Missing Diver Off Vandenberg?

[wgw04024]

You really can't in this case imho.

 

[jadairiii]

Can you explain why it is so important to plan on going to the bottom of the wreck, while it is NOT important to plan on going very deep on a wall? Perhaps the answer is simply because you MAY be able to plan for the hard bottom of the wreck, but can't for a wall?

I personally try to understand the reasons for different protocols, rather than simply follow some "rule of thumb".

I'm really curious as to how you delineate and distinguish the two situations.

Thanks!

Because the bottom does exist and I am not going to abandon a diver if they go to the bottom or not be able to work out and solve a problem if I find myself on the bottom. So I will plan on a "worst case" that I will have to go to the bottom, and will bring adequate gas and mix. And before you misconstrue "worst case" I am merely referring to finding myself on the bottom. If you are close to the end of a dive on the Van with a single Alu 80, with what is left of your 32%, there is no way you will be capable of rescuing a buddy that drops over the rail. It is a "Thunderdome" dive.....at best.

As to a wall dive, there is not a realistic "hard bottom", but I would plan my dive, if I was diving a wall, to be at least 40' above my MOD. Do I need to explain why?

And for either scenario, any dive below 90' I'm diving doubles anyway. Is this concept that hard to grasp?

 

[Dody]

This is absolutely true, and many people cannot begin to understand how true it is. Here is a very simple example. I was diving with my daughter-in-law and grandson on a relatively shallow reef in good light and visibility. We were in a triangle formation, with me in the lead and the others side-by-side. I turned to signal the end of the dive. My grandson noticed immediately and returned the signal, but his mother was checking out the reef and did not see it at first. When she saw my signal, she immediately looked at her SPG, and during that time, my grandson and I ascended maybe 6-7 feet and waited for her. When she looked up from the SPG, she could not see us. She began to look around frantically. Her son dropped back down so she could see hime, and we ascended.

My point is that if in that time she was looking at her SPG her son had lost buoyancy control and gone to the surface instead of hovering a few feet above her, she would never have seen it, and she was being as attentive as a mother can be.

However, there is one thing that would prevent this from happening. It is the two way communication protocol. When you signal for a move, the move should not start before everyone has acknowledged. All it takes is to signal OK after the instruction and not moving before all the other divers signal back.

 

[BackAfter30]

Because the bottom does exist and I am not going to abandon a diver if they go to the bottom or not be able to work out and solve a problem if I find myself on the bottom. So I will plan on a "worst case" that I will have to go to the bottom, and will bring adequate gas and mix. And before you misconstrue "worst case" I am merely referring to finding myself on the bottom. If you are close to the end of a dive on the Van with a single Alu 80, with what is left of your 32%, there is no way you will be capable of rescuing a buddy that drops over the rail. It is a "Thunderdome" dive.....at best.

As to a wall dive, there is not a realistic "hard bottom", but I would plan my dive, if I was diving a wall, to be at least 40' above my MOD. Do I need to explain why?

And for either scenario, any dive below 90' I'm diving doubles anyway. Is this concept that hard to grasp?

Lots of people ask questions because they don't know something and hope someone will educate them.

Is this concept that hard to grasp?

 

[boulderjohn]

However, there is one thing that would prevent this from happening. It is the two way communication protocol. When you signal for a move, the move should not start before everyone has acknowledged. All it takes is to signal OK after the instruction and not moving before all the other divers signal back.

My example was but one example. Divers can disappear any time the buddy is looking away; a signalling situation would actually be a rare case.

On land, we live on something of a plane. If we look away from a person, look back, and find him or her gone, we have limited options to explore in our search. In scuba, they could be anywhere. A diver losing buoyancy control or caught in a current could be out of your sight in no time while you are frantically checking every possible angle.

As a tech instructor, I have to watch students perform some elaborate skills in poor visibility. They tend to change directions a lot during this, especially when they are new to the skill (there's lots less of this with more practice), and I make sure I am in the best possible position to spot a problem and intervene as needed. I especially want to protect against an unwanted ascent. That means I do a lot of twisting and turning during the exercise. When the students are done, they typically twist and turn to try to find me, even though I am barely an arm's length away.

 

[Dody]

Anyway, this faith that some people have in the buddy system, I say faith because it is irrational to believe it is foolproof, is ridiculous. You can't always stay side by side. Sometimes, one buddy follows the other and when you are in front, you can't look back every other second. In 50 dives together, I have lost my wife twice underwater even though we always stay very close. In those two instances, something happened: 1st time, mask issue, second one, equalization issue. Situations when you can't and won't notify your buddy before fixing your problem. I found her (or she found me) before we had to surface as per procedure but I think we were lucky... and well trained. With a strong current or a down/ up current for example, the outcome could have been different.

 

[scubadada]

If I want to to keep my wife with me, she dives in front of me. In this case, I cannot lose her.

 

[Jcp2]

If I want to to keep my wife with me, she dives in front of me. In this case, I cannot lose her.

But she could lose you. A rear view mirror seems like a better idea.

 

[boulderjohn]

If I want to to keep my wife with me, she dives in front of me. In this case, I cannot lose her.

I once had a regular buddy who, when we were supposedly diving side by side, would always drift a little behind and above me. He said he did this so he could see me better. I told him he was a pain in the neck--quite literally.

 

[scubadada]

But she could lose you. A rear view mirror seems like a better idea.

As long as I know where she is, everything is OK, she does not really need to know where I am, I am there.