Bandito lawsuit?

General banter about diving and why we love it.
User avatar
deep diver
Pelagic
Posts: 905
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 7:49 am

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by deep diver » Wed Dec 03, 2014 10:25 am

Here is another way test co low cost
http://www.co-pro.com/
It's a good day.... nobody died!

User avatar
CaptnJack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 7774
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:29 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by CaptnJack » Wed Dec 03, 2014 12:00 pm

deep diver wrote:Here is another way test co low cost
http://www.co-pro.com/


1) Will only detect gross contamination. 10ppm is the US standard, 5ppm is the Canadian standard. 10ppm is the older value and widely considered "too high" for compressed breathing gases.
2) The disks wear out with age and there is no way to know if they are still working.

My opinion is that if you have thousands of dollars to travel to the tropics (where CO is a really big issue due to the heat, poor installations and infrequent oil/filter changes) then you have the money to invest in a proper CO meter - which just might save your life.

Many people carry them nowadays and the reports of CO contamination are actually on the rise due to so many people using them. Scubaboard (amazingly) is the best source for these reports. DandyDon is on a mission to get people using CO meters after his own incident. There are a few reports per year in the accidents and incidents subforum.

In the case I mentioned earlier about seeing 450 ppm about 20ft from my truck that was years ago back when diving specific meters weren't made and I was using an adapted household unit. My wife back up to the garage while I was filling and wham 90 seconds later there was this pulse of CO in the compressor (it took that long to make it through the filter). I was filling my banks at the time and it was a very short duration (she turning off the truck quickly). So the concentration in the bank was below 1ppm in the end. If it had been left idling it would have been a major issue. I was far enough away that there was little or no exhaust odor at the time.
Sounder wrote:Under normal circumstances, I would never tell another man how to shave his balls... but this device should not be kept secret.

User avatar
johndo88
Compulsive Diver
Posts: 321
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by johndo88 » Wed Dec 03, 2014 2:52 pm

Desert Diver wrote:You would be amazed at how people forget about their BCD's.

Been there, done that. My wife and I now make it a point to check that the BCD works, suit inflation works, and both second stages work before entering the water. Between the two of us we have over 700 dives and have been surprised how many times this check worked to catch something. I am finding that when with a group of dives that it is really easy to miss a step.

User avatar
Dusty2
I've Got Gills
Posts: 6388
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 9:04 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by Dusty2 » Wed Dec 03, 2014 6:11 pm

I know from nothing about the actual event but from what I am hearing Contaminated gas was not the problem. I'm thinking, excited new boat diver goes of the back with tank not on and BC not inflated. Hence panic and sinking. It's the only explanation that fits. I have rolled off the boat without my bc inflated and if my tank had been off I would have been in bad shape.

User avatar
johndo88
Compulsive Diver
Posts: 321
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by johndo88 » Wed Dec 03, 2014 7:24 pm

That makes alot of sense. Makes me wonder, do we spend enough time teaching when and how to dump weight belts?

dalcodiver
Avid Diver
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:00 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by dalcodiver » Wed Dec 03, 2014 8:32 pm

I was at Pt Defiance that day when Rick pulled in. Rick had already called emergency services and the EMT's were there at the dock waiting. The crew was providing CPR when they pulled in , continuing until the EMT's took over. Has to be a very tough situation to deal with , in my opinion Rick handled it calmly & professionally. I don't believe he could have done anything more to get the diver to medical attention any faster.
If I'm not diving unfortunately I'm working.

User avatar
Desert Diver
Extreme Diving Machine
Posts: 471
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 9:20 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by Desert Diver » Wed Dec 03, 2014 9:20 pm

johndo88 wrote:
Desert Diver wrote:You would be amazed at how people forget about their BCD's.

Been there, done that. My wife and I now make it a point to check that the BCD works, suit inflation works, and both second stages work before entering the water. Between the two of us we have over 700 dives and have been surprised how many times this check worked to catch something. I am finding that when with a group of dives that it is really easy to miss a step.


I've gotten in the water a couple of times without my suit inflater hooked up. Stupid, but I just found the hose and hooked it up. In certain circumstances we roll off the boat in Mexico after deliberately removing all air from the BCD. My wife and I do have a hard and fast rule of a final breath from the reg while watching for the pressure gauge to twitch before going in the water, even when walking in.

