Wilmington Incident - 16 Oct

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

From what I have heard she was NOT diving with her husband, nor was she solo. She signaled her buddy she was heading up, he followed 15 min. later & found her gear in close proximity to the anchor.

Could you provide a bit more information, please.

Who was her buddy if not her husband?

Who was the last person to see her alive on the dive?

I understand that the diver was very experienced. How much experience did she have - especially in NC diving?

Can you provide facts in response to any of Thal's questions in Post #60?
 
First, my sincere condolences to the family.

I have communicated with three divers who were on the boat when Amy passed away. All divers versions were consistent - leaving lots of questions.

Facts we know:
1. Divers entered the water and descended to approximately 110'
2. Some of the divers were diving doubles and/or had pony bottles. One of the divers I spoke to on the boat stated Amy had a single bottle and no back-up, the other stated he was not sure but didn't remember seeing her with anything other than a single tank.
3. Some number of divers had planned DECO stops and had staged bottles under the boat.
4. There was a fairly strong current. One of the divers I spoke to said he could not make it back to the boat from his safety stop and had to be pulled in to the boat by line.
5. Amy was first spotted face down some distance from the boat.
6. Amy was retreived and there were medical professionals onboard - not clear what level (nurse, doctor, paramedic) but it was reported they were medical professionals and they tended to Amy.
7. Two or more bottles of oxygen were called for by those tending to Amy
8. The boat motor was started by someone onboard - I assume a crew member since John was reported still in the water. The diver who was on the boat questioned why the motor was being started and he was told this was the recall signal. According to this diver, everyone did not return to the boat - presumably because doing so would have put them at significant risk - they had extended DECO stop requirements to fulfill. This diver said it might also have been possible they didn't return because they may not have known the recall signal. He said - had he been in the water, he would not have returned because he was unaware this was the recall signal.
9. One of the divers on the boat stated the equipment was not recovered at the time of the incident, however he believes it was recovered later. Neither of the two divers I spoke to knew if there was air remaining in her tank.

Appearances:
*It appears (from speaking to both of these divers) that everyone - for all intents and purposes was "solo" diving. They reported everyone descended, tied off their wreck reels and headed off in the sand in different directions.
*It also appears some number of them (again, based on info from the two divers) and quite possibly Amy, were "solo" diving without proper training or equipment / i.e no redundancy. As a Solo Instructor, it also bothers me that any of them (unless SOLO qualified to that depth) were doing this. Solo diving has depth limitations - being no deeper than 2X the depth to which one can breathhold dive. Of the people I have certified, I have yet to certify anyone beyond 60ft. The average diver (who is not a trained freediver) can usually reach no deeper than 30ft on a single breath of air - and this is in optimal conditions. Even with redundancy, one would be depth limited by the standards considered to be safe for solo diving.
* Not everyone on the boat was aware of the lengthy DECO stops some divers may be doing on this trip. This is questionable. When "techies" do trips, it is understood that if someone gets into trouble, the boat is not going to be able to do a recall and leave quickly to seek medical assistance. This appears to have been a "recreational trip" that was conducted well beyond recreational limits - again, according to the two divers on the boat.

Here is a direct quote from one of the divers on the boat that day - "We really do not know what happened to Any Pieno.
The boat did not have all the things I would like to see in case of an emergency.
Everyone pitched in when it was asked. This was a terrable thing that happened so so upseting"


