Yukon tangent thread

[TSandM]

Just for those of us who aren't from SoCal -- what is the profile on this dive? How deep is the sand, and how far up into the water column does the superstructure go? (I'm asking this mainly because a fairly square profile will make for a much more predictable maximum dive time than a strongly stepped profile.)

 

[Blackwood]

Just for those of us who aren't from SoCal -- what is the profile on this dive? How deep is the sand, and how far up into the water column does the superstructure go? (I'm asking this mainly because a fairly square profile will make for a much more predictable maximum dive time than a strongly stepped profile.)

105 to the sand (maybe you can get a little deeper if you really try), about 45 feet of relief or thereabouts.

She's lying on her port side, so the first structure you come across is the starboard hull.

 

[ZenDiver.3D]

Quote:
Originally Posted by awap
Is the only way one can make a credible judgment is to be an eye witness?
In this case. Yes. Considering the strong assertions the poster has made, I think this is a fair question. He seems to imply that the DMs onboard are complete idiots and negligent in their duties. It seems fair to ask if he was even on the boat to view what he asserts has taken place. Or is is just guessing this happened based on "what he heard" over the internet posts?

Is it unreasonable to expect someone to listen to testimony and other evidence and make a judgment?I don't consider posts on Scubaboard to be "testimony" or "evidence". Do you? The majority of posters don't even live in the area yet are quick to offer their opinion rendered as fact on the matter.

Yukon

I agree about the first response here.
I don't think posts here are testimony either, but we have in the past had witnesses post their accounts. By hashing this over and over and even supposing varied scenarios, it makes most of us more thinking divers. And if filtering wild accusations from the good solid ideas is work, it also helps others to plan and change possibly bad behavior. If this thread saves the life of one other diver in the future, then it is worthwhile.

I certainly don't live in the area. Far from it, in fact. However, I am always interested in finding out what happens to people, and why. I try to never post speculation as fact. But others certainly do. They quite often scream it from the rafters. Hopefully, most can weed that out.

 

[Rainer]

What he said.

We usually average around 80-90'. Typical BTs for us (on 32%) are 40 minutes. It has *a lot* of relief and most of the interesting features are in the 80-90' range. Taking pictures in the sand, though, is going to keep you deeper (but not at 105-110' in all areas).

105 to the sand (maybe you can get a little deeper if you really try), about 45 feet of relief or thereabouts.

She's lying on her port side, so the first structure you come across is the starboard hull.

 

[tbaldi]

we have in the past had witnesses post their accounts. If this thread saves the life of one other diver in the future, then it is worthwhile.

I agree with you. However, has anyone who was on the boat that day actually posted anything in this thread? If so, I missed it. I did see rampant speculation and accusatory statements made about staff of the Humbolt despite very little firsthand info (read none). Is there anyone on this thread that was actually on the boat that day?

Also, how is it effective to wildly speculate what happened with no first hand info and consider that learning or effective? Why not wait until the accident report comes out and then discuss?

About the only statements that carry some creedance IMO is Brandons. He is a captain of a local dive boat, was in the area, has hundreds of dives on the wreck in question, worked with the rescue teams and knows (or has trained / worked with) the crew / captain of the dive boat in question. Does anyone else have those qualifications? Or is this just purely speculation on everyone's part? Or are were really going to rely on "educated guesses" made by those "local experts" that may have dove the wreck once in their lifetime but reside in Singapore or on the east coast?

Again, my condolences to the family of the diver who passed on the wreck.

 

[ScubaSteve]

Also, how is it effective to wildly speculate what happened......

Without the "wildly" label, I would say many could offer an answer. The wildly label requires some definition before an opinion could be offered.

 

[Jax]

Also, how is it effective to wildly speculate what happened with no first hand info and consider that learning or effective? Why not wait until the accident report comes out and then discuss?

One noob diver's opinion: Quite effective! Ever heard of the phrase, "Learn from other's mistakes, because you won't have time to make them all yourself."?

People's discussions of the "what might have" happened allow me to learn many different possibilities, and I can learn to account for and pay attention to those possibilities.

This fellow died on what "should have been" an easy dive due to the nice conditions, at a depth that "should have been" an easy depth to deal with, and performing an activity with a known risk of "losing track" of tasks, but not generally considered an abnormal task load.

For me, I take away that there is a high probability he ran out of gas and failed to respond appropriately. A second high probability is a medical problem about which he could not react.

The first, I can do something about. God Willing I will not be so stupid as to run out of gas because of my photography, but I acknowledge the risk by training for such an event and always carrying a pony if I dive local. I rent one if I'm not local. If I cannot rent one, I will be the best d****d buddy I can be!

The second probability . . . God doesn't take "no" for an answer. C'est la vie.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

... has anyone who was on the boat that day actually posted anything in this thread? If so, I missed it....

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/5471234-post62.html

 

[Hetland]

Also, how is it effective to wildly speculate what happened with no first hand info and consider that learning or effective? Why not wait until the accident report comes out and then discuss?

Discussing what happens before, during and after an OOA at 100fsw has value. Especially since some people suffer the delusion that Navy Seal-class rescue divers will be instantly deployed in the event one of your bubbles fails to reach the surface.

If we wait until an accident report is posted the discussion will never happen.

 

[fjpatrum]

So reading the last few posts it occurred to me, as a newb never been below 75 feet and never having witnessed anyone narc'ed, how common is it for people to get narc'ed at only 100 feet? If the sand is 105 FSW and the diver was seen "taking pictures in the sand" would it be reasonable that he might have been narc'ed? Would that lead us back to the gas question and what he was breathing? (I have no idea how much of a difference gas mixtures have on getting narc'ed.)

This is not meant as another fire-starter, but a legitimate question (in my opinion) from a newb who has no experience with this diving issue.