Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
-----Original Message----- From: Dan Volker <dlv@ga*.ne*> Newsgroups: rec.scuba Date: Monday, January 19, 1998 9:21 PM Subject: Re: Divers Supply - Press Release > Lee, your question is an extremely good one. I have always been squarely on >the side of diver responsibility in all dive related accidents I have ever >commented on. >This case is very different. >1. The people of Divers Supply attempted to impede the recovery of the >bodies, and we are suspicious of this action---I think reasonably >suspicious. They were caught in a major lie in this process. > >2. The dead student was in fact, placing himself in the ocean under the >belief that his training and gear were ideal for the situation---this belief >may have been ill founded---and this is a huge issue with me-----the >analogy------Say Joe Smith makes up a bogus instructor card, and trains John >Doe how to dive, one of his teachings is to stay down till you run out of >air, and with your last big breath, hold it, till you get back to the >surface. When John Doe dives, you may say he was naive to believe in Joe >Smith, but its the instructor/student relationship. There was trust. >I am shocked that the student and Claypol were compromised by this >instructor, by their trust in him, that 4 steel tanks were good gear for >this dive. I was even more shocked that these steel tanks were matched to >wings covered by bungee cord like mesh ( what we call bondage wings) ---this >preventing inflation beyond a relatively small volume, after which it forces >the relief valve to dump air if added----so buoyancy drops from somewhere >around 70 to 85 pounds( what it should be), down to as low as 25 pounds for >the bondage style wings.. > >Since the instructor was responsible for the profile and turning point in >the dive, I was shocked that a tech diving student was allowed to run out of >air, and even more shocked that the instructor did not share trimix with >him using his long hose---and instead allowed or actually placed the nitrox >reg in the students mouth---an act which would effectively kill him within >the next minute. Whether Andre placed the reg in the students mouth, or >allowed the student to place it in his own mouth----we got each version from >the survivor, so we don't know which occurred---but either one is >reprehensible---the long hose should have been out and in this students >mouth in a heart beat!!! > >There is plenty more for me to be shocked at, but the major issue is the >trust of a student to their instructor, and to the store that put them in >equipment the tech community is in agreement was horribly improper for this >purpose---in fact, most I have discussed this with feel that the sum total >adds up to criminal negligence. > >I have NEVER been exposed to such a tragedy as this one. I hope it will >never happen again, and this is one reason I want all the facts surrounding >this case to come out. > > >Regards, >Dan > > > >-- >Dan Volker >South Florida Dive Journal >http://www.sfdj.com/ >The Internet magazine for u/w photography and mpeg video > >Lee Bell wrote in article <34C3F5A5.3EB1@ix*.ne*.co*>... > >>Without disagreeing with a single point you made, because I happen to >>agree, I'm surprise at the approach you're taking. You, I and just >>about every other experienced diver on this group has preached diver >>responsibility. DS may not have done anything for the divers, but DS >>didn't force them into the water. Mistakes were made and those who made >>them have paid much too great a price for their mistakes. This, and >>nothing else, is lesson number one for divers, whether wannabe techies >>or not. >> >>You mentioned the rule of thirds for cavers. This is not a caver rule, >>it's a general safety rule. It applies to any dive which represents >>exceptional risk for the diver's skills and experience. For some, its a >>good rule for all dives. It's also a common rule in other pursuits >>which pose unusual risk. FYI, it's the rule for planning extended >>boating cruises as well. You use one third for the trip out, one third >>for the trip back and one third for the unexpected. >> >>Will I boycott Diver's Supply? Probably not. If they have the lowest >>prices for what I have decided to buy, I'll probably buy it from them. >>Will I dive on their boat? Probably not. Any boat which would allow a >>drift dive, particularly a deep one, without a surface float, is >>unlikely to get my charter business. >> >>Will I trust them to guide me in my choice for technical equipment? >>Absolutely not. I'll listen to Dan, Carl, Fish and others I know from >>this group and who's skills I have learned to respect . . . and then >>still decide for myself. >> >>Above all, I am responsible for knowing the risks I face, gathering >>information about them and how to deal with them and . . . you've got >>it, making decisions for myself. >> >>Lee > > > > -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]