skippy311
Contributor
I hope that was a misunderstanding. The ocean is formidable and I am so sorry for his death.
Wife describes losing husband - Maui, Hawaii
- Thread starter DandyDon
- 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
VirginiaScubaGuy
Registered
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 8
- # of dives
- 100 - 199
I think the reporter means that the instructor dropped whatever weights were being used. I have a single pull weight release in my Zeagle BCD. could have been a weight belt.
Rickk
Contributor
I am reading this as they descended to planned dive depth, then buddy up.
They got distracted while forming buddy pairs, the husband continued to descend for some reason. ( narced? stroke? Heart attack?) Is there a down current at that location, some seam to think it is possible.
The wife chased her husband, the DM chased the wife. They ended at 185' with wife not catching husband but DM caught wife. DM did something to make wife positive and she went to surface.
Husband died, body recovered later. Wife and DM apparently had no ill effects at surface. ( Did they really bounce to 185'?)
They should have descended in buddy pairs.
They should have discussed the down current and set decision points for aborting dive and dealing with current ( less current away or close to the wall from wall?)
Wife claimed to have no knowledge of narcosis, She should have been better trained, kept up with additional training or self study to know current thinking on narcosis and depth limits.
Should narcosis awareness been include3 in the briefing? To me that depends on the planned maximum depth but of it was to be 100' or so, then at least a mention should have been made.
They got distracted while forming buddy pairs, the husband continued to descend for some reason. ( narced? stroke? Heart attack?) Is there a down current at that location, some seam to think it is possible.
The wife chased her husband, the DM chased the wife. They ended at 185' with wife not catching husband but DM caught wife. DM did something to make wife positive and she went to surface.
Husband died, body recovered later. Wife and DM apparently had no ill effects at surface. ( Did they really bounce to 185'?)
They should have descended in buddy pairs.
They should have discussed the down current and set decision points for aborting dive and dealing with current ( less current away or close to the wall from wall?)
Wife claimed to have no knowledge of narcosis, She should have been better trained, kept up with additional training or self study to know current thinking on narcosis and depth limits.
Should narcosis awareness been include3 in the briefing? To me that depends on the planned maximum depth but of it was to be 100' or so, then at least a mention should have been made.
I've done a half dozen dives on this site, and another half dozen or so on the interior. Narcosis at 70' seems such an unlikely event that I'd look to other causes.
On the back wall, I once chased a manta ray (while video recording) to 110' thinking I was only at about 80'. It's easy to do for somebody used to 90' being a perpetual night dive in murky, northwest coast USA waters. The clear water "feels" shallower. What if the deceased chased down a shark just in his view but out of sight to other divers?
While sympathetic to the widow, no certified diver should be unaware of narcosis risk. I had a 15 year gap between OW and AOW certs (diving throughout, though), and never "forgot" narcosis. The key risks of diving that my (and any, I hope) OW course instilled in me were don't hold your breath, DCS hits at 60' and 60 minutes (on old Navy tables) and faster deeper, narcosis hits at around 100' (dark narc, silly narc, or aggressive narc), and you die of oxygen toxicity at 200' breathing air. Given how thoroughly narcosis is covered in video, text, quizzes, and exams in current PADI courses, I think it's reasonable to expect any certified diver to be aware of the risk just as they're aware of the need to exhale on ascent and not stay too deep for too long.
On these dives, it's routine to be told a max depth in the briefing. Most of the dives I did here start at max depth and work shallower. Whether due to willful disregard, lack of attention, or incapacity, the deceased blew through all reasonable limits.
On the back wall, I once chased a manta ray (while video recording) to 110' thinking I was only at about 80'. It's easy to do for somebody used to 90' being a perpetual night dive in murky, northwest coast USA waters. The clear water "feels" shallower. What if the deceased chased down a shark just in his view but out of sight to other divers?
While sympathetic to the widow, no certified diver should be unaware of narcosis risk. I had a 15 year gap between OW and AOW certs (diving throughout, though), and never "forgot" narcosis. The key risks of diving that my (and any, I hope) OW course instilled in me were don't hold your breath, DCS hits at 60' and 60 minutes (on old Navy tables) and faster deeper, narcosis hits at around 100' (dark narc, silly narc, or aggressive narc), and you die of oxygen toxicity at 200' breathing air. Given how thoroughly narcosis is covered in video, text, quizzes, and exams in current PADI courses, I think it's reasonable to expect any certified diver to be aware of the risk just as they're aware of the need to exhale on ascent and not stay too deep for too long.
On these dives, it's routine to be told a max depth in the briefing. Most of the dives I did here start at max depth and work shallower. Whether due to willful disregard, lack of attention, or incapacity, the deceased blew through all reasonable limits.
How can any normal person (not Sheldon Cooper) testify to what exactly they were or were not taught in a class 26+ yrs ago? IMO you can only tell what you remember being taught, but to think you accurately remember what all else might have been discussed decaded ago is a bit far fetched.
Bob DBF
Contributor
One can only tell what one can remember would be true regardless of the timeframe. That’s why I have a library, at least I can reread what I was supposed to know. Some of the added content I remember because it was used in local diving, other would depend on how interesting the info was.
I guess if you were not taught something and it turned into an aw **** moment, you would probably know it. But discerning whether you were never told, or weren’t listening, or forgot would be pretty tough.
As far as testifying, you answer to the best of your ability, it is up to the court to decide if your answers are worth listening to. It may work differently in other countries.
In my PADI OW manual 1980, used in the NAUI/PADI OW class, not only has information on Narcosis, it was also covered in the knowledge review questions at the end of the chapter. Can’t tell you if it was on the test. We were responsible for knowing the contents of the book,
The information on narcosis is pretty good in that it does not use the martini effect of depth as earlier training.
A quote relevant to the discussion:
“When narcosis occurs, the diver may not be aware of it unless familiar with the symptoms. If feeling strangely, immediately ascend to shallower water to determine if narcosis is the problem. Relief will usually result quickly and there are no after effects from narcosis, which can be prevented simply by avoiding deep dives. This is especially true for inexperienced divers.”
lamarpaulski
Contributor
Some had 2 CO2 cartridges - it was made pretty obsolete by low pressure inflator, a real improvement.
Bob DBF
Contributor
At one time BC’s had both low pressure inflator and CO2 cartridges. Each have their function.
They were taken off as a safety measure, not because they were obsolete. I miss them.
Bob
Similar threads
