Orange Grove fatality?

[kensuf]

We also might want to start asking ourselves a few questions as a community:

1. Does the Intro certification still makes sense, given the tendency of Intro divers to exceed their limits?
2. Why are more Intro level divers breaking their limits?
3. Why do some Intro divers apparently violate those limits very shortly after getting Intro certified?
4. What role is being played by full cave certified team mates in encouraging, or tolerating this behavior?
5. Would we be better served with an intermediate cert with a couple more days of training that allowed limited navigation (for example, one or two jumps, gaps or tees), or would that just create the option for those divers to do dives with multiple navigational decisions and even greater penetration?

6. We should be asking ourselves how do the accident rates compare between, for example, NACD Intro to Cave which takes 8 dives, usually over 4 days and NAUI Cave 1 which takes 4-5 days and allows two navigational decisions?

We also might want to ask ourselves whether our training standards and expectations have slipped, and whether we might be reducing the value of a greater number of training days and longer dives in training. For example Cavern and Intro used to take 4 days but now it seems some agencies allow divers to knock out that combination with 8 dives in just 3 days, but with less bottom time. Even if they meet the training requirements in that time period, there is still value in getting another couple dives under the supervision of an instructor who can further refine the student's skills and impart additional knowledge in the process.

I snipped a bunch of your post out and left the stuff that I think is really important to address. I even added #'s to a few of the questions.

For the first 3 questions, I think the answers are "Yes" and "Not entirely sure, but see my answer to #4".

For #4 I think there's a huge problem with full cave divers trying to encourage intro divers to break the limits of their training. I've had several former students tell me of people that tried to encourage them to dive to thirds almost immediately after they were done with intro. And while I'm not a fan of Kelly's idea of going back to the days of Single Tank Only, there's one benefit of being in a single tank -- you have a finite gas amount that will limit your penetration. Most of the gas is used just running the reel to the primary line anyway.

Instructors need to do a better job of reminding their students they have a responsibility to not take people beyond the limits of their training. We should all review the previous levels of training and explain in depth why taking people beyond their limits is a horrible idea.

#5 - that course exists, it's called Apprentice. Or Cave 1. Or "TekLite Cave Diver", depending on your agency.

#6 - It's difficult to have a significant statistical analysis of the safety of NAUI Cave 1 versus Intro because the numbers for Cave 1 are substantially lower. You can go out any day of the week and you're likely to run into an intro class, but rarely will you run into a NAUI Cave 1 course. BTW, NAUI Cave 1 requires 9 dives (2 cavern, 7 cave). Apprentice requires 10 (4 cavern, 6 cave). Probably not enough either way, and Cave 1 is really a "zero to hero" program so it is a lot for many people to digest at once.

On the standards slipping front.. Cavern/Intro has been allowed to be taught as a 3 day course since at least 1994 when I started cave diving.

I think the difference isn't the standards on paper, but rather the quality of the instructors teaching the material. Twenty years ago, even the cave instructors that I thought were goof balls, were stellar cave divers and excellent at sharing how to cave dive safely. But now, not so much. We have "Cavern Instructors" that can't do a frog kick, and are taking students to the Keyhole in Ginnie while the instructor is in a single tank K-valve.

I think this drop in instructor quality goes back to the path taken to become a cave instructor. I mentored/co-taught under a dozen different cave instructors (in no particular order they were Bailey, Berman, Jablonski, Oestreich, Sorenson, Fowler, Cole, Murcar, Bernot, Wyatt, Sellers, Moon), and that used to be the norm. Not so anymore.

 

[The Chairman]

I'm sure that instructor standards have degraded over time. However, I can't see that as a primary or contributory cause in this accident.

Every diver needs to know and honor their limits. Training limits are set in stone, while in the water diver limits are obviously more flexible. There are no "Scuba Police". We can self police to a point, but more importantly, we need to set the example and encourage others to do the same. No, I'm not talking about shaming others as I find that counter productive. You can be a great example, encouraging of standards and not be a jerk about it.

This appears to be a bit more than merely flexing the standards. Blind jumps and exceeding gas limits are not exceeding standards as much as breaking the basic rules of survival. We may never know if it was a matter of hubris, laziness or simple inattention that caused him to make these blind jumps or exceed the rule of sixths, but that cost him his life. You can't train the stupid out of people. Neither can you train them to not panic when they are facing their own mortality. Neither is a skill that can be easily assessed and diagnosed. Bad attitudes are easy enough to mask for few days of training.

 

[karstdvr]

We also might want to start asking ourselves a few questions as a community:

1. Does the Intro certification still makes sense, given the tendency of Intro divers to exceed their limits?
2. Why are more Intro level divers breaking their limits?
3. Why do some Intro divers apparently violate those limits very shortly after getting Intro certified?
4. What role is being played by full cave certified team mates in encouraging, or tolerating this behavior?
5. Would we be better served with an intermediate cert with a couple more days of training that allowed limited navigation (for example, one or two jumps, gaps or tees), or would that just create the option for those divers to do dives with multiple navigational decisions and even greater penetration?

.