Speculation:
There are only two handfuls of reasons why a diver would remove their gear and head to the surface. Regardless of what the medical examiner rules as cause of death, we will never know what happened - because there are no witnesses who saw her removing her gear. But here are the possibilities -
1. Amy ran out of air ( one of the more likely scenarios)
2. Amy was narc'd (suffering from Nitrogen Narcosis) - (unlikely, put possible)
3. Amy became entangled and removed her gear to escape (this would be known by whoever recovered her gear - it should still have ben tangled)
4. Amy's tank valve was not open all the way and gradually became harder to breath at depth , causing her to panic. (unlikely based on the fact she was observed heading casually to the anchor line by another diver mentioned in this post)
5. Amy had an equipment failure (a blown HP hose, an exhaust valve come off of her BCD - flooding it etc...) This again should be easy enough to find by whoever recovered the gear
6. Amy made it to the anchor line, lost her grip on the way up and got caught fighting a current in midwater - and possibly ran out of air fighting it... deciding to remove her gear thinking it would be easier to swim without it - leading to drowning (unlikely, but possible)
7. Amy may have encountered a large predator and removed her gear to defend herself. (Unlikely but possible in the gulfstream -Great Whites, Tigers etc... have been seen there - but there were no other reports of sharks)
8. A physical ailment such as chest pain could have caused her to panic (but it is highly unlikely this would cause one to end up on the surface without gear)
9. Amy may have committed suicide (highly unlikely since she appears to all to have a wonderful loving family and great life)
10. Amy could have been murdered (highly unlikely - truly unthinkable - again, it doesn't fit - not at all)

It is just another sad tragedy and one we will probably never have a definitive answer to - unless an equipment failure is found or her tank was recovered completely empty or with the valve nearly closed.

I encourage everyone to support the family and regardless of what the investigation turns up and the coroners report says, learn from it.

Please, to all the people who are doing these types of dives - get the proper training and carry the proper equipment. Your life and the lives of those diving with you depend on it.
 
I'm curious as to what agency sets depth limits on solo diving and uses that rule. And is it on their cards? My SDI solo instructor said nothing about that. And though I have yet to do any meg tooth dives so far I would expect them to be conducted as same ocean buddy or solo dives given the environment and techniques required. No need for a solo cert or training. Just common sense. Anyone doing 100+ ft dives in the atlantic should be capable of doing those dives alone. Proper equipment yes. But that would be up to the individual diver to decide what is proper for them.
 
Thanks, offthewall1, for your report and analysis.
 
Amy's reel and it's status are, I think, possibly important. Try this speculation, which can be proved or disproved by physical evidence that we do not yet know about. Amy went OOA, negligence or gear failure. She begins a free ascent. Her reel line, which is tied into the anchor chain arrests her upward progress, rather than cut the line she ditches her gear, stress is at the max and she heads for the surface way too fast holding her breath ... at this point she's out of control. Is this contradicted by any of the physical evidence? We need to know about her reel and where her gear was found.
 
Thanks for all the info. Unless the gear shows some failure, I agree that scenario 1 is most likely. If that is so, something as simple as a pony bottle could have made all the difference in the world.

Does anyone know about her weighting system? Ditching the scuba unit might be more likely if an out of air diver was wearing non-ditchable lead. Any info on that?

Also, a few of those scenarios are stretching it a bit...I've never considered removing the scuba unit to fend off an aggressive shark?

I had not thought about a reel entanglement, but....If she would be reeling herself back to the anchor line, why or when would she clip it off to her BC? Maybe she ran low on air, realized she could not make the lateral distance to the anchor and then started an ascent holding the reel spooling it out as she ascended, not wanting to get blown away from the anchor line? But even in this scenario, it wouldn't be clipped off to her body/bc would it?
 
I'm curious as to what agency sets depth limits on solo diving and uses that rule. And is it on their cards? My SDI solo instructor said nothing about that. And though I have yet to do any meg tooth dives so far I would expect them to be conducted as same ocean buddy or solo dives given the environment and techniques required. No need for a solo cert or training. Just common sense. Anyone doing 100+ ft dives in the atlantic should be capable of doing those dives alone. Proper equipment yes. But that would be up to the individual diver to decide what is proper for them.

