Yukon tangent thread

[Tropicalwolf]

How can a activity that has a cert for it be "something outside of the accepted standards" there must be some acceptance for it as a realitively safe and doable activity before there can be a cert for it. I'd say the boat op is responsible for passenger safety not diver safety. If the boat sinks and there are no life jackets then yes he's responsible. If a cab driver delivers someone to a dive site and they drown is the cab driver responsible? The problem with diving is the same with most things, the refusal of people to take responsibilty for themsleves. Makes me sick.

^ Fact.

I have dove the Yukon. I have dove the Yukon solo. I do not recall the operator I was with at the time (2004?), nor would I name them anyway and open them up to scrutiny here. The Yukon is a great dive. That is all I can add to this discussion other than my condolences for the diver, the diver's family and all involved.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

You forgot to mention diving with a buddy. That is taught as rule #1, even before you are taught to read your pressure gauge. At least it was when I was taught.

Minor Hijack

I was taught "never hold your breath while on SCUBA" as rule #1. IIRC this is the 2nd time that buddy diving has been called the #1 rule. If this is really a subject for extended discussion, maybe this topic will be split off this thread.


End minor hijack

 

[ZenDiver.3D]

Minor Hijack

I was taught "never hold your breath while on SCUBA" as rule #1. IIRC this is the 2nd time that buddy diving has been called the #1 rule. If this is really a subject for extended discussion, maybe this topic will be split off this thread.


End minor hijack

That's okay. Apparently, divers are unable to swim where he is from, also.

 

[ScubaSteve]

I call a guy that can't cover one length of the pool without drowning a person that can't swim.

So how did he make it the length of the pool then? Did he float allowing the current to take him the length? Or did he swim the length? If he swam it, then he can swim.

I can substantiate it, once again, with personal observation. This problem has ballooned over the last few years. I know quite a few instructors myself and they will all tell you the same thing: This does happen, and this is happening more often now than ever. Blame the economy if you want. No one wants to turn away a paying customer these days, so maybe that is the incentive for overlooking this requirement. After all, if they can get around with a flotation device and fins, what difference does swimming make?

I would say you are being overly dramatic for effect. Either that or you have a very creative imagination. Either way, carry on.

If I knew which shops were turning these people out, I would report them. However, you are doing exactly what they are doing. You are denying a problem that obviously exists and are trying to shout down anyone that brings it to light. That is your choice, but it doesn't change reality, no matter how much it bothers you to hear it.

You have their agency name and their certification number. You have what you need if you wanted to make a difference.

Right. 100-199 logged dives does not include the hundreds more teaching and training dives and hours that I have participated in that did not meet the 15' for 20min requirement to be a logged dive. Unlike some people, I don't consider every instance of breathing underwater to be a "dive" just to run up some imaginary number.

One does not need to provide a BS (inflated) dive count in order to claim they are an expert know it all. In fact, we are seeing a lot of it here.

Ken, believe it or not, I do know you and I do know many of the people you know. I may be new to this board, but I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday. All of them will corroborate the fact that photographers are notorious for forgetting to adhere to basic safety rules in the interest of getting a good picture. They are typically (not always) the worst buddies on the planet, unless you consider their camera to be their buddy. You can deny this as well, but all it does is run your credibility down a little further, which is unfortunate. I've always considered you a fairly well informed and knowledgeable person.

I know more dive "photographers" that are better buddies than many of the insta-brew buddies that I have been paired up with. I agree that a photographer does get distracted, but seldom is it more distracted than they newly minted diver on their first couple new and exciting dives. Too many people blindly spout the BS that you are here about photographers.

If this guy got hurt or killed diving off the beach on his own, then he would be the only responsible party. The fact is, he was diving off a boat. That boat allowed him to do what he did. As a result, they bear some responsibility for this accident. I am not implying that they held him down till he drowned, but letting him dive 100' underwater with no buddy is stupid, no if, ands or buts, and you know it.

Sorry but your outlook on solo diving is laughable. You are no different than the over zealous "journalist" that claims that the diver died because there was nothing in his oxygen tank. Solo diving does NOT kill. Poor choices kill. Medical conditions kill. Solo diving does NOT kill. No ifs, ands or :mooner:'s.

