Tourist dies while diving on Ambergris Caye

[Teddy Boy]

Tourist dies while diving on Ambergris Caye[/QUOTE
He probably ran out of air and never filled his BCD to stay afloat and never dropped his weights either. Seems like what possibly could have happened.

 

[Scuba-74]

I’ve read that people near panic will often times give the ok sign out of habit, which means we can’t make the assumption he was truly ok. Given that, @DandyDon has some very good theories, although I worry about stroke or heart attack at 57, so I would definitely leave it on the table for a 66 year old.

OK signals can't be taken at face value. Some divers will give an OK signal in all situations but the grave emergency.

300 psi but i'm headed shallow for a safety stop ? OK. I'm shivering but can tough it out? OK. I have no idea why my computer just started beeping? OK. And so on and so forth.

It's interesting that the article doesn't mention how much air he actually had at the safety stop. Surely the DM must have checked it personally, rather than relying on an OK sign?

 

[Ministryofgiraffes]

It's interesting that the article doesn't mention how much air he actually had at the safety stop. Surely the DM must have checked it personally, rather than relying on an OK sign?

I suspect this as well, particularly as the initial call from the diver was that he was low/out of air. It would be very surprising that the DM wouldn't check and leave him, but i don't know. I do know that this was a very experienced dive instructor who has trained multiple DMs across Ambergris..

 

[Dan G]

Often there are politically incorrect but real factors impacting how businesses run and the workflow is managed. I've seen enough of these threads on the forum to know that the politically correct 'model' tends to be 2 buddies conducting the dive throughout, preferably arm's length or similar distance, glancing at each other every few minutes, if one goes up the other does, all the way to back on the boat and post-dive discussion.

I also know that's very often what doesn't happen. What's more, from what I've experienced and perceived from observing others, and the reports about what instabuddies do from forum threads, I don't think that's what all the paying customers want.

If I had to abort a dive, I'd want to be delivered to the safety stop depth at the boat, then left. I'd probably try to 'shoe' the DM back to the group if I could. Obviously some divers have very different expectations and desires.

I don't post this to start an argument. I figure others, particularly newer divers and family members, etc...., who stumble across this thread may read through the posts, see recurrent opinions and wonder 'Well, why doesn't everybody just do that?!?!?'

Because customer experience and skill levels, desire and expectation standards (e.g.: how much 'hand holding' supervision one expects) vary a lot.

Condolences to this diver's loved ones.

From my perspective, this highlights why it is so important to have and follow actual standards. You label it the "politically correct" way to buddy up and dive, but I don't quite follow. Just because a paying customer wants to dive a particular way does not mean they should be permitted to. I do not care what their expectations are. While I agree that following standards does not always occur, they should be followed and this diver may have been saved by one of the most basic of standards.

In a situation such as this particular death, maybe 999 out of 1000 times the diver is just fine and makes it to the boat. Diving protocol and safety procedures aren't designed for those 999 times everything goes right. They are designed for the 0.1% (or less) of times things go sideways. We do not know exactly why this diver died. If it was a medical event, perhaps even the most experienced and capable buddy would not have been able to rescue him. If he simply went OOA at the SS and panicked or could not CESA, then a buddy would have been super valuable and maybe lifesaving.

 

[Scuba-74]

You label it the "politically correct" way to buddy up and dive, but I don't quite follow. Just because a paying customer wants to dive a particular way does not mean they should be permitted to. I do not care what their expectations are.

I think the main point here is that for this protocol to work you would need another paying customer to cut their dive short. Which they may or may not be willing to do. And the dive op may or may not be willing to enforce it.

I'm not taking sides, but a fundamental conflict of interest is fairly obvious.

 

[Dan G]

I think the main point here is that for this protocol to work you would need another paying customer to cut their dive short. Which they may or may not be willing to do. And the dive op may or may not be willing to enforce it.

I'm not taking sides, but a fundamental conflict of interest is fairly obvious.

I agree wholeheartedly about the economics of it all and think it is irresponsible of the divers to put an op in that position. People regularly post in the Cozumel forum, "Looking for a reliable and safe dive op..." Then they get there and can't tolerate a dive cut short due to safety. Well, too bad. That's the nature of diving and if you don't like it, take up another activity.

 

[MrBigfins]

I agree wholeheartedly about the economics of it all and think it is irresponsible of the divers to put an op in that position. People regularly post in the Cozumel forum, "Looking for a reliable and safe dive op..." Then they get there and can't tolerate a dive cut short due to safety. Well, too bad. That's the nature of diving and if you don't like it, take up another activity.