User avatar
CaptnJack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 7774
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:29 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by CaptnJack » Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:33 am

johndo88 wrote:That makes alot of sense. Makes me wonder, do we spend enough time teaching when and how to dump weight belts?


Yeah most drowning victims still have their weights on :( I seem to recall the woman who descended at Edmonds in 8 ft of water without her gas on never ditched her weights either (3 or 4 yrs ago?). This and how to reach your own valve so you can easily check it yourself prior to splashing.

Harder to describe than to do but unless your tank is hanging down by your butt... If your elbow is kept close to your ear your arm can more readily go back and reach your own valve. I always check mine on the boat bench if the DM wants to check it I will recheck it after them. I am always the last person to check my own valve.

Doing a regulator pre-breathe is also part of OW class and if its more than 2 breaths you will rapidly run OOA if the valve is off. Many people don't breath on the reg long enough thinking they are "wasting air"
Sounder wrote:Under normal circumstances, I would never tell another man how to shave his balls... but this device should not be kept secret.

User avatar
ljjames
I've Got Gills
Posts: 2723
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:46 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by ljjames » Thu Dec 04, 2014 12:52 pm

The ability to recover from a gas off descent becomes astronomically harder if you are in a drysuit. The gas compression even in 10' of water will start to shrink wrap your body and even if you could reach your valves or find your weight release on the surface or on a dive with your gas on, suit squeeze will be restrictive. If you are going to be neurotic about one thing in diving, this is it. As Richard mentions, pre breath or hit the purge button a couple times and also learn to reach back and check your own gas as the last thing you do before descending. Once in the water your BC will float your kit up and make it as easy to reach as if you were sitting on the bench pre-dive. If you can't reach it, have your buddy help you check it.

I made one full descent with Drysuit inflator not hooked up, to the 60' range. I was hard pressed to have mobility to do anything. I had the "forgot inflator" tiger stripes of shame (drysuit hickey) after that dive.

CaptnJack wrote:
johndo88 wrote:That makes alot of sense. Makes me wonder, do we spend enough time teaching when and how to dump weight belts?


Yeah most drowning victims still have their weights on :( I seem to recall the woman who descended at Edmonds in 8 ft of water without her gas on never ditched her weights either (3 or 4 yrs ago?). This and how to reach your own valve so you can easily check it yourself prior to splashing.

Harder to describe than to do but unless your tank is hanging down by your butt... If your elbow is kept close to your ear your arm can more readily go back and reach your own valve. I always check mine on the boat bench if the DM wants to check it I will recheck it after them. I am always the last person to check my own valve.

Doing a regulator pre-breathe is also part of OW class and if its more than 2 breaths you will rapidly run OOA if the valve is off. Many people don't breath on the reg long enough thinking they are "wasting air"
Last edited by ljjames on Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
----
"I survived the Brittandrea Dorikulla, where's my T-shirt!"

User avatar
Jeff Pack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 3060
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by Jeff Pack » Thu Dec 04, 2014 2:29 pm

Theres no scuba sign for "My Suit is squeezed so bad I cant move". But when you strike the bottom like an asteriod striking the earth, hopefully your dive buddy will figure it out. :)
=============================================

- I got a good squirt in my mouth
- I would imagine that there would be a large amount of involuntary gagging
- I don't know about you but I'm not into swallowing it

CCR discussion on Caustic Cocktails.

User avatar
Desert Diver
Extreme Diving Machine
Posts: 471
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 9:20 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by Desert Diver » Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:21 pm

CaptnJack wrote:
johndo88 wrote:That makes alot of sense. Makes me wonder, do we spend enough time teaching when and how to dump weight belts?


Yeah most drowning victims still have their weights on :( I seem to recall the woman who descended at Edmonds in 8 ft of water without her gas on never ditched her weights either (3 or 4 yrs ago?). This and how to reach your own valve so you can easily check it yourself prior to splashing.

Harder to describe than to do but unless your tank is hanging down by your butt... If your elbow is kept close to your ear your arm can more readily go back and reach your own valve. I always check mine on the boat bench if the DM wants to check it I will recheck it after them. I am always the last person to check my own valve.

