• Welcome to ScubaBoard

  1. 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

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Three dead in Poland last week

Discussion in 'Accidents and Incidents' started by Ryszard R, May 24, 2020.

  1. Hiszpan

    Hiszpan Nassau Grouper

    I think the plan was too ambitious for the first dive of the trip.
    Why not go to 20-30m first, without fixed plan, and test everything, including yourself?
    It is the deepest lake in Poland, with steep shores dropping ultimately to a 108m. Whenever I went there diving, if a Friday-after-work to Sunday trip, I have never either started diving straight after arrival on Friday (after all day's work),nor chose to go to the "wooden paddle boats" at 35m on our first dive (diving OC on air). Always felt some respect for that place.

    Looking a bit wider I have an impression this fatality is another one of those where everything seems to have been done according to the rules/training/protocols, but fatality still happened nevertheless. Are we missing something?
  2. uwxplorer

    uwxplorer Rebreather Pilot

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Los Angeles
    Beside the reason that triggered Diver 1 to bailout (and not get any better having done so, the breathing mix being a likely contributing factor), treat any problem as a potentially deadly one, is to me the take-home lesson. I am revisiting dive logs with this in mind. In particular one where one of my two buddies showed me a dead cell warning and decided to go back to the boat, and refused that I accompanied him to it, so I could stick with my other buddy, who was already on the wreck, out of range for signaling. He made it safely back, but I can't imagine what I would feel if he had not. We clearly did not have the proper protocol to handle this dive properly.
  3. stuartv

    stuartv Seeking the Light ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Manassas, VA
    I don't think anyone said it was impossible. It's simply that it was SAFER to do it the way it was done.

    From everything everyone has posted about the bottom topography, it sounds to me like swimming along the bottom did constitute ascending. It was just ascending at an angle, instead of a free ascent straight up.

    If you want to go up and you have a choice between a free ascent or following the bottom up, and following the bottom still gives you a good ascent rate AND gets you out at a more favorable spot, why would you not?
    Bob DBF and rjack321 like this.
  4. fsardone

    fsardone Solo Diver ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Rome, Italy
    Are you a flyer? :wink:
    This is EXACTLY what we say in flying! Being behind the aircraft: react to events, being ahead planning and proactively manage the events. When you fall behind it becomes more and more difficult getting back ahead and avoid missing things. You become more task saturated and, at a point, unable to cope.
    This is when you ask for a delay vector (extend a path) to ATC or give tasks to the copilot (if you have the luxury of one).

    And a loud YES again. We are missing risk management and decision making (Human factors) following rules is worthless if you are not thinking.
    I am in the military (still AD) used to fly in combat. In a couple of weeks I will go back to the squadron for my twice a year recurrency training. I will fly get theoretical instructions, sims and emergency sims and the go fly a very simple profile. A flight that I could do in my sleep 20 years ago and now requires me to be "prepared" for it.

    So some rules have been modified to require recurrence training in my world. In the diving world ...? Not yet and I do not think we should have those rules but we need to be aware that capabilities are a perishable good and good judgement needs to be cultivated.

    A superior (pilot diver) is someone who use his superior judgement to avoid situations that would require his superior skills. :crafty:


    stuartv likes this.
  5. johndiver999

    johndiver999 Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Gainesville FL
    rjack's earlier comment on this thread:

    Controlling 3 sources of buoyancy (wing, drysuit, counterlungs) while also controlling 3 sources of buoyancy in a bailed out buddy is pretty much not going to happen. (even on BO the counterlungs need to be vented).

    I paraphrased this comment as impractical/impossible. It seemed that his conclusion/opinion on this matter was generally accepted by the experts on this thread?
  6. stuartv

    stuartv Seeking the Light ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Manassas, VA
    I'll give you that one.

    Sometimes (often?) I take things quite literally. So, "pretty much not going to happen" did not equate to "impossible" in my mind. But, your point is fair enough.
    johndiver999 likes this.
  7. Dr Simon Mitchell

    Dr Simon Mitchell ScubaBoard Supporter Staff Member ScubaBoard Supporter

    You are deflecting on a minor technicality. But OK, here's my response to your "We can fix bent. We can't fix dead" quote again, worded to capture exactly what you were implying:

    It is easy to proclaim something catchy like this and sound wise when judging the event in hindsight with the outcome known, but invoking the stated principle is much more fraught when the event is evolving. Put yourself in the shoes of Diver 1. Up until the separation nothing had happened that gave him cause to think that completing a safe decompression up the slope was an unrealistic goal. At that point ascending to or toward the surface sufficiently quickly that one or both divers suffer (probably) serious DCS almost certainly did not look like the best option". It is easy to say that it might have been in hindsight - maybe (and maybe not because both of them might have ended up bent and dead). But at the time I would have been going for a safe outcome for both divers and would have made the same decision.

    While we are on it, it is worth noting that we can't always "fix bent"; a fact also relevant to decision making in this setting.

    Not if you are struggling to maintain neutral buoyancy in mid water with a virtual ceiling overhead, particularly when the alternative option is ascent up a hard sloping bottom.

    They were heading upward, back the way they came up the slope.

    Simon M
    Jack Hammer likes this.
  8. newmanl

    newmanl Nassau Grouper

    # of Dives: 2,500 - 4,999
    Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
    All great questions. Fabio nailed it - to me this is the very essence of the human factors aspect in recreational diving. The assessment of risk is up to the individual involved. We don't have a governing body to assess the risks for us and don't have to abide by any formal mitigation measures. Every recreational diver - be it rec, tech, wreck, cave or RB, gets to assess the level of risk for themselves, and implement, or not, whatever mitigation measures they see fit. As Fabio asks, "Are we realistic in evaluating our capabilities to handle issues underwater?" I'd suggest we, as a community, are not realistic. If our little dive community here in the PNW is any indication of the greater state, then any instruction (if it actually happens) on thorough dive planning, gear-matching, bubble-checks, modified S-drills and flow-checks are simply going the way of 'hands at 10 and 2' (or is it 9 and 3 now... its been a while!) right after the test is done! I can't breathe underwater, so I treat every dive the same - with a thorough assessment of the risks and detailed mitigation measures developed with my buddy or team.

  9. eleniel

    eleniel Photographer

    # of Dives: 50 - 99
    Location: Utah
    I think its 4 and 8 as the ideal with 9 and 3 as an option, due to airbag deployment concerns.

Share This Page