DAN Report thoughts

[MikeFerrara]

After reviewing the latest DAN accident report I got wondering how many look at it and what they get from it. It is hard to do any probability predictions since we don't know how many active divers there are or how many dives are actually done. However, from the data gathered from reported accidents I think you can get a good picture of the person who is most likely to get hurt. The following traits were present in a large percentage of the reported cases:
Little recent and/or lifetime experience
Minimal training
Buoyancy control problems reported on the dive
Rapid ascents
Depth 90 - 100 if I remember right

None of this is a suprise and is similar to other DAN reports. Ignoring medical conditions what it tells me is that divers who have little experience and poor skills and are diving beyond their abilities are the ones who most often get hurt.

We all know this stuff. I present this info in every class I teach. Still, vacationing novices choose to do 100 ft dives. How in the world does someone who doesn't have the basics down justify doing deep dives? What sense does it make for a diver with poor skills to go much below 30 ft or do any dive where there will be significant nitrogen loading? Are instructors not teaching good judgment?

Something else that might be interesting is that the majority of cases involved the use of a computer. Of course, this could be because nearly everyone uses one. However, I have many divers tell me of the dives where their computers had them in deco. In general when a computer says you owe time you owe time. I know of instances where vacationing novices following a DM not only put their computer in deco but the computer was displeased enough with the ascent to go into gauge mode for 48 hours.

I believe it is wrong to teach the concept of NDL. I mean, does it make divers think that they take the extra nitrogen home with them?

The other day I had some OW students talking about the dive tables during a break. They noted the fact that you could spend 10 minutes at 130 ft and go directly to the surface (yes the table indicates a safety stop for this). My response was to outline for them the equipment and the plan I would use for such a dive. My plan, of course included much more gas and it's use planned in detail, redundant equipment and my safety stops started at 50 ft as apposed to 15 ft. Oh, and the fact that I would prefer to have a bottle of 50% or 100% even for this dive. Oh yes I also mentioned that I may on a whim shoot a little He into my bottom gas just for good measure. Then of course there is the contingency planning. I would have the gas and the ability to calculate my ascent if my ascent was delayed or I was forced to go a few feet deeper.

My intent was to convince these folks that they had much to learn and alot of work to do before they went anywhere near 130 ft.

Comments? Other views? whatever

 

[Diversauras]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...


Something else that might be interesting is that the majority of cases involved the use of a computer. Of course, this could be because nearly everyone uses one. However, I have many divers tell me of the dives where their computers had them in deco. In general when a computer says you owe time you owe time. I know of instances where vacationing novices following a DM not only put their computer in deco but the computer was displeased enough with the ascent to go into gauge mode for 48 hours.

Mike,

As usual I agree in general with what you wrote, and as for the computer figuring into the DAN profile, I think it is because the are available. Like faster cars being called a problem because bad drivers still can't drive.

 

[tombiowami]

Sure, dive certs in general are open ended, even if I don't dive for five years I retain my AOW or Rescue or whatever status.

The standard "trained to dive to 60' in conditions certified in" generally gets tossed out the window. I do not see anyone tossed off of dives here in NC even though typical dive is 2 hours each way, 4' seas, 100'+, etc.

You are obviously an instructor who cares a great deal about delivering a fine product, your training. That is definitely not my experience of all dive trainers in my short one year career.

Most divers rely on the good equipment available to cover up their deficiencies. You won't find as many on this board as most of the people here are reading and writing in an effort to learn better and safer and more pleasurable ways of diving.

I also notice the proliferation of heart attacks in the reports, lots of overweight and unhealthy folks out there.

Most people are lured into false security because there are so few real accidents per number of divers out there. I could look at the thousands of divers that dove last weekend and shutter at many of them, but the fact is that they all came back fine for the most part. (I think, have not heard of any accidents)

Tommy

 

[nicodaemos]

I skimmed through the report and what I found interesting was how few accidents are the result of gear failure. Like you mentioned, buoyancy control problems were encountered on greater than 40% of both DCI injuries and fatalities. From my reading of the charts, it was the number 1 problem encountered overall.

So if buoyancy control is such a problem, then why isn't it a larger part of diving education? In my recent PADI training, we did a quick fin pivot and hover .... and that was it. My buoyancy is not very good right now and I'm trying to look into classes. Unfortunately, my lds offers it only as part of the Advanced Open Water cert .... well to be honest, I don't really want to do more advanced dives until I'm solid with my buoyancy up to 60'. This weekend I'm doing a trip to an Alabama quarry to practice. I guess I'll just have to keep practicing on my own.

