Ginnie Springs diver missing - Florida

[diverlee]

After a day or so it’s all arguments. Everyone has an opinion. Everyone is right Makes us look like egotistical idiots. It’s at that point on CDF now.

 

[The Chairman]

After a day or so it’s all arguments. Everyone has an opinion. Everyone is right Makes us look like egotistical idiots. It’s at that point on CDF now.

Most are being very respectful so far. Lots of differing perspectives and I've learned a bit.

 

[rjack321]

There’s also a very dangerous “there’s nothing to learn from x accident” idea that pops up every now and again. You wanna talk about something toxic? That’s toxic.

Learn? There are definitely brand new ways people have died but they seem to be rare, although RBs certainly open up a pandora's box of ways to kill yourself.

I'd wager most fatalities are more reminders of what we already know or at least should have been taught/learned. Often it's something as fundamental as what's taught in intro cave, or for the CCR fatalities in MOD1.

 

[Manatee Diver]

I agree with @helodriver87 having an open accident analysis allows not just for figuring out what caused an accident but allows people to examine trends, if a rule was violated, why was it violated, does the rule not apply, was it improperly applied, questions like that. Just wiping our hands of an accident with the claim of diver error is doing a disservice to the diver who died. Helodriver mentions how the military has initial inquiries, and then formal boards. Well civilian aviation has a similar thing, we all know about the NTSB, they typically release a preliminary factual report within a few months (which is really quick for the government), and a year or so later after a board is convened a final report going over likely causes.

While cave diving probably doesn't need anything anywhere near that formal, just gathering the basics facts and having it available for anyone to read in one consolidated place could be used to improve safety. I know that from reading accident reports that form the basis of cave diving rules, I understand why the rules are in place.

 

[tmassey]

And if nothing else, seeing the same reasons come up over and over tells you two things:

One, whatever you were expecting people to do is unrealistic. Either because you’re not training them properly, or because the rule flat out sucks. I’m reminded of “never go into an overhead environment“ for open water divers. It’s a horrible, useless rule. It just trains people to completely ignore that rule. Either way, knowing that a noticeable percentage of fatalities involve the breaking of a particular rule would be extremely informative.

Two, for an individual diver, it really helps them to have the facts they need to remind themselves to not rationalize their behavior. For me personally, knowing that breathing the wrong gas is the leading cause of death of technical divers means I am very careful with my bottle procedures, in and out of the water. Yet even so, I have made mistakes. But the knowledge that where I made a mistake is the single leading cause of death certainly emphasizes how much of a screwup that was, and certainly helps me to avoid normalization of deviance.

You don’t have either of those if you don’t carefully keep track of what is killing people and why. And even if it’s the same answer over and over, the information has value.

but just like other aspects of life (cigarettes, drunk driving, etc.), it won’t fix everything or convince everyone. But it doesn’t mean you don’t keep trying.

 

[ChuckP]

Wasn't there quite a detailed report written about two guys that recently died in a Mexico cave? I remember reading it, it seemed detailed but I can't really comment if it was detailed enough. Why was that report written, who wrote it?

The accident reporting relates to all diving - as a non cave diver, when I hear about a DCS incident or an accident - it would be great learning material to understand what happened or at least the events leading up to it. I would happily pay an agency like DAN to gather and assemble that data in a meaningful way - I know they do somewhat but I want to see computer profiles, more useful info.

 

[kensuf]

I had to come back to this. There is nothing to prevent discussion about accidents anywhere. When no truth is proffered, the lies, the myths, and the innuendos win. Unfortunately. these untruths often bypass social media and get whispered around the springs. I know several instructors who have horrible, albeit inaccurate, stories circulating about them all the time. Getting the truth in writing on a forum is essential in order to even start to battle the miasma of crap that's out there. After all, Google favors ScubaBoard, even above Facebook when it comes to people searching the interwebs for the truth. Staying silent is a win for the nattering nabobs of negativism.

Hi Pete,

I get it, I understand. I also know that sometimes things, such as a rebuttal, are misinterpreted when they're put in writing. It's a ****** situation when you've got an investigator telling you "don't say anything" and some dipstick is on Facebook posting he could have saved the deceased.

I'm glad you allow freedoms here and appreciate the requirement to keep it civil.

Ken

 

[rjack321]

One, whatever you were expecting people to do is unrealistic. Either because you’re not training them properly, or because the rule flat out sucks.

Years ago there was a long running discussion about CCR fatalities on another forum. Many of the participants were emphasizing how if you are absolutely convinced of your positive and negative checks, then a certain unit was perfectly safe. But a single hair in a critical Oring was potentially a huge co2 bypass problem. This went on for many pages and even continued after I pointed out that the design was crap if a single dog hair could kill you.

There are even more units on the market now, some more robust and fault tolerant than others. Divers are especially adept at overlooking the flaws in the unit they "like" the best. Sidemount divers and sidemount CCRs seem to be especially prone to having blinders on and not accepting there are tradeoffs and weaknesses in their chosen steads.

 

[rjack321]

Wasn't there quite a detailed report written about two guys that recently died in a Mexico cave? I remember reading it, it seemed detailed but I can't really comment if it was detailed enough. Why was that report written, who wrote it?

The accident reporting relates to all diving - as a non cave diver, when I hear about a DCS incident or an accident - it would be great learning material to understand what happened or at least the events leading up to it. I would happily pay an agency like DAN to gather and assemble that data in a meaningful way - I know they do somewhat but I want to see computer profiles, more useful info.

From ~2 years ago?
It was written privately by @Norwegian Cave Diver. He got a lot of flack from the family of the deceased about the conclusions since it's fairly clear that both divers were heavily distracted by the camera and not diligently monitoring their gas. That accident led to several articles emphasizing how cameras were killing cave divers.
Do Cameras Kill Cave Divers? One Explorer Thinks So - InDepth (gue.com)

 

[Capt Jim Wyatt]

I'd wager most fatalities are more reminders of what we already know or at least should have been taught/learned.

100% agreed...100%