Yukon tangent thread

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!

So people should be diving dry I presume. I will preface this with my feelings about water less than 60 degrees for an hour dive IMO should be done with a drysuit and proper undergarments.
As we all know hydration and thermal protection are the best prevention of decompression illness.
I will further suggest that it is IMO that a dive to 100 feet should be properly planned.
 
I have to say how annoying threads like this are.

I am not associated with the boat that had the accident. But having first hand knowledge of the accident since I was in the area and speaking to officials during the rescue operation yesterday am extremely frustrated at the amount of BS and how much everyone feels like they have to speculate. Wait for the report, offer your RIP and stop reading into news reports. They are all different. If you know someone who witnessed the accident get the knowledge from them directly and keep the rumors off the boards.

After saying that, I can tell you that about 90% of your comments are not accurate at all and do absolutely no good for the diving community.

Captain Brandon
TDI Technical Rebreather Dive Master

Can you tell us what 10% of our comments are accurate?

Can you add any first hand information since you were in the area and speaking to officials?
 
A nicely split hair.

Good to know, though. Anchored versus moored, I like to hear about dive sites with a mooring line, better for the environment and a personal preference.
 
Gee. Thanks. :rolleyes:

You're welcome. We didn't need misinformed sidetracks clouding an accident thread.
 
I dove the Yukon from the Humboldt this morning. There was no current and little surge. Visibility was a spectacular 40+ feet. The water temperature on the bottom was 52 degrees. The crew said conditions were similar yesterday at the time of the accident, with maybe a little less visibility.
 
I vote for African Sleeping Sickness. I hear there's a lot of that going around lately, but the diagnosises are being kept hush-hush so that proves that this is what it must be.

I'd personally rule out Breath-Holding Spells in Infants since the guy was 39 . . . or 48. (But perhaps they meant MONTHS, not years, so maybe the Infant thing would probably be true.)

And one should be aware of the amazing number of incidents of Thyroxine Deficiency.

Boy, isn't speculation fun??? And useful??????

(Just to be clear, the post above is totally tongue-in-cheek. Don't lose sight of the fact that someone has died. Pure speculation, IMHO, has no place. State the facts. State the possible scenarios that might fit those facts. But don't start making stuff up and then say, "Well, if it was this, then it could have been that . . .)

- Ken
 
Last edited:
I dove the Yukon from the Humboldt this morning. There was no current and little surge. Visibility was a spectacular 40+ feet. The water temperature on the bottom was 52 degrees. The crew said conditions were similar yesterday at the time of the accident, with maybe a little less visibility.

What did the Humboldt crew say about yesterday?
 
What did the Humboldt crew say about yesterday?

Probably nothing -- the first thing a crew is told is to speak only to law enforcement, as a liability issue, as I was told by a captain.

I figure we will find out the whole story only if a family member chooses to inform us.
 

Back
Top Bottom