Diver Death in Cayman
- Thread starter fosterboxermom
- Start date
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
- Status
pilot fish
Guest
- Messages
- 11,538
- Reaction score
- 4
- # of dives
- 200 - 499
Let's see, if the Dive Master is really just a Dive Guide, has zero responsibilty for new divers, is not responsible for at least advising safe profiles for that dive, does not keep the group together, so he's not even "guiding" the dive, does not warn a brand new diver against diving to 100 ft, as recommended against by most, if not all, dive agencies, continues a dive while a brand new diver is missing, takes new divers to an mproper dive site and does not hold proper pre dive briefing, is that DM/DG doing his job? Is he doing any job, other than the calypso shuck and jive for tips?
Aquaviolator
Contributor
I think you stated it all...totally agree. Prayers to the family.
Aquaviolator
Contributor
Was agreeing with Jimlap's post on page three...
I am not saying for a second that this DM didn't dropped the ball - the site was wrong, the breifing stunk.
My focus is not ONLY on his original training but the fact of the matter is that if this diver has exercised personal responsibility then this likely wouldn't have happened. Unless he was unaware of the dangers in the first place.
Assuming the original training was up to standards then this diver would have been made aware of his training of the risk of narcosis, of the increasing rate of using his air, of the suggested depth limits and why. So if his training was up to standards then why didn't he listen to that training - is there not enough emphasis being put on personal responsibility during the course? Did he just ignore it (I will admit that I have caught wind of former students of mine exceeding depth limits and doing other things that I trained them against - I assure you I was not happy about it). So to answer your question - I don't know and neither can you know/think/believe if the diver would have still been alive ... if he ignored his training on this dive then what would have kept him from ignoring his training on a 60-80 dive? - maybe holding his breath while ascending, maybe wondering off and finding a deeper area, maybe ignoring his pressure gauge.
PF clearly you want handholding by dive professionals and since your OW and other certs are indicating you don't need that - please let me know if this is what you are asking for and I'll send you a PM with my address. Then send me your c-cards and I will find an industrial sized wood chipper to put them through (I'll even video tape it for you). Further more - so you can still enjoy diving ... I'll invite you up to Canada (on my dime) to complete a Scuba Diver cert - this cert will allow all dive professionals to know that you require/want a much higher level of observation during dives and you will receive it.
Ayisha
Contributor
That's true. If someone does not want to take responsibility for themselves as a certified O/W SCUBA Diver as they were trained, then they should just get the Scuba Diver cert or do a Discover SCUBA or resort course. They will be supervised much closer and kept to stricter limits. Even then, however, that diver cannot be protected from everything or from him/herself, and still has risk.
There is an idea among new divers that instructors and other dive professionals are "Dive Gods" and can keep them safe, and that is a false sense of security. If you are a student, they will do their best to stay close and stay within limits and follow protocols. If you are a certified diver, you should be planning your dive and diving your plan. If a leader is leading a group and one diver goes significantly away from the group, does the one leader look for the single diver or stay with the rest of the group? He/she will probably not risk the group for the individual diver. A leader also cannot be expected to take undue risk to themselves either in rescuing others.
Please remember that this dive was not bottomless and the wall that this group was diving did not have a steep drop-off. For the diver to swim his way all the way out and down to 340 feet by himself took a lot of WORK. He did not just drop to 340 feet. That information is a very important part of this puzzle.
Now let's say that the diver did drop quickly to 340 feet. A leader might try to descend part of the way and catch the diver or signal them to get their attention, but they cannot be expected to follow a diver indefinitely or put themselves at risk. They also cannot put the rest of the group at risk.
For our own safety, we all need to be proficient, self-reliant divers who stay within our training, limits and experience and use the appropriate equipment for the dives we do.
deep.dude
Registered
Like Joker31 I haven't read the entire thread but I want to put my 2 cents worth in.
1. 130 feet is widly recognized as the maximum recreational limit. And their are no laws stating that this limit must be followed. However all of the training agencies have standards that thier instructors must follow to maintain the instructor certification. By NAUI standards no Scuba Diver (basic open water) training dives are to take place deeper than 60 feet. For AOW certification at least 1 dive greater than 60 feet is required and that the instructor must accompany students during the first training dive deeper than 60 and no training dives are to be conducted in excess of 130. (this infor was taken directly from NAUI's Standards and policy manual).
2. In the NAUI standards manual it is stated that upon successful completion of any course the graduate is considered competent to engage in open water activities without direct supervison provide that the diving activites and the areas dived approximate those of training. In other words the diver should not have undergone the dive that they made. And it was thier responcibility to decline the dive. In all classes I have taken it was made clear that if I do not feel comfortable with a dive it is my right and responcibility to decide if I am comfortable with a dive or location.