If the diver presented themselves as a qualified and trained solo diver and if the Humbolt has a policy to allow solo diving, then they did nothing wrong IMO. I am not saying either of these is true or fact because I simply do not know, but your blind hatred for solo diving is ridiculous.

You forgot to mention diving with a buddy. That is taught as rule #1, even before you are taught to read your pressure gauge. At least it was when I was taught.

Diving with a buddy is not Rule #1. You are failing your students if it is.

 

[Jax]

:lookaround:

Another question for you experienced folks . . . I've heard very experienced people on this board discuss that they have made an emergency ascent from 100 fsw. Is that ability within the capabilities of a less experienced diver, one with less than five hundred dives, for example? I realized I am asking for speculation, here . . .

 

[ZenDiver.3D]

:lookaround:

Another question for you experienced folks . . . I've heard very experienced people on this board discuss that they have made an emergency ascent from 100 fsw. Is that ability within the capabilities of a less experienced diver, one with less than five hundred dives, for example? I realized I am asking for speculation, here . . .

One of my commercial divers had an equipment malfunction and had to perform a cesa from 32 meters. I would not suggest that it is something Anyone of any experience level or certification should feel that they are perfectly capable of doing. I hope to never be in that position. Short of a total system failure, there is no real reason for anyone to run out of air. If you plan properly, obey good diving rules, and remain aware, you will not "run out of air."

There is no magic number of dives for performing an out of air ascent. You are never "ready to handle it." It's just that people being people, with high numbers of dives, many make bonehead mistakes by that time. But we shouldn't.

 

[Jax]

I agree, TSandM, the boat's leaving seems a non sequitur to this incident.

Speculation:

So, if the diver did lose track of gas supply and went OOG, for whatever reason, his recourse would be an emergency swim-up ascent from 100fsw depth . . . assuming what air he had in his BC would help more as the volume increased as he ascended . . . He might have had the availability of sucking air from the BC on the way -- one would assume he would dump his weights. All this if he kept calm, or at least held panic at bay, through the emergency.

Poor guy was found on the bottom with all equipment, as far as we know.

 

[tracydr]

I dove this dive site with a private charter back when it was new. Didn't particularly like it but thought it wasn't that hard, just typical for So Cal. My Ex bailed at the top, having gotten overheated. We dove wet and I continued with my brother who was very inexperienced at the time but had done a few NC wrecks.
I will say when I first started using my camera I had problems with awareness. Took me quite awhile to adjust to the extra task loading. In fact, I remember a very simple night dive ( Town Pier) where the simple addition of the light in my other hand since I didn't have a strobe became nearly overwhelming for a couple minutes until I adjusted. I can actually understand how a diver new to photography could run OOA. Unfortunate, but we will never know what really happened since he was solo and can't tell us. We probably know, since he was seen in the sand (deep, high air consumption), taking pictures, and his tank was empty. No entanglement, not lost, OW, relatively simple dive, huge shame. I'm surprised the work of breathing didn't cause him to realize something was wrong but he was probably pretty well narced, on top of tunnel vision. Wonder what gas he was diving? I doubt at 110 that oxtox could be a problem, even on 36% but some people are highly susceptible.

 

[tracydr]

I guess he could have been breath holding to capture good pictures and passed out, although if the tank was truly empty this doesn't explain it.

 

[dirtdiver1]

You know, reading this thread, I'm struck by the number of people who think that the boat leaving played a major role in the fatality. If, in fact, something happened to this gentleman under the water (as it sounds) and he did not make it to the surface (which seems likely), then even had they waited at the site for him to surface, and eventually figured out he wasn't going to, by the time anyone went down to look for him, it would have been too late.

Boats leaving are a problem for someone on the surface, or who comes to the surface and discovers he's drifting with no way home. But a boat remaining at the site is almost never of any significant use to a person who is in trouble UNDER the water. The only way I can imagine in which the boat leaving was relevant here was if the guy did a CESA, made it to the surface and was unable to establish positive buoyancy, AND somebody saw this AND got in the water AND reached him before he sank again. Lots of ifs.

1+ But it looks bad (and indeed is not good).