Diver dies trapped in wreck in Gran Canaria

[Dan]

It was her colleagues who gave the alert a few minutes after eleven in the morning. The Salvamar Nunki Maritime Rescue boat, as well as the GEAS team of the Armed Institute, immediately began work to try to rescue the diver.

This sounds like she penetrated alone, while her buddy was outside the wreck. The rusted upside down floor or internal wall of the wreck might have collapsed on her, silted-up and trapped her. Even though she might have run lines, she might’ve not able to get back out.

 

[boulderjohn]

Even though she might have run lines, she might’ve not able to get back out.

If you get caught in a tangle of cables, running line does not do a lot of good.

I know of the case of someone who dived the Britannic, the sister ship of the Titanic. It was filmed, and the filmer wanted to film the diver going down the grand staircase, the twin of what was featured in the movie. He refused. The entire area was a hopeless tangle of cables.

Most of us dive only sanitized wrecks that have been nicely cleaned up before sinking, a process sometimes costing millions of dollars. These have not only had those obstacles removed, in many cases exit holes have been cut in strategic places. Real wrecks are nothing like that, and they need to be approached with extreme caution.

 

[oceancurrent]

what the appropriate certification was for these divers to do those swim-throughs. He laughed, because he believed as well as I did that there is no such certification.

Sure, go have fun any time in one of these tropical artificial wrecks that are set up with cutout exits all over. The wreck in this accident is different beast altogether, from all we know! People with healthy self preservation instincts wouldn't shouldn't even consider going in without proper training, equipment, planning, etc.

 

[boulderjohn]

Sure, go have fun any time in one of these tropical artificial wrecks that are set up with cutout exits all over. The wreck in this accident is different beast altogether, from all we know! People with healthy self preservation instincts wouldn't shouldn't even consider going in without proper training, equipment, planning, etc.

Isn't that what I said?

 

[Dan]

If you get caught in a tangle of cables, running line does not do a lot of good.

I know of the case of someone who dived the Britannic, the sister ship of the Titanic. It was filmed, and the filmer wanted to film the diver going down the grand staircase, the twin of what was featured in the movie. He refused. The entire area was a hopeless tangle of cables.

Most of us dive only sanitized wrecks that have been nicely cleaned up before sinking, a process sometimes costing millions of dollars. These have not only had those obstacles removed, in many cases exit holes have been cut in strategic places. Real wrecks are nothing like that, and they need to be approached with extreme caution.

I just finished listening to 13 CDs of Shadow Divers (discovering & identifying a German U-boat complete with its crew of 55 men) on my way home, 10-hour driving from Big Bend National Park. I can imagine how the real wreck would look like.

Also I dove into Thistlegorm wreck in Red Sea. Although there were still a lot of stuff in there (motorcycles, cars, etc), however, this wreck seems to have been cleaned up quite a bit for tourist diver to safely swim through without guideline, but with a guide.

 

[Couch]

This report kind of skizzed me out. There are all kinds of dive activities I find interesting, and worth some measure of risk, but others, not so much. This is a serious question that I'd like some informed wreck divers to answer: what's the point? I mean, I understand the point if it's a newly discovered wreck of some historical importance and the penetrations are done carefully, by experienced teams, with mechanical equipment available to help in rescues if necessary. But a 70s fishing boat? It seems to me (I may be wrong) that too often wreck diving is thrill seeking. If it's an easy thrill -- well established routes known to be safe -- okay. But this one...man, this one is tough for me to rationalize. It's like one of those 300-foot bounce dives to prove you did it, where the two outcomes are (a) you did it but nobody cares, and (b) death. I mean, WTF?

 

[OTF]

This report kind of skizzed me out. There are all kinds of dive activities I find interesting, and worth some measure of risk, but others, not so much. This is a serious question that I'd like some informed wreck divers to answer: what's the point? I mean, I understand the point if it's a newly discovered wreck of some historical importance and the penetrations are done carefully, by experienced teams, with mechanical equipment available to help in rescues if necessary. But a 70s fishing boat? It seems to me (I may be wrong) that too often wreck diving is thrill seeking. If it's an easy thrill -- well established routes known to be safe -- okay. But this one...man, this one is tough for me to rationalize. It's like one of those 300-foot bounce dives to prove you did it, where the two outcomes are (a) you did it but nobody cares, and (b) death. I mean, WTF?

As a wreck diver, this is a good question, and one that I ask myself all the time. We all should more carefully consider motivation as part of the risk/reward calculation. Sometimes I don't have a good answer.

 

[boulderjohn]

The question gets asked of cave divers often, and the answer is often misunderstood as a putdown. The answer is that you either get it or you don't. Some people just love swimming around inside confined spaces. There is no explanation for it. Other people don't. There is no explanation for it.

 

[dmaziuk]

There's always "because it's there".

 

[cipherbreak]

The video says the dive was "recreational" and mentioned there is an ongoing investigation against the dive "instructor" for negligence and for deficiencies in the equipment used during the dive. It doesn't say if/what course was being taught by said instructor.