JJ just posted this 'near miss' accounting and I thought I'd share it here
MHK
training rebreathers in Japan. He sent me the following report but has
since been out of email contact. I am posting it for him, knowing that he
would prefer to see the information released.
Best wishes,
jarrod
On this list, in our GUE classes, and within our projects we have
consistently reiterated that divers must carefully identify the true risk
of a given dive. With gas diving, oxygen toxicity remains the most
consistent and yet often under appreciated risk. Irresponsible mixing,
convoluted marking/procedures, and careless divers are almost exclusively
the culprit in these cases. The following actual account depicts an all too
common over confidence that nearly cost one diver their life. I encourage
everyone to read this report and to appreciate the risk to which divers
expose themselves and their team.
While conducting a Tech 1 in Croatia this last week we were faced with the
following incident, one that should prove educational to all. It is for
this reason that we wanted to bring it public attention. The course was
conducted in Croatia, on an Island called Pag. The initial part of the
training, DIR fundamentals and critical skills went well, with students
undergoing training with myself and Richard Lundgren. After two days of
fundamentals and 4 days of critical skills training, we were ready to move
forward to the experience portion of the class. During this portion, the
students plan and execute two dives to a max depth of 36 m, on a 30/30
triox mix and decompress on Nitrox 50.
The logistics of the course were coordinated by the local dive facility.
The owner of the facility was involved with the class. Upon returning from
the sixth day of training, Diver X who also is the facility owner, began
the nightly filling process for the next day of diving. Oddly enough in
Croatia, the same valve fitting (threads) is used for all gases,
facilitating confusion for those that are not properly vigilant. In fact,
diver X confused the supply bottles, accidentally filling oxygen instead of
Helium into his own back tanks. Failing to heed the directions of his
instructors to properly analyze his gasses, diver X marked all his
cylinders as analyzed while, in fact, his back tanks were never analyzed.
Clearly such a mistake placed the diver and his team at tremendous risk; in
this instance it almost cost him his life. Individuals must bear in mind
that these actions do not occur in a vacuum, and that rescuers and other
team members are compromised when they must take extreme actions to
safeguard the safety of other members.
Following the execution of all pre-dive drills (conducted in seven minutes)
both groups proceeded with their dive. Nineteen minutes into the dive,
Diver X gently flashed me with his light to get my attention. He pulled his
regulator out of his mouth (as if he was giving me an OOA) but instead
began to convulse at 36m. I immediately donated my regulator, grabbed his
harness (with my left hand) and tried to put a regulator in his mouth. His
convulsions were very strong and I could not initially get the regulator in
his mouth. I proceeded to swim him closer to the wall to avoid being swept
away by the current. Diver X convulsed for a solid two minutes. We then
started up, my right arm under his right arm, holding him firmly while
keeping the regulator in his mouth. During this process I tried to remain
conscious of maintaining an open airway.
We then proceed up, with the help of my assistant, controlling all buoyancy
with my left hand. It took about one minute to reach 17m; there Diver X
began to convulse again. Following this convulsion I slowly led him to the
surface. Upon surfacing, I called for the surface support boat, which
initiated an emergency response. I removed my mask and his and prepared to
start mouth-to-mouth breathing. Fortunately he was breathing, making this
unnecessary. We then removed his gear and put him on the Zodiac.
Upon establishing that all divers were safely at the surface with no need
for additional decompression, we decided to start back to the dock, where
we could meet the ambulance. During the ride to shore, Diver X began to
come around, his color improved and his breathing became more rhythmic. We
administered oxygen during the return trip to the dock and by the time we
had arrived, he was feeling and looking much better. Upon reaching the dock
the ambulance took over, taking him to the hospital for further testing.
Further testing proved that there was no lung damage or bends and only as a
precaution did they treat him for near drowning.
Subsequent analysis proved that Diver X's cylinders had been improperly
marked. At this point we re-analyzed all diving cylinders, demonstrating
that the only improper marking had been on Diver X's cylinders. It turns
out that although his tanks were marked for 30/30 he was, in fact,
breathing 50.1%.
Although this event ended well it was clearly filled with dangerous
potential. All divers should use this as yet another example of the
importance in following careful procedures for gas analyzation and tank
marking. This must be the case whether they fill themselves or whether
others fill the tanks for them. In this particular case Diver X allowed his
personal filling of the tanks and the accuracy of the other mixes to induce
a false sense of confidence. The diver later told me that he is keenly
aware of his error, embarrassed by his arrogance and grateful to be alive.
It is my hope that this account will help others realize that short cuts
often fail and seemingly impossible things can and do occur. Ignoring the
proper procedures can cause an accident very quickly.
Andrew Georgitsis
GUE Training Director
Greg Mossman
news:ShOP8.3097$3u4.14...@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com...
> Although this event ended well it was clearly filled with dangerous
> potential. All divers should use this as yet another example of the
> importance in following careful procedures for gas analyzation and tank
> marking. This must be the case whether they fill themselves or whether
> others fill the tanks for them. In this particular case Diver X allowed
his
> personal filling of the tanks and the accuracy of the other mixes to
induce
> a false sense of confidence. The diver later told me that he is keenly
> aware of his error, embarrassed by his arrogance and grateful to be alive.
> It is my hope that this account will help others realize that short cuts
> often fail and seemingly impossible things can and do occur. Ignoring the
> proper procedures can cause an accident very quickly.
Yep, and all the other team divers (except Andrew, the instructor) shared in
the responsibility of the mismarkings, unless they signed the new waiver.
Popeye
I don't understand why the instructor wouldn't supervise fills and verify
contents during a trimix class...
Popeye
Der Anschluss.
Just Say No.
Greg Mossman
news:20020618193253...@mb-ck.aol.com...
> I don't understand why the instructor wouldn't supervise fills and verify
> contents during a trimix class...
But no problem, even if it was gross negligence.
MHK
> contents during a trimix class...
The owner of the shop filled his own tanks in this case. Sometimes the
students show up to the class with the tanks being filled from a different
source. The fact of the matter is that it is the diver's responsibility to
analyze their own gas.
We demonstrate the proper procedure for analyzing, we show them the proper
way to mark the tanks, and we also show the checks used when using a deco
gas. In this case the guys made a mistake on the one hand, then compounded
the mistake by NOT analyzing his own gas, and he owned up to his mistake.
Popeye, I thought you were part of the crowd that wants diver's to take
responsibility. I would never in my life get into the water without
analyzing my gas, even when I do my own blending, I analyze. That is a
message that every tech diver learns..
Later
chilly
before diving.
Not to mention leaving one student in a restaurant and going off on the boat
for the final training dives without him. You'd think they'd know how many
students they should have with them on the boat before they leave. I
thought that would be almost as important as knowing that you have returned
with all of them after ascending.
Lee Bell
a job well done.
In Vance Harlow's most recent version of the Oxygen Hacker, there's a
description by George Irvine detainling his process for ensuring he knows
exactly what is in his tanks, from the point where he uses one fill to the
point where he's ready to use the next. When I read the section I remember
thinking that his process is one of the most detailed, most anal and most
sensible practices I've seen relative to ensuring you know what you're
breathing. While my own process varies considerably, it's no less
consistent. While I don't diver to the extremes that George does, not by a
long shot, it is no less important for me to know what I'm taking with me on
my dives.
Hopefully, at least one Cratian dive operator will learn from his very lucky
close encounter with death. Hopefully others will learn from his mistake
rather than from a close encounter of their own.
Lee
"MHK" <mhk...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:ShOP8.3097$3u4.14...@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com...
MHK
Who said anything about leaving a diver in a restaurant?
Also, they are instructed how to analyze a tank in several areas of the
class. Both during the lecture portion of the class and also we demonstrate
it during the first dive. Part of the diver's, any technical diver's,
responsibility is to ANALYZE YOUR OWN GAS!!!!!! No diver should ever get in
the water without analyzing his gas.
In this case, it was the guy that owned the shop, as part of his capacity of
shop owner and class coordinator, he was responsible for blending the gases
for the class. In so doing, he made a mistake and then compounded his
mistake by not analyzing the gas. He owned up to it, he paid for it and I
guarantee you he learned from it.
The purpose of the cross post is so that other's may also learn from it.
While I fully recognize that some would take cheap shots, I also hope that
some will learn from this..
Later
"chilly" <sla...@shaw.canada> wrote in message
news:SEPP8.30175$ia2.2...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
Popeye
>The owner of the shop filled his own tanks in this case. Sometimes the
>students show up to the class with the tanks being filled from a different
>source. The fact of the matter is that it is the diver's responsibility to
>analyze their own gas.
>
>We demonstrate the proper procedure for analyzing, we show them the proper
>way to mark the tanks, and we also show the checks used when using a deco
>gas. In this case the guys made a mistake on the one hand, then compounded
>the mistake by NOT analyzing his own gas, and he owned up to his mistake.
>
>Popeye, I thought you were part of the crowd that wants diver's to take
>responsibility. I would never in my life get into the water without
>analyzing my gas, even when I do my own blending, I analyze. That is a
>message that every tech diver learns..
