Missing Diver off of Kahala, Oahu, Hawaii

[k ellis]

Do we actually know that past bad experiences with the dive op has little to do with the current tragedy? I haven't been able to discern that one way or the other from the information and speculation provided so far. If someone can provide information to the contrary, please join the discussion.

I personally wouldn't discount a diver's past experience with the same dive op, unless it happened a long time ago. The way a dive op does business can be a valid component in a dive incident, and something that is routinely looked at in an official investigation.

Just my .02.

If its proven to be a repeat problem such as several people going out and finding that they dont do roll call then yes it could play a part in a current tragedy but for one person to say that he was let down by them not doing a roll call (This is only as an example so any similiarity is pure coincidence) would only be signs that a divemaster made a mistake on one occasion.

Now if the incident was the day before or the same day then yes it would be something to look at but from some of the above stated complaints it would lead a reasonable person to believe that the incidents they describe had quiet a significant time lapse between the time of their experience and the time of this experience. One person complaining to could be a sign of a number of things. If you recall the fish always gets bigger with each time a story is told as it holds a persons interest better.

Again unless its something relative to the incident in question or something that is concrete as a recurring problem it really does not help solve the delima of what happend to the diver nor what could have happend by bringing up the fact I or anyone else had a less then happy experience with a dive company on one or 2 occasions. This is only proof to me that a dive master or boat captain was being lazy or just not doing their job and many rotate their staff out which could mean that on this date in question they may have had a dive master and or boat captain who did do every thing right.

 

[cruiser]

If its proven to be a repeat problem such as several people going out and finding that they dont do roll call then yes it could play a part in a current tragedy but for one person to say that he was let down by them not doing a roll call (This is only as an example so any similiarity is pure coincidence) would only be signs that a divemaster made a mistake on one occasion.

Now if the incident was the day before or the same day then yes it would be something to look at but from some of the above stated complaints it would lead a reasonable person to believe that the incidents they describe had quiet a significant time lapse between the time of their experience and the time of this experience. One person complaining to could be a sign of a number of things. If you recall the fish always gets bigger with each time a story is told as it holds a persons interest better.

Again unless its something relative to the incident in question or something that is concrete as a recurring problem it really does not help solve the delima of what happend to the diver nor what could have happend by bringing up the fact I or anyone else had a less then happy experience with a dive company on one or 2 occasions. This is only proof to me that a dive master or boat captain was being lazy or just not doing their job and many rotate their staff out which could mean that on this date in question they may have had a dive master and or boat captain who did do every thing right.

I see what you're saying but I'm not willing to discount the post that this was a shoddy operation. If you feel that the bad report could be embellished with retelling , could the same be said of the good reports About the dive op, that they were embellished as well? I, for one, don't doubt the negative report. And when a diver is lost, the dive master and/or captain did not do everything right.

 

[k ellis]

And when I diver is lost, the dive master and/or captain did not do everything right.

Not always. We only know that the diver is missing. Is it not possible he had a health concern he did not disclose? Is it possible perhaps a hidden medical condition perhaps even the diver was unaware of. It would not be the fault of the crew if this diver was to have gone diving per say and had a heart attack and due to its instant effects he did not inflate his bcd to get him to the surface?

As far as the embellishments you are correct that it could be over drawn with good remarks. However have you not ever gone to a store where everyone praises how excellent they are and instead of good service you vowed never to go back? What about bad service reports but you decided to roll the dice and found them to be outstanding?

I just think that throwing negatives of mistakes past into the equation before we even know what happend is not a good way to discuss the incident at hand. Now if someone was on that boat at that time then they could bring to light what the crew did or did not do. Keep in mind also that bad comments towards any person place or business that causes harm even in just reputation can result in some slander charges. Thats all I am stating to people is until more details are in the open they should refrain from throwing too much negative about a company into the open.

And yes though I dont discount the possibility that the operation was subpar I was just trying to keep the thread from becoming a bashing thread and turn it back to the topic at hand

 

[Thalassamania]

Not always. We only know that the diver is missing. Is it not possible he had a health concern he did not disclose? Is it possible perhaps a hidden medical condition perhaps even the diver was unaware of. It would not be the fault of the crew if this diver was to have gone diving per say and had a heart attack and due to its instant effects he did not inflate his bcd to get him to the surface?

If you suddenly turn around and find that a diver is missing, and no one knows where the diver went, and no one witnessed the diver's leaving, then, even if there were a health concern, or a hidden medical condition, it would be my opinion that the operation did not fulfill it's duty. It's the mysterious disappearance that is, in this and similar cases, so damning in my view. That alone demonstrates, IMHO, that the operation is subpar.

 

[k ellis]

If you suddenly turn around and find that a diver is missing, and no one knows where the diver went, and no one witnessed the diver's leaving, then, even if there were a health concern, or a hidden medical condition, it would be my opinion that the operation did not fulfill it's duty. It's the mysterious disappearance that is, in this and similar cases, so damning in my view. That alone demonstrates, IMHO, that the operation is subpar.