I'm just surprised that the reports indicate that more training would help reduce diver injuries and fatalities, yet most of the classes are focussed on teaching you new skills rather than on helping you hone the base ones.

 

[Jarhead]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
How in the world does someone who doesn't have the basics down justify doing deep dives?

Quite simply, They don't know, what they don't know. In Other Words: They don't realize that they don't have the basics down yet. They feel that since they passed their certification, that they're "10 foot tall and bullet-proof".

Are instructors not teaching good judgment?

IMO, No. Judgement can't be taught. Generally, judgement is based on experience. They don't realize that basic OW is just the "tip" of the scubadiving "iceberg".

Jarhead

 

[Genesis]

is something that, IMHO, can't be "taught."

It can only be learned, and there is only one way - underwater practice.

A lot of the problem is due to overweighting and poor trim though. That CAN be taught, but it is often glossed over or simply ignored. I strongly dislike this, but I see a LOT of it....

If I had one change that I could make to the OW course I would have a requirement that the instructor go through significant trim and weight exercises, and change this nonsense about "neutral at 15' with 500 psi" to "neutral at 1' with LESS THAN 500 psi", along with REQUIRING that these checks be done with the legs and arms crossed.

Swimming with your legs down increases work and makes proper buoyancy control very difficult. If you are neutral and swim, you rise. Rise too much and the air in your BC takes over and suddenly you're REALLY going up! I can easily see someone struggling with this, getting out of control and suddenly they're in a buoyant ascend unintentionally - and get a DCS or AGE hit as a consequence.

If you get trim right then buoyancy control becomes much easier. Now when you're neutral and kick, you stay neutral. You can control slight up or down angles with where your arms/hands are, or the even the angle of your head. You're FAR less likely to bang the reef/bottom, or silt it, and you can bend at the knees to get even more clearance at the cost of a slight down angle, even if you don't frog kick. Your exertion level goes down, and so does your air consumption as a consequence. Turning head-down to look at something becomes simple.

We spent essentially zero time on trim in my OW class. My instructor spent essentially zero time on it in my AOW too, but that may have been me - I pretty much had it figured out already and my trim is pretty good as it stands, so perhaps there just wasn't much more to say..... at least I'd like to think that

 

[O-ring]

The statistics that I found most compelling were the ones Mike touched on:

Buoyancy and rapid ascent were the overwhelming majority of (>40% and ~25% respectively) reported problems on the dive in which the injury occurred.

Infrequent diving in the past 12 months seemed highly correlated to the incidence of a diving accident.

 

[Scubamedicjoe]

what I see is the industry as a whole needs tougher standards
one area needs more work is this advance buoyancy control ,
bottom line most dont have any control of there buoyancy at all
they get out of school bingo there they go to coast doing some ocean dives are they ready hell no , should they even be allowed on the boat as a diver yet nope not as the open water level
then you got the one's who complete there open water dives ten to 20 dives later they are in a advance open water dive class are they ready yet nope sorry they need more practice with a experence divers first .
bottom line the experence level needs to be higher before they go on to the next levels

 

[dvas]

hi,
where can I find this report?

sasha

 

[Genesis]

I think a lot of that has to do with where you were trained.

Around here most of the people who do their OW are pretty advanced pretty fast. You have to be - there's like one thing you can dive on a less than 60' profile, and most of the charter profiles are in the 80-90' range in open water.

If you're not comfortable there then you simply won't be diving at all.

If you trained in 30' and that's where your dives have been, then its a different situation entirely. Likewise if your diving has all been in gin-clear springs or something similar.

The people who I see down here with the most trouble are the "vacation divers" who don't get out often. They lose their edge, have poor buoyancy control and just generally aren't comfortable in the water. It takes only one incident for them to be freaked out and then the spiral begins...

With the exception of the night dive, which really was cool and something I hadn't done before, the rest of my AOW class was pretty much passe' - nothing really new to be learned or experienced. "Deep" was a pure joke - the agency definition of "deep" is basically where all of my diving has been done!

For grins and giggles I did my ascents on my wreck dive prone and turned sommersaults during my deep and safety stops on the way back up. Was having a good time - hope my instructor enjoyed it