Two fatalities in Monterey

[MXGratefulDiver]

I'm just going to toss something out there for those of you who seem bent on blaming this on inadequate training. To be completely up-front about it, this is purely a mental exercise ... speculation ... I'm in no way asserting that it actually happened like this. You judge the plausibility.

First off ... what do we know? We know that two young lads ... ages 16 and 17 died in a scuba accident. We know that these boys were recently OW certified through their high-school program. We know that they played football on their high-school football team. We know that they were with a group of 16 high-school students and three (some sources say four) in-water chaperones. We know they were on their third dive of the trip ... one the previous evening, and one earlier in the day prior to the accident. We know that when they were found, one diver's tank was empty and the other one nearly so.

Here's what may have happened. The boys ... along with their classmates and chaperones ... did their first dive on the breakwater the previous evening. It was their first salt-water dive, and they worked on weighting, buoyancy, and the usual things that new divers concentrate on under new to them conditions. All went well, everyone had a good time.

Next morning they go out on the boat. First dive, everyone doing quite OK ... back on the boat, excitement builds. The boys start talking among themselves. Someone suggest a little "contest" to see who can make their tank of air last the longest. A few of the boys decide to go for it. The chaperones know nothing about this. Two boys ... the football players ... are determined to "win". They're trained to win. They know they're going to have to break some rules to do it, but hey ... winning is important. And what's the harm? What difference does it make if you come back with 500 psi or 100 psi?

See where this is going? It may not have happened this way at all ... but my assumptions in this scenario are based on every bit as much evidence as that of those who are blaming the accident on a "massive training failure".

These are 16, 17 year old boys. Has anyone ever heard of boys this age doing things they were specifically told NOT to do? I know I have ... all too often, I was that boy.

I read on ScubaBoard nearly every day people giving the following advice to new divers ... "only you are responsible for your safety". And yet, every time there's an accident, some of those same people want to find someone else to blame it on ... usually an instructor or an agency. Where's the logic?

Want to learn something from this tragedy? OK ...

... Only YOU are responsible for your safety ... quit trying to blame it on somebody else.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[VooDooGasMan]

you can look at it how you want the dive trip was a part of normal operation where you get divers together and dive for fun and get the best possible deal on the charter and trip, yet all things change when it comes to the day of the dive, people cancel and now you change direction on the staff.
It does not matter what the out come is when you have kids on your dive charter, you have to be aware that they need extra supervision. The parents trusted instructors, organizers. they are completely responsible and should face what ever charges or humiliation that comes of this, no matter what.

I see instructors and the dive world prey on schools to gain profit for dive instruction. so be it.

The lord does not have a problem as long as you take care of his children are ready to loose everything you have, cause you prey on children for your profit.


The parents have the right to put these Individuals out of the dive business for killing there children, It should have never happen, and could have been avoided, they were totally irresponsible to the youth diving program.

Whine all you want, the boys had an adventure and a hysterical moment before death, they are now in a peaceful place, and are going forward in there life, while all others are mourning and putting self blame on others.


The thing is DIVINGS DANGEROUS and that is all there is to it. Scubaboard strides for diver safety and is a all around dive system that cares, and helps people become safe divers.

You will have deaths and there will be blame, and the leaders have stepped up to take this challenge, and will deal with the bad thing when it happens.





Do not know the names of the boys, but I wish you the best,

and rest in peace, that many are in sorrow of your absence in the world of diving.


I will run into you boys one day, and it will be a blessing to meet you both.

For every one else, take precaution on the youth divers in your presence while in the water, they really need more knowledge of survival than just a open water class.







Happy Diving

 

[ItsBruce]

I am intrigued by how much emphasis is being put on the number of dives the young men, or any one else, for that matter, had done. As I see it, it is not the number of dives that makes a good diver, but rather the quality of those dives and what one does on them.

For example one could rack up 8 or 10 dives a day cleaning the bottom of boats. However, there is no reason to think that such a diver, even after 10 years of doing this could handle an OOA or a broken mask strap, let alone plan and execute a dive to 60 feet. Even one who has done 100 recreational dives does not necessarily have the skill to clear a mask if he or she has not practiced doing so. 100 dives may make one comfortable in the water. It does not make one competent.