>
>Later
I'm all for responsibility, Mike, but the guy was a student.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Tech 1 a trimix class, among other things?
chilly
> What the F%$K are you talking about???
I'm talking about a trip report that was written by one of the students that
took the course in Croatia in early June.
>
> Who said anything about leaving a diver in a restaurant?
>
The student that took the course in Croatia in early June and wrote the
report. I'll try to find a link for you.
> Also, they are instructed how to analyze a tank in several areas of the
> class. Both during the lecture portion of the class and also we
demonstrate
> it during the first dive. Part of the diver's, any technical diver's,
> responsibility is to ANALYZE YOUR OWN GAS!!!!!! No diver should ever get
in
> the water without analyzing his gas.
That's what I thought.
> In this case, it was the guy that owned the shop, as part of his capacity
of
> shop owner and class coordinator, he was responsible for blending the
gases
> for the class. In so doing, he made a mistake and then compounded his
> mistake by not analyzing the gas. He owned up to it, he paid for it and I
> guarantee you he learned from it.
That's good. He's a lucky SOB that he'll get another chance to remember his
mistake.
So everyone else analyzed their own gas before diving but he didn't because
he believed he'd already done it since he'd mixed it? Do I understand that
correctly?
> The purpose of the cross post is so that other's may also learn from it.
No problem. Great idea.
> While I fully recognize that some would take cheap shots, I also hope that
> some will learn from this..
>
I probably wouldn't have brought up the left behind student but since you
were talking about things that happened while training was going on in
*Croatia*, I thought I'd ask about the boat going out without a full
compliment of students aboard. Other than that noo problem. By the way,
Mike, this isn't the first thread to head off into another direction.
HLAviation
>class. Both during the lecture portion of the class and also we demonstrate
>it during the first dive. Part of the diver's, any technical diver's,
>responsibility is to ANALYZE YOUR OWN GAS!!!!!! No diver should ever get in
>the water without analyzing his gas.
>
Roger, I understand that completely, but this is a class, these people are
students. It would be in the normal standard of care for the instructor to
check to make sure that the gas mixing and analyzation was being performed
properly and actually was what it is supposed to be. When I worked for Billy
Deans, there was a shop person supervising every analyzation that was performed
by a student, and although the guy was the shop owner, he was still a student
and all critical phases such as gas analysis (and in my opinion the gas mixing)
should have been supervised by the GUE instructor. I believe the standard of
care was violated in this instance, luckily everything came out ok.
>He owned up to it, he paid for it and I
>guarantee you he learned from it.
>
Which is good. Hopefully George and GUE also learned from this experience,
because if it happens again it would be pretty easy for a lawyer to show Gross
Negligence and violation of a reasonable standard of care now that it has
already happenned once. I'm personally shocked that the gas mixing and
analyzing was unsupervised. I though that GUE was supposed to be a premier
ultimately safety conscious agency, and not to supervise STUDENTS in BOTH of
these critical phases seems irresponsible to me.
http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/
HLAviation
shot, just a critical evaluation of the situation.
Lee Bell
> We demonstrate the proper procedure for analyzing, we show them the
proper
> way to mark the tanks, and we also show the checks used when using a deco
> gas. In this case the guys made a mistake on the one hand, then
compounded
> the mistake by NOT analyzing his own gas, and he owned up to his mistake.
You mean you demonstrated "an effective" procedure and show them "an
effective" way to mark the tanks, right? You way is only "the" way in the
somewhat limited confines of your own organization. Yes, I understood what
you meant, but to me, it's not just a nit pick.
As far as I know, every training organiztion emphasizes analyzing one's own
gas beginning at the introductory nitrox level. As you say, this guy made a
mistake and then compounded it. Had he followed anybody's effective way of
filling or analyzing his gas, he would not have had the problem.
Lee
chilly
"chilly" <sla...@shaw.canada> wrote in message
>
> "MHK" <mhk...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:qNPP8.3167$E05.14...@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com...
> > What the F%$K are you talking about???
>
> I'm talking about a trip report that was written by one of the students
that
> took the course in Croatia in early June.
>
> >
> > Who said anything about leaving a diver in a restaurant?
> >
> The student that took the course in Croatia in early June and wrote the
> report. I'll try to find a link for you.
>
Here's the addy. Sorry it took so long, I had to find it again.
http://members.tripod.com/mlloyd_1/croatia.html
S_chewba
"Lee Bell" <lee...@ix.netcom.com> skrev i melding
news:aeonqg$tcs$1...@slb5.atl.mindspring.net...
> MHK wrote
>
> As far as I know, every training organiztion emphasizes analyzing one's
own
> gas beginning at the introductory nitrox level.
Even so the instructor, at least those associated with the most beloved
agency among rec.scubans, have to ensure that the students performs the task
correctly.
With learning people new things comes responsibillity.
Making sure that none of your students will be breathing a gas consisting of
50% O2 at 36 meters sounds like a responsibillity.
I have too much respect for AG to express it in a more direct manner.
S_chewba
Gordon Dewis
> Here's the addy. Sorry it took so long, I had to find it again.
> http://members.tripod.com/mlloyd_1/croatia.html
Tried that and got a 404. Dropping the last letter produced the report...
http://members.tripod.com/mlloyd_1/croatia.htm
--G
--
Gordon Dewis | Tired of using "military intelligence" as an example
BA Hons Geography | of an oxymoron? Try "ethical bulk emailer" instead.
chilly
"Gordon Dewis" <gor...@pinetree.org> wrote in message
news:aeosfp$ra4$2...@pinetree.pinetree.org...
HLAviation
>> Here's the addy. Sorry it took so long, I had to find it again.
>http://members.tripod.com/mlloyd_1/croatia.htm
Left a student behind? That's not a very good thing for a world class
instructor to do.
http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/
OldSalt
Ohhhhh dear.
David Scarlett
news:aeoscr$sdi$1...@lise.netcom.no:
> Even so the instructor, at least those associated with the most
> beloved agency among rec.scubans, have to ensure that the students
> performs the task correctly.
Even if the student is a qualified gas blender?...
--
David Scarlett
dscarlett [AT] optushome [DOT] com [DOT] au
"Only a fool enters a fool's argument."
John Francis
>"S_chewba" <outc...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>news:aeoscr$sdi$1...@lise.netcom.no:
>
>> Even so the instructor, at least those associated with the most
>> beloved agency among rec.scubans, have to ensure that the students
>> performs the task correctly.
>
>Even if the student is a qualified gas blender?...
And in effect lied by marking the tanks as having been analyzed. I
suppose the "perfect" instructor should also be a mind reader, which
in turn would bring self-righteous cries of "thought police".
Some of you guys are relentless. The words "snatching defeat from the
jaws of victory" come to mind.
Does anyone want to take this one step further and insist that the
instructor has an obligation to disassemble and tune all regs, check
suit valves for safety and functionality, perform a medical exam on
site to ascertain proper health, do a psychological examination of the
student to determine mental capacity and ability to handle
task-loading, etc. I'm sure some of you can come up with even better
ones with a little effort.
And picking on poor Mike, of all people. You'd think he'd ruffled some
feathers around here. 8)
JF
Florida trip report http://www3.sympatico.ca/johnfrancis/May2002.htm
HLAviation
>> beloved agency among rec.scubans, have to ensure that the students
>> performs the task correctly.
>
>Even if the student is a qualified gas blender?...
Yes, he is still the student. The instructor has the duty in his standard of
care to make sure the gas is right.
http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/
Popeye
>And picking on poor Mike, of all people. You'd think he'd ruffled some
>feathers around here. 8)
>
>JF
>
Not mine, and I'm the one who pointed it out.
And I always back Mike up.
But the question begs to be asked by anyone who actually gave thought to the
entire incident.
If we're to learn from these incidents, as Mike rightfully implies, then it's
important that they be carefully analyzed.
There may have been more than one mistake here, and I don't see why we should
concentrate on one, and not the other.
John, is a trimix instructor responsible for the gas content in a trimix
student's tanks during class?
(Todays' essay should be fifty words or less) :-)
Shootndive
>share it here
>From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
>Date: 6/19/2002 9:38 AM Central Daylight Time
> John, is a trimix instructor responsible for the gas content in a trimix
>student's tanks during class?
No. The instructor is responsible for teaching the student to mix gas, analyze
tanks/gas properly, proper tank marking protocol. In addition the instructor is
responsible for teaching the student about the potential ramifications of a
failure to follow proper protocol. The student is responsible for what he
breathes.
The shop owner in question knew how to mix gas, how to analyze gas, and how to
mark his tanks. His failure was a personal one. An instructor can not cover
every contingency. The student has clear responsibilities, especially in a
course like Tech 1.
Eric
Popeye
>Date: 6/19/02 11:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20020619114516...@mb-cc.aol.com>
>
>>Subject: Re: JJ just posted this 'near miss' accounting and I thought I'd
>>share it here
>>From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
>>Date: 6/19/2002 9:38 AM Central Daylight Time
>
>> John, is a trimix instructor responsible for the gas content in a trimix
>>student's tanks during class?
