A thread on the tragic drowning on the Costa Del Sol. I have no info that’s not in the public domain, but I’ve seen a lot of speculation about the pool pumps etc, and as I know a fair bit about this subject, I thought it would be worth explaining a few things...
Firstly, although drownings can be caused by too much suction in pool sump valves, it’s very rare because most pools are designed to ensure it can’t happen and the cases you do see, tend to be outside the EU and in much larger leisure pools. Not a small 25m (approx) pool.
Secondly, it’s very, very easy for a child to get into difficulty. The most common reasons are:
-losing armbands when jumping in with arms raised.
-not realising how deep it is and jumping in
-thinking they can stand, but sliding down a slope in the pool bottom
-losing armbands when jumping in with arms raised.
-not realising how deep it is and jumping in
-thinking they can stand, but sliding down a slope in the pool bottom
When a child does get into difficulty, people often make instinctive decisions. The best course of action if you can’t swim, is to look for rescue equipment such as a pole/rope, or run for help from someone who can swim. But people do jump in.
In this case, it’s been confirmed that the pool was not lifeguarded.
It does not look like there are a lot of rescue aids, based on images of the pool, although you can see a large lifesaving buoy in some photos, so unless that has been planted after the fact, there was one.
It does not look like there are a lot of rescue aids, based on images of the pool, although you can see a large lifesaving buoy in some photos, so unless that has been planted after the fact, there was one.
In images of the pool taken before the incident, it does appear that the pool is quite quiet, and with it being off season, it’s probably fair to assume that not a lot of people were about.
So you end up with all the ingredients you need. A child in difficulty who can’t swim, more people going in after them who can’t swim because there is no lifeguard, no bystanders who can help, and the people who are there don’t spot the rescue equipment before jumping in.
Other possibilities such as the victims being drunk have been ruled out. Too much chlorine, causing poisoning has been ruled out (that would show up in pool test results).
So back to the pumps in more detail...
So back to the pumps in more detail...
Most pools draw water out from two places, the sump (drain at the deepest part of the pool) and the balance tank, where the water from the top of the pool drains out through gutter channels. The sump catches debris that sinks and the balance tank catches pollution that floats.
Most pollution is microscopic (pee, poo, perfume, deodorant etc) and combines with chlorine and floats in the top 2cm, so 2/3 of the water that is drained from pools comes from the surface via the gutters & balance tank).
Pool manufacturers make sure of this, by making the pipe to the balance tank twice as wide as the one to the sump. They also make the sump drain cover wide, then make the sump pipe narrow, to ensure the suction isn’t significant enough to suck even small people down.
Even if they’d got it all wrong in this case and made it strong enough to suck one person down, the chances of it being strong enough to suck down three, is non-existent.
The pool itself is 2m deep at the deepest part. 
It also seems to slope towards the deepest part of the pool which is in the middle. (I’m 99% sure I have the right pool here, but could potentially be corrected).
The pumps etc were checked by the police & found to be running normally. The only thing supporting the idea that there may be an issue with the pumps/suction is that the person who eventually retrieved the victims, also struggled to get out of the water.
I don’t know what that means exactly. The person may or may not have been a lifeguard. They could have been a cleaner, or receptionist. They could be a strong swimmer, they could be a weak swimmer. What we do know, is that they have just retrieved 3 bodies from a pool...
...which is a bloody tiring thing to do, especially when your Adrenalin is pumping. After retrieving three bodies, climbing out at the deep end with nothing to put your feet on, may have looked awkward & they would have been physically & mentally exhausted.
There is also an issue of translation. That may have been a throwaway remark, that was pounced on. The Sun (shock) seem to have written a very sensationalist story with a lot of speculation prefixed with “it’s not know if...”
But you have to assume that if the person who went in, was getting sucked to the bottom by the sump and they had to fight against it to get out, that would have been specifically mentioned by them.
So we go back to the most simple explanation, which is that a child was struggling, and non swimmers tried to help but made the situation worse.
If you think that is unlikely, I suggest you watch a few episodes of Bondi Rescue...
If you think that is unlikely, I suggest you watch a few episodes of Bondi Rescue...
...where you see non-swimmers trying to rescue other non swimmers all the time. (It’s a different environment in the sea, but the principle of people making the wrong choice still applies.
My Qualifications: I’ve been a qualified lifeguard for 20 years. I was a RLSS trainer assessor for 8-9 years, I hold the RLSS National Pool Manager’s Qualification (which deals with risk assessments & UK pool safety laws) and I was in charge of a pool plant room for 12 years.
I realise I mentioned that the pool was not lifeguarded, but I didn’t talk about why, so a few tweets on that...
Rules differ in other countries. In the UK, that pool probably would have been lifeguarded, based on it’s surface area and depth.
There are guidelines (HSG 179).
The decision is based on a number of factors & the risk assessment that all pools must carry out.
There are guidelines (HSG 179).
The decision is based on a number of factors & the risk assessment that all pools must carry out.
Other factors include what the pool is used for, no of kids etc.
Pool can also reduce the number of lifeguards required on duty as well, by installing drowning detection cameras.
Pool can also reduce the number of lifeguards required on duty as well, by installing drowning detection cameras.
In Europe and the, US, they have a more libertarian attitude and tend to just put up “swim at your own risk” signs, particularly in quiet pools and particularly in the off season.
I don’t know the Spanish rules, but I would expect that if they had been broken, the police wouldn’t have been so quick to let the hotel reopen the pool.
Often there are cameras, but CCTV on it’s own, without underwater cameras and drowing detection software is virtually useless at preventing drownings. All it does is help you figure out what happened after the fact unless someone is monitoring the cameras (rarely happens).
Some foreign pools (I’ve heard of a few in the UAE) comply with RLSS UK guidelines in order to satisfy British tour companies but I believe this is still pretty rare, especially in Spain.
So to summarise, I don’t think the pool was legally obliged to have lifeguards. They are *probably* obliged to have some rescue equipment, they *probably* did and it probably wasn’t spotted before the 2nd and 3rd family members jumped in.
On the pumps again, I read that the child’s swimming hat was sucked into the filtration system. A swim cap only weighs a few grams, so this tells you very little about whether or not any suction was strong enough to draw in 3 humans. (I doubt it was as per the thread).
One more addition, look how steep the slope was...