Which all leads me to proclaim that I have joined the camp that feels current standards are inadequate to make one a safe diver. One may understand the skill and be able to execute it. But, that does not mean one can execute it when under stress. One may be able to form a dive plan. But that does not mean one really understands the importance of sticking to it.

Do not ask me for a solution. I don't have one.

 

[ItsBruce]

Now a comment on the earlier discussion about when to drop one's weights. I was trained by NAUI. If my recollection serves, it was over a period of 4 weeks, with one day per week in the pool and one day per week in the classroom. Then we did beach dives and then boat dives.

As I recall it, we were trained that at the first sign of trouble, to remove and hold our weight belt. That way if things went from bad to worse or we lost consciousness, we'd at least be buoyant. (I did not even realize other programs did not teach this.) The exception, as I recall was OOA. When one goes OOA, the overriding priority is to get more air, whether from a buddy or the surface. That should be done immediately. No time should be wasted messing with one's weight belt, even if it is to drop it. Once more air is secured, remove and hold the weight belt, just in case you need to drop it.

 

[Blue Sparkle]

Which all leads me to proclaim that I have joined the camp that feels current standards are inadequate to make one a safe diver. One may understand the skill and be able to execute it. But, that does not mean one can execute it when under stress. One may be able to form a dive plan. But that does not mean one really understands the importance of sticking to it.

Do not ask me for a solution. I don't have one.

I've been thinking about this, and about the range of dive training available. I know there is some very comprehensive, long, thorough training available. But when it comes to the more "usual" shorter courses... I'm having a hard time putting my thoughts into words here, sorry..... but I keep thinking about learning to drive.

Driving: Now there is something that many people say is much more dangerous than SCUBA diving. Certainly it can be very dangerous. And yet, I remember my driver's ed. training as being a few filmstrips and then two or three days in the car with a guy who was not really all that interested or enthusiastic, where we drove around the lake and admired the scenery. I think I learned the most when a friend took me out in her car and - in the spirit of a teen-aged friend - "tried" to get me into trouble (not really, but I mean things such as having me stop on a hill and then watching me sweat bullets when I had to get going without hitting the car RIGHT on my back bumper).

The tests consisted of a written true false exam that was pretty simple, and then driving around some cones and painted lines on a mock street behind the DOT building. And there I was, a newly minted driver. Supposedly ready to take on rush-hour freeways, icy highways, and dark, curving backroads. Only of course I wasn't. I had to build up to it. But I'm pretty sure I *knew* that, so it was okay. I'm sure I did not head right out onto an icy mountain pass; instead I built up to it slowly. I knew I had WAY more to learn on my own, even with my brand-new shiny driver's license. And that seemed to be common knowledge.

I have no idea how driver's ed. is done now, but it just came to mind as a parallel to diving. Something was rolling around in my mind about whether it can be okay to accept that training is just the springboard to further educating yourself. One issue may be that is that in some cases it may not be presented as such, and so maybe that is a/the problem? i.e. divers (not these two boys, from the sounds of it) taking one of the "quicker" classes that we know are out there but then being awarded certification that makes it sound like they are ready for any OW dives? I know they say "the same conditions you certified in," but...

So, might one problem be (in general, not for these divers specifically) a mis-match between training and projected expectations? In other words, some people are getting the two-day "high-school driver's ed." class but it's not made clear enough that they did not take the "high speed super skilled professional driver" class (or even that those classes are out there)? Maybe in the more abbreviated classes there needs to be more emphasis placed on further training, or on the need to "train yourself" further?

Perhaps this has been exacerbated by the fact that (as I have read) many of the popular agencies have taken their "Beginner I, II, and III classes and made Beginner one "the" OW class, and then II and II "Advanced" classes, which to me skews one to perceive one's self as "ready to go" after just the OW (i.e. Beginner I but not Beginner II or III, which are now "Advanced").

To relate it back into this event, why does it seem that if, say, two teenagers have a car accident and perish, that most people don't say things like "Their training must have been totally inadequate!" It seems like most folks would be thinking and saying things like "Well, something must have gone wrong with the car, or there must have been an icy patch, or maybe they were being a bit reckless." Even though (unless it has changed dramatically), driver's ed. is pretty basic and really doesn't prepare you for all driving (not even close in my case).