>
>No. The instructor is responsible for teaching the student to mix gas,
>analyze>tanks/gas properly, proper tank marking protocol. In addition the
instructor
>is>responsible for teaching the student about the potential ramifications of a
>failure to follow proper protocol. The student is responsible for what he
>breathes.
I gotta disagree. You're saying that the instructor, any instructor, has no
responsibility other than to correctly explain course content.
During class.
No way.
>The shop owner in question knew how to mix gas, how to analyze gas, and how
>to>mark his tanks. His failure was a personal one. An instructor can not cover
>every contingency. The student has clear responsibilities, especially in a
>course like Tech 1.
The students' responsibilities have been covered.
Here's another biscuit to crux.
Once he becomes a student, you imply an individuals' prior knowlege aleviates
all -related- instructor responsibility.
GUE only instructs experienced, certified divers.
If not his own course content, what would the instructor be responsible for?
>Eric
John Francis
>
> John, is a trimix instructor responsible for the gas content in a trimix
>student's tanks during class?
>
> (Todays' essay should be fifty words or less) :-)
>
Yes.
But isn't it reasonable to expect the guy who fills the tanks to be
already expert at analyzing those mixes, and not to lie when asked if
his mix is okay? He marked the tanks. He's already qualified for that.
Why should the instructor be responsible for any more than making sure
the guy knows which mix he should use where?
But then I've never taken a techy course or dived weird gases. Maybe
you're right and the instructor should personally analyze each and
every tank.
But if I was buying gas from this guy I'd sure be nervous from now on.
John Francis
That's what I meant to say. Dayum. I have to learn to read ahead.
Jammer Six
<johnf...@sympatico.ca.remove> wrote:
€But isn't it reasonable to expect the guy who fills the tanks to be
€already expert at analyzing those mixes, and not to lie when asked if
€his mix is okay?
When someone lies, the game is over.
The rest is bullshit.
--
"We're going to rush the hijackers."
-Jeremy Glick, aboard United Airlines flight 93, September 11, 2001
MHK
no
> responsibility other than to correctly explain course content.
>
> During class.
>
> No way.
Guys,
I guess there will always be soem debate in this regard, and since I haven't
yet had the opportunity to discuss the issue with AG, I'll be curious to get
his thoughts and to see if there are any further checks implemented.
Knowing both JJ and AG the way I do I'm confident that they'll use this
experience as a learning tool, which is why we posted it in the first place.
What I can say in this regard is the following:
WRT, to this class, realize that this was the last dive of the tech class
and the tech class followed a fundamentals class. Accordingly, this shop
owner blended 4 tanks per student for the DIR-F class. Assuming a class of
6 that's 24 tanks plus both instructors so that's another 8 tanks. So
that's 32 tanks for the DIR-F class. Then you have 8 dives in the tech
class, again assuming 6 students, plus 2 instructors that's another 64 tanks
so in total this shop owner/student blended a total of 96 tanks for this
class. Given that he is a shop owner, that obviously is a certified
blender, I'm not sure what more AG could have done. We emphasize time and
again during the class that every student MUST analyaze their tank, they
must put the contents on a label, but this guy just made a mistake..
Also, from a practical perspective, when we do a class at AG's hop in
Seattle we do the blending, but often times when we go into a foriegn city
or a foriegn country, some shops will NOT allow us to enter their blending
area. Some shops will cite insurance concerns and only allow shop employees
to enter the blending area, and in some rare cases some shops don't even
want us in their area and they refuse to sell the students gas if they are
taking our class. That just happened last month in Minnesota, their was
only two shops in town that had Nitrox and when one of the shops found out
the gas was going to be for a DIR class he refused to sell the students gas.
Fortunatley it didn't matter because the other shop owner was much more
receptive, but the point is that we don't always have the opportunity to do
our own blending when we take the classes on the road. We are invited
guests in some cases, and dive shop owners aren't always so willing to allow
a stranger that they have never met into their shop to blend.
Whether or not that happened in this case, I don't know yet since I haven't
spoken to AG, but I know for certain that in other cases we have been
precluded from entering the blending station.
1>
> Once he becomes a student, you imply an individuals' prior knowlege
aleviates
> all -related- instructor responsibility.
>
> GUE only instructs experienced, certified divers.
>
> If not his own course content, what would the instructor be responsible
for?
Also, one further thought is that many times when we come to an area the
shop owner is more often then not previously certified from a wide variety
of agencies but have an interest in taking a GUE class to understand what
distinguishes GUE from the other agencies, and that may very well have been
the case here. In other words, I agree that once a student is a student
that we have the obligation to teach the class, but as it relates to a shop
owner who is a certified blender, and blends 90+ tanks during the course of
the class, I'm not sure where the instructor's obligation begins in that
respect.
Put another way, let's assume that the very same shop owner is NOT taking
the class and he precludes us from entering his blending station citing
insurance concerns, so the class simply buys gas from him, how would you
suggest that any instructor handle that situation?
I think it's a somewhat gray area at this point but I've got 9 classes with
AG over the next 2 months so I'm confident that we'll discuss it and perhaps
figure out some added safeguards.
But I still maintain that every diver is responsible for analyzing their own
tanks before they get in the water..
Later
HLAviation
>you're right and the instructor should personally analyze each and
>every tank.
No, he shouldn't be doing the analysis, he should be supervising the students
doing the analysis verifying proper method and result.
http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/
Shootndive
>share it here
>Date: 6/19/2002 11:28 AM Central Daylight Time
>That's what I meant to say. Dayum. I have to learn to read ahead.
>
Sorry :-)
Popeye
>But isn't it reasonable to expect the guy who fills the tanks to be
>already expert
If he's an unquestionable expert, why's he taking the class?
>at analyzing those mixes,
and not to lie when asked if
>his mix is okay?
His mistake already accounted for.
And maybe the number one reason the instructor should verify.
>He marked the tanks. He's already qualified for that.
Not for this dive.
>Why should the instructor be responsible for any more than making sure
>the guy knows which mix he should use where?
He's responsible for that, too. Just because he has other training is no
excuse for the instructor to assume his training was correct. Infact, according
to conventional GUE dogma, his prior training -simply couldn't- have been
correct.
By this thought process, the instructor could have given the class over the
phone.
>But then I've never taken a techy course or dived weird gases. Maybe
>you're right and the instructor should personally analyze each and
>every tank.
Hell, yes, until they graduate, them they're damn well on their own.
>But if I was buying gas from this guy I'd sure be nervous from now on.
Not me, I check my own. :-)
Popeye
>Date: 6/19/02 1:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20020619130016...@mb-bg.aol.com>
>
>>Maybe
>>you're right and the instructor should personally analyze each and
>>every tank.
>
>No, he shouldn't be doing the analysis, he should be supervising the students
>doing the analysis verifying proper method and result.
>
Bingo.
MHK
"chilly" <sla...@shaw.canada> wrote in message
> So everyone else analyzed their own gas before diving but he didn't
because
> he believed he'd already done it since he'd mixed it? Do I understand
that
> correctly?
>
As far as I understand it, that appears to be what happened.
Later
Popeye
>That's what I meant to say. Dayum. I have to learn to read ahead.
>
>JF
>
That's ok, I answered this one too. :-)
MHK
Popeye,
It is very common when we go into a foriegn city or foreign country for the
shop owner to sit in on the class to see first hand how a GUE class is run,
what, if any, that GUE does differently or to even just see if they are
interested in learning more about GUE and perhaps become a GUE instructor.
It is very commonplace for this to happen. In fact, AG and I are doing a
Fundamental class in Hawaii in September and the only students that will be
in the class will be shop owners and instructors from the shops. Their sole
reason for flying us in and paying for us to be there is to learn and see
first hand GUE. So it is very common for an ,expert, such as the term is
being used, to be in the class..
Later
Shootndive
>share it here
>From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
> I gotta disagree. You're saying that the instructor, any instructor, has no
>responsibility other than to correctly explain course content.
>
> During class.
>
> No way.
The instructor certainly does have a responsibility beyond merely explaining
the course content. Demonstrating how to mix, analyze and then label tanks and
overseeing students who do not have these skills when they first analyze their
tanks or do there first mix etc.
The shop owner in question knew how to mix gas, analyze tanks and the labeling
protocol. He failed to follow proper procedures, not out of ignorance but out
of apparent laziness. Then as John pointed out, he in essence lied about his
failure to analyze his backgas by labeling the tank.
>Once he becomes a student, you imply an individuals' prior knowlege aleviates
>all -related- instructor responsibility.
I can't speak for this particular class but when I took Tech 1 we dived with
32% backgas and 50/50 deco mix everyday right up until we made the first trimix
dive. So gas mixing, analyzing and tank labeling went on everyday. I'm willing
to bet that the shop owner demonstrated his competence in the appropriate
skills many times prior to the incident.
> GUE only instructs experienced, certified divers.
>
> If not his own course content, what would the instructor be responsible
>for?
Valid question. However, there is no conceivable way this guy would have been
allowed to mix his own gas without first demonstrating an appropriate degree of
competence. Yes, the instructor is responsible for teaching the hows and whys.