Was it a guided tour? Did they have a divemaster leading the group? I have seen some on your honor dive groups where they take you to a site and the divers are responsible to stay within a certain area and return by a certain time. However with this being a drift dive there is no mention of how fast the current was. There are some drift dives all over the world know for stout currents in which it would not take to long for an unconcious diver to be carried out of site.

Again I dont know all the details but instead only what has been reported from the media so thats the only thing keeping me from making a decision as I have personally witnessed the media over state accidents and not tell the complete story in others.

 

[k ellis]

Just to put it more into detail why I see the way I do there are questions I have.

1. Was the diver informed before ever boarding the boat the complexity of the diving conditions (The waves reported height at the time of boarding)
2. has the diver made dives of this nature before and if so how many dives and were the conditions similiar.
3. was the diver briefed about the dive site on the way out.
4. was the diver comfortable with the dive and if not was he pressured to dive with thoughts of no refunds or other similiar concerns.
5. was there a dive plan made and discussed as a group and if so were there any concerns mentioned by the diver at that time? did the DM ask all divers if they understood?
6. once in the water did the group wait until all divers were in and then submerge as a group.
7. did he have a buddy and if so where was his buddy at
8. what was the bottom conditions I.E. what speed was the current flowing and in which direction?
9. did any divers on the boat recall seeing this diver at any point during their dive and if so what did they recall his demeaner. Was he calm did he seem stressed was he attempting to enter the wreck
10. upon resurfacing what was the conditions like post dive. Had the waves subsided had they intensified changed direction
11. What was the weather conditions like. Where there clouds in the area? was the sun beaming down in such a way the reflection would cause those on the boat to not be able to look out on the sea to attempt to locate him
12. how was the roll call taken. was it as you exited you told the dm your name and marked you off or did he just wait till the entire group was up before roll call
13. if he waited until the entire group was up did they group all surface together or did they continue their dive till they were low on air and surface as buddy teams and signal the boat while the remainder of the divers continued their dive until they ran low on air
14. when they called for help how long did it take for the help to arrive. When you call the authorities it could take upwards of 20 minutes or greater for the authorities to arrive at which time a current moving say at 2 or 3 knots could move a diver fairly quickly out of visual range.
15. did the diver carry adequate emergency devices for such a complex dive. Ie. SMB, Mirror, Dye, whistle

see so many things are missing that we just cant know about and even if some details are missing we really need all answers before we can say it was anyones fault or no ones fault

 

[Thalassamania]

We will never know all the details. It is my understanding that these dives are typically lead and trailed, if that turns out to not be the case here, I will have to reevaluate. This is kinda like a Grand Jury (served in that capacity a couple of times) where the test is: " if the evidence presented is sufficiently strong to warrant a reasonable person's belief that the person being investigated is probably guilty of the offense charged."

None of the items that you listed (while all of interest) address what I see as a breakdown in the operator's supervisory duty. The inability to tell where the diver went and when the diver separated from the group is all that is really needed for that determination, the only defense would be if it were a California style dive, which I am given to understand it was not. And even then, there is the question of the operator's duty to not be putting tourist divers into what the NOAA Satellites recorded as ten foot seas, a day that I called a dive because of conditions (granted on another island, but in the same wave regime).

 

[k ellis]

We will never know all the details. It is my understanding that these dives are typically lead and trailed, if that turns out to not be the case here, I will have to reevaluate. This is kinda like a Grand Jury (served in that capacity a couple of times) where the test is: " if the evidence presented is sufficiently strong to warrant a reasonable person's belief that the person being investigated is probably guilty of the offense charged."

None of the items that you listed (while all of interest) address what I see as a breakdown in the operator's supervisory duty. The inability to tell where the diver went and when the diver separated from the group is all that is really needed for that determination, the only defense would be if it were a California style dive, which I am given to understand it was not. And even then, there is the question of the operator's duty to not be putting tourist divers into what the NOAA Satellites recorded as ten foot seas, a day that I called a dive because of conditions (granted on another island, but in the same wave regime).

Agreed. if it turns out to be a guided tour there would be some explaining to be done and would not look good for the operator I will agree. Now if the report is accurate with 10 foot waves then there is a damnation in itself as I agree. you go before a jury or piers and few if any of these would have any diving experience at all would wonder why you would put divers in the water thats around the height of the ceiling in most rooms as I am sure most plaintiffs lawyers would describe it as being. Even as an experienced diver I would be hard pressed to even get on a boat the size of most dive boats and go out into 10 foot seas. I did one in 6 foot seas and called the dive myself simply because it was in my opinion too dangerous.

 

[divermike1011]

K Ellis:

Almost all dives from boats with tour operators on Oahu are guided dives. I certainly can't state that this one was, but it would be outside the normal practice here if it wasn't a guided dive. Obviously since I wasn't there I can't speak to this particular case.

Michael

 

[justleesa]

I concur with Michael, that most tours are guided. Some tourists get a bit touchie about that "I'm a big girl or boy, I can go on my own" kinda thing - so some might want go off on their own.

I've been to the barge a couple of times and the current was ripping on both occasions - sometimes it almost sucks you into the wreck. Can't say much of what happened on that day, but judging the sea conditions on Monday, I think it's safe to say that it was more difficult than usual. Not for a beginner or unsure diver.