Missing diver found in wreck

Mark Wison

Nov 17th 2008, 16:45

@ R. Azzopardi

I agree completely, each diver will assess the situation and dive accordingly, some are happy with wreck penetration and some are not, this diver was obviously very experienced and knew what he was doing, people should refrain from making accusations about his competence as some of the messages have below. if only out of respect for his family who no doubt are reading these reports. My point was that the wreck is advertised as “a cleaned wreck prepared for divers but unfortunately upside down”, More information is needed for divers who then would probably choose to dive the other wrecks nearby and not bother to go near it. A simply updating of the information board in the car park would be a great first step and could be done easily.

M Aquilina

Nov 17th 2008, 15:28

well done to all CPD volunteer divers and CPD rescue divers.

R. Azzopardi

Nov 17th 2008, 13:00

@Mick Wilson
Penetrating a wreck lying upside down is pushing it a bit too far in my opinion. I don't need any signs to tell me not to enter.

Eric Hamerslag

Nov 17th 2008, 11:36

Dear Antonio, your philosophy is correct.
As frequent Northsea- and Malta diver, I am used to poor visibility. So even diving in the Grand Harbour is astonishing better then I am used to. I can imagine that the temptation of entering any wreck in Malta is always in your mind.

mick Wilson

Nov 17th 2008, 11:12

I dived this wreck 1 month ago, there are no warnings on the information sign in the car park other than the statement" for experienced divers only" and the signs on the wreck are barely visible with one lying upside down and the others covers in silt and green growth. Books and the gozo dive schools own website also mention nothing about dangers and they also have photos of a clean white wreck with divers inside. So how exactly should everyone who visits the island know of the dangers. Any diver will know that a sign saying "danger" 40m underwater as the first and only warning is not an adequate measure to take.
Change the information board.
update the information in books.
inform the tourist divers when they hire equipment or visit the island
update the websites.

R. Azzopardi

Nov 17th 2008, 09:17

Whether the MV Xlendi gets blown up or not, I will never penetrate that particular wreck. Whatever's supposed to be resting on the floor is now hanging from the ceiling. Definitely not an ideal scenario. We have a good number of wrecks to dive on. Why take unnecessary risks? I circled the Xlendi once and got bored. The Cominoland and Karwela wrekcs lie just a couple of hundred metres away and offer loads of diving pleasure. We should stick to those.

David Meilak

Nov 16th 2008, 18:07

Oh yeah and while the government is at it, if somebody introduces sky jumping in Malta, the govt should guarantee a giant mattress on the ground just in case a parachute does not open. Seriously people, some sports are risky, and are at the sportsman's risk, and that risk is sometimes what makes it so pleasurable to the person, that adrenaline rush. So stop blaming everything on the govt and expecting the govt to always be there, 'Just in case'............Man what a country we live in!!

Cas Madasar

Nov 16th 2008, 16:42

keith, you are aware that diving is in fact a strong tourism attraction? Removing it will be a huge blow to the islands.

Secondly. Diving is a safe sport. Its those that do not take it seriously that make it dangerous

s.camilleri

Nov 16th 2008, 12:24

Keith, like all things in life, diving is what you make it!

Clive Brockdorff

Nov 16th 2008, 11:04

It seems that for some people, the solution to everything is banning all activities which do not meet their (subjective) approval.
In my opinion, this is a reprehensible attitude, reminiscent of totalitarian societies.

I agree with those posters who feel that it is not up to "the authorities" to molly-coddle everybody - Divers (and all those engaged in potentially risky pastimes) must learn to take responsibility for their behavior and dive within their limits - and I write this as a diving instructor with several years of enjoyable, careful diving behind me.

Joseph Schembri

Nov 16th 2008, 09:21

@Keith Davis: I don't agree with you when you lump scuba diving with hunting and fireworks. The latter two affect third parties while diving, which is a wonderful sport, entails only risks to the diver himself. Also remember that diving is an environment friendly sport unlike the other two things that you mention and it encourages eco-tourism.

Keith Davis

Nov 16th 2008, 07:40

I dont know why we permit people to take such risks just for the fun of it! Such things should be illegal in the first place so we stop seeing people dying for nonsense pleasures!

Fireworks
Diving
Hunting

s.camilleri

Nov 16th 2008, 00:46

I dont agree with you ray do you pay for rescue in your country to rescue is not about making money its about trying to save a ilfe,so go back home and dont tell us what needs to be done.

Antonio Anastasi

Nov 15th 2008, 20:41

What everybody keeps forgetting is that this wreck is clearly marked with large signs as dangerous.
Divers on holiday, especially those coming from dark cold waters, take risks that they would NOT dream or consider taking in their seas.
Our water is warmer and much clearer and this can lull divers into overconfidence compounded by the effect of nitrogen narcosis.
They would NEVER think of penetrating ANY wreck back home without the due precautions, and in this case I am assuming that no line and reel were used to to guide them back out of the wreck.
If this is in fact the correct assumption that this sad tragedy, is even sadder that a diver of this experience who should know better would take such risks.
As for breaking up the wreck.
Why????
Who will take legal responsibility and declare it safe?
This should have been done BEFORE sinking it and the minister for Gozo and the Gozo tourist board should have waited for better weather conditions for sinking the Xlendi in the right place and position.
This does not imply that anyone but BAD judgement was responsible for this sad, avoidable tragedy.

Jeremy J Camilleri

Nov 15th 2008, 20:36

What has happened? Why are we now ever so stringy with our taxes, after years of them being spent unresponsibly?



This wreck is not a normal wreck, but a very dangerous one. It has been dangerous ever since it was scuttled.

Since I am also a taxpayer, I have no problem whatsoever with my taxes being spent to avoid similar deaths, rather than to provide ministers with expensive, fuel guzzling Jaguars.

ray tomlinson

Nov 15th 2008, 20:05

yes condolences to the family but i disagree that the authorities should break up the wreck. what agency will certify it safe after breakup? Government ? (ie the taxpayer) which will render itself liable to all sorts of claims in the future if the wreck causes death , injury or damages to equipment. ALL wrecks are potentially dangerous and ALL diver should take sfety precautions including diving in pairs and topside safety boats. make divers pay the cost of the rescue . then clubs and solo divers will tighten up on safety

Dino Galetovic

Nov 15th 2008, 17:42

Heartfelt condolences to the relatives and family of Paul Swain. I do hope that now the federation sits at the table and decide once and for all what would be the next course of action to take with the wreck. I think the best idea insofar is that of Mr. E.Farrugia , that it should be split in the middle,or crack it and then get the elements to finish the job. It's a shame that such wonderful wreck should be destroyed like that, but it will save lifes in the future.Thanks to the divers and volunteers that took part in the search and recovery.

Franco Farrugia

Nov 15th 2008, 16:23

Congratulations to all those volunteers who took part in the grim search. Certainly not easy, in the given situation, to take part in such an activity. And condolences to the relatives. Hoping that they will now find the peace they deserve.

Hopefully, the authorities will now see to it that the wreck and its environs will be rendered safe.