I don't see how an instructor can anticipate much less be responsible for
character flaws of Darwinist proportions.
Eric
MHK
----- Original Message -----
From: "HLAviation" <hlavi...@aol.com>
> Roger, I understand that completely, but this is a class, these people are
> students. It would be in the normal standard of care for the instructor
to
> check to make sure that the gas mixing and analyzation was being performed
> properly and actually was what it is supposed to be.
Hal,
The reality is that by requiring a CERTIFIED blender and dive shop owner to
blend the gases you are satisfying the standard of care. This is no
different that if the shop owner was not part of the class and the students
simply purchsed a fill from him. THis isn't a case of AG using his own
shop, this is a case of a shop owner in Croatia inviting him over to teach a
class, and the shop owner agreeing to blend for teh class.
When I worked for Billy
> Deans, there was a shop person supervising every analyzation that was
performed
> by a student,
With all due respect to Billy, when I took my class with him NO one watched
me analyze anything. And at that time I had already been certified as an
IANTD Trimix gas blender so I was quit comfortable knowing whether someone
was supervising the analyzation.
and although the guy was the shop owner, he was still a student
> and all critical phases such as gas analysis (and in my opinion the gas
mixing)
> should have been supervised by the GUE instructor. I believe the standard
of
> care was violated in this instance, luckily everything came out ok.
I agree that mistakes were made, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he
violated the standard of care. I'd be hard pressed to see anyone make a
case that suggests that by using an experienced shop owner and certified gas
blender to blend for the class that that is somehow negligent.
Later
"HLAviation" <hlavi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020618213335...@mb-fq.aol.com...
> >Also, they are instructed how to analyze a tank in several areas of the
> >class. Both during the lecture portion of the class and also we
demonstrate
> >it during the first dive. Part of the diver's, any technical diver's,
> >responsibility is to ANALYZE YOUR OWN GAS!!!!!! No diver should ever get
in
> >the water without analyzing his gas.
> >
>
> Roger, I understand that completely, but this is a class, these people are
> students. It would be in the normal standard of care for the instructor
to
> check to make sure that the gas mixing and analyzation was being performed
> properly and actually was what it is supposed to be. When I worked for
Billy
> Deans, there was a shop person supervising every analyzation that was
performed
> by a student, and although the guy was the shop owner, he was still a
student
> and all critical phases such as gas analysis (and in my opinion the gas
mixing)
> should have been supervised by the GUE instructor. I believe the standard
of
> care was violated in this instance, luckily everything came out ok.
>
> >He owned up to it, he paid for it and I
> >guarantee you he learned from it.
> >
>
> Which is good. Hopefully George and GUE also learned from this
experience,
> because if it happens again it would be pretty easy for a lawyer to show
Gross
> Negligence and violation of a reasonable standard of care now that it has
> already happenned once. I'm personally shocked that the gas mixing and
> analyzing was unsupervised. I though that GUE was supposed to be a
premier
> ultimately safety conscious agency, and not to supervise STUDENTS in BOTH
of
> these critical phases seems irresponsible to me.
> http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/
Popeye
> Then as John pointed out, he in essence lied about his
>failure to analyze his backgas by labeling the tank.
So how is the instructor to know that the students he's about to dive with
are either lying or just wrong?
He -has- to supervise and verify. What would happen if Andrew wasn't this
guy's buddy? What about Andrew's next group of students?
If you taught a nitrox class to a group of divers with varying levels of
experience, would you let any of them dive without knowing -exactly- what was
in their tanks?
I wouldn't even consider it.
If a dive boat assigned bud told me he just got out of class, I'd check his
gear.
I treated myself to 450 rounds at the new indoor range Monday morning. I
introduced myself, had 6 firearms inspected (including two custom built
weapons), talked about their individual histories. Signed up for a combat
match. Priced some AR parts for a project, and then stepped out to the range.
They checked my (extesively equiped) range bag for loaded (chambered)
weapons, and admired my Colt Firearms tattoo (Glock boys, of course).
Made sure I had eyes and ears, which I did.
Did my obvious experience and proficiency cut me any slack? Nope. Safety
check. Had to load and clear, clear a simulated jam, had to draw and shoot from
the holster (since I was wearing one).
Had to read out loud and initial each safety rule.
He was even kind enough to tell me not to walk forward of the booth while
others were firing. :-)
Shootndive
>share it here
>From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
>So how is the instructor to know that the students he's about to dive with
>are either lying or just wrong?
Lying is greatly different from being wrong. The being "wrong" part can be
reasonably mitigated through teaching and observation. The "lying" part you can
mitigate through applications, interviews to acertain motives for taking a
class etc.
However, neither lying or being wrong can be 100% prevented. At some point the
student has to stand and deliver or how the hell can they graduate?
>I treated myself to 450 rounds at the new indoor range Monday morning.
Cool. I'm returning from an extended lay off from serious shooting. Just
started back shooting IPSC on Tues nights and IDPA on Wed nights. Still trying
to find that sweet spot, the right combo of speed and accuracy. Shooting a
single stack 1911 in a present day IPSC match is a hoot. I look like a
Christmas tree I have so many magazines hanging off me:-)
>I
>introduced myself, had 6 firearms inspected (including two custom built
>weapons), talked about their individual histories. Signed up for a combat
>match. Priced some AR parts for a project, and then stepped out to the range.
>
> They checked my (extesively equiped) range bag for loaded (chambered)
>weapons, and admired my Colt Firearms tattoo (Glock boys, of course).
LOL about the Colt tattoo..
> Made sure I had eyes and ears, which I did.
>
> Did my obvious experience and proficiency cut me any slack? Nope. Safety
>check. Had to load and clear, clear a simulated jam, had to draw and shoot
>from
>the holster (since I was wearing one).
>
> Had to read out loud and initial each safety rule.
>
> He was even kind enough to tell me not to walk forward of the booth while
>others were firing :-)
Holy Shit! I have had people who didn't know me ask to see me work out of a
holster before letting me loose but I've never seen that degree of safety
checks.
However, a tremendous amount of people buy and use guns with no formal training
the result of which are sometimes injury and death.
In a technical dive class, you go in with formal training and experience. At
what point in a students training do you draw that magical line that
differentiates between certified diver and student? The accident in question
could have just as well happened the day after the class.
Eric
P.S. Once they witnessed you work out of the holster they didn't screw with you
anymore did they? Well, once Andrew saw that this guy could mix gas, analyze
tanks and understood the labeling protocol he let him go to work. No real
difference there that I can see.
Jim B
"Shootndive" <shoot...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020619153017...@mb-fz.aol.com...
HLAviation
>the class and he precludes us from entering his blending station citing
>insurance concerns, so the class simply buys gas from him, how would you
>suggest that any instructor handle that situation?
>
Supervise the students during the analysis of the gas thereby verifying the
correct gas in each jug.
Popeye
>>From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
>>So how is the instructor to know that the students he's about to dive with
>>are either lying or just wrong?
>Lying is greatly different from being wrong. The being "wrong" part can be
>reasonably mitigated through teaching and observation. The "lying" part you
>can>mitigate through applications, interviews to acertain motives for taking a
>class etc.
>However, neither lying or being wrong can be 100% prevented. At some point
>the>student has to stand and deliver or how the hell can they graduate?
This accident wasn't 0% prevented.
The accident was that the guy lived.
And if it had been fatal, done irreperable damage to AG and GUE.
You're quite correct about lying -vs- mistakes, but the consequences are the
same either way.
You did generate an interesting new question, though...
Did the liar pass the class and get a GUE card...?
Popeye
>At some point the
>student has to stand and deliver or how the hell can they graduate?
I'd rather discuss the contents of his tanks before the dive, than if he
survives it.
HLAviation
>what point in a students training do you draw that magical line that
>differentiates between certified diver and student?
This is a GUE class, and according to GUE /DIR spokesmen who post here, until
you have completed your class with them your training was not proper,
therefore, to a GUE instructor, they would have to be considered students until
they have received their GUE certification.
>The accident in question
>could have just as well happened the day after the class.
If that were the situation, then there would be no questions, however it did
happen during the course of a GUE class so a good lawyer could make the case.
Popeye
>From: shoot...@aol.com (Shootndive)
>>From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
>Cool. I'm returning from an extended lay off from serious shooting. Just
>started back shooting IPSC on Tues nights and IDPA on Wed nights. Still
>trying>to find that sweet spot, the right combo of speed and accuracy.
Shooting a
>single stack 1911 in a present day IPSC match is a hoot. I look like a
>Christmas tree I have so many magazines hanging off me:-)
I like local combat matches (lane combat). Usually 30 rounds per run, which I
could do on 3 mags if I want, and I like to shoot my carry peice.
>LOL about the Colt tattoo..
My second tattoo. :-)
>Holy Shit! I have had people who didn't know me ask to see me work out of a
>holster before letting me loose but I've never seen that degree of safety
>checks. >However, a tremendous amount of people buy and use guns with no
formal
>training>the result of which are sometimes injury and death.
