How important is armchair incident analysis?

[lamont]

i don't need a real accident to trigger that off. i can do that in a vaccum, and
just use my imagination.

that's not accident analysis. that's speculation.

accident analysis seeks to determine what happened in a particular
accident, analyze it, and learn from the real world situation.

all the speculation in the world won't reveal to me what is actually killing
divers out there. only accident analysis can.

and instead of speculating about 10 possible reasons, i can analyze the one
actual, real reason, and learn from that.

If you define away the utility of speculation, then of course it has no utility.

 

[H2Andy]

well, no... all i am saying is let's call it what it is

speculation has its place, but let's not call it accident analysis

 

[Carolina Diver]

There are a lot of people out there that seem to think there is something of urgent importance to be gleaned from each and every incident that occurs. Another thread is currently running that asks whether such analysis might lead one to give up diving. That would certainly be a solid result of incident analysis. Are there any others?

I am asking three things:

1) Can you list anything you have changed in your diving as a result of armchair incident analysis?

2) Have you ever helped clarify, resolve or bring about any good by armchair analysis?

3) If the answer to both 1 and 2 are no, isn't this form of armchair analysis the cyber equivalent of freeway rubbernecking?

1) No, not really. My buddy says I am anal about safety anyway.

2) Probably not.

3) No. When you see a topic about an accident you look hoping to learn something. Not the same as looking for blood on the highway.

Unfortunately, we don't do much analysis. That requires facts and detail. I haven't seen many incidents reported on any boards that have that. Most is speculating what happened. Not much point, and not really fair to those involved. Just my opinion.

If someone want so ask about hypothetical situations, that seems to generate a lot of discussion on its own, which is the intention.

 

[lamont]

well, no... all i am saying is let's call it what it is

speculation has its place, but let's not call it accident analysis

That's fine by me but "speculation" in these parts is a sin.

I also don't necessarily think its "speculation". If you just play 'what-ifs' you're just doing hypothetical analysis. Its the theoretical physics approach, instead of the experimental physics approach which is accident analysis. If you detatch the analysis you're doing from analyzing the actual incident then its just at theoretical game to figure to out what might result in such an outcome. This is fraught with the possibility of taking the theory too seriously without testing it (both in physics and in diving), but in physics the theoretical approach often pays some kinds of dividends -- even mathematicians who have prided their math on having no practical application have had their works 'perverted' by grubby physicists because it turns out that theoretical exersizes often prove fruitful...

 

[Darnold9999]

I have changed a number of things that I do from reading this board. Did they come from the accident analysis part of the board - who knows, probably. Have I contributed anything to the accident analysis part of the board, probably not, but I hope so. I do post what I think in hopes that someone with more experience or a different point of view will chime in and show me the error of my ways . Don't always agree, but at least it makes me think.

I am firmly in the camp of speculate away. If discussing and thinking about what went wrong and what could be done to prevent or recover from what went wrong(accident analysis) or what might have gone wrong(speculation) becomes taboo on this board then it and we will be poorer for it.

In the world of your mind there is absolutely no difference between an accident that really happened vs one that might have happened - when considering how to avoid it.

If you incorporate the thinking about how to resove/prevent problems into your diving who really cares if it was speculation that made you rethink what you do or an actual accident with "facts". You become a better and more importantly safer diver.

 

[Scuba]

I'm speaking for myself, but the way I see it, the reason for accident analysis, and speculation that takes place here - is to help divers learn or refresh their knowledge of how problems may arise and develop. Which brings attention to how to prevent, mitigate, and ways to successfully handle them once they occur. This can be very useful information to many divers.

This is not an official board of enquiry.

Also, let's not lose site of the fact that some extremely thorough investigations, by the FAA for example, which may utilize the latest tools and techniques, best team of experts available, millions of dollars in research and analysis and taking years to conclude - sometimes end up with one or more highly probable speculative hypothesis of an actual unknown cause. A cause which often times can not be conclusively proven due to lack of information. Whether its the actual cause, or a different potential failure point that is identified through research and analysis, all can be extremely useful information in future accident prevention.

Unless you have conclusive incontrovertible evidence of an event, and this is often questionable, there are always several paths from which any event can emanate and ways it can evolve. The essential nature of the search for evidence and facts requires speculation. I may be looking too deep into it, but it's a fact. You can not accept without question what someone says or what seems apparent.

Reading here about the probable causes and developments of actual accidents, has either re-enforced or changed things about my diving from techniques to gear usage. For me, it goes hand in hand with learning and practicing the use of dive tools and techniques.

One quick note. I sometimes wonder if the refusal to disclose information that is so prevalent in diving, doesn't have something to do with covering up information that would make others look bad or implicate them in the accident, Besides dive ops. issues, let's face it, when a buddy suffers an accident and the other is not on top of things, he most likely screwed up too. This is just a general comment devoid of any specific implications towards anyone or any incident.

 

[Kim]

In the world of your mind there is absolutely no difference between an accident that really happened vs one that might have happened - when considering how to avoid it.