Jim,

To answer your question... I can not find any reference to this in the current SDI manual or Instructor materials. To be honest, I'm not sure if it is or ever was an official standard, however I began teaching solo diving a few years back when all agencies accept SDI frowned upon it. Some of the more recognized names in the sport recommended this as a limit (see article below.) The limit made perfect sense and I adopted it as a standard in my teaching. As I said, I can not find it in my new SDI materials... but I'm almost certain it was in my old materials. I could however be wrong... and it may have been something I adopted based on the below article. On the SDI diver submission form (sent in to get the c-card) in the lower left corner there is a spot for the Instructor to fill out the depth to which the diver is certified in the specific specialty. I have always required divers as part of their training to conduct a free dive and measured the max depth they reach (while I'm on Scuba.) I then 2X this depth and list it on their submission form. Because I have had cards mailed directly to the students, I have not seen whether this is listed on their card or not. That is a good question. I may call one of my students today to find out. If this is not a standard, it clearly should be. It makes perfect sense.

As someone else noted in this thread, in a perfect scenario, with a full breath of air, it is quite possible for someone to ascend from 100 ft on a single breath - exhaling tiny bubbles are the way to the surface... but while it is possible - rarely is the circumstance perfect enough to allow for this. By limiting depth to 2X a free dive, the likelihood of such an ascent being successful - doubles. Just my two cents. I placed the specific reference paragraph in BOLD below.

Excerpt - Copied as written and found on the internet -

The Buddy System Reexamined
By Alex Brylske. Reprinted from Dive Training, Sept. 1996

These situations all point out that at some time all of us end up solo diving whether we realize it or not. So, the key to safety is not in who or how many other divers accompany you, but in self-reliance. Only when you can take care of yourself can you truly be prepared to help someone else.

Achieving Self-reliance

Because of both its practical and psychological benefits, self-reliance should be a prerequisite for all divers - even those who would never consider entering the water alone. From the practical standpoint, a self-reliant diver is one who can handle problems even if a buddy is not around or paying attention. To a self-reliant diver a buddy is an aid, not a necessity.

From a psychological perspective, a self-reliant diver is a self-confident diver who knows-buddy or no buddy-he or she can handle whatever problems might arise. This translates into less apprehension and anxiety. The benefits are a reduced breathing rate, lower threshold of panic, and improved ability to pay attention to the dive and to his or her buddy.

Achieving self-reliance requires three essential conditions. The first and most obvious is that you possess skill competence. At minimum, you must be able to perform all the skills you learned in your entry-level course in a calm, deliberate manner and without the need for assistance. You should be able to do this in an environment typical of the conditions you normally encounter.

Skill competence also implies some familiarity with self-rescue and the ability to offer assistance to others. The willingness to help your buddy is meaningless if you don't know how to do it. But such knowledge and skill do not just materialize out of thin air. To gain these insights requires training, such as a diver rescue course.

The second element of self-reliance is that you maintain an adequate physical condition. The question is, what's adequate? That answer is highly personal and varies according to circumstance. Start by reviewing the kinds of environmental conditions you usually encounter. Do you normally dive in heavy or moderate currents or surf? At what depths and temperatures? you dive in open ocean or in a lake or quarry? Can these conditions change from day to day, or even hour to hour?

Your physical condition must match or, better yet, exceed the conditions you dive most often. What this means, of course, is that divers who dive primarily on the shipwrecks off the northeastern U.S. need more physical stamina than those who confine their diving to summertime excursions on picture-perfect days in the Florida Keys.

Third, and perhaps most important, self-reliant divers understand and accept their limitations. This may be the most difficult element to achieve because it requires a great deal of a quality many of us lack-self-honesty. We all have an internal vision of ourselves, and sometimes that vision belies reality. For divers whose self-image is overblown, the result can be downright dangerous. Truly self-reliant divers understand their strengths and limitations, and as a result, when they decide to dive, it's with a high level of psychological and emotional confidence. This is the final measure of a self-reliant diver.