3. I am not sure about the Caymans but here in Florida a dive boat must have a crew member other than the captain on board all all times provided there are more than 6 passangers and the helm is on a raised bridge or Fly Bridge. If the boat is a center console and the Captain is on the same deck they are not required to have another crew member on board. Based on early posts the dive operation was faulted for not having another crew member on board but from what liitle detail was given I doubt if another deck hand would have made any difference.
4. I agree that a dive breifing should have been given by either the guide, dive master of Captain. This briefing should include any safety concerns like the importance of closely monitoring your depth during a wall dive. and if the only depth available was 100 or more then a different site should have been chosen based on the experience of those on board but a profile of 100 on a wall dive is usually considered to be the maximum depth on less the wall doesn't start until 100 feet in which case you would be diving the top of a ledge rather than a wall. You obviously decided not to stay with the DM and apparently thought that was OK.
5. As a dive guide how can you force divers to stay with you? maybe put a leash on each of them? As for not calling a dive because a diver who was not with the group, should the guide have called the dive because you were not with him. The missing diver could have decide to acsend to be with you or maybe decide to acsend all the way to the surface.
6. As for dive breifings it is the responibily of the operation to give thenm and the responsibilty for all divers to shut thier trap and listen while a breifing is given. I can't count the times I have heard a diver ask a question because they were to busy messing with thier gear during a breifing.
I am not say the operation is not at least partially responcible for this situation but I have not read any details the prove that they were. But each of us have to take responcibility for our own actions and I am tired of hearing people constantly blame thier own failures on someone else.
1. 130 feet is widly recognized as the maximum recreational limit. And their are no laws stating that this limit must be followed. However all of the training agencies have standards that thier instructors must follow to maintain the instructor certification. By NAUI standards no Scuba Diver (basic open water) training dives are to take place deeper than 60 feet. For AOW certification at least 1 dive greater than 60 feet is required and that the instructor must accompany students during the first training dive deeper than 60 and no training dives are to be conducted in excess of 130. (this infor was taken directly from NAUI's Standards and policy manual).
2. In the NAUI standards manual it is stated that upon successful completion of any course the graduate is considered competent to engage in open water activities without direct supervison provide that the diving activites and the areas dived approximate those of training. In other words the diver should not have undergone the dive that they made. And it was thier responcibility to decline the dive. In all classes I have taken it was made clear that if I do not feel comfortable with a dive it is my right and responcibility to decide if I am comfortable with a dive or location.
3. I am not sure about the Caymans but here in Florida a dive boat must have a crew member other than the captain on board all all times provided there are more than 6 passangers and the helm is on a raised bridge or Fly Bridge. If the boat is a center console and the Captain is on the same deck they are not required to have another crew member on board. Based on early posts the dive operation was faulted for not having another crew member on board but from what liitle detail was given I doubt if another deck hand would have made any difference.
4. I agree that a dive breifing should have been given by either the guide, dive master of Captain. This briefing should include any safety concerns like the importance of closely monitoring your depth during a wall dive. and if the only depth available was 100 or more then a different site should have been chosen based on the experience of those on board but a profile of 100 on a wall dive is usually considered to be the maximum depth on less the wall doesn't start until 100 feet in which case you would be diving the top of a ledge rather than a wall. You obviously decided not to stay with the DM and apparently thought that was OK.
5. As a dive guide how can you force divers to stay with you? maybe put a leash on each of them? As for not calling a dive because a diver who was not with the group, should the guide have called the dive because you were not with him. The missing diver could have decide to acsend to be with you or maybe decide to acsend all the way to the surface.
6. As for dive breifings it is the responibily of the operation to give thenm and the responsibilty for all divers to shut thier trap and listen while a breifing is given. I can't count the times I have heard a diver ask a question because they were to busy messing with thier gear during a breifing.
I am not say the operation is not at least partially responcible for this situation but I have not read any details the prove that they were. But each of us have to take responcibility for our own actions and I am tired of hearing people constantly blame thier own failures on someone else.
stevejaz
Contributor
This is pretty late in the conversation but I wanted to chime in with a couple of things as there are so many things that don't make sense to me, thoughts I have about this, and how it could have occured or been prevented.
Per Webster... master: one with control or authority over another or others ; a male teacher or tutor
Sooo, being a relatively new diver myself it was my impression that the "divemaster" was in control and that they determined the dive and took responsibility for it. Of the few dives I have under my belt, that has definitely been the case. They chose the location based on conditions and input, they chose the direction and profile, they setup the equipment...yada, yada, yada
Now, that being said, that doesn't mean I didn't/don't double check everything and exercise my own judgement. What may be perfectly within your comfort level doesn't necessarily mean that it's with in mine and vice versa even with the same experience.