Keeping in mind this is a brand new facility, they don't even let anyone but
Peace Officers holster draw. He let me because I had on a De Santis combat
loop.
They don't want anyone locked and cocked out of the booth (holstered) and
they don't want the wannabees shooting themselves in the foot trying to fast
draw. :-)
>In a technical dive class, you go in with formal training and experience. At
>what point in a students training do you draw that magical line that
>differentiates between certified diver and student? The accident in question
>could have just as well happened the day after the class.
And -then- it wouldn't have been the instructors' responsibility.
>Eric
>
>P.S. Once they witnessed you work out of the holster they didn't screw with
>you>anymore did they?
Actually, they conspicuously watched me the entire time I was there. I like
to shoot at the target while reeling it out, and that seemed to intrigue
them...
mike gray
Popeye wrote:
>
> >Yep, and all the other team divers (except Andrew, the instructor) shared in
> >the responsibility of the mismarkings, unless they signed the new waiver.
>
> I don't understand why the instructor wouldn't supervise fills and verify
> contents during a trimix class...
Actually, there's two errors here: first, there was an error made in
mixing; second, there was an error made in analyzing.
Dumb Croats.
mike gray
David Scarlett wrote:
>
> "S_chewba" <outc...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:aeoscr$sdi$1...@lise.netcom.no:
>
> > Even so the instructor, at least those associated with the most
> > beloved agency among rec.scubans, have to ensure that the students
> > performs the task correctly.
>
> Even if the student is a qualified gas blender?...
If I were doing my own blending, I'd ask someone else to confirm my
analysis.
mike gray
HLAviation wrote:
>
> >chilly <sla...@shaw.canada> wrote:
> >> Here's the addy. Sorry it took so long, I had to find it again.
>
> >http://members.tripod.com/mlloyd_1/croatia.htm
>
> Left a student behind? That's not a very good thing for a world class
> instructor to do.
Object lesson in the buddy system?
Shootndive
>share it here
>From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
>
> I'd rather discuss the contents of his tanks before the dive, than if he
>survives it.
I entirely understand. Sort of like running a cold range when everyone knows
that " All guns are always loaded" Doesn't stop the idiot from going home and
shooting the T.V.
The problem is that certain people are destined to screw up and by holding
their hand in an extended fashion you're not really helping them as much as
making sure the "fuck up" doesn't happen on your watch.
Eric
Jason O'Rourke
>Seattle we do the blending, but often times when we go into a foriegn city
>or a foriegn country, some shops will NOT allow us to enter their blending
>area. Some shops will cite insurance concerns and only allow shop employees
>to enter the blending area, and in some rare cases some shops don't even
So in these instances, are you limited to nitrox and air only? I didn't
think there was a way to analyze trimix once it's done.
--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com
Popeye
>Date: 6/19/02 5:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <aeqtsl$1j47$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>
There are now helium anylizers on the market for around a grand. My LDS has
one.
Matthias Voss
any other stuff sounds to me like "grandma, why you've got such big
ears".
Matthias
Popeye schrieb:
Dan Bracuk
: That just happened last month in Minnesota, their was
:only two shops in town that had Nitrox and when one of the shops found out
:the gas was going to be for a DIR class he refused to sell the students gas.
How odd. How silly. Did he give a reason?
Dan Bracuk
Toronto, Canada
All men are cremated equal.
Best of Rec.Scuba http://www.chaoticarts.com/~scuba/
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Dan Bracuk
: Made sure I had eyes and ears, which I did.
What would have happened if you were missing an eye?
S_chewba
"David Scarlett" <lo...@my.signature> skrev i melding
news:3d1049cc$0$21003$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> "S_chewba" <outc...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:aeoscr$sdi$1...@lise.netcom.no:
>
> > Even so the instructor, at least those associated with the most
> > beloved agency among rec.scubans, have to ensure that the students
> > performs the task correctly.
>
> Even if the student is a qualified gas blender?...
Maby especially so if the student is a qualified gas blender and blend his
own gas.
If it's not the case that the student is qualified and blend his own gas,
the gas will be analyzed and checked by atleast two persons, the blender and
the student. When the student is also the blender you take away a safety
net.
S_chewba
S_chewba
"Shootndive" <shoot...@aol.com> skrev i melding
news:20020619114516...@mb-cc.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: JJ just posted this 'near miss' accounting and I thought I'd
> >share it here
> >From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
>
> > John, is a trimix instructor responsible for the gas content in a trimix
> >student's tanks during class?
>
> No. The instructor is responsible for teaching the student to mix gas,
analyze
> tanks/gas properly, proper tank marking protocol. In addition the
instructor is
> responsible for teaching the student about the potential ramifications of
a
> failure to follow proper protocol. The student is responsible for what he
> breathes.
So he's not responsible during the practical application portion of the
course to ensure that the students have understood the knowledge that have
been presented to them and that the transition from theory to practical
application is taking place correctly ?
You can't really mean that my responsibillities as an instructor stop when
I've finished presenting the verbal information and eg administered the
exam. There's a practical application portion there as well, which is part
of the learning process. The one facilitating the learning process have
responsibillities during all stages of the course.
> The shop owner in question knew how to mix gas, how to analyze gas, and
how to
> mark his tanks. His failure was a personal one. An instructor can not
cover
> every contingency. The student has clear responsibilities, especially in a
> course like Tech 1.
Making sure that any of your students won't be breathing 50% O2 at 36 meters
can hardly be defined as "covering every contingency".
S_chewba
Popeye
>Date: 6/19/02 4:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20020619160525...@mb-bg.aol.com>
Really. Why the hell would you give a trimix class in a shop that won't let
you mix. Do you have an analyzer? You damn well should, -especially- if you're
going to wander around the world giving classes.
Alan Street
<j...@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
ý MHK <mhk...@prodigy.net> wrote:
ý >Seattle we do the blending, but often times when we go into a foriegn city
ý >or a foriegn country, some shops will NOT allow us to enter their blending
ý >area. Some shops will cite insurance concerns and only allow shop employees
ý >to enter the blending area, and in some rare cases some shops don't even
ý
ý So in these instances, are you limited to nitrox and air only? I didn't
ý think there was a way to analyze trimix once it's done.
You can still analyze for O2 content, which is the most important wrt
toxing. Miscalculating the amount of He would affect the deco schedule,
but I don't think the class puts you that far into deco anyway.
Alan
Laser
Laser
"MHK" <mhk...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:g23Q8.2662$fK5.10...@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
MHK
let
> you mix.
It's simple Popeye, think of it this way. 5 guys from your area decide that
they want to take a tech class and they want AG and I to teach the class..
These 5 guys have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with any dive shop so
AG and I fly in to Anytown, USA. Ahead of time we find a shop in the area
that pumps trimix, so we use that facility for gas.
If you were the owner of that shop and AG & I showed up and you have never
saw us before, you have never met us before would you let us blend tanks in
lieu of your shop employee who you are paying, who is covered under your
insurance policy, who you know, who you trust, or would you let two
strangers come into your shop and take over your blending station???
It happens all the time..
Later
MHK
"Dan Bracuk" <NOTb...@pathcom.com> wrote in message
news:3d10ff36....@news.axxent.ca...
> From "MHK"
> : That just happened last month in Minnesota, their was
> :only two shops in town that had Nitrox and when one of the shops found
out
> :the gas was going to be for a DIR class he refused to sell the students
gas.
>
> How odd. How silly. Did he give a reason?
He put it very simply.. He's a TDI shop and he doesn't plan on selling gas
to any gooey students..
It actually worked out well since the *other* shop in town was one of the
nicest guys I've ever met and I'm glad we wound up in his shop.
Later
Dan Bracuk
:He put it very simply.. He's a TDI shop and he doesn't plan on selling gas
:to any gooey students..
Wonder if he will still refuse to sell it to them now that they are
graduates.
MHK
"Dan Bracuk" <NOTb...@pathcom.com> wrote in > Wonder if he will still
refuse to sell it to them now that they are
> graduates.
He is the second TDI shop that is refusing to acknowledge GUE. There is
another shop in NYC that refuses to sell gas to GUE certified diver's, and
Brett has specifically, and mistakenly, told his instructors that GUE
doesn't have insurance. In one shop that we used in the Virginia area, AG
and I were required to send in a copy of our policy, two pictures of
ourselves and we were required to name the shop as an additional insured
before they would allow us to teach the class. When I asked why the
extraordinary requirements he told me that Bret specifically told him that
we didn't have insurance so he wanted us to provide proof. We did and the
class went off without a hitch..
It's just a simple smear tactic, but this shop owner just lost 6 potential
customer's for trimix fills and I'm glad that the other shop will get the
business because he was a great guy..
Later
Popeye
>saw us before, you have never met us before would you let us blend tanks in
>lieu of your shop employee who you are paying, who is covered under your
>insurance policy, who you know, who you trust, or would you let two
>strangers come into your shop and take over your blending station???
>
>It happens all the time..
>
>Later
>
>
If they were certified instructors, I'd still let them watch.
And I assume you have a O2 and a helium analyzer?
