Accident on Southern Cal Oil Rigs Dive

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!

I didn't assume anything. I was simply pointing out that your assumption was a bit of a stretch in logic. There's no good reason to assume that the victim and buddy had the same gas in their cylinders.

You stated "If we assume..." and then went on to imply that since the buddy made it to 160 feet without ill effects, we could conclude something about the gas in the victim's cylinder. Regardless of the relationship between victim and buddy, there's no reason to assume they were using the same gas.

I will agree with you that conservative planning of a third dive on air should require a shallower depth than might have been reached on the first two dives. So if the dive was planned conservatively and if the dive plan was followed, then we could expect oxygen toxicity risk would have been mitigated.

The only thing we can conclude with certainty is there are a lot of "ifs."

Exactly. At this point, we have a very few known facts and some items that have been reported in posts on this thread which may be true or may be simple hearsay. At this point I'm choosing to go with a null hypothesis of proper dive planning being followed rather than assuming the deceased pushed the limits in one or more ways. Given what has been stated about him in this thread and elsewhere, the former seems more likely than the latter.

What happens in a lot of these A&I threads, as boulderjohn posted earlier, is the desire to find some clear root cause of the accident:

But in the world of accident and incident discussions, people insistently believe there must have been a preventable cause, and they search for it. They look for every possible clue of what the diver did wrong, or what the buddy did wrong. They keep waiting for more information. They keep demanding more information. But more information will never come.

In one thread a few years ago the information that the diver had died of a cardiac event of some kind was indeed released, and several people still insisted something must have gone wrong on the dive. Heart attacks don't happen without some triggering event, they said. Well, the truth is that people have cardiac events without triggering events all the time. The second most common time to have one is when you are asleep. The most common time is after breakfast.

A lot of the posts in this thread seem to assume that something had to have gone wrong in order for this event to happen - exhaustion, exceeding MOD, bad dive planning, etc. So if we're going to discuss those, why not lay out what would have had to happen before any of those scenarios came into play? Then we'll at least know what information is needed to support a particular hypothesis rather than blindly speculating - for example, whether or not the deceased had done both prior dives or whether there was heavy current that day.
 
I just want to add a generic dive safety comment, since we don’t know what Henry had in his tank. Personally I don’t use Nitrox on dives that have no bottom such as this blue water dive or wall dives.

On a deep dive at Punta Sur in Cozumel (but still less than the MOD of EAN32) I noticed the dive guide also used air, and when I asked him about it he said It’s in case he may need to chase after someone deep and exceed the MOD.

I also recall reading a case report of a diver having a seizure on Nitrox at around 1.4 atm O2 partial pressure. In Cozumel I use air for the first deep dive and EAN36 for the second shallow dive.
 
Exactly. At this point, we have a very few known facts and some items that have been reported in posts on this thread which may be true or may be simple hearsay. At this point I'm choosing to go with a null hypothesis of proper dive planning being followed rather than assuming the deceased pushed the limits in one or more ways. Given what has been stated about him in this thread and elsewhere, the former seems more likely than the latter.

What happens in a lot of these A&I threads, as boulderjohn posted earlier, is the desire to find some clear root cause of the accident. . .

A lot of the posts in this thread seem to assume that something had to have gone wrong in order for this event to happen - exhaustion, exceeding MOD, bad dive planning, etc. So if we're going to discuss those, why not lay out what would have had to happen before any of those scenarios came into play? Then we'll at least know what information is needed to support a particular hypothesis rather than blindly speculating - for example, whether or not the deceased had done both prior dives or whether there was heavy current that day.
Again and yet again, based on what scant published and third party information there is, the best non-trivial hypothesis is the one that has the fewest assumptions. A "null hypothesis" is obviously a trivial reductio ad absurdum statement and does nothing to help make sense of this accident, along with useless admonitions on speculation.

Again. . .There is a common experience for all SoCal oil rig divers of a live boat drop-off and surface fin-kick swim to get inside the structure's boundary, in that you have physical activity with a natural physiological tachypneic (increased breathing rate) response even before the descent to depth. Potential compounding issues are the victim's fitness level and any underlying relevant medical history -and therein lies your root "factors", @HalcyonDaze and @boulderjohn, factors that are presently unknown at this time as well. Therefore Rule Out CO2 Toxicity/Hypercapnia in Scuba Diving activity as the precipitating event to the primary Cause of Death by Drowning. . . (This differential diagnosis of Hypercapnia is supported by the research referenced in post #133 and the video in post #139).

See also this lecture on Respiratory Physiology with regard to Carbon Dioxide starting at the 4:00 minute mark:

What we as Oil Rig Divers can learn from this, is to take a few minutes to recover and regain a normal relaxed breathing rate -without the work-of-breathing of the regulator in mouth- on the surface, before beginning a descent to depth. If you cannot, and especially if there are equipment problems or water conditions turn out to be too rough for your ability, abort and signal the Diveboat for pick-up.

I just want to add a generic dive safety comment, since we don’t know what Henry had in his tank. Personally I don’t use Nitrox on dives that have no bottom such as this blue water dive or wall dives.

On a deep dive at Punta Sur in Cozumel (but still less than the MOD of EAN32) I noticed the dive guide also used air, and when I asked him about it he said It’s in case he may need to chase after someone deep and exceed the MOD.

I also recall reading a case report of a diver having a seizure on Nitrox at around 1.4 atm O2 partial pressure. In Cozumel I use air for the first deep dive and EAN36 for the second shallow dive.
On Oil Rig Dives, I always use Air and a DPV/Scooter to provide mobility at all phases of the dive -including the surface swim for both drop-off and pick-up. If going far below the second horizontal crossbeam framework (36m/120') down to the third & fourth tiers for significant minutes of bottom time, I usually breathe an appropriate Helium mix in a twinset together with 50% & 100% O2 deco gases.

Another Lesson Learned from this Accident: The most important factors to consider when using any recreational Oxygen-Nitrogen gas mixture are gas density/work-of-breathing, ppO2, and narcosis. Physical activity at deeper depth together with increasing gas density eliciting the effects of work-of-breathing and spiraling CO2 retention, adds to the anesthetic effect of Nitogen Narcosis, along with elevated ppO2 levels which in turn increases the chances of Oxygen Toxicity Syndrome.

The critical gas density point for Air (and for EANx32 & 36) is right at 40m/130' -which just happens to be the maximum recommended recreational depth limit. That the surviving diver reportedly tried to rescue the deceased by going down to a depth of 50m/167' (with whatever remaining tank pressure) is commendable. Amazing and fortunate that other than a CO2 headache, this diver did not go hypercapnic into unconsciousness; Oxtox seizure; or on the ascent, run out of breathing gas and develop acute DCI.
 
Last edited:
It's now been a few months and the investigation must be complete by now. Anyone have any updates on the cause of this accident?
I imagine the investigation is complete by now. According to what the sheriff's department told me immediately after the accident, once the investigation is complete, all you have to do is contact them to get it. If someone were to do that and post the information here, I am sure it would be greatly appreciated.
 
just buying some :popcorn:and waiting for any official news. My guess is that I will be finished with it before that time :happywave:
 
In Flower Gardens the boat is tied to them with a continuous guideline from the rig to the boat. You can pull yourself to the boat and (or the rig) hand over hand if you don't want to swim it. But they are very nice dives, sometime wonderful dives.

True for going to the rig, as the rig is anchored to the sea bottom, but not the other way around. The captain asks us to just loop our fingers around the line as a guide & we need to fin ourselves to the boat. If all 20 divers pull themselves to the boat, after finish diving in the rig, the boat will be pulled towards the rig.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Back
Top Bottom