However, it's always surprised me just how willing people are to be led and trust in others (especially with a title such as "divemaster"). Their unwillingness to step up in a questionable situation and be heard or stray from the group. In a crisis situation where someone needs to take control....forget about it, even less people respond. Then add in an "alleged" ego from someone whom I'd assume was most if not everybodies elder.....
I think all of this contributed to an ending with traggic results. Although I must say, if what the original OP states is true, they did do this to some extent by refusing to go to such a depth and taking responsibility for the fiance, in my mind this would obsolve them from the other group and no responsiblity would lay with them. This dive had 2 divemasters of sorts and the fact that the divemaster for the 100' club looked to the other for their missing diver shows that they were not clear as to the division of the groups. Poor dive planning to say the least!
But, that being said if this guy hit 346' and made it back to the surface in 22 minutes? He was either determined, heavily overweighted, and or narc'd badly somewhere around 100' (if he intended to do the dive as planned), but even still to get down there and still make a conscious decision to presumably make an emergency bouyant ascent?????? If he was that determined, he was going to do it and I don't know that it's the divemasters responsibility to reign somebody like that in and risk their safety as well as that of the group.
One other thing....coming out of class we had covered nitrogen narcosis but I didn't have a good understanding of it until I started reading this board. I certainly had no idea an experienced diver could have a bad experience with it 90 some feet. With the rec limit being 130' and being told that the dive tables were conservative, I think it can easily give people a false sense of security.
Somebody also made the comment about the lack of instruction and online courses being part of the problem. Like has been mentioned, those experiences vary. While I have had issues with DM's or instructors, my personal certification experience was very good and I did it online (through PADI) and then my instructor of the confined and OW dives was great. However, while I retained a lot of it, it really solidified a lot of it teaching/explaining it to others that took the class later.
But then again, like someone said, you don't know what you don't know until you know!
Sooo, I know I just managed to ramble a lot, but to the OP, I'm very sorry for your experience! BUT, looking for someone to blame will not solve the issue, finding the root cause and sharing it will not change the past but may change the future and I hope you can atleast get some comfort in that.
Take care,
Steve
Per Webster... master: one with control or authority over another or others ; a male teacher or tutor
Sooo, being a relatively new diver myself it was my impression that the "divemaster" was in control and that they determined the dive and took responsibility for it. Of the few dives I have under my belt, that has definitely been the case. They chose the location based on conditions and input, they chose the direction and profile, they setup the equipment...yada, yada, yada
Now, that being said, that doesn't mean I didn't/don't double check everything and exercise my own judgement. What may be perfectly within your comfort level doesn't necessarily mean that it's with in mine and vice versa even with the same experience.
However, it's always surprised me just how willing people are to be led and trust in others (especially with a title such as "divemaster"). Their unwillingness to step up in a questionable situation and be heard or stray from the group. In a crisis situation where someone needs to take control....forget about it, even less people respond. Then add in an "alleged" ego from someone whom I'd assume was most if not everybodies elder.....
I think all of this contributed to an ending with traggic results. Although I must say, if what the original OP states is true, they did do this to some extent by refusing to go to such a depth and taking responsibility for the fiance, in my mind this would obsolve them from the other group and no responsiblity would lay with them. This dive had 2 divemasters of sorts and the fact that the divemaster for the 100' club looked to the other for their missing diver shows that they were not clear as to the division of the groups. Poor dive planning to say the least!
But, that being said if this guy hit 346' and made it back to the surface in 22 minutes? He was either determined, heavily overweighted, and or narc'd badly somewhere around 100' (if he intended to do the dive as planned), but even still to get down there and still make a conscious decision to presumably make an emergency bouyant ascent?????? If he was that determined, he was going to do it and I don't know that it's the divemasters responsibility to reign somebody like that in and risk their safety as well as that of the group.
One other thing....coming out of class we had covered nitrogen narcosis but I didn't have a good understanding of it until I started reading this board. I certainly had no idea an experienced diver could have a bad experience with it 90 some feet. With the rec limit being 130' and being told that the dive tables were conservative, I think it can easily give people a false sense of security.
Somebody also made the comment about the lack of instruction and online courses being part of the problem. Like has been mentioned, those experiences vary. While I have had issues with DM's or instructors, my personal certification experience was very good and I did it online (through PADI) and then my instructor of the confined and OW dives was great. However, while I retained a lot of it, it really solidified a lot of it teaching/explaining it to others that took the class later.
But then again, like someone said, you don't know what you don't know until you know!
Sooo, I know I just managed to ramble a lot, but to the OP, I'm very sorry for your experience! BUT, looking for someone to blame will not solve the issue, finding the root cause and sharing it will not change the past but may change the future and I hope you can atleast get some comfort in that.
Take care,
Steve
Although I feel the diver is the first responsible..... You are right and have a point....
- Status
Similar threads