MR MOTOz 21
>Date: 6/19/02 8:00 PM Central Daylight Time
You have made the best points on this whole thread Popeye. No matter how the
bottom line gets danced around the instructor should have required the students
to check their own mix before they got in the water. Period. It doesnt matter
who did the blending, each and every one of them should have known what was in
their tank. And they should have been supervised doing this as they were
students.
This whole cluster has changed my opinion of GUE.
Ron W.
HLAviation
>another shop in NYC that refuses to sell gas to GUE certified diver's, and
>Brett has specifically, and mistakenly, told his instructors that GUE
>doesn't have insurance.
Mistakenly? I believe we all know better. It doesn't surprise me in the
least.
http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/
HLAviation
>: That just happened last month in Minnesota, their was
>:only two shops in town that had Nitrox and when one of the shops found out
>:the gas was going to be for a DIR class he refused to sell the students gas.
>
>How odd. How silly. Did he give a reason?
>
Kinda obvious, they were cutting into his market. He was standing to lose the
training fees. Probably a TDI shop with an attitude like that.
http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/
chilly
"Dan Bracuk" <NOTb...@pathcom.com> wrote in message
news:3d10ffd7....@news.axxent.ca...
> From buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
> : Made sure I had eyes and ears, which I did.
>
> What would have happened if you were missing an eye?
Safety glasses and ear muffs.
Shootndive
>share it here
>From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
> Did the liar pass the class and get a GUE card...?
God I hope not!
Eric
Shootndive
>share it here
>Date: 6/19/2002 3:40 PM Central Daylight Time
>If that were the situation, then there would be no questions, however it did
>happen during the course of a GUE class so a good lawyer could make the case.
No doubt. Aside from the potential civil liability though( which means nothing
to me since we live in a litigious, ambulance chasing society) was GUE wrong to
let this guy mix, analyze, and dive his own gas. I think not.
Shootndive
>From: buzcu...@aol.com (Popeye)
>Date: 6/19/2002 3:46 PM Central Daylight Time
> Actually, they conspicuously watched me the entire time I was there. I like
>to shoot at the target while reeling it out, and that seemed to intrigue
>them...
Gotta love it. The reality of the practice had 'em puzzled.
Eric
Shootndive
>share it here
>Date: 6/19/2002 6:12 PM Central Daylight Time
>He put it very simply.. He's a TDI shop and he doesn't plan on selling gas
>to any gooey students..
LOL, Well you had to figure that was going to happen sooner or later. With all
the slamming of TDI and IANTD by GUE proponents what did you guys expect?
Eric
e-shark
news:20020619133031...@mb-cc.aol.com...
<snip>
> The shop owner in question knew how to mix gas, analyze tanks
> and the labeling protocol. He failed to follow proper procedures,
> not out of ignorance but out of apparent laziness. Then as John
> pointed out, he in essence lied about his failure to analyze his
> backgas by labeling the tank.
<snip>
> I don't see how an instructor can anticipate much less be responsible
> for character flaws of Darwinist proportions.
The shop owner knew what he was supposed to do. He didn't forget to do it,
he just decided not to do it. Then he lied about it. He suffered the
consequences, although not permanent ones.
Sounds like the chlorine level in the gene pool is just about right.
Steve
mhk...@prodigy.net wrote on 6/18/02 3:15 PM:
The tanks should have been 30/30 but were actually 50.1% EAN? I haven't been
able to locate my tables or text since I moved to figure this out. What was
the PPO2 at 36M? How far over was his oxygen exposure on the NOAA tables for
the nineteen minutes he was on the bottom? TIA
Steve
> I am posting this message for Andrew Georgitsis who is out of touch
> training rebreathers in Japan. He sent me the following report but has
> since been out of email contact. I am posting it for him, knowing that he
> would prefer to see the information released.
> Best wishes,
> jarrod
>
> On this list, in our GUE classes, and within our projects we have
> consistently reiterated that divers must carefully identify the true risk
> of a given dive. With gas diving, oxygen toxicity remains the most
> consistent and yet often under appreciated risk. Irresponsible mixing,
> convoluted marking/procedures, and careless divers are almost exclusively
> the culprit in these cases. The following actual account depicts an all too
> common over confidence that nearly cost one diver their life. I encourage
> everyone to read this report and to appreciate the risk to which divers
> expose themselves and their team.
>
> While conducting a Tech 1 in Croatia this last week we were faced with the
> following incident, one that should prove educational to all. It is for
> this reason that we wanted to bring it public attention. The course was
> conducted in Croatia, on an Island called Pag. The initial part of the
> training, DIR fundamentals and critical skills went well, with students
> undergoing training with myself and Richard Lundgren. After two days of
> fundamentals and 4 days of critical skills training, we were ready to move
> forward to the experience portion of the class. During this portion, the
> students plan and execute two dives to a max depth of 36 m, on a 30/30
> triox mix and decompress on Nitrox 50.
>
> The logistics of the course were coordinated by the local dive facility.
> The owner of the facility was involved with the class. Upon returning from
> the sixth day of training, Diver X who also is the facility owner, began
> the nightly filling process for the next day of diving. Oddly enough in
> Croatia, the same valve fitting (threads) is used for all gases,
> facilitating confusion for those that are not properly vigilant. In fact,
> diver X confused the supply bottles, accidentally filling oxygen instead of
> Helium into his own back tanks. Failing to heed the directions of his
> instructors to properly analyze his gasses, diver X marked all his
> cylinders as analyzed while, in fact, his back tanks were never analyzed.
> Clearly such a mistake placed the diver and his team at tremendous risk; in
> this instance it almost cost him his life. Individuals must bear in mind
> that these actions do not occur in a vacuum, and that rescuers and other
> team members are compromised when they must take extreme actions to
> safeguard the safety of other members.
>
> Following the execution of all pre-dive drills (conducted in seven minutes)
> both groups proceeded with their dive. Nineteen minutes into the dive,
> Diver X gently flashed me with his light to get my attention. He pulled his
> regulator out of his mouth (as if he was giving me an OOA) but instead
> began to convulse at 36m. I immediately donated my regulator, grabbed his
> harness (with my left hand) and tried to put a regulator in his mouth. His
> convulsions were very strong and I could not initially get the regulator in
> his mouth. I proceeded to swim him closer to the wall to avoid being swept
> away by the current. Diver X convulsed for a solid two minutes. We then
> started up, my right arm under his right arm, holding him firmly while
> keeping the regulator in his mouth. During this process I tried to remain
> conscious of maintaining an open airway.
>
> We then proceed up, with the help of my assistant, controlling all buoyancy
> with my left hand. It took about one minute to reach 17m; there Diver X
> began to convulse again. Following this convulsion I slowly led him to the
> surface. Upon surfacing, I called for the surface support boat, which
> initiated an emergency response. I removed my mask and his and prepared to
> start mouth-to-mouth breathing. Fortunately he was breathing, making this
> unnecessary. We then removed his gear and put him on the Zodiac.
>
> Upon establishing that all divers were safely at the surface with no need
> for additional decompression, we decided to start back to the dock, where
> we could meet the ambulance. During the ride to shore, Diver X began to
> come around, his color improved and his breathing became more rhythmic. We
> administered oxygen during the return trip to the dock and by the time we
> had arrived, he was feeling and looking much better. Upon reaching the dock
> the ambulance took over, taking him to the hospital for further testing.
> Further testing proved that there was no lung damage or bends and only as a
> precaution did they treat him for near drowning.
>
> Subsequent analysis proved that Diver X's cylinders had been improperly
> marked. At this point we re-analyzed all diving cylinders, demonstrating
> that the only improper marking had been on Diver X's cylinders. It turns
> out that although his tanks were marked for 30/30 he was, in fact,
> breathing 50.1%.
>
> Although this event ended well it was clearly filled with dangerous
> potential. All divers should use this as yet another example of the
> importance in following careful procedures for gas analyzation and tank
> marking. This must be the case whether they fill themselves or whether
> others fill the tanks for them. In this particular case Diver X allowed his
> personal filling of the tanks and the accuracy of the other mixes to induce
> a false sense of confidence. The diver later told me that he is keenly
> aware of his error, embarrassed by his arrogance and grateful to be alive.
> It is my hope that this account will help others realize that short cuts
> often fail and seemingly impossible things can and do occur. Ignoring the
> proper procedures can cause an accident very quickly.
>
> Andrew Georgitsis
> GUE Training Director
>
>
>
>
Jason O'Rourke
>LOL, Well you had to figure that was going to happen sooner or later. With all
>the slamming of TDI and IANTD by GUE proponents what did you guys expect?
better business sense? Shop owners keep complaining about how the volume
of nitrox and mix is too low to make up for the capital investment. Either
you desparately need more customers, or you overcharge them. Either way,
it's silly to reject other agencies.
Vic
I think this rescue procedure is worth highlighting - exactly how I
was taught to do it (and flamed for not so very long ago...)
>began to convulse at 36m. I immediately donated my regulator, grabbed his
>harness (with my left hand) and tried to put a regulator in his mouth.
Andrew is trying to get a reg into the convulsing diver's mouth to
prevent water getting into the airway. Not as easy task, as we can
see, but essential...
