When Things Go Wrong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kwinter

Those who have already decided without first-hand facts that
a) the incident involved students in a teaching situation
b) the instructor abandoned the students
c) the instructor did so without valid reason (medical, etc)
have already done their analysis. Facts will only confuse them, and their goal is not to further cave diving knowledge for safety, but only to blame someone and make sure s/he is ridiculed and punished. That is not accident analysis IMHO.

---

Too bad cave divers don't have cell phones, then they could get a first hand account from someone who was on site.

If the people involved want to clarify the facts, at least one of them is on this forum. They have a right to share or keep it close, whatever they choose. Cave divers have a right to speculate, after all that's half of Sheck's Blueprint for survival book, and even if it's wrong it may spark good conversation. I think the WKPP and Coz incidents prove that a prompt accident statement not just limits, but eliminates speculation, not to mention it really does help the diving public. The Bruce incident at Ginnie where the dive computer log was smothered proves how speculation spreads when details aren't shared.

My, my, my, I'm un-edjumacated and ignorant, and even I can sense the anger in some posts. What say we step away from the keyboard and do some deep-breathing exercises?

What is done is done, and anger has no place at this point. :)

No anger. Disbelief.

And sadness. A significant emotional event for at least two, if not all three.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RN

Based on the information presented so far, I would disagree.

---

So you know the instructor is the one who left first leaving 2 students in the cave? Or was the instructor one of the 2 divers remaining in the cave methodically looking for his lost student (who'd already exited) and the line while his 2nd student was panicking?

If you don't know that's fine but it seems like you do and you're 3200 miles closer than me...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RN

There are likely a lot more facts to this story that we'll never know so a proper evaluation will never be done. I'm failing to see the purpose of this discussion. It's all speculation with nothing to learn from it.

---

The fact that this incident did occur(can we all agree that something happened out there?) under the (lack of)supervision of an instructor, should be enough to require an investigation.

We(cave divers) keep saying we police ourselves.

We are not.

We are not even allowed to learn from incidents and accidents, despite being taught there importance. Its much easier for people to bury any information as not to hurt someones feelings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jax

And sadness. A significant emotional event for at least two, if not all three.

---

Why sadness? I'd be incredibly happy if I were any of the three participants. Incredibly happy. They survived.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jj1987

If the people involved want to clarify the facts, at least one of them is on this forum. They have a right to share or keep it close, whatever they choose. Cave divers have a right to speculate, after all that's half of Sheck's Blueprint for survival book, and even if it's wrong it may spark good conversation. I think the WKPP and Coz incidents prove that a prompt accident statement not just limits, but eliminates speculation, not to mention it really does help the diving public. The Bruce incident at Ginnie where the dive computer log was smothered proves how speculation spreads when details aren't shared.

---

+1

aainslie:

I can imagine several things that could have caused an instructor to go for help, and, because everyone survived, it's hard to accuse him/her of making a poor decision on just that one element of the story. If I had been one of the students, I really wouldn't care, seeing as how I was alive and all. I might not choose that same instructor again, but that decision would be based more on what led up to the separation, than what the end result was.

Let's say that student #1 was freaking out, and rescue attempts resulted in dislodged masks/regs, etc. How long does the instructor wait with a rabid student in the water? If you have a student that's freaking beyond your ability to safely rescue him/her, wouldn't going for help be the next best option? Assume further that student #1 is between you and student #2, and a clay bank is involved. I can imagine it's not a good idea to do a blind search for a second student with a frenzied diver somewhere in a cloud of silt....

I'm not saying any of this happened, I'm just asking what YOU would do in that scenario and/or what circumstances would have to exist before you made the decision that seeking help was the best option?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rjack

So you know the instructor is the one who left first leaving 2 students in the cave? Or was the instructor one of the 2 divers remaining in the cave methodically looking for his lost student (who'd already exited) and the line while his 2nd student was panicking?

If you don't know that's fine but it seems like you do and you're 3200 miles closer than me...

---

That would change the entire dynamic of the incident and subsequent speculation.

oh good grief, to borrow from andrew. An instructor took a wrong jump, could not follow his students through a restriction....decisions then made, good or bad... he exits without them and edd goes in and finds them each with under 1500psi left (he hears them in the system). Clearly an instructor made some mistakes and he and his agency needs to deal with the issues...while some of this is my own pick up on hear say from some that were involved I think that the instructor agency involved is not the nss/cds, nacd, or gue...i suggest patience...this was a training incident not an accident (thanks to edd) and no one died.