Doing a regulator pre-breathe is also part of OW class and if its more than 2 breaths you will rapidly run OOA if the valve is off. Many people don't breath on the reg long enough thinking they are "wasting air"


When my air usage was higher and we were diving with a guy who didn't seem to use any I got in the habit of not using any air I didn't have to. You can check for yourself, if your air is off or even almost off and you take a breath, the gauge will twitch. If it is off the gauge will drop down and stay. With a full tank and the valve open I can't even see a twitch when I take a breath. One breath does it for me unless someone else touches my stuff.

User avatar
CaptnJack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 7774
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:29 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by CaptnJack » Thu Dec 04, 2014 3:37 pm

Desert Diver wrote:
When my air usage was higher and we were diving with a guy who didn't seem to use any I got in the habit of not using any air I didn't have to. You can check for yourself, if your air is off or even almost off and you take a breath, the gauge will twitch. If it is off the gauge will drop down and stay. With a full tank and the valve open I can't even see a twitch when I take a breath. One breath does it for me unless someone else touches my stuff.


This is false economy. Breathing on a tank at the surface for a minute (3L tidal volume x 12 respirations/min) uses about 1.25 cf total. That's 20 seconds less gas available at 60ft. You can afford to shorten your dive by 20 seconds to do a proper pre-breathe on the reg.

Is it all the way on? Does it taste funny? Is the reg leaking somewhere? Mouthpiece intact? Zip tie on the mouthpiece? Exhaust diaphragm functioning correctly? Trying to do this on the minimum possible gas is not wise, beginners are especially advised to take their time since they are least likely to be able to accommodate something less than perfect underwater.
Sounder wrote:Under normal circumstances, I would never tell another man how to shave his balls... but this device should not be kept secret.

User avatar
Grateful Diver
I've Got Gills
Posts: 5322
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 7:52 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by Grateful Diver » Thu Dec 04, 2014 6:33 pm

A standard pre-dive gear check should include two breaths off of each of your two second stages. Ideally you want to do them with your face submerged in the water, to make sure that your regs aren't leaking ... if there's something causing the diaphragm to not seal they may breathe just fine above the water, but "slurp" once submerged ... the last thing you want if you're dealing with an OOA diver is to hand them a "slurping" regulator. Best to check before the dive starts that they're both functioning properly.

And if those four breaths are a cause for concern due to air conservation issues, then you're cutting your safety margins way too thin in the first place.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
Threats and ultimatums are never the best answer. Public humiliation via Photoshop is always better - airsix

Come visit me at http://www.nwgratefuldiver.com/

User avatar
ljjames
I've Got Gills
Posts: 2723
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:46 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by ljjames » Thu Dec 04, 2014 7:07 pm

Thank you Richard and Bob... I was trying to come up with a tactful way to say what you both just covered nicely.
----
"I survived the Brittandrea Dorikulla, where's my T-shirt!"

User avatar
lamont
I've Got Gills
Posts: 1212
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:00 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by lamont » Thu Dec 04, 2014 8:25 pm

By far the easiest trick to being able to dive safely is just to protect your ability to breathe underwater at all costs. Once you lose that ability your options are incredibly limited. Check that your valves are open early and often. Breathe off the regulators on the surface to make sure that they breathe and mouthpieces are attached, etc. Breathe on them under water to make sure you haven't sat a tank down on them in the car and cracked open the plastic in the exhaust port. Never go near the water when you've got your valve closed. End your dives early enough that you're getting out with at least 500 psi (because if the weather got snotty and you drifted away from the boat or something then a working high performance regulator attached to a tank of gas works way better than a snorkel in whitecaps).

I don't understand people who go diving and temporarily have the super power of being able to breathe underwater and then go and deliberately play with kryptonite and risk losing that power. As long as you can keep breathing underwater everything else is just details...

jerryehrlich
Avid Diver
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:34 am

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by jerryehrlich » Fri Dec 05, 2014 5:01 pm

CaptnJack wrote:

Doing a regulator pre-breathe is also part of OW class and if its more than 2 breaths you will rapidly run OOA if the valve is off. Many people don't breath on the reg long enough thinking they are "wasting air"


5 breaths
Rolling in with the gas off = dangerous CF

User avatar
Desert Diver
Extreme Diving Machine
Posts: 471
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 9:20 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by Desert Diver » Fri Dec 05, 2014 5:10 pm

ljjames wrote:Thank you Richard and Bob... I was trying to come up with a tactful way to say what you both just covered nicely.