The Decision to Solo

So far, we have based our discussion on the assumption that any breakdown of the buddy system's effectiveness is unintended and requires corrective action. This ignores an entire segment of divers who take a completely different approach to the issue of personal safety-those who intentionally dive without a buddy.

Although a comparatively small segment of the diving community, these revisionists contend that placing your faith in a system that's dependent on someone other than yourself is misguided. So, they conclude, better to rely only on yourself because you are, after all, the only person you can absolutely count on in the event of an emergency.

Furthermore, many solo divers contend that there are other reasons to abandon the idea of a buddy. They maintain that some diving activities, in fact, lend themselves to diving alone. For example, the last thing an underwater photographer wants is someone scaring the marine life, destroying visibility, or getting in the way of the picture. Indeed, many professional underwater photographers dive alone unless they need a model. Even in those situations where the photographer is accompanied, for a Practical Purposes the photographer is solo diving-his or her attention is devoted completely to getting pictures, not watching another diver.

Like photographers, some underwater hunters often Prefer to go it alone. Many lobster divers look at buddies as nothing more than Competitors for a limited resource. Having a buddy means that they will give away the location of their special spots and successful techniques. Spearfishermen sometimes feel the same way about buddies. Furthermore, they add, diving without a buddy is safer because in limited visibility a partner risks becoming an accidental target.

Another reason some choose to dive alone is simply because they don't want to be responsible for someone else. Ironically, many consider anyone who would dive solo as irresponsible, but devoted solo divers are often more responsible than buddy divers. That should not come as a surprise because a lot of careful consideration, planning, and self-reliance is essential to becoming a proficient solo diver. Many divers choose to dive alone even when others are willing to accompany them. They believe that diving alone is better than diving with someone they don't know, Of who is incompetent, inexperienced, unprepared, or unwilling to act as a true buddy. Frankly, that's difficult logic to counter. Ron Von Maier, author of Solo Diving:

The Art of Underwater Self-Sufficiency, Sums it up perfectly: "Any buddy is not better than no buddy."

Another big reason some divers go Solo is purely one of Practicality- they just have no one else with whom to dive. We often forget that diving is not a popular activity everywhere, and not being able to find a buddy can be a serious impediment. This is not a minor issue. One of the primary factors the diving industry points to in explaining why people drop out of diving is simply that they cannot find someone with whom to dive. While endorsing the Practice of solo diving for that reason is difficult, it's also difficult to rebuke those who do.

The final reason for going it alone may be the most compelling-the solitude. While there's certainly something to be said for sharing the experience, solo divers often feel that diving is best appreciated in complete isolation from others.

The underwater realm is, after all, a silent world; and some feel that the accompaniment of another diver is an intrusion.

The Solo Recipe

Solo diving is often misinterpreted to mean nothing more than jumping in the water without a buddy. That's not solo diving; that's just plain stupid diving. Because they have no one else to fall back on in case of a problem, responsible solo divers follow a planning routine that is often more rigorous than most buddy divers. In addition to the standard pre dive preparation, they follow a set of special rules and safety considerations.

Perhaps the most important rule for solo diving is that the diver has past experience in similar diving conditions. In other words, the dive is not beyond the diver's level of experience and personal comfort zone. This applies not only to the conditions present at the time the diver enters the water, but also to how those conditions might change during the course of the dive. It's one thing to enter the water on a bright calm day with no current, but if the weather or tide changes, no one will be around to help.

If in the planning process a solo diver determines that he or she can handle the dive only if conditions remain stable, then that's a good indication to abandon the solo plan and make the dive with an experienced buddy. This is an excellent illustration of the need for self-honesty mentioned previously.

Once in the water, perhaps the most important consideration for solo diving is air management. Some suggest that solo divers take the time to meticulously calculate air requirements and probable air usage. Except for mission oriented technical dives, however, divers rarely are willing to do this. A simpler and more practical planning guideline is to use the "rule of thirds." This simple rule says that you should plan to use only one-third of your air supply for the trip out, then another third for the trip back. The final third is a reserve for unforeseen circumstances, which, when diving without a buddy, can be a particularly vital consideration.