>Diver X convulsed for a solid two minutes. We then
>started up,
Note that they have stayed at depth for the duration of the convulsion
- they do not head for the surface straight away.
> It took about one minute to reach 17m; there Diver X
>began to convulse again. Following this convulsion I slowly led him to the
>surface.
A second convulsin at 17m, and again, they stop the ascent for the
duration of the convulsion.
Vic.
David Scarlett
news:3d119e3c...@news.madasafish.com:
> Note that they have stayed at depth for the duration of the
> convulsion - they do not head for the surface straight away.
> A second convulsin at 17m, and again, they stop the ascent for the
> duration of the convulsion.
Why's that? Is there a danger of barotrauma or something?
--
David Scarlett
dscarlett [AT] optushome [DOT] com [DOT] au
"Only a fool enters a fool's argument."
Vic
>Why's that? Is there a danger of barotrauma or something?
Yep. During the tonic (and possibly the clonic) phases of a
convulsion, the airway may be closed; lifting a diver in this state is
just like holding your breath on ascent...
Vic.
Lee Bell
that a GUE instructor should have supervised the tank fills, but damn, guys,
this is not an entry level course or a gas mixing course. By the time
anybody is ready to take a course like this, one would think that they would
long since have learned that, if the gas is something other than air, you
analyze it yourself. While the GUE was wise to teach their preferred method
for filling and analyzing, it's a bit much to require them to have to tell
somebody at this level that the process at least includes an analysis.
Lee
"HLAviation" <hlavi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020618213335...@mb-fq.aol.com...
> >Also, they are instructed how to analyze a tank in several areas of the
> >class. Both during the lecture portion of the class and also we
demonstrate
> >it during the first dive. Part of the diver's, any technical diver's,
> >responsibility is to ANALYZE YOUR OWN GAS!!!!!! No diver should ever get
in
> >the water without analyzing his gas.
> >
>
> Roger, I understand that completely, but this is a class, these people are
> students. It would be in the normal standard of care for the instructor
to
> check to make sure that the gas mixing and analyzation was being performed
> properly and actually was what it is supposed to be. When I worked for
Billy
> Deans, there was a shop person supervising every analyzation that was
performed
> by a student, and although the guy was the shop owner, he was still a
student
> and all critical phases such as gas analysis (and in my opinion the gas
mixing)
> should have been supervised by the GUE instructor. I believe the standard
of
> care was violated in this instance, luckily everything came out ok.
>
> >He owned up to it, he paid for it and I
> >guarantee you he learned from it.
> >
>
> Which is good. Hopefully George and GUE also learned from this
experience,
> because if it happens again it would be pretty easy for a lawyer to show
Gross
> Negligence and violation of a reasonable standard of care now that it has
> already happenned once. I'm personally shocked that the gas mixing and
> analyzing was unsupervised. I though that GUE was supposed to be a
premier
> ultimately safety conscious agency, and not to supervise STUDENTS in BOTH
of
> these critical phases seems irresponsible to me.
> http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/
mike gray
Lee Bell wrote:
>
> I understand all the issues with students, standards of care and opinions
> that a GUE instructor should have supervised the tank fills, but damn, guys,
> this is not an entry level course or a gas mixing course. By the time
> anybody is ready to take a course like this, one would think that they would
> long since have learned that, if the gas is something other than air, you
> analyze it yourself. While the GUE was wise to teach their preferred method
> for filling and analyzing, it's a bit much to require them to have to tell
> somebody at this level that the process at least includes an analysis.
The GUE course professes to teach the "proper" way to mix, analyze, and
mark. Even PADI doesn't take the student's word that he already has the
skills covered by the course.
mike gray
Steve wrote:
>
> The tanks should have been 30/30 but were actually 50.1% EAN? I haven't been
> able to locate my tables or text since I moved to figure this out. What was
> the PPO2 at 36M? How far over was his oxygen exposure on the NOAA tables for
> the nineteen minutes he was on the bottom? TIA
PPO2 would have been 2.3, which is off the old NOAA Exceptional Exposure
tables, which only go to PPO2 2.0 for 30 minutes.
It is still well below the old deco for ops diving limit of 2.5 and the
Table Six limits.
I'd say the oxtox and the PPO2/time were consistant.
MHK
"MR MOTOz 21" <mrmo...@aol.compost> wrote in > > No matter how the
> bottom line gets danced around the instructor should have required the
students
> to check their own mix before they got in the water.
No one is dancing around anything. Bear in mind, I posted this so people
can learn from it. We aren't hiding. covering-up or dancing around
anything.
Furthermore, we go over a very detailed explanation of how and why a diver
needs to analyze the tanks. It is required that each diver analyze their
own tanks, it is required that each diver mark their own tanks, and since we
emphasize time and again that the results of failing to follow this protocol
is usually death, the students need to realize that we will not always be
there and that the responsibility lies with the person breathing the tank.
You breathe it, if you screw it up, you'll die.. There is no sugar coating
this issue, it is spelled out several times in the class. Moreover, the
experienced shop owner that is a certified trimix gas blender, is a
certified trimix diver was well aware of the procedure, protocols and the
methodology behind the process, he simply got complacent...
If anyone wants to debate the ancilliary issue of whether an instructor
should visually verify the analysis, I'm sure we can have that discussion,
but I hope what doesn't get lost in this thread is that the important isue
is that everyone, no matter how expereinced or inexperienced, should analyze
their contents before getting into the water..
Period. It doesnt matter
> who did the blending, each and every one of them should have known what
was in
> their tank.
I agree and having taught many of these classes, I can promise you that we
emphasize this fact with great fevor.
And they should have been supervised doing this as they were
> students.
I guess this is a debatable point, and I do plan on discussing this with AG
next week, and I'll point out that this issue transcends any alphabet soup
of agencies. I did my initial trimix training with two of the top guys at
IANTD, and I can promise you that not in one class did either of those two
instructors supervise my analysis. They made the point clearly: You are
breathing it, you analyze it; you screw it up and you die.. That was all I
needed to hear!!!
Later
MHK
"mike gray" <omy...@worldnet.att.nit> wrote in message > The GUE course
professes to teach the "proper" way to mix, analyze, and
> mark. Even PADI doesn't take the student's word that he already has the
> skills covered by the course.
Mike,
Even for you this post is such bullshit... We don't take their word that
they know how to do it. We show them how, we demonstrate it, and we tell
them that if they screw it up they'll die. You're the biggest supporter of
the personal responsibility crowd, but yet you would have us hand hold the
students and analyze their gases for them..
The fact is, is that tech diving is a serious sport, and part of that
requires that a diver analyze their own gases before they get in the water.
Period, end of sentence. When I parachute I don't rely on anyone else to
check my chute. I do it myself. Why??? Simple, because if the chute
doesn't open it's my ass that is going to splat!! The same holds true for
your breathing gas.. You analyze your own because it's your ass on the
line..
Later
JW
It is plain to see that a number of people in this group like to pick apart
anything GUE.
One incident that wasn't even the fault of the agency and instructors,
becomes the
target of anti GUE freaks. These people are close minded and nothing will
open up
their eyes or change their minds
I have taken Padi, Naui, and a GUE fundamentals class. Taking classes from
these
different agencies helped me understand where each one is coming from and
what
skills they teach and by far the fundamentals class was the best.
Andrew, JJ, and the rest of the instructors were very knowledgeable and
personable.
I did not once feel unsafe or feel like my PADI skills were being made fun
of. They
just gave me pointers and showed me areas of where I could improve.
I dove NITROX the whole time and no once did I think the instructors should
have analyzed my air. I think it is pretty dumb for people to think the
instructors should
analyze their air. I would like to know how many people in this group have
had their
mix analyzed by an instructor? I am sure you won't find too many.
"MHK" <mhk...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:AGnQ8.518$T22.21...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
mike gray
So it doesn't bother you that a course that was intended to teach how to
blend, analyze, and mark skipped that part of the syllabus?
Do you think that, because you say you learned all that stuff from PADI,
they should just check it off?
mike gray
MHK wrote:
>
> "mike gray" <omy...@worldnet.att.nit> wrote in message > The GUE course
> professes to teach the "proper" way to mix, analyze, and
> > mark. Even PADI doesn't take the student's word that he already has the
> > skills covered by the course.
>
> Mike,
>
> Even for you this post is such bullshit... We don't take their word that
> they know how to do it. We show them how, we demonstrate it, and we tell
> them that if they screw it up they'll die. You're the biggest supporter of
> the personal responsibility crowd, but yet you would have us hand hold the
> students and analyze their gases for them..
When I'm on my own, I am personally responsible. When I take a course, I
expect to be shown how, to have it demonstrated, and to have my work
checked even if it is a skill I think I already have. I pay the
instructor to hold my hand and check everything I do, or say I have
done, or think I might have done. If the instructor can't handle that,
I'll read the book and practice alone.
> The fact is, is that tech diving is a serious sport, and part of that
> requires that a diver analyze their own gases before they get in the water.