And while I think you all are correct, it is still hard for me to make myself do after all these years of thinking the other way. No need for tact! I'll agree or argue.

maelstrom
Frequent Bubbler
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:30 am

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by maelstrom » Mon Dec 08, 2014 4:46 pm

It appears to me that there is a great deal of speculation and pontificating here with very few facts.
We do not know the CO concentration of the breathing gas. Undoubtedly, it has been analysed.
We DO NOT know if the tank valve was open. This has undoubtedly been documented.
It certainly appears that he was negatively buoyant, either the BC was not inflated, or malfunctioned.
We do not know if he was wearing a dry suit.
We do know that he was a VERY new diver, with little or no cold water experience: "According to the lawsuit, Vance had made 23 dives before Nov. 19, 2011, but was making his first cold water boat dive that day."

To an inexperienced warm water diver, either a dry suit, or farmer John wet suit would probably seem very constricting, and the amount of weight we use would be very unfamiliar. Jumping in to dark Puget Sound (IN NOVEMBER) would be very intimidating, followed by that sensation of very cold water seeping in(if wearing a wet suit). I can imagine(and have seen) a panic situation at just this time, regulator out of mouth even if everything had been done correctly by everyone. Add the buoyancy issue, and you have a tragedy. If he was a certified diver on a shop dive, the responsibility would thus be his alone. If he was student in some type of class, things get more complicated.

Anyway, my point is that we know nothing but poorly worded allegations in a news article about an ongoing law suit. While we should learn from the facts, groundless speculation will give more ammunition to plaintiff's attorneys in this and future law suits. Assume that they are reading all of this.

Hal

User avatar
ljjames
I've Got Gills
Posts: 2723
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:46 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by ljjames » Mon Dec 08, 2014 5:37 pm

Instead of implying that we shouldn't talk about things for fear of giving lawyers ammunition, how about asking a moderator to split the thread and rename it something unrelated? I don't think that any of us were speculating about the case at hand, just musing about things that can be issues and trying to learn more or share experiences about diving incidents in general, since the initial topic peaked interest in something that folks may or may not have ever given any thought to.
----
"I survived the Brittandrea Dorikulla, where's my T-shirt!"

User avatar
CaptnJack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 7774
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:29 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by CaptnJack » Mon Dec 08, 2014 7:13 pm

maelstrom wrote:It appears to me that there is a great deal of speculation and pontificating here with very few facts.
We do not know the CO concentration of the breathing gas. Undoubtedly, it has been analysed.
We DO NOT know if the tank valve was open. This has undoubtedly been documented.
It certainly appears that he was negatively buoyant, either the BC was not inflated, or malfunctioned.
We do not know if he was wearing a dry suit.
We do know that he was a VERY new diver, with little or no cold water experience: "According to the lawsuit, Vance had made 23 dives before Nov. 19, 2011, but was making his first cold water boat dive that day."

To an inexperienced warm water diver, either a dry suit, or farmer John wet suit would probably seem very constricting, and the amount of weight we use would be very unfamiliar. Jumping in to dark Puget Sound (IN NOVEMBER) would be very intimidating, followed by that sensation of very cold water seeping in(if wearing a wet suit). I can imagine(and have seen) a panic situation at just this time, regulator out of mouth even if everything had been done correctly by everyone. Add the buoyancy issue, and you have a tragedy. If he was a certified diver on a shop dive, the responsibility would thus be his alone. If he was student in some type of class, things get more complicated.

Anyway, my point is that we know nothing but poorly worded allegations in a news article about an ongoing law suit. While we should learn from the facts, groundless speculation will give more ammunition to plaintiff's attorneys in this and future law suits. Assume that they are reading all of this.

Hal


Really? You think there's something here for either side to benefit from? Even if there is, if its coincidentally factual then they (either side) deserves to know about it or look into it.

PS we don't even know that the gas was analyzed for CO at all. The plaintiff <claims> it was contaminated. It could be 2ppm for all we know (which btw is about the concentration in a normal exhalation by a non-smoker...)
Sounder wrote:Under normal circumstances, I would never tell another man how to shave his balls... but this device should not be kept secret.

maelstrom
Frequent Bubbler
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:30 am

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by maelstrom » Tue Dec 09, 2014 3:44 pm

If the tank valve was actually closed, I think this thread could give plaintiff's attorneys a better case for gross negligence by emphasizing that standard safety practices are in place to prevent such tragedies. It is also possible, but unlikely that the authors above could be called in to voice their opinions under oath.

