Multiple deaths diving off NC coast May 10, 2020?

[Rose Robinson]

From what I have gathered, the two divers in this accident were well-experienced, including experienced in diving the wrecks in that area. I'm not sure why you have asserted that the charter operators are using inadequate prerequisites.

The various boats I have been on when diving the U-352 all get there in around 2 hours or less. But, I guess it is possible that the wrong boat and the wrong conditions could result in taking 4 hours to get there from Morehead City/Beaufort.

The deepest I have ever recorded on the 352 is 116' (and I like to lay on the sand to take pictures, when there happens to be any sharks there), but I suppose if the tide were high there, at that time, you could get 119'. However, most of my dives there show a max of around 111'. Regardless, 130' or less, no physical overhead and no mandatory deco stops is the very definition of recreational sport diving. I agree that the offshore wrecks there should only be dived by advanced open water divers (notice I did not say "Advanced" - capital A - because I don't care about an AOW card, that might only represent 9 total dives). But, they are not technical dives - unless the diver makes it into one.

We can agree to disagree.

When was the last time you dove the graveyard wrecks, did anyone ask you for prerequisites, ask to see your log, or review your experience.

If you respond with a none/none and none, my response is, things have changed, and not for the better.

Experienced in that area, maybe not so much. If they were diving with OW certification only, and not Advanced Certification/Deep Specialty, then they were at least 50 ft. deeper than they should have been.

Rose.

 

[uncfnp]

We can agree to disagree.

When was the last time you dove the graveyard wrecks, did anyone ask you for prerequisites, ask to see your log, or review your experience.

If you respond with a none/none and none, my response is, things have changed, and not for the better.

Experienced in that area, maybe not so much. If they were diving with OW certification only, and not Advanced Certification/Deep Specialty, then they were at least 50 ft. deeper than they should have been.

Rose.

I have mixed feelings about this. First and foremost each diver is ultimately responsible for his or her dive. The best the dive op can do is a basic screen for certification/experience but as we all know a card does not equate competence and 1000 logs under benign/routine conditions does not prove experience.

Do I think there was complacency? Yes. Do I think there was inadequate gear. Yes. Can the dive op monitor for complacency? Maybe if they dive enough with the op to establish a pattern. Can the dive op mandate gear? This! I think here may be where there is obvious room for improvement.

 

[stuartv]

We can agree to disagree.

When was the last time you dove the graveyard wrecks, did anyone ask you for prerequisites, ask to see your log, or review your experience.

If you respond with a none/none and none, my response is, things have changed, and not for the better.

Experienced in that area, maybe not so much. If they were diving with OW certification only, and not Advanced Certification/Deep Specialty, then they were at least 50 ft. deeper than they should have been.

Rose.

This past Saturday, I dived the Aeolus and the Suloide. Before that was 4 days at the end of May. If I didn't miss any, I've got 82 dives on wrecks out of Morehead City in the last 5+ years. This year has been light because of COVID and a shoulder/neck injury.

Nobody has asked to see my log in quite a while. They know me at Olympus and know my credentials well enough. But, when I take new people, I know that they do ask them questions about their recent experience.

I am instructor. I teach Advanced and Deep. But, I do not agree with your judgment. I *might*, if I learned more about the 2 divers in question. But, I am not an instructor who believes that the only way anyone can learn something or do it safely is by taking a class that produces a C card. So, just because someone may only have an OW and a Nitrox card and nothing else does not AUTOMATICALLY mean (to me) that they are not well qualified and competent to do an ocean dive to 115 feet. C cards, in and of themselves, don't mean a lot outside of a courtroom, I think.

 

[Barnaby'sDad]

Sorry. I did not jump to any conclusions. You made a statement that implied that certain dive computer features don't exist and would be borderline magic if they did. I related some facts to address the statement that you made. No assumptions made, whatsoever.

I will now venture away from strictly facts. It is great if you never make a mistake while diving. I applaud you. If you never go a little too long between times of checking your SPG, that is awesome. My speculation is that there are lots of other people who are well-trained, experienced, and generally diligent about checking their SPG, who may sometimes (or even just once) get distracted (or narced) at just the wrong time and end up forgetting to check their SPG as often as they should.

That could even be what happened in this particular case.

My theory is that when that happens to a well-trained, experienced, and generally diligent person, an alarm on their dive computer that vibrates or beeps or both may save that person from an unpleasant (though not necessarily injurious or fatal) situation.

If you don't want to use those kinds of alarms, you are certainly free not to. But, I reject the notion or implication that someone who does have that kind of an alarm as a backstop to their own skills as a diver somehow makes them a "bad" diver.

How far would you like to take your rejection of "new and improved" technology? My dad has teased me several times about "needing" to use the crutch of a BCD. He started diving when he was 14 and dived in the Navy (but not as a rated Navy Diver). He always dived double steel 72s, in a 1/4" wetsuit, and likes to point out that he never had a BCD and he never needed one because he was weighted correctly. A BCD is just a crutch for bad weighting and/or poor buoyancy skills.

He never had an SPG, either. That's another crutch (and an unnecessary failure point). He kept one tank turned off until the other tank started to run out. Then he would turn the second tank on, let them equalize, turn it back off, and continue, knowing that he had used half his gas.

