Posted by Eins on March 06, 2001 at 23:53:08:
In Reply to: Re: Mea culpa, I stand corrected. posted by John Walker on March 06, 2001 at 22:48:05:
I thought I had it right...and then Kevin confused me with Mia. I concluded (wrong) that I fudged and "gave him" that accident.
You are quite certainly right, I have far less knowledge in this field than you. However, if you care to re-read my posts, I used the pinnacle analogy on Mia, not on the German tourist.
Now, about the real issue--when someone asks about accidents on a wreck, does this not imply inquiring about the inherent risk and danger of a wreck (vs. a reef) dive?
Let's take your quoted example of folks dying on the Doria because they jumped in with the valves closed. In all fairness, they did not die because it was the Doria. They did not die because it was a wreck. This could have happened on any dive with the same forgetfulness (or eagerness) and enough depth for them to drown. Yes, they died while attempting to dive the Doria, but was it a wreck dive-related accident? I don't think so.
My point is, to analyze wreck or any other specific dive site related accidents, would it not make sense to filter out causes that are incidental and have nothing to do with the inherent dangers of that specific site? Like what happened to the German tourist on the Yukon. Or to Mia on another wreck, for that matter, that could as well have been a pinnacle, and she would have died the same, so it had nothing to do specifically with a wreck?
Post a Followup