Diver dies at Molokai on Maui dive boat

[scubadada]

I have an associate with a ridiculous SAC rate - he can routinely do a 1 hr 40 min dive off an alum 80. (When most everyone else is surfacing at around an hour) When he is diving on a boat - he lets everyone know they will be waiting for him. It certainly angers some people, but in his mind, he's paid the same as everyone else, so...

On a more important note, I agree there is an inherent assumed risk one must accept when mixing tech and rec diving on the same boat. There should be some obvious protocols used to protect everyone, but I don't think one should automatically call all tec/rec mixed diving as blatantly dangerous. It looks like this had been a practice for quite some time at this dive site especially. I would assume (although I don't know this as a fact) that before the boat leaves, everyone knows there will be tec divers down for the duration - and each diver must accept the associated risks with such a dive plan

I do most of my diving in SE FL. Many of us are reasonably good with gas consumption and/or use larger cylinders, but limit our run time to 70-75 minutes out of consideration for other divers, to give us a reasonable SI between dives, and to help the operator keep a schedule, especially when they are running two trips a day.

I dive open circuit, single cylinder. Not infrequently, there are other divers on doubles or rebreathers. Some of them do two shorter dives along with the rec divers and some of them do one long dive, they are given the choice. I have thought about the limitations placed on the rec divers by those doing the longer dives with deco. In my situation, the diving is not remote and there is often another boat that could pick up the stragglers. On one occasion, with all rec divers, there was an OOA/near drowning that occurred before I ascended from a deeper wreck dive. My boat had started transporting the affected diver back to the marina while I was picked up by another dive boat that was in the area.

 

[doctormike]

It's an interesting question from the point of view of dive operator financials. You need to fill boats to keep the business running. Many recreational operators have a strict no-deco policy for both safety and logistics reasons. This is particular the case when they are running an AM two tank boat dive, followed by a PM dive, as in the Caribbean.

On the other hand, places where there is a lot of tech diving can't completely shut out that market, since even though there are a lot more rec divers, the tech divers are much better customers individually in terms of the number of dives per year per diver. Caribbean rec charters probably have very few locals or repeat customers so it's not so much of an issue. I don't know what things are like in Hawaii, but in the Pompano area, for example, they definitely mix divers to keep the boats full, and they can't afford to tell tech divers that they aren't welcome too often.

In the NYC area, virtually all charters allow deco. The deeper ones are obviously strictly deco, but even on the relatively shallow dives billed as good "intro to northeast diving", some people will opt for one long dive rather than two short ones. All other things being equal, two ascents is a greater DCS risk than one ascent. And if everyone enters the water around the same time on those, the one-and-done tech divers will usually be ready to head back home before the rec divers have finished their surface intervals and their second dive.

 

[scubadada]

... And if everyone enters the water around the same time on those, the one-and-done tech divers will usually be ready to head back home before the rec divers have finished their surface intervals and their second dive.

This is generally true, I believe that's why many of the tech divers do two shorter dives along with the rec divers. I generally get in a couple hours of bottom time and a 45-60 minute SI per trip.

Regardless, the divers doing one dive are still going to be down for quite a while if anyone has a problem, particularly, on the 1st dive.

 

[Joneill]

I have an associate with a ridiculous SAC rate - he can routinely do a 1 hr 40 min dive off an alum 80. (When most everyone else is surfacing at around an hour) When he is diving on a boat - he lets everyone know they will be waiting for him. It certainly angers some people, but in his mind, he's paid the same as everyone else, so...

In my limited diving experience (Carribean) they usually limit you to 60 minutes as they have a schedule to keep. I got "scolded" for 64 minutes once - but I can understand why as, in those situations, it's unfair to the other divers and the Dive Op as well.

On a more important note, I agree there is an inherent assumed risk one must accept when mixing tech and rec diving on the same boat. There should be some obvious protocols used to protect everyone, but I don't think one should automatically call all tec/rec mixed diving as blatantly dangerous.