In that case why not make accident scenarios for discussion that while they MAY be based on actual events to a certain extent basically leave all direct connections out of it? Too many people seem to believe that they have some kind of right to all the details when in fact they have none. If a family wishes to preserve some privacy around an actual situation then who is anyone else to try to circumvent that privacy? In some kinds of accident analysis, such as aircraft, that privacy doesn't exist as a crashing aircraft can be a danger to others - the same with car crashes. When a diver has an accident though it's very personal and poses no threat to others unless they allow themselves to be drawn into it, for instance by trying to effect a rescue. Unfairly speculating about real people and real events can cause a great deal of grief to people close to whoever it was. People speculate fault, and it often leads to presumption. Someone can actually get blamed by popular belief even though that belief was arrived at purely through a speculative process and may not be true at all. Is that right?

Personally I believe that actual known facts are fair enough, IF the immediate family doesn't mind sharing them. Keep speculation where it belongs, in the 'theory' box, and keep it for theoretical incidents that don't name names or unjustly level real accusations. As you said - it doesn't matter how the lesson is learned as long as it is.

These are my personal views and in no way represent any official SB position on the subject.

 

[lamont]

In that case why not make accident scenarios for discussion that while they MAY be based on actual events to a certain extent basically leave all direct connections out of it? Too many people seem to believe that they have some kind of right to all the details when in fact they have none. If a family wishes to preserve some privacy around an actual situation then who is anyone else to try to circumvent that privacy? In some kinds of accident analysis, such as aircraft, that privacy doesn't exist as a crashing aircraft can be a danger to others - the same with car crashes. When a diver has an accident though it's very personal and poses no threat to others unless they allow themselves to be drawn into it themselves, for instance by trying to effect a rescue. Unfairly speculating about real people and real events can cause a great deal of grief to people close to whoever it was. People speculate fault, and it often leads to presumption. Someone can actually get blamed by popular belief even though that belief was arrived at purely through a speculative process and may not be true at all. Is that right?

Personally I believe that actual known facts are fair enough, IF the immediate family doesn't mind sharing them. Keep speculation where it belongs, in the 'theory' box, and keep it for theoretical incidents that don't name names or unjustly level real accusations. As you said - it doesn't matter how the lesson is learned as long as it is.

These are my personal views and in no way represent any official SB position on the subject.

okay, next time we've got a dive incident, i'll start up a thread to discuss a dive incident theoretically with exactly the same info we've got about the one that just happened and see how long it lasts...

idiots can abuse speculation over accidents and use it to level accusations. getting completely bent out of shape over this leads to 'gag ordering' the rest of us and generally stifiling any discussion of analysis on this board. typically when an accident occurs threads on scubaboard get cleaned out of anything other than 'thoughts for the family' because we *never* get perfect enough information to satisfy the people who endlessly whine about 'speculation'. i'll put up with the b.s. over on TDS because its obvious who is levelling accusations (and its often easy to see why they're dong it) and its also easy enough to ignore. if you want to ban that junk on scubaboard, just ban 'blamestorming' like the sticky in the accidents forum says.

 

[Kim]

I already stated that the above views are mine personally. There are lots of accusations of 'gagging' and 'banning' on SB but it's actually not really that simple. There are timing issues....that's all.

 

[HowardE]

One quick note. I sometimes wonder if the refusal to disclose information that is so prevalent in diving, doesn't have something to do with covering up information that would make others look bad or implicate them in the accident, Besides dive ops. issues, let's face it, when a buddy suffers an accident and the other is not on top of things, he most likely screwed up too. This is just a general comment devoid of any specific implications towards anyone or any incident.

I would think that the most common reason for not releasing details, is that they DON'T KNOW. In most dive accidents, the victim ultimately ends up drowning. Thus, the cause of death, is downing, end of case... close the file... the police have earned a gold star for being ace investigators.

-------------

After reading several posts in this thread, there seems to be a disagreement on what speculative interpretation of an accident is vs a WAG.

I don't have a problem with speculation in general, but when people just throw random thoughts and ridiculous scenarios into the equation, I don't think it serves any real purpose, other than self gratification on some weird level.

I am really thinking about a recent incident, where there was an accident, and the victim (who died) made several mistakes, and the true outcome will never be known, but speculation can help us to determine "How not to end up in this situation yourself". However, several people focused on and made personal slams against not just the victim, but the person who dived to recover the bodies. This I found offensive. I found it offensive that some people had the gaul to "say how they would have done a better job recovering the bodies, etc" rather than just analyze the accident... While the actual speculation on the accident didn't bother me at all... they were criticizing my the first responder for his actions in a none to tasteful situation.

My point is, that there needs to be more specific ground rules.

Without saying anything about the case in particular... There have been cases of "dive related accidents" where really, there is NOTHING dive related at all. In several cases reported by DAN, the victims suffered heart attacks WHILE diving. Would an in depth accident analysis filled with speculative hypothesis help analyze this situation? I think not.

There is a time and a place for guessing and theorizing about what caused any particular accident. So far from what I have seen... The MOD's here have done a pretty good job of keeping it level.