Be Pro-Safety
Posted By Divers Alert Network on 9 November 2007
By Robert N. Rossier | visit DAN Online
An old adage in aviation says that an exceptional pilot uses his exceptional knowledge to avoid needing his exceptional skill.
The same really does apply in diving. Without a doubt, the key to safe diving lies in making good decisions, preferably sooner rather than later. In diving, making good decisions requires an assessment of three critical factors: our equipment; the environment; and our own skills and abilities.
Too often, divers exhibit questionable attitudes about one or more of these factors. Such attitudes can influence behavior, and the divers can find themselves in deep trouble. By looking at some of the ways divers get into trouble, perhaps we can learn a few lessons that will make us better - and safer - divers.
About a year ago, I read an article about a diver who died near Lover's Point in Monterey, Calif. The story's title was "Diver's Death a Mystery." To the uninitiated and experienced alike, it would seem the accident truly was a mystery. But as I read through the article, revealing signs emerged, foreshadowing the diver's demise.
Apparently the 20-year veteran diver had recently returned from Cozumel, where she completed more than a dozen dives. On the fateful morning, she entered the 50-degree F (10 C) water of Lover's Point with her brother. The two became separated. According to the report, she may have become entangled in kelp, although I haven't been able to verify that as fact.
Equipment Issues
Perhaps the most noteworthy gear issue is a description of the diver's equipment. Apparently the diver had a buoyancy compensation device (BCD) that was about 25 years old, and although she was given a new one, she supposedly preferred her old one. It is unclear if she had worn the old BCD at the time of the accident. When she inquired about a drysuit some days before the dive, an employee at the dive center reportedly commented that her archaic equipment would cost her her life.
For all we know, the diver's equipment was in perfect operating condition. If she was comfortable using it, then perhaps we can understand why she shied away from the new gear. On the other hand, using out-of-date equipment might indicate an attitude problem: perhaps complacency or overconfidence in one's ability or equipment. That "old dog" seems to be saying, "I've been doing it this way for 20 years, and I don't see a reason to change now..."
Some rather poignant statistics might convince us how important it is to ensure that our equipment is up to the task of supporting life - our life. Of particular interest is the fact born out in figure 4.2-10 (next page) of the DAN Report on Recompression Illness, Diving Fatalities and Project Dive Exploration 2004 Edition. This figure indicates that equipment problems were involved in 44 of the 89 diver fatalities reported in 2002. Without a doubt, equipment problems can represent a serious problem; having a cavalier attitude about it is almost certainly a recipe for trouble.
Environment
The diver apparently had recent experience in the warmer waters of Cozumel, Mexico, while this accident occurred in California -- two decidedly different environments. While it's unclear whether the diver had recent experience in the cold waters of Monterey, the circumstances nevertheless underscore the importance of experience - preferably recent - in the environment about to be entered. While we may have the skills and experience to dive in one particular environment, we can readily find our skills and knowledge lacking as we enter a different realm. Again, it's a matter of attitude, and it's easy to become so confident in one setting that we overestimate our ability in another.
Unused skills soon become dull; when assessing our ability, we should remember the importance of recent diving experience. Figure 4.1-6 (next page) in the DAN report suggests a lack of recent dive experience as a possible contributor in fatal diving accidents. Roughly one-third of the male divers who perished in 2002 had made between 0 and 19 dives in the past 12 months, compared to less than 5 percent of the male diver fatalities for any other range of past experience. Nearly 60 percent of the female divers who perished that same year had between 0 and 19 dives in the past 12 months; less than 10 percent had more than 80 dives in the previous 12 months.
We don't know the recent experience levels of all the divers diving in that year; it is difficult to draw any solid conclusions. However, we may still ponder the possibility that a lack of recent experience could put us at a disadvantage in the water.
- Bookmark with :
- what are these?