I can agree with that as long as the rec divers are aware of the mix when they book their dives and don't only learn when they get on the boat. It certainly can add risk in an emergency situation and divers need to be aware in advance so they can decide what they are comfortable with.

 

[Carl_F]

My takeaway is that a mixed charter absolutely increases the risk!

I agree that the risk is increased but to think that the overall risk has increased other than a small increment is not the correct picture of risk profile.

If the CG had been available, the boat would have waited for the CG. - risk not increased by waiting for someone with a deco obligation.
If the CG is not available, the time needed to make it back to medical help from a remote site is the limiting factor not the additional time from a deco obligation. If the CCR divers had already cleared deco or were within NDLs, going and getting the other group of divers would likely have taken an additional 10 - 15 minutes. The likelihood of survival from a cardiac or respiratory failure if it takes 2 hours to get to the ER vs 2.5 hrs to get to the ER is not significantly greater. The likelihood of survival is greater in absolute terms but, in my opinion, not by a statistically significant amount.

There are many more basic things that a diver can do to minimize risk of a dive-related fatality by a whole lot more than not diving in a mixed charter.

I can agree with that as long as the rec divers are aware of the mix when they book their dives and don't only learn when they get on the boat. It certainly can add risk in an emergency situation and divers need to be aware in advance so they can decide what they are comfortable with.

I would offer that divers are accepting of much greater risks than a tec - rec mixed boat. And they're probably doing so without even thinking of it. Going to a remote site is a much greater risk increase than going on a tec-rec mixed boat.

Beware false equivalences.

 

[Carl_F]

.

 

[doctormike]

I would offer that divers are accepting of much greater risks than a tec - rec mixed boat. And they're probably doing so without even thinking of it. Going to a remote site is a much greater risk increase than going on a tec-rec mixed boat.

Beware false equivalences.

This is an excellent point.

If you are going to conclude that you should never mix tech and wreck divers because that might cause a delay of 34 minutes in evacuating an injured diver, then you should also conclude that you should never allow recreational divers on a dive boat with a top speed of less than 30 knots, because at 20 knot boat would mean a significant delay in getting an injured diver to a medical facility, and the dive operator is liable if they don't have the fastest boat available.

Also, you might conclude that all recreational divers should be limited to an arbitrary distance from the shore and nearest emergency facility, because diving a more remote site would incur an additional risk due to delayed evacuation (potentially far more than simply mixing tech and rec).

 

[CuzzA]

I think we're overthinking this. Any boat trip that has a long travel time has the same risk regardless of the dives taking place.

Almost always the USCG is ready to respond and deploy assets. In this case, it just so happened they were already engaged in a number of emergencies when this call came in. Bad luck. 34 minutes knocked off 2 hours wasn't going to change the outcome. The USCG arriving 34 minutes after the first sign of trouble? Maybe.

 

[Frontpointer1000]

I think we're overthinking this. Any boat trip that has a long travel time has the same risk regardless of the dives taking place.

Almost always the USCG is ready to respond and deploy assets. In this case, it just so happened they were already engaged in a number of emergencies when this call came in. Bad luck. 34 minutes knocked off 2 hours wasn't going to change the outcome. The USCG arriving 34 minutes after the first sign of trouble? Maybe.

I dont think Cuzza is espousing this, but it makes me think about where we place our confidence. Often times in this modern society of governmental dependency, there seems to be a predilection toward believing some other magical authority will save us. They won't. They can't. This is a particularly good time to emphasize the importance of self-dependency. Learn CPR. Learn navigation. Learn whatever. More people are likely to survive by YOU knowing CPR than by waiting for the USCG to arrive to provide care. It's simply a matter of time and distance. Save yourselves. Dont depend on someone else.

 

[Dan]

More importantly, be honest to yourself, learn your limitation, learn to say no when the situation is beyond what you are comfortable with. There is no dive site is worth dying for.