Another air management guideline is to calculate your returning air pressure in consideration of your depth. To do this, round off your actual depth to the next greater increment of ten, then add a zero to that figure. The result is the air pressure at which you should begin your ascent. For example, assume you are making a dive to 57 feet (17m). Round that up to 60 (18m) and add a zero. You should then begin your ascent when you reach an air pressure of 600 psi.

What if you screw up your air management plan and run out of air? No one, of course, will be around to give you an octopus or alternate inflation regulator (although a solo diver should still carry such a device if, for no other reason, a first-stage malfunction occurs). The only out-of-air contingency that will work for a solo diver is a completely redundant air supply, such as a Spare Air' or pony bottle. When a solo diver is making deeper dives, larger capacity pony bottles or dual tanks with independent valves or separate regulators are essential.

Von Maier, one of the few people who has written extensively about the subject, advocates two other commonsense rules for solo diving. The first is that you should never solo dive deeper than twice the depth to which you can free dive. This tends to impose a reasonable and personalized depth limit.As few people do much free diving anymore, some might not see this as a usable guideline. Instead, you might limit a solo dive to a depth no greater than that from which you have performed a controlled emergency swimming ascent. That way you have the self confidence of knowing that even without air you can make it to the surface because you have done it before.

Von Maier's second rule is another sensible one: Your underwater distance from your exit point should not exceed the distance you can comfortably swim in full scuba gear while at the surface. Remember, getting to the surface is only half the battle. You also have to get out of the water, and there won't be anybody to help you.
 
This is certainly off topic, but a solo depth limt of 2 times a freedive depth is the most nonsensical and arbitrary guide I can imagine. I can freedive to 75 feet in a speedo and big fins, in perfect conditions and on the right day after a warm up and a good breath up. A good freediver can dive to twice that depth (experts are going past 100 meters now).

What does that have to do with my ability to swim up with no air when winded while wearing a bulky scuba unit, wearing mittens, a dry suit, double tanks and who knows what else? Answer: absolutely nothing!

It is NOT common sense. It is arbitrary, dangerous and stupid to set a depth limit like that. A solo diver should be using appropriate gear, techniques and abilities to set their depth limit. When I read stupid crap like this speewed out by "professionals", it just serves to remind me why I have never taken any solo or technical training.

Perhaps the victim could freedive to 60 feet, so she was "safe" diving to 110 solo with no redundancy?
 
Last edited:
I own and have Von Maiers book. It's outdated and not very realisitic as well as quite thin on technique. I also disagree with a lot of Alex's recommendations as I read them in Dive Training magazine. I don't consider either to be any more of an authority on it than any competent tech or for that matter thorough Open Water instructor. My 2 deepest solo's to date are 120 in 38 degree water in Lake Erie and 127 in 80 degree water with low vis and a very silty bottom in Mt Storm. Felt perfectly at ease with dbl 85's and a slung 40. Oh and my ice dive in february was solo for the last half. Tethered to the surface but no buddy. Again properly equipped and fine with it. The pic in my avatar was taken by another diver from a different hole. We just happened to get close enough for him to take it.
 
<snip>...

3. Some number of divers had planned DECO stops and had staged bottles under the boat.
4. There was a fairly strong current.

...<snip>
This sounds like a recipe for disaster, IMHO. For me, #3 (staging deco bottles) is out of the question on an open-ocean dive (or most dives outside the cave), but that's just me. Add #4 and solo diving and it just seems like an accident waiting to happen.

I'm not bashing solo diving--it's not for me, but people do it. And I'm not saying it had anything to do with this accident necessarily. Just pointing out that, in this particular situation, these (solo/deco/staging bottles) seem like bad ideas.

Chris
 

Back
Top Bottom