. Just as Dave Shaws video does.
Some very prominent dive experts have gather some very useful data from David Shaw's tragic dive. And the video obtained will likely save someone's life someday although we won't ever know that.
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
. Just as Dave Shaws video does.
A ScubaBoard Staff Message...
A ScubaBoard Staff Message...
Special Rules for the Accidents & Incidents Forum
The purpose of this forum is the promotion of safe diving through the examination and discussion of accidents and incidents; to find lessons we can apply to our own diving.
Accidents, and incidents that could easily have become accidents, can often be used to illustrate actions that lead to injury or death, and their discussion is essential to building lessons learned from which improved safety can flow. To foster the free exchange of information valuable to this process, the "manners" in this forum are much more tightly controlled than elsewhere on the board. In addition to the TOS:
New Rules:
Someone has died or been injured. Please show the proper dignity, etiquette and refrain from any demeaning remarks. We discourage the family from reading these threads, but you can bet they still will. Let's be civil, sensitive and still remain relevant. This forum is only intended for learning and not assigning blame.
This is a strict 'No Troll' and 'No Chest Thumping' zone. It's not the place to keep repeating your favorite topic no matter how important or relevant you may imagine it to be. Nor is it the place to tell us how this wouldn't have happened if they dove/taught the way you do.
You may not use real names here, until after they have appeared in the public domain (articles, news reports, sheriff's report etc.) Please cite the source if you do.
Discussions should only be about the causes, theories and remedies for these accidents. Off topic posts or those with off topic comments may be removed without notice. Condolences, including comments indicating surprise and indignation, should be kept to the Passings Forum, legal action should be kept to the Scuba Related Court Cases Forum and so forth.
If you are presenting information from a source other than your own eyes and ears, please cite the source. Links are preferred.
Those who can not seem to follow these rules will have their access to this forum quickly revoked. As always, you should use the report button rather than bicker about possible infractions in the thread.
--Accident analysis is the business of identifying mishap causes and recommending actions to prevent a repeat mishap.
Who's to blame doesn't matter.
The laying of blame, extraction of justice, punishment, liability, etc - all these are the business of the courts (and to satisfy our inner need for balance and justice in the universe), but they don't really address mishap prevention. Mishap prevention involves actions.
Example:
Lets say the causes of a mishap are all actions taken by a boat's captain.
Mishap analysis would identify those actions as causes, and recommend other actions that would prevent (or greatly reduce the chance of) the mishap in the future. Nothing about liability, fault, blame, punishment etc would be addressed in the mishap analysis because those are not actions that would prevent the mishap.
Example: "The boat didn't have enough fuel on board to conduct a search." might be identified as a cause of a mishap, and mishap analysis would recommend "that a boat always carry enough fuel to conduct a search" on every dive. Why the boat didn't have enough fuel, who made the decision to carry too little fuel, whose fault it is that the boat had too little fuel, etc, are all questions for regulators and courts, not mishap analysis. And it may be that there's no blame anyway - it could be that a new standard needs to be set because this mishap revealed a flaw in the current standard.
The general theme of mishap analysis is that all mishaps are preventable, even when no one is at fault. For example, all diving mishaps are preventable by not diving in the first place.
Mishap analysis doesn't waste time asking "what was he thinking?" either, but rather asks "what did he do?" We can agonize all day long about why Joe didn't ditch his weights when ditching his weights would have saved him, but it doesn't really matter. The action that will prevent a repeat of Joe's mishap is "ditch weights."
--
What we're trying to do in the A&I forum is to provide a forum for a Safety type analysis of mishaps; to identify actions that lead to mishaps and actions that can prevent mishaps. The mishap analysis mindset is difficult for those who lack formal training in it, as our natural tendencies are to find out who or what to blame and seek justice.
Just remember that justice isn't going to prevent future mishaps. It is changes in behavior that prevents recurrence of mishaps.
Rick
There is no need to criticize the deceased diver to find out what the diver did that caused the mishap. Nor is there any need to get all wound up trying to figure out why... the "why?" just doesn't matter, so long as the *action* that caused the mishap is properly identified and isn't repeated.[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD] [TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="class: midtext"][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
It have to be room to discus the decisions and behavior of the victim of a diving accident when analyzing an accident, the best ting we as a community can do after accident is to learn from it, by having taboos like "don't criticize the deceased diver", we will just hinder this learning process. And if there is evidence to say that the decisions , training, experience, dunning Kruger effect, state of mind or other things that might paint a not so good picture of the deceased played a role in the accident, it must be allowed to say so.
USCG policy makers and investigators are a bunch of clowns.
Agreed. The details of a dive plan to set a record are beyond most of us, but the philosophy of setting records isn't.posts relating to world record attempts belong in an open forum... Not behind the closed doors of T2T.
A friend of mine tuned me onto this happening a while back. I was genuinely curious, although I've never really understood the desire to spend such a pleasant activity staring at a number on your wrist trying to make it go higher (that's just me, of course!). But, from his description of Dr. Garman, it sounded like this was a longtime diver experienced well beyond anyone I have ever met. I watched for an update, like many did - and was very saddened to hear what happened.
In the aftermath, I was shocked to hear this weekend he was only a diver of four years, less than 600 dives and trying to break this record. I've been diving for over 30 years and I cannot believe at that experience level someone would believe they were able to effectively begin even regular technical diving, let alone push the extreme boundaries of it. I think there needs to be some real evaluation at how this was even allowed to be attempted, let alone encouraged. It doesn't sound like they even did much planning for this potential outcome, they seemed to be just thinking about taking their victory photo on the dock. I've seen several very good questions asked here (not "hatefulness"), and I have to wonder were these questions raised by those that helped him?
This death will be pointless if we allow it to be. We need to learn from it, and the way to do that is to ask questions - not just express sympathy. Of course we are all saddened by this.