Research Diver Fatality in Alaska

[Rollin Bonz]

. .there was a mutual assumption that the shallow depth made this kludge ok.

Yep, easy to understand how this may have been the case. I know I've been guilty of it, maybe less than others I know, but guilty just the same.

 

[rjack321]

Yep, easy to understand how this may have been the case. I know I've been guilty of it, maybe less than others I know, but guilty just the same.

yea guilty more times than I can count. Not this exact thing, but other bailing wire and duct tape "fixes" on life support equipment

 

[Hiszpan]

I am just wondering who made Diver 1 a Dive Leader on that particular dive. Diver 3 was much more experienced judging from the bio provided. It looks like there was a lot of tasks assigned to Diver 1, who was the least experienced. Protocols should be reviewed.

 

[Rollin Bonz]

I am just wondering who made Diver 1 a Dive Leader on that particular dive. Diver 3 was much more experienced judging from the bio provided. It looks like there was a lot of tasks assigned to Diver 1, who was the least experienced. Protocols should be reviewed.

Only one way to gain experience. Diver 3 was once a Diver 1. A seemingly "safe" dive at 30 feet would be a chance to build Diver 1's experience. That's how you get more divers with experience like Diver 3.

Just my take of course.

 

[g1138]

I am just wondering who made Diver 1 a Dive Leader on that particular dive. Diver 3 was much more experienced judging from the bio provided. It looks like there was a lot of tasks assigned to Diver 1, who was the least experienced. Protocols should be reviewed.

I do not believe the reciprocity letter for Diver 1 is accurate for lifetime career dives. Here's why:
*edit* Pg 17 shows lifetime dive log.

Diver One’s Diver History
At the time of the accident Diver One had completed and logged 269 SCUBA dives. Of these dives, 29 were official training dives working toward several certifications, and 231 were scientific dives under American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS) standards. Diver One logged 62 drysuit dives, including: 27 Antarctic dives based out of McMurdo Station; 19 dives in the Sitka, AK area; and 6 Glacier Bay dives on this trip prior to the accident.

The dive reciprocity log used for the the scientific program at UCSC does not account for all recreational dives logged, just scientific dives with that program and the 12 needed to regain active status if coming back from inactive.

Diver 1 started with the UCSC sci dive program in 2013 as an undergraduate. Recreational training and dives prior to that start would have been the minimum for OW, ADV, & Rescue and I personally went at least 10 dives with him as well before he passed scientific training.

In addition he spent a gap of years away from UC Santa Cruz where he was with UC Santa Barbara's dive program as a graduate PhD student, doing ops there and several dive ops in Antartica. Those dives would also not have been imported as the programs and University of California schools are all separate entities of each other; yes confusing despite the UC prefix in all their names.

Since his UCSC Training dives are marked 0, I speculate his original record might have been expunged, as he probably surpassed the number of years that records are kept in archive for inactive divers. (ie he was inactive with UC Santa Cruz as he wasn't attending that university any more, while at UC Santa Barbara).

He returned back to UCSC as a postdoc after finishing his PhD at UCSB

Records for inactive divers in an AAUS program are kept for a set number of years then expunged. Don't take that as a nefarious meaning; that's how organizational record keeping works for records.

 

[John the Pom]

... a mutual assumption that the shallow depth made this kludge ok.

It goes right back to one of the first things we learned in the classroom sessions for Open Water. It was drilled into us that gas doubles in volume between 10m and the surface, so we should never treat shallow water as "safe."

 

[Hiszpan]

Only one way to gain experience. Diver 3 was once a Diver 1. A seemingly "safe" dive at 30 feet would be a chance to build Diver 1's experience. That's how you get more divers with experience like Diver 3.

Just my take of course.

Valid point. What do you think about the dive plan then, was it planned properly? They were diving in a threesome which is not ideal per se. They planned to be separated underwater - Diver 1 was doing the survey from the long end of the transect tape toward the zero point and back. The other two were going from zero to 30metres. Additionally, when Diver 3 finished,he surfaced alone, leaving Diver 1 and 2 underwater. Diver 1 and 2 at that point also did not have a visual contact with each other. Visibility was around 6 metres so Diver 1 was basically alone on the long end of the tape while Diver 2 and 3 were buddied together until Diver 3 decided to leave for the surface, if I read the report correctly.
I presume dive plans have to be approved by DSO overseeing the scientific activity.

I must say,looking at the pictures of a model diver without the crotch strap fastened, how on earth was it possible to dive in that thing...and nobody called the dive before it even started.

I have definitely learnt from this report a few valid lessons and I am extremely thankful for sharing this with us.

 

[Hiszpan]

I do not believe the reciprocity letter for Diver 1 is accurate for lifetime career dives. Here's why:
*edit* Pg 17 shows lifetime dive log.


The dive reciprocity log used for the the scientific program at UCSC does not account for all recreational dives logged, just scientific dives with that program and the 12 needed to regain active status if coming back from inactive.

Diver 1 started with the UCSC sci dive program in 2013 as an undergraduate. Recreational training and dives prior to that start would have been the minimum for OW, ADV, & Rescue and I personally went at least 10 dives with him as well before he passed scientific training.

In addition he spent a gap of years away from UC Santa Cruz where he was with UC Santa Barbara's dive program as a graduate PhD student, doing ops there and several dive ops in Antartica. Those dives would also not have been imported as the programs and University of California schools are all separate entities of each other; yes confusing despite the UC prefix in all their names.

Since his UCSC Training dives are marked 0, I speculate his original record might have been expunged, as he probably surpassed the number of years that records are kept in archive for inactive divers. (ie he was inactive with UC Santa Cruz as he wasn't attending that university any more, while at UC Santa Barbara).

He returned back to UCSC as a postdoc after finishing his PhD at UCSB

Records for inactive divers in an AAUS program are kept for a set number of years then expunged. Don't take that as a nefarious meaning; that's how organizational record keeping works for records.

Agreed, they do not show the total number of dives he ever did. But comparing LORs for those three divers, Diver 1 was the least experienced in recent scientific dives, correct?

 

[greeniguana]

I've done a fair bit of transect scientific diving as a consultant but not in the realm of AAUS academic..... Whether a team of 2, or 3, if someone finishes their task first we always go find the other(s) to check their progress before leaving. Besides safety, it speeds things up if you can help with photos, writing notes, or carrying gear.

 

[Rollin Bonz]

Valid point. What do you think about the dive plan then, was it planned properly?

I know nothing of the planning for these types of scientific dives, so I'd have to refrain from judgement. I do plan and execute light technical dives, and would not consider this plan appropriate for THAT.

I think a great many things were tolerated or overlooked on this dive because of the illusion that a 30 minute dive to 30 feet was completely benign.

I must say,looking at the pictures of a model diver without the crotch strap fastened, how on earth was it possible to dive in that thing...and nobody called the dive before it even started.

Maybe not called the dive, but a "What the hell? Are gonna DIVE like that?" Would have been called for and the situation corrected.

I have definitely learnt from this report a few valid lessons and I am extremely thankful for sharing this with us.

Absolutely agree.