I think intro/basic is a good cert and has proven to have a good history, and I think it retains its relevance,but the questions you ask need reflection and understanding. If the intro/basic diver stay within their level and avoid jumps, stages and scooters which are way outside their certification level, then it has a good track record. Good questions that the dive community needs to embrace.

 

[cerich]

I think intro/basic is a good cert and has proven to have a good history, and I think it retains its relevance,but the questions you ask need reflection and understanding. If the intro/basic diver stay within their level and avoid jumps, stages and scooters which are way outside their certification level, then it has a good track record. Good questions that the dive community needs to embrace.

"if"... the real if is that IF suddenly Intro is treated in the way intended when society was quite different and the cave community much smaller.

I think that IF is unlikely.

the Intro incidents we have seen the last dozen + years and the lack of fidelity by students and instructors to the limitations of Intro have IMHO spoken pretty clearly that Intro isn't really working.

I have seen so many Intro students tell me and others that their instructor encouraged them to dive with more experienced full cave divers and gain experience, even on thirds and with deco and nav it's disgusting.

I am so tired of the dive industry talk about "what should be, what standards say" versus what Really IS and what is really happening. It's just a easy way to dodge the issue and place culpability on the diver when the eventual happens instead of developing a safety first culture of ongoing inward systemic evaluation, recognition and education.

 

[karstdvr]

and the cave community much smaller.

.

Sometimes when entering a book in the middle doesn't help us the know the previous chapters. The heyday of cave dive diving instruction was in the early to mid 90s (which is when me and Ken got certified), and that is when we had the most certifications, demographics from there show a gradual shrinking, with ebbs and flows with the economy and people's disposable income. Hence the cave diving community (population) has really been in contraction since then, and more like stabilized over the last few years,but far less than the heyday era. During the 90s there were a lot of intro certifications (realize I don't say basic because it didn't exist), and best to my memory we didn't have many intro accidents,if any, and the irony is all intro diving was done on a single tank. It really slaps in the face of the argument that intro is not safe in a single tank because there isn't enough redundant gas. But, one thing there was more of in the earlier periods was mentoring that really helped to reinforce the skills to be safer. People bring up some valid questions that I think the training community needs to address.

 

[PfcAJ]

I'm sure that instructor standards have degraded over time. However, I can't see that as a primary or contributory cause in this accident.

Idk man. If a brand new cave diver drowns with usable gas in their tanks because they didn't manage their valves properly I kinda think that's a training issue. I've read or heard nothing to suggest there was an issue with the diver's regulator. I could be mistaken.

I firmly believe that SM isn't a good choice for a new cave diver, and it would appear that if the deceased was in BM they would have had access to the remaining gas and would have survived even if there was a regulator failure of some sort.

I think in blueprint for survival there's a section about "insufficient scuba". That might be the case here.

 

[The Chairman]

it would appear that if the deceased was in BM they would have had access to the remaining gas and would have survived

The valve was off. Who knows why, but roll offs are even more common as well as harder to deal with in back mount. You can't assess or teach a diver how to recover from panic. You're only fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

 

[rjack321]

the Intro incidents we have seen the last dozen + years and the lack of fidelity by students and instructors to the limitations of Intro have IMHO spoken pretty clearly that Intro isn't really working.

I am so tired of the dive industry talk about "what should be, what standards say" versus what Really IS and what is really happening. It's just a easy way to dodge the issue and place culpability on the diver when the eventual happens instead of developing a safety first culture of ongoing inward systemic evaluation, recognition and education.

Snipped down to the gist for me....

Totally agree.
Cavern and Intro isn't working and Blueprint for survival isn't working at communicating the "rules" like it once did.

Saying that the rules haven't changed or if students only listened or whatever is a backwards approach to me. Most agencies have not significantly adapted their programs and offerings in a long time. NAUI's (significant) entry into the market and some minor changes to GUE's cave1 gas limits are the only changes I can think of. I'd prefer to see a top down reassessment of who has died or had reportable near misses. What could be changed about courses or cultures or the "blueprint" rules to reduce the frequency or severity of these problems?

I have not seen that kind of self assessment and reflection in cave training agencies. We basically blame the student for breaking the rules and wash our hands as if it that excuses the agencies and culture that facilitated their fatal choices.

As this incident unfortunately drives home, you absolutely can "lose all your gas" in sidemount. That internet myth, perpetuated ad nauseum here on SB and elsewhere is part of the misleading culture which has developed unchecked by agency's and poor instructors in the decades since the blueprint was written.

 

[rjack321]

The valve was off. Who knows why, but roll offs are even more common as well as harder to deal with in back mount. You can't assess or teach a diver how to recover from panic. You're only fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

If you quit blaming the student for breaking the rules and panicking, you can step back and see that there are systemic problems with training, the "rules" of cave diving, and the lack of a culture of safety which is facilitating these repeated fatalities.

 

[PfcAJ]

The valve was off. Who knows why, but roll offs are even more common as well as harder to deal with in back mount. You can't assess or teach a diver how to recover from panic. You're only fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

My point is that it doesn't matter *why* the valve was off as you still have access to all of the gas with BM doubles.

I do think you can create issues in class that can show if a diver is likely to have trouble keeping their wits about them.