Blue Sparkle

PS: Sorry if this is too much of a ramble here, and maybe it should be in another thread (but then the posts that are ahead of mine here are also talking about training, unless we move them all (?).

PPS: And, just to reiterate, it sounds like some excellent sources have vouched for these divers training, so I'm directing this more at the dive community that is posting about the subject in this thread, and not at this accident specifically.

 

[DandyDon]

Now a comment on the earlier discussion about when to drop one's weights. I was trained by NAUI. If my recollection serves, it was over a period of 4 weeks, with one day per week in the pool and one day per week in the classroom. Then we did beach dives and then boat dives.

As I recall it, we were trained that at the first sign of trouble, to remove and hold our weight belt. That way if things went from bad to worse or we lost consciousness, we'd at least be buoyant. (I did not even realize other programs did not teach this.) The exception, as I recall was OOA. When one goes OOA, the overriding priority is to get more air, whether from a buddy or the surface. That should be done immediately. No time should be wasted messing with one's weight belt, even if it is to drop it. Once more air is secured, remove and hold the weight belt, just in case you need to drop it.

That idea of remove and hold came up kinda late in this thread actually, a new one to me but made good sense once presented - but why not on OOA, which was why weight ditching below was suggested? OOA is the prime emergency to me; most other problems are challenges to evaluate and deal with - and weight dumping may still be chosen in time.

 

[openmindOW]

Knowing who their instructors were, . . . .

The Instructors on board the vessel on the day of the incident or their OW Instructors?

 

[Chuck Tribolet]

The big difference between diving and driving is that when we
get our driving learner's permit we have been riding around with
Mom and Dad for 15 plus years, and sorta already know the rules.

Open Water I card should be called Learner's Permit.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

The Instructors on board the vessel on the day of the incident or their OW Instructors?

I know who runs the program under which they were trained ... I have no idea who was on board the vessel that day ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[raftingtigger]

I'm new at this forum stuff, and have inadvertently not included my first comments that Bubbletrouble is making comments on. Sorry.

Bubbletrouble has very valid comments, but as the mother of 16 and 18 yo boys I know how each word/letter/implied thought... can be debated. I'll comment on 2 and then leave it to the forum from there.

I'd like to caution you about reading too much into that 1991 report. Your interpretation would seem to suggest that failure to ditch the weightbelt contributed to one or more of those 23 fatalities. Wouldn't it make sense to do an in-depth accident analysis of each specific case...and then draw a conclusion about whether failure to ditch weight contributed to death? After all, correlation does not imply causation.

FROM RAFTINGTIGGER: I 100% agree that correlation DOES NOT equal causation, yet this statistic (if in fact true) should make one pause and think at least a little. BTW, since we are talking about MONTEREY, CA statistics it is a safe assumption that they were all wearing exposure suits also.l

FROM BUBBLETROUBLE:

From this statement, you seem to be implying that ditching weight is the only way for a diver with an empty tank to ascend. If a diver wants to ascend to the surface from any depth, why should he ever have to add air (by power inflater or by mouth) to his BCD? A small kick up should initiate an ascent very easily -- air expands in the BCD and neoprene expands as the ambient pressure decreases. Perhaps divers need to learn how to be "neutrally" buoyant at depth. That's something I learned in my PADI basic OW class.

Don't forget that as you ascend your wetsuit will expand a little as ambient pressure decreases. Also, as you use up air from your tank, this should make you more "positively" buoyant. Obviously, if the tank is already empty, the latter effect doesn't occur in any significant way.

FROM RAFTINGTIGGER: Yes, absolutely. This IS a form of increasing displacement, adding air to the BCD is another. Is ascending sufficient to go from negative to positive? Depends on the circumstances. Remember, once at depth we shouldn't even be negative.... Oh, and using tank air up is a way of decreasing density.

Overall this thread has been a good and thought provoking discussion. It has made me consider additional limitations and restrictions to use when taking my youth group out in the future (once we're all certified to our appropriate levels). The thought of 2 youth (including my 2 Eagle scout sons) buddying together and then going out alone has always given me pause. With this tragedy it is even more of a concern.

Lastly, I am very thankful that our instructor (OW youth, DM me) is training us TOGETHER. I will get to know my youths' strength and weakness much better.