I experienced this exact situation on our most recent trip. The DM was buddied with a fairly new diver who guzzled his air. On the first dive the DM popped his sausage and accompanied the diver to safety stop, hung until the diver made it on boat and rejoined the group. The second dive had much swifter current, when that diver ran low I communicated with my buddy and the DM that I would switch partners and ascend with him. I didnt feel that with varying currents at different depths that the group would be able to stay together safely, so I sacrificed 20 mins of a dive.

I can understand the pressure on the OP and DM to maximize bottom time for all clients. Sometimes it's our responsibility to ensure it's a safe dive for ourselves and others regardless

 

[potato cod]

I think the main point here is that for this protocol to work you would need another paying customer to cut their dive short. Which they may or may not be willing to do. And the dive op may or may not be willing to enforce it.

I'm not taking sides, but a fundamental conflict of interest is fairly obvious.

Yes, I suspect that is very much the issue. As primarily a vacation diver, I am very aware of how much money and time traveling it takes to be splashing into the ocean, and operators in vacation spots certainly know this too.

I'm incredibly lucky because my spouse dives, so there is never any question about sticking together closely for the entire dive or getting back on the boat with my buddy. If either of us has any sort of issue, we head back to the boat/shore together because each other's safety is literally the most important thing in the world. I almost never dive with anyone else because I've seen way too many "same ocean, same dive" buddy pairs that dive so far apart it's hard to imagine how they would even know if their buddy needed help. That said, I can imagine the pressure to continue a dive or to not insist on being accompanied all the way back to the boat if I were diving with someone other than my husband.

 

[yle]

A few years ago I had a problem on a cruise dive excursion. I started heaving at 50’ due to a reg breathing wet. I couldn’t stop so I signaled the DM that I had to surface. He sent up a SMB and stayed with me to the surface. He made sure I was OK and made sure the boat was coming and asked if I was OK and if I was good with him
going back down with the other other divers.
Leaving a diver with a problem before the surface just isn’t right.

Totally agree with you, but in the current incident the diver wasn't having a problem. It seems he decided, from his remaining air, that it was time to end his dive. Unfortunately, the procedure followed in this incident occurs very frequently with no negative consequences. Which is why everyone is now left asking "what happened??"

But... in this incident the DM definitely could have had the diver skip the safety stop. The diver had only been underwater for 25 minutes to a max depth of 80 feet. While a safety stop is always a good habit, it definitely was not necessary for this dive. The ability to make this kind of decision needs to be part of a DMs arsenal.

 

[drrich2]

You label it the "politically correct" way to buddy up and dive, but I don't quite follow. Just because a paying customer wants to dive a particular way does not mean they should be permitted to. I do not care what their expectations are.

I’ll try to articulate things a bit better. With political correctness, you’ve got at least 2 views on an issue, at least one socially acceptable (e.g.: superficially agreed with, not apt to be challenged when stated), at least one not (e.g.: likely to trigger an argument when stated publicly) - even though the latter may be what many (even most) people ‘vote for with their feet,’ so to speak.

In mainstream scuba training at the OW level, buddy diving is heavily endorsed. Okay. Not a bad thing. Out in the world post-certification, the way it is actually practiced is much different. Observation on dive op. recreational trips made clear to me group diving without a specifically assigned buddy is common and preferable to many divers. Some people prefer strict conservative buddy pair diving, many people follow a far looser interpretation, many people just ‘dive with the group’ and some dive solo.

None of these approaches are necessarily ‘wrong.’ It’s also politically correct to claim ‘safety first,’ but it’s not ‘safety only’ or we wouldn’t dive. There is some level of risk that’s acceptable. No one seems to have a hard number for that, and variance in practices shows we don’t all agree. People drive down the highway without a ‘co-pilot’ in a drivers’ ed. style vehicle that would let the ‘buddy’ take over if we had an abrupt medical event zipping down an interstate at 70 mph.

This becomes a big issue when you speak of what people should not ‘be permitted’ to do.

Cozumel was mentioned and a great example. In Cozumel, there are 2 approaches to dealing with the first diver who runs low on gas; either the whole group goes up (e.g.: I’m told Aldora does this), or the guide can send up an SMB and the diver (alone or buddy pair) can ascend (some other op.s). Aldora preferred its approach on safety grounds. A number of divers strongly prefer the latter approach.

Just how much hand-holding/supervision people need/want is not a universal standard for people who aren’t taking a class. Leaving a diver at a safety stop depth by the boat is not reasonably expected to be higher risk than a number of other things divers do. How would the odds of death compare to some of the more daring technical dives?

There may well be 'standards' to some extent (though regional practices vary a lot; a dive boat out of California may do less hand-holding than one in the Caribbean), but I don't think those standards are necessarily what they're often claimed to be.