Your statement that the gas may not even have been analysed was a VERY good one. Given the wording of the complaint, I just assumed it had been analysed.

User avatar
CaptnJack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 7774
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:29 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by CaptnJack » Tue Dec 09, 2014 4:11 pm

maelstrom wrote:If the tank valve was actually closed, I think this thread could give plaintiff's attorneys a better case for gross negligence by emphasizing that standard safety practices are in place to prevent such tragedies. It is also possible, but unlikely that the authors above could be called in to voice their opinions under oath.


I have not seen any "standard safety practices" published other than those in OW texts. Being able to reach your own valves is taught by some agencies, not others. Pre-breathing regs before relying on them for life support is OW 101.

A lawyer can get my IP from the board owner, trace back to my computer, and subpoena me anytime. Or they can just ask and I will tell them my expert witness rates... But they would be fools to do so since my pearls of internet wisdom are highly irregular and rarely materialize in real life :rjack:
Sounder wrote:Under normal circumstances, I would never tell another man how to shave his balls... but this device should not be kept secret.

User avatar
fmerkel
I've Got Gills
Posts: 1033
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 6:45 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by fmerkel » Wed Dec 10, 2014 9:21 am

maelstrom wrote:If the tank valve was actually closed, I think this thread could give plaintiff's attorneys a better case for gross negligence by emphasizing that standard safety practices are in place to prevent such tragedies. It is also possible, but unlikely that the authors above could be called in to voice their opinions under oath.

Your statement that the gas may not even have been analysed was a VERY good one. Given the wording of the complaint, I just assumed it had been analysed.


Gross negligence is a [yes/no] decision by the jury after the trial by 10 of the 12 jurors. If no > the trial is over. If yes > then it is not unusual for "percentage of blame" to be doled out.

For instance in the trial I was on-the jury vote NO. We were done. 2 jurors did not and flatly stated they would never have changed their vote. But they were also clear that in this case the family was something like 90% at fault and the Mountaineers 10%. Their only rationale is the parents should be compensated 'something' for the loss of a child from an 'uncaring company'. So the parents were suing for $10M but would not have gotten nearly that much.

I've read a bunch of dive cases in trying to sort out dive liability for our Club. 2 cases that appear to be pretty similar on the outside can end up with entirely different outcomes depending on how effectively the lawyers color the [negligence vs. blame] equation. That's likely how this would play out in court.

At this level we're just a bunch of people that weren't there, speculating about some concepts surrounding this event. As long as we weren't involved, or end up being part of the suit we can do and say whatever we want. The only limitations will be the ones imposed by this forum and social pressure. People obviously vary from wanting to have a discussion and maybe get some value out of it, to thinking we should never even come near this kind of topic.
To Air is Human,
To Respire, Divine.

User avatar
Tom Nic
I've Got Gills
Posts: 9362
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:26 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by Tom Nic » Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:59 am

This:

fmerkel wrote: Their only rationale is the parents should be compensated 'something' for the loss of a child from an 'uncaring company'.


And it is really terrifying. :BDub: :eek:

If this doesn't scare someone it is ONLY because they never anticipate themselves on the receiving end of such a subjectively foolish standard.

Once again my plea / vote for someone MUCH smarter than I to untangle the gordian knot of torte reform.

Not holding my breath. :tomnic:
More Pics Than You Have Time To Look AT
"Anyone who thinks this place is over moderated is bat-crazy anarchist." -Ben, Airsix
"Warning: No dive masters are going to be there, Just a bunch of old fat guys taking pictures of fish." -Bassman

User avatar
coulterboy
Amphibian
Posts: 871
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 10:19 pm

Re: Bandito lawsuit?

Post by coulterboy » Wed Dec 10, 2014 12:31 pm

fmerkel wrote:

At this level we're just a bunch of people that weren't there, speculating about some concepts surrounding this event. As long as we weren't involved, or end up being part of the suit we can do and say whatever we want. The only limitations will be the ones imposed by this forum and social pressure. People obviously vary from wanting to have a discussion and maybe get some value out of it, to thinking we should never even come near this kind of topic.


+1 :popcorn:
When was the last time you did something for the first time?

Post Reply