Suit filed in case of "Girl dead, boy injured at Glacier National Park
- Thread starter Jim Lapenta
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Coming from a military aviation background the cockpit voice recordings, flight data recordings, HUD cameras, and models from crashed aircraft are extensively used in the safety community as teaching tools. It's pretty chilling when you can hear the moment the crew realizes they are about to parish and there isn't anything they can do about. So I believe the videos could be useful here, when applied tastefully and with some care. I don't necessarily think it should be dropped just for shock value, but it can be a put into a presentation and dissected as a teaching tool. I think much like in aviation the focus should be the systemic failures that had to occur prior the fatal event, perhaps even more than event. What had to fail to get to that point, what rules/guidelines/procedures weren't followed? What should have been done, and what were the likely outcomes? What new process/guidelines/procedures can the viewers think of that would prevent it? What in their local control can break the chain of events that led to this. Again referencing the many aviation safety briefings and their tone. The actual fatal event while discussed was almost de-emphaised, everyone understands that when planes hit things at fast speeds the humans inside don't do well. But what caused that to happen, and what can we take from it, so as to not repeat it.
I'd recommend you reach to Gareth Lock and have him produce a video on it for dive professionals. This is far more into the human factors area than many things. His other video is an excellent example of this type of discussion.
Saboteur
Contributor
I just heard about this incident from perusing scuba related vids on youtube (Divers Ready channel). Absolutely horrifying and tragic… I sure hope something positive comes out of this for future diver training and standards.
OP
The agency named in this has changed standards. But not for the better. They're even worse now in some people's opinion.
Can you explain?
OP
4 to 1 on dives deeper than 60ft?
How many hands does an instructor have to get a hold of divers who have a problem?
You get a diver who starts a rapid ascent. You reach for him and if using proper buddy procedures and supervision distance you can maybe grab the buddy and use them also to help slow the ascent. Or you can immediately signal the buddy and have both in sight.
But the others are now not being supervised because the instructor is too occupied with the one having an issue.
One of them starts to get freaked by this and takes off.
Another possible fatality because greed trumps common sense.
Two to one is better.
And 6 to 1 in the first two atmospheres where the most risk of overexpansion is present.
Wait- aren’t ALL divers taking AOW already CERTIFIED?
So why is there any issue leaving two certified divers in the water?
wait for it……
Thanks for responding. Were the ratios in the old standards lower? Asking because I honestly don't know.
I agree that a 2:1 ratio is better, but that's the case for just about every course. There is always a risk that a student is going to bolt, lose buoyancy and ascend too rapidly, panic, etc. regardless of the course. But then dive training would become nearly impossible for many shops. And, as Omisson stated, for courses beyond OWD, the divers are already certified.
Bringing this back to the case at hand, the biggest problem is that the instructor was, to put it bluntly, an absolute effing moron whose sheer stupidity and lack of common sense got someone killed. To me, the failure points were not the standards but in a) PADI letting Snow "earn" her instructor rating in the first place and b) Gull Dive hiring and using someone with such complete lack of common sense as an instructor. The tightest standards in the world won't amount to anything if the instructor doesn't know what he/she is doing, and if dive shops hire instructors who are idiots.
Wookie
Proud to be a Chaos Muppet
Staff member
ScubaBoard Business Sponsor
ScubaBoard Supporter
Scuba Instructor
For the sake of argument, when a diver is in "Student" status, are they (by the standards) responsible for themselves, or is the instructor responsible for them.
Remember, they are by definition, being introduced to something (equipment, skills, task loading) outside of their previous experience. Otherwise they wouldn't need direct supervision.
This sadly leads to operators not letting OW divers dive below 60 feet, which is BS IMO, because they haven't been to 60 feet with an instructor.
I dive a drysuit, DPV, use hydraulic tools, and look at fish all without the accompanying specialty card. And I like to think I have some small amount of sense, at least enough that I haven't died in the last 6000 or so dives.
CuzzA
Wetwork for Hire
I disagree with your example. 2-1 now leaves 1 student by their self if one student shoots. This would more likely lead to a buddy separation panic for the remaining sole student.
At least if it's 4 to 1 and one diver shoots, the instructor can chase and three divers are there to manage their ascent together.
