Rob Davie's accident. (aka. BigJetDiver)

[lamont]

IMO, this is the critical time. Particularly in view of

Perhaps "just under the surface" translates to "floating on the surface, face submerged". Even if he had a problem where the flooded unit tended to flip him face down, the report also says that he has air still left in the bailout bottle. So that should have still been survivable, unless he was incapacitated for some reason.

It's reasonably clear that a rebreather mouthpiece problem started the cascade of problems. What's not clear is what happened once he got to the surface, with air still in his bailout bottle.

It seems pretty clear to me that with air left in the bailout bottle that he didn't just drown because of a flooded unit pulling him under (although i hadn't recognized that as a risk with rebreather divers -- note to self made about closing the mouthpiece in a rescue situation). So, something incapacitated him while he was breathing off the bailout bottle. The list so far seems to be:

- AGE/DCS
- Pulmonary issues related to aspirating water?
- MI or other medical issue

I don't really like either of the first two choices, MI/medical seems to be most likely. And only if there's a link between CO2 and MI can we really say that the unit started the cascade in that case (although 'stress' may have started the MI, but that seems a little bit useless to me as being causative, because diving tends to be inherantly stressful).

 

[mdb]

] Further - please be aware that there is a very good chance that the exact cause may never be established for certain. Let's not try to convert 'best guess' into 'truth'.

Kim: You are right. It seems this thread has turned into CSI. We don't need medical terms, someones theory on what actually happened, etc.

Likely we will never know.

May Rob rest in peace.

 

[roakey]

Kim: You are right. seems this thread has turned into CSI.

I take that as a complement to the thread; did you mean to imply something different?

We are, after all, trying to pull as much information out of what little facts we have available.

Exactly what "CSI" does.

Roak

 

[Darnold9999]

It is hard to discuss these things without it seeming to "blame" someone. I don't see that as what is happening here at all.

My thought while reading this is to review the bounds of MY buddy protocols.

For example at 80 feet early in the dive, my first stage fails for some reason. I as a hypothetical experienced diver switch to my pony/bailout - signal to my buddies that I am surfacing - no distress or panic, and that they should continue the dive. Do they continue the dive, watch me until I get to the surface then continue the dive, follow me to the surface, and continue the dive or follow me to the boat and call the dive? (I don't carry a pony and right now vis is so bad to be sure someone made it to the surface you pretty much have to go to the surface as well so this is hypothetical)

In that situation the limits of my current buddy protocol would be to watch the buddy to the surface and then continue the dive. If someone suggested that we just wave goodby and continue the dive I would not accept that. I don't think I would feel compelled to surface unless there was some other factor like a diver in distress or new diver - neither of which seems to be the case here.

On reflection I don't think I would change this. If someone is in control, experienced and waves me on to surface by themselves then, barring some other factor ,that is exactly what I do - subject to making sure I visually ensure that they get to the surface OK.

If they are not experienced, or in distress or anything doesn't feel right then I escort them to the boat and call the dive.

 

[cerich]

In that situation the limits of my current buddy protocol would be to watch the buddy to the surface and then continue the dive. If someone suggested that we just wave goodby and continue the dive I would not accept that. I don't think I would feel compelled to surface unless there was some other factor like a diver in distress or new diver - neither of which seems to be the case here.

On reflection I don't think I would change this. If someone is in control, experienced and waves me on to surface by themselves then, barring some other factor ,that is exactly what I do - subject to making sure I visually ensure that they get to the surface OK.

In the past I would have done the same, now I wouldn't (and wouldn't for the last 6 years or so). The only exception would be a 4 man team, if 2 continued as a buddy team and 1 accompanied the "problem" diver back to boat/shore and remained with their buddy.

 

[lamont]

Actually the buddy thing gets very close to blamestorming in my opinion. We all should know the issues, we should all have formed our opinions about it.

 

[Nailer99]

"Blamestorming." That's good. As far as the "CSI" stuff goes....of course everyone's speculating. What else could this thread possibly be for? The facts are sparse, and conclusive evidence will probably never be had. Within reason, it's entirely appropriate to engage in a bit of "what if" here. I've learned a few things allready.

 

[Cacia]

I see his buddy as totally vindicated as he was obviously diving in the fashion they were both in mutual aggreement on from what has been said. Even if someone else now chooses to operate differently... that does not change my impression that they were both doing what they loved to do, exactly the way they both chose to do it. Could have just as easily been the "other" guy. Nobody in their right mind would need to blame anyone.

Personally, I feel it has been good to air it. People that jump all over others ...well it is misplaced grief, frankly.

 

[cerich]

Actually the buddy thing gets very close to blamestorming in my opinion. We all should know the issues, we should all have formed our opinions about it.

some people with less experience are going to be reading this, our desire to say nothing that could possibly be percieved as "bad" about one of our own isn't going to do anybody any good.

We are never going to know EXACTLY how Rob passed, IMHO a team approach is safer and for my risk/benifit thoughts on diving makes more sense to me but it's natural that others will feel different.

If this thread is in danger of being "modded" because there may be things said that reflect badly on Robs judgement then it may be better if the whole thread were to disappear and because Rob was ONE OF US we only have the memorial thread.

There is no way to discuss this without considering "Pilot error" along with equipment, medical and enviornmental factors.

Best,

Chris

 

[cerich]

I see his buddy as totally vindicated as he was obviously diving in the fashion they were both in mutual aggreement on from what has been said. Even if someone else now chooses to operate differently... that does not change my impression that they were both doing what they loved to do, exactly the way they both chose to do it. Could have just as easily been the "other" guy. Nobody in their right mind would need to blame anyone.

Thank you for putting it better than I could.