> Period, end of sentence. When I parachute I don't rely on anyone else to
> check my chute. I do it myself. Why??? Simple, because if the chute
> doesn't open it's my ass that is going to splat!! The same holds true for
> your breathing gas.. You analyze your own because it's your ass on the
> line..
Personally, were I to take skydiving lessons, I'd feel a lot better if
my instructor checked the packing of my chute. Just as my instructor
checked my analysis of my mixes when I took those courses.
YMMV.
migu...@oasisofficepark.com
>Furthermore, we go over a very detailed explanation of how and why a diver
>needs to analyze the tanks. It is required that each diver analyze their
>own tanks, it is required that each diver mark their own tanks, and since we
>emphasize time and again that the results of failing to follow this protocol
Consider this point. If the students tanks had no label, then some
might say that something could have been noticed, but this certified
and experienced mislabeled their own tanks to indicated an incorrect
mix. By conventional standards, that label was indication that the
tank was analyzed. At what point does the diver have to take
responsibility for themselves.
For all of you saying the instructor should have checked, if you did
any classes outside of the nitrox course (e.g. divemaster, or some
other spaciality), would you seriously expect the instructor to check
your gas when you are already certified for it's use? Does an
instructor have to check your work order receipts to make sure your
reg has been serviced in the past year? Do they have to take the tank
valve off to make sure the tank has been visually inspected? If this
was a beginner nitrox class, then you may have a point, but this was
well beyond that point.
cc
situation. If CNS or lung damage had been done could the oxygen
administered on the surface have further exacerbated the condition? It's
not a criticism at all. I'm just curious to know if administering oxygen
is always the best thing to do and is in fact general procedure,
especially when diving with unusual gas mixtures where oxygen toxicity is
a more likely injury than with ordinary air, or is there no chance of
further injury as long as the partial pressure of oxygen is an atmospere
or less?
JW
blending and analyzing gas.
It is up to the student to know how to analyze what is in his tanks. If he
has questions or doubts then
he should talk to his instructor. I know that JJ and Andrew would be more
than willing to sit down with
a student and help him with any problems that the student may have in the
class.
"mike gray" <omy...@worldnet.att.nit> wrote in message
news:3D121C3E...@worldnet.att.nit...
JW
with Andrew, MHK, and JJ?
You could teach them your philosiphy and how to do it the Gray way. I am
serious about this. I am sure that
there will be a class coming up in your area soon. If you are going to talk
the talk, walk the walk. I thought
I knew everything before I enrolled the non technical fundamentals class, I
thought that GUE and the instructors
where the Nazis of the dive community like alot of people on this list think
before I took the class. I could not
have been more wrong. I found instructors that were willing to give me the
time of day, willing to spend the time
to go over stuff that I didn't understand until I got it right. They are a
very friendly and a very professional
group of people.
"mike gray" <omy...@worldnet.att.nit> wrote in message
news:3D121C3E...@worldnet.att.nit...
>
>
mike gray
JW wrote:
>
> Any tech course that you take from any agency is going to teach you about
> blending and analyzing gas.
Agreed
> It is up to the student to know how to analyze what is in his tanks.
Ummmmmm..... Then why bother teaching it in any tech course????
mike gray
migu...@oasisofficepark.com wrote:
>
>
> For all of you saying the instructor should have checked, if you did
> any classes outside of the nitrox course (e.g. divemaster, or some
> other spaciality), would you seriously expect the instructor to check
> your gas when you are already certified for it's use? Does an
> instructor have to check your work order receipts to make sure your
> reg has been serviced in the past year? Do they have to take the tank
> valve off to make sure the tank has been visually inspected? If this
> was a beginner nitrox class, then you may have a point, but this was
> well beyond that point.
If I take a course in servicing regs, I expect the instructor to check
my work.
If I take a course in grafting citrus, I expect the instructor to check
my work.
If I take a course advertised as teaching blending, analysis, and
marking, I expect the instructor to check my work.
If I'm buying a GUE merit badge, I'll just send in a list of the things
I already know.
chilly
"JW" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:uh4avgm...@corp.supernews.com...
> Mike Gray you have some good points. Why don't you take a GUE Tech course
> with Andrew, MHK, and JJ?
> You could teach them your philosiphy and how to do it the Gray way. I am
> serious about this. I am sure that
> there will be a class coming up in your area soon. If you are going to
talk
> the talk, walk the walk. I thought
> I knew everything before I enrolled the non technical fundamentals class,
I
> thought that GUE and the instructors
> where the Nazis of the dive community like alot of people on this list
think
> before I took the class. I could not
> have been more wrong. I found instructors that were willing to give me the
> time of day, willing to spend the time
> to go over stuff that I didn't understand until I got it right. They are a
> very friendly and a very professional
> group of people.
Maybe what needs to happen is that you do a few dives with Mike. That is
assuming he'd consider diving with you.
Popeye
>Date: 6/20/02 9:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <3D11D725...@worldnet.att.nit>
Bingo.
Popeye
Der Anschluss.
Just Say No.
MHK
"mike gray" <omy...@worldnet.att.nit> wrote in message
> blend, analyze, and mark skipped that part of the syllabus?
Mike,
You are full of shit... Nowhere whatsoever did it suggest that they didn't
teach how to bland, analyze and mark the tank.. In fact, it's just the
opposite, they did in fact teach it both in the Fundamentals class and the
tech class, but the dive shop owner failed to follow the protocol. That is
vastly different then saying it wasn't taught so stop lying to suit your own
bullshit agenda.
Your post is a 100% complete lie and you should be man enough to retract
your comments and apologize for spreading unsubstantiated lies.
Later
MHK
"mike gray" <omy...@worldnet.att.nit> wrote in message
> > It is up to the student to know how to analyze what is in his tanks.
>
> Ummmmmm..... Then why bother teaching it in any tech course????
Mike,
It's obvious you are blurring the lines to suit your agenda. Let's be clear
here:
1) teaching a student how to analyze is taught in both the tech class and
the Fundamentals class;
2) this student in question was a dive shop owner, a certified trimix gas
blender, and a previously certified trimix diver;
3) Analyzing a tank takes a few seconds, and is a very simple thing to do;
4) The student in question has blended 1,000's of tanks in his life, but
simply got complacent and failed to analyze his gas.
5) We teach the student how to do it, but it is up to the student to
actually do it.
So any references that you repeatedly refer to that suggest the skill isn't
taught is not factual and is an outright lie.
In the instant case the skill was taught on atleast 4 occasions during this
class, and the very student that you are speaking of blended over 90 tanks
during the class, so to even attempt to suggest that the skill is not, or
was not, taught only serves to further diminish your credibility.
We all knew that when we posted this accounting that many would take cheap
shots, but we felt that lessons could be learned and decided to put up with
the peanut gallery in order so that many can learn. So thank you for being
part of the peanut gallery that offers nothing, lies about the facts, and
serves only to stir the pot and not engage in educational exchanges of
information. I expected nothing less from you..
Later
Jason O'Rourke
>I'm just wondering about the danger of administering oxygen in this
>situation. If CNS or lung damage had been done could the oxygen
>administered on the surface have further exacerbated the condition? It's
The dangers of O2 on the surface are outweighed by the benefits. If the
guy convulses again, he does. But he is in no risk of drowning. People
in chambers do it too. And the 24 clock for pulmonary issues is far away,
and even then isn't as big a concern as any excess helium or nitrogen in
the body.
Popeye
>From: "JW" J...@nospam.com
>Date: 6/20/02 1:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>
>Mike,
>
>It is plain to see that a number of people in this group like to pick apart
>anything GUE.
JW, I'm the one that pointed out the descrepancy, and I'm pro-GUE.
>One incident that wasn't even the fault of the agency and instructors,
>becomes the target of anti GUE freaks.
The incident certainly -was- the fault of the instructor, and if he was
within GUE guidelines, the agency as well.
That a TRIMIX INSTRUCTOR wouldn't supervise and verify a TRIMIX STUDENT'S gas
mixing DURING TRAINING is ludicrous.
To simply assume, as the instructor did, that the student diver was properly
equipped is negligent.
That a trimix instructor would get in the water with 6 or however many
students without -any idea whatsoever- what is in their tanks is preposterous
and foolhardy.
That the student lied, should only serve as a harbinger of the necessity and
responsibility of this verification.
What about the next liar? Or honest mistake?
Had this student died, it would be a disaster of epic proportion for GUE as a
training entity, and AG as an instructor personally.
>These people are close minded and nothing will
>open up their eyes or change their minds
The only closed mind in this matter is yours. When "pro GUE freaks"
pontificated to other experienced divers that an instructor or agency is simply
above error or reproach due to previous experience or reputation it detracts
from the credibility of both.
And the other question stands: Did this negligent lying idiot get his GUE
card, and JW, are you ready to buddy with him -today-?
HLAviation
>is that everyone, no matter how expereinced or inexperienced, should analyze
>their contents before getting into the water..
Oh, I thought that that was a given. I think we all recognized(at least I hope
we did) that failure and violation right off the bat. My issue was to bring up
other points in the chain of events where the accident cycle could have been
broken.
http://hometown.aol.com/hlaviation/