Do you reject use of a BCD and an SPG along with your rejection of AI alarms? They are all "crutches" that people have adopted because they feel that those crutches make them safer....

Good points. I’ll be more precise in my wording...I don’t think that the existence of AI alarms are bad. My issue is with dependence upon AI alarms.

Using AI alarms, but still maintaining good habits (periodically checking your gas consumption) would make them a tool. Depending upon them and not monitoring your gas consumption periodically (how less diligent people would use them) would make them a crutch.

My position on BCD’s is the same. Do you treat it as a tool to make diving easier (ex. Put in an effort to dive with the appropriate amount of weight), or do you just stuff your pouches/pockets full of weight with no thought to how much you need, because you’ve got ‘XX’ lbs of lift and your BC will “git r done?” For the latter scenario/diver, a BCD is a crutch.

 

[stuartv]

Can the dive op mandate gear? This! I think here may be where there is obvious room for improvement.

I have mixed feelings about this. A person carrying a pony for the first time - because they are required to - is not necessarily safer.

I think changes to the current requirements - e.g. mandating additional gear - should be driven by statistics, not just a knee-jerk response to an accident. How many divers in that area are dying in a year? How many of those are cases where these is some evidence that a pony would have made a difference?

The lives that might be saved by requiring a pony have to be balanced against the potential lives lost because you have people who are now showing up there and diving with a pony for the first time. Maybe the pony makes them complacent - they feel like they don't have to worry about running out of gas, and then they do. And when they do, does the unfamiliarity of the pony they are carrying results in them having an accident that they wouldn't have if they didn't have it in the first place and were, thus, more earnest about not getting low on gas in the first place?

Ocean dives, 20+ miles offshore, are not the place to be using new gear or trying out skills for the first time. Yet, I foresee that happening a lot, if it became mandatory to dive with redundant gas.

 

[stuartv]

Good points. I’ll be more precise in my wording...I don’t think that the existence of AI alarms are bad. My issue is with dependence upon AI alarms.

Using AI alarms, but still maintaining good habits (periodically checking your gas consumption) would make them a tool. Depending upon them and not monitoring your gas consumption periodically (how less diligent people would use them) would make them a crutch.

My position on BCD’s is the same. Do you treat it as a tool to make diving easier (ex. Put in an effort to dive with the appropriate amount of weight), or do you just stuff your pouches/pockets full of weight with no thought to how much you need, because you’ve got ‘XX’ lbs of lift and your BC will “git r done?” For the latter scenario/diver, a BCD is a crutch.

Agreed.

 

[uncfnp]

I have mixed feelings about this. A person carrying a pony for the first time - because they are required to - is not necessarily safer.

I think changes to the current requirements - e.g. mandating additional gear - should be driven by statistics, not just a knee-jerk response to an accident. How many divers in that area are dying in a year? How many of those are cases where these is some evidence that a pony would have made a difference?

The lives that might be saved by requiring a pony have to be balanced against the potential lives lost because you have people who are now showing up there and diving with a pony for the first time. Maybe the pony makes them complacent - they feel like they don't have to worry about running out of gas, and then they do. And when they do, does the unfamiliarity of the pony they are carrying results in them having an accident that they wouldn't have if they didn't have it in the first place and were, thus, more earnest about not getting low on gas in the first place?

Ocean dives, 20+ miles offshore, are not the place to be using new gear or trying out skills for the first time. Yet, I foresee that happening a lot, if it became mandatory to dive with redundant gas.

There is a precedence for this. New England wreck diving often mandates gear including redundancy. I think advanced diving on our coast (or hunting on advanced sites) may deserve no less.

 

[stuartv]

There is a precedence for this. New England wreck diving often mandates gear including redundancy. I think advanced diving on our coast (or hunting on advanced sites) may deserve no less.

I know. I did some wreck diving up in NJ and the boat required everyone to have doubles or a pony. But, that was cold, green, murky water, which generally brings divers with a somewhat different level of commitment, compared to the divers who show up to dive the warm, clear, blue water out of Morehead City...

I'm not saying I'm against it, at all! I'm just saying I can see two sides to the discussion. So, I would want to know the stats for fatalities on the dives out of Morehead City/Beaufort. I don't really buy into the "if it saves ONE life..." type of argument. I want to know how much of a problem there is, that would reasonably be expected to mitigate by requiring more gear. If the only justification that we need is to "save ONE life", we would ban all diving there, period.

 

[scubadada]

There is a precedence for this. New England wreck diving often mandates gear including redundancy. I think advanced diving on our coast (or hunting on advanced sites) may deserve no less.

This logic could apply to "advanced" dives nearly anywhere. Rather than AOW and/or applicable experience, perhaps nitrox cert, are you going to require a minimum size cylinder, redundant gas...?

 

[uncfnp]

This logic could apply to "advanced" dives nearly anywhere. Rather than AOW and/or applicable experience, perhaps nitrox cert, are you going to require a minimum size cylinder, redundant gas...?

Agreed, if the dives in North Carolina are no different than any other tropical dive destination. Unfortunately my attempts to dive my own coast have been mostly blown out so I can not make a truly informed opinion. Just speculation.

Would I personal hunt deeper than 100 feet without independent redundancy? Heck no.