Fatality in the Vandenberg Wreck, Key West Florida

[yle]

Agreed. People can Armchair Quarterback the buddy’s decision all they want. At some point, you’re going to have to make the call to ascend.

The deceased was found inside of the wreck. Are you proposing that someone with only an AOW cert and no wreck penetration experience follow someone inside of a wreck in a situation like this?

No, not at all. The point of my post was that we crank out AOW divers with very minimal training for deep diving (a cursory review of some relevant info and one deep dive), and then we pretend they are qualified to handle a dive like the Vandenberg... with typically strong current at a depth of 110 ft. Training that includes "what if" scenario discussions, so that AOW students are aware, before getting in the water, of all the little things that could go wrong would be beneficial.

To your last point, we discussed that during my AOW course. It’s one of the reasons I carry a pony bottle.

I know there are instructors that go beyond standards and understand the bigger picture. Sounds like yours was one of them!

 

[yle]

No, you don’t have it right...

This is one of the scenarios that comes up in cave training, btw. Divers are expected to make a best effort to get their buddy out of a cave in this exact scenario. And, maybe that happened in this case, I don’t know.

I'm not cave trained, but I get the impression that dive planning for cave dives includes plenty of redundancy, including gas supply. And the effort you describe to help a buddy in need is also part of the training, I'm sure.

Not saying the effort would have been successful, but I don’t agree with not doing everything possible just because it’s an insta-buddy and a wreck. I don’t like the PADI position of abandonment, until every effort has been made.

I don't believe PADI has a "position of abandonment." Unfortunately, there is an unofficial position of "you did one deep dive in your AOW course, and now you're qualified to handle any deep dive." Of course dive ops are allowed to require further training and/or experience before taking divers to sites that would warrant such.

I saw a diver narced out of his mind at 120ft on a wreck once. His instructor just swam up beside him, didn’t wrestle with him, just stayed with him, and kept pulling him higher as he swam. It took him a few minutes to get him up where he started recovering.

Exactly. That instructor had the training and experience to handle the situation. The typical "I just finished my AOW class!" usually does not.

 

[yle]

No, he was advocating grabbing a tank valve and may be pulling the diver up to where his head would clear. If the guy was narked, he wouldn't figure out what was going on for a good 30', and then possibly be thinking about retribution or just a simple thank you.

Which brings up another issue that is unique to sites like the Vandenberg. When I've been there, medium to strong currents have been the norm. And the deck is at around 100 ft depth. Which means the only way to effectively ascend shallower is on the line from the deck to the boat at the surface. Trying to ascend 30 ft with an unwilling buddy would mean either first getting that buddy to the ascent line, or ascending midwater in a current.

Lot of difficult decisions to be made within the few seconds available.

 

[yle]

For a FL wreck (especially one of big popular ones) it's a combo that never should have splashed. .

Could have been the Benwood. Or something similar. Not all Florida wrecks are deep and challenging.

 

[yle]

So like another poster said, they can sue you even if there is no proof that you broke any law ?

LOL... Americans are reading your post thinking "well, yeah..."

You're in London, Blue, so you can be forgiven for thinking this concept is bizarre: Americans can sue each other for anything, anytime. Typically only the lawyers benefit from this arrangement.

 

[AdivingBel]

Could have been the Benwood. Or something similar. Not all Florida wrecks are deep and challenging.

That's certainly possible and I take your point, but I'm not sure where exactly you would "swim through" on the Benwood.

 

[Bob DBF]

Lot of difficult decisions to be made within the few seconds available.

Which is why I have no issue with the survivors course of action, or anyone else's for that matter, one can only do what one can do.

As an instructor, and having experience watching divers and heading off their bad decisions, I believe your response might be something other than just let your buddy swim off. And because I mentioned one possible scenario, does not mean that is what I would actually do, as I would have to experience the situation to decide what would work.

The problem with the what ifs for an accident such as this, is one is not there experiencing all the conditions. I try to make it clear in the dive plan that we will stay together as a buddy team. And I know from experience that if things go wrong, I will do something.

Oh yeah, did I tell you I prefer solo.


Bob

 

[BlueTrin]

LOL... Americans are reading your post thinking "well, yeah..."

You're in London, Blue, so you can be forgiven for thinking this concept is bizarre: Americans can sue each other for anything, anytime. Typically only the lawyers benefit from this arrangement.

Yea, I can imagine someone having to pay lawyers fees just to defend himself.

Not a good situation to be in even if you have done nothing wrong.

 

[AfterDark]

Yea, I can imagine someone having to pay lawyers fees just to defend himself.

Not a good situation to be in even if you have done nothing wrong.

That's how it works the one with most money wears the other one down financially. The one with the most money may have 2,3,4 or more legal minds working on a lawsuit, to the others one lawyer. Even if one can prove the lawsuit is without merit they are still out the legal fees. So you can win the lawsuit and lose everything else.

There was a time when a judge would throw out a meritless suit, but that's not done much these days.

 

[BRT]

So like another poster said, they can sue you even if there is no proof that you broke any law ?

You don't have to break a law to be sued! Anybody can sue anybody for anything.