Galapagos Scuba Diving Fatality - February 12, 2010 - Eloise Gale

[RJP]

OK I'll bite - what is an "advanced" diver?

Put three divers in a room and you'll get 4 definitions.

Personally I know it when I see it, and it sure isn't any particular number of dives.

Advanced is such a meaningless term - I would prefer something that describes the conditions that you will meet - currents of X knots, water temp of X degrees, simultanious back roll entries, hot entries, ability to descend at X rate, blue water ascents in low vis, typical wave hights, etc. etc. would be much more useful.

Research can get you all of this, but few do it.

By definition the word ADVANCED is a relative term - whether in scuba or anywhere else. As such it is only useful in a comparative and not an absolute fashion. Additionally, it is an adjective, which by definition is used to modify a noun.

advanced - placed ahead or forward; ahead or further along in progress, complexity, knowledge, skill, etc.

An "Open Water Diver" is a beginner. So an "Advanced Open Water Diver" is a beginner who is ahead or further along than other beginners.

While I understand that some folks might be a touch confused into thinking that they are "advanced divers" after receiving an "advanced open water" certification...I do believe that more than half of the problem here lies in their own naivete and/or intellectual laziness. (Or maybe I just spent too many years in Catholic school diagramming sentences.)

 

[Thalassamania]

Or perhaps it's that not too long ago an Advanced Diver was; then the term Advanced was applied to the certification that then existed under a different name and that followed Open Water in sequence thus lowering the value substantially. I think the reason for doing this was to perform just that slight of hand and deliver a less valuable product, that was cheaper to produce, but that had a higher value cachet. Lesson One, the Art of PADIfication.

 

[RJP]

Or perhaps it's that not to long ago an Advanced Diver was; then the term Advanced was applied to the certification that then existed under a different name and that followed Open Water in sequence thus lowering the value substantially. I think the reason for doing this was to perform just that slight of hand and deliver a less valuable product, that was cheaper to produce, but that had a higher value cachet. Lesson One, the Art of PADIfication.

Fair point.

While I've been performing just such marketing sleight of hand for 25 years or so...I only started diving in 2006. I haven't been around long enough to miss "the good ol' days" when men were men...and you all had to swim up hill both ways...in the driving snow...with a hole in your fin...

Almost everything in the world is now comparatively more-cheaply produced and is of comparatively lower-value than it used to be "back in the good ol' days."

The upshot is that while there are still high-quality, high-value offerings in the market-place... the consumer needs to do their part to find these options and then probably be willing and able to pay a bit more to get them. Why very intelligent people - who see this occur in virtually every single product and service arena in the world - are somehow surprised that this phenomenon actual applies to scuba training as well, is somehow very curious to me.

I'm not saying you need to accept that it's a good thing, but at some point you'll accept that it's happened.

 

[merxlin]

@merxlin: I was curious about this at first, but then I thought about it a little. I suspect the two groups of 7 had more to do with evenly loading the pangas. Seven divers + one DM in each panga means that 8 people are doing back-rolls simultaneously. Then everyone descends with a buddy (or buddies) immediately.

With four teams of 2, there might not be enough room in a panga to accommodate an extra person and it would create an odd number for entry. Furthermore, I don't think it would work for a buddy pair to be riding out in separate pangas either. Considering the strong current, it would probably be pretty difficult to coordinate entry with the other panga and link up with the other lone diver. Just thinking out loud here...................

So diver safety should be determined by the stability/capacity of the pangas?

You're assuming facts not in evidence. (That the boat forced solo divers or 3-diver teams.)

It's entirely possible that the "7 and 7" simply worked out based on the buddy groups who were on the trip. If they happened to have two 3-diver teams and the rest were buddy pairs...then "7 and 7" would be fine.

I understand but almost every report I have seen shows the same 7+7 arrangement. I believe they don't allow solo divers, so that would require a 3 person team, no? I'm just saying even numbets would allow for standard two person buddy teams.

 

[Thalassamania]

Fair point.

While I've been performing just such marketing sleight of hand for 25 years or so...I only started diving in 2006. I haven't been around long enough to miss "the good ol' days" when men were men...and you all had to swim up hill both ways...in the driving snow...with a hole in your fin...

Almost everything in the world is now comparatively more-cheaply produced and is of comparatively lower-value than it used to be "back in the good ol' days."

The upshot is that while there are still high-quality, high-value offerings in the market-place... the consumer needs to do their part to find these options and then probably be willing and able to pay a bit more to get them. Why very intelligent people - who see this occur in virtually every single product and service arena in the world - are somehow surprised that this phenomenon actual applies to scuba training as well, is somehow very curious to me.

I'm not saying you need to accept that it's a good thing, but at some point you'll accept that it's happened.

I do believe that I was the one pointing out that it has happened.

As one who proffers high-quality, high-value offerings in the market-place, I'm just doing my part to inform consumers of the superior options that are out there and provide some insight as to why the inferior options are not what they appear to be.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

So diver safety should be determined by the stability/capacity of the pangas?

@merxlin: Are you saying that having odd-numbered buddy teams is unsafe diving practice?

Of course, I'm not saying that safety should be compromised by stability/capacity of the pangas.

With strong currents, it makes sense that everyone enters the water at the same time. In a small boat/RIB/panga, it's easy to imagine that 8 divers simultaneously entering the water affects the stability of the craft.

The dive op may not have thought through buddy team numbers very well in terms of panga capacity...but I could be wrong. Perhaps it might be possible to upgrade to larger pangas on the mothership. I don't know.

I never said that it was an optimal arrangement. I was just offering an explanation as to why 14 divers were split into two groups of 7. We should also consider the possibility that there may have been two groups of 3 on the trip.

If you don't accept my explanation, I invite you to send an inquiry to an Aggressor representative and report back to the thread.

 

[RJP]

I understand but almost every report I have seen shows the same 7+7 arrangement. I believe they don't allow solo divers, so that would require a 3 person team, no? I'm just saying even numbets would allow for standard two person buddy teams.

I've never seen/heard of anyone diving solo...nor have I ever seen/heard of anyone traveling with a friend/buddy and then being forced to buddy with someone else due to panga arrangements.

If the 7+7 was mandated as SOP surely we'd have heard complaints of one or both of these two situations, no?

 

[RJP]

With strong currents, it makes sense that everyone enters the water at the same time. In a small boat/RIB/panga, it's easy to imagine that 8 divers simultaneously entering the water affects the stability of the craft.

It's actually much easier to imagine that SEVEN divers - four on one side, three on the other - would have a greater adverse effect on stability. Sort of indicates to me that the op would only allow 7+7 in the interest of optimizing buddy teams rather than merely out of simple 14divers/2pangas=7divers/panga.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

It's actually much easier to imagine that SEVEN divers - four on one side, three on the other - would have a greater adverse effect on stability. Sort of indicates to me that the op would only allow 7+7 in the interest of optimizing buddy teams rather than merely out of simple 14divers/2pangas=7divers/panga.

@RJP: There's one DM on-board each panga. 7 divers + 1 DM = 8 divers simultaneously entering the water. Am I missing something?

 

[RJP]

@RJP: There's one DM on-board each panga. 7 divers + 1 DM = 8 divers simultaneously entering the water. Am I missing something?

Duh...

Nevermind.

:shocked2:

Still can't imagine that they'd split husband/wife, two buddies traveling together, etc. There's plenty of trip reports here and on other boards, and as I'm going on a liveaboard to Galapagos in a few months I think I've ready every one of them. Have never heard of a solo diver or a force-split buddy pair.