At what point do you run a line?

[ArcticDiver]

Reading through the posts I'm left with the distinct impression there is a reluctance to run a line unless "needed" by some rule or another. Given the professed holistic nature of the philosophy shouldn't the thought process be instead that a line will be run unless absolutely not needed?

If there is a discussion as to whether a line is needed the resulting decision should be to run the line? After all it is fundamental to a safe dive in any circumstance that navigation is accurate.

 

[TSandM]

Well, when I did the swim through in Cozumel you saw, it would have been a PITA to run line through it, because we weren't coming back. Same with the Rhone. You can't realistically lay line unless you're going to go back, take the line out, and then go somewhere else. Any time you're doing a one way swim through something, it's just not feasible.

 

[Meng_Tze]

...Given the professed holistic nature of the philosophy shouldn't the thought process be instead that a line will be run unless absolutely not needed?

If there is a discussion as to whether a line is needed the resulting decision should be to run the line? After all it is fundamental to a safe dive in any circumstance that navigation is accurate.

See post 43

 

[ArcticDiver]

Well, when I did the swim through in Cozumel you saw, it would have been a PITA to run line through it, because we weren't coming back. Same with the Rhone. You can't realistically lay line unless you're going to go back, take the line out, and then go somewhere else. Any time you're doing a one way swim through something, it's just not feasible.

Absolutely. I should have been more clear in my post.

The whole purpose of a line is to navigate back the way you came. If you don't need to go back with your well planned dive there is no reason to run a line. The trip I just returned from had lots of situations where the overhead was a "swim through" and I never laid a line for any of them.

By the way, I read #43. There is a lot of verbiage there but it seems to have at its heart the idea that you don't lay a line unless you need to.

 

[RTodd]

Absolutely. I should have been more clear in my post.

The whole purpose of a line is to navigate back the way you came. If you don't need to go back with your well planned dive there is no reason to run a line. The trip I just returned from had lots of situations where the overhead was a "swim through" and I never laid a line for any of them.

By the way, I read #43. There is a lot of verbiage there but it seems to have at its heart the idea that you don't lay a line unless you need to.

This don't lay a line if you aren't going back rule is absurd. Take an extreme cave example. A 10k foot traverse. You are familiar with your exit and laid a line there. Since it is a traverse you don't bother to lay a line on the entrance. But, you miss a jump, don't hit your midway point and have to turn around. You realize this after breaking thirds. You started the dive at dusk and it is dark now. You didn't run a line on your entry because you weren't coming back. Hit the orignal entrance low on gas, get lost in another side passage trying to find the entrance and drown.

Swimtroughs - you blitz the swimthough going in and the current pushes ithe silt past you. Now you can't see your exit or your entrance. How much gas do you have left now that you are streased and your breathing rate spikes? What happens if the swimthrough branches to an area that doesn't have an exit and you don't realise this?

Notice in both of these examples it takes more than one thing to go wrong so many people don't think about it. But, that is how things go wrong underwater. What level of briefly not having a direct ascent to the surface risk you take is skill level dependent and is never the smart thing to do. Also, most people greatly overestimate their own skill level for taking these sorts of increased risks.

 

[Meng_Tze]

By the way, I read #43. There is a lot of verbiage there but it seems to have at its heart the idea that you don't lay a line unless you need to.

I think you need to re read that.

I believe it said:"Do you need to run a line to go into an overhead env.? No you do not. But you may need it to get out of that env.. And this is the issue here."

A lot of people, and RTodd, eloquently puts it here as well, do not think about what it will take to get out. Many tings can go wrong on a dive and a line put in can safe your life. The thought is that you need to think about what you are doing and why. It is lonely, dark and scary to be lost in an overhead environment.... trust me.

 

[Rick Murchison]

... Any time you're doing a one way swim through something, it's just not feasible.

Well... no, feasible or not, unless it's a swimthrough, it's a traverse; you still need a line.
Rick

 

[Rick Murchison]

...Swimtroughs - you blitz the swimthough going in and the current pushes ithe silt past you....

Uh, how's that? When I'm swimming through a swimthrough with a current, the current's pushing me along as well, and I'm still going to be ahead of any silt I happen to stir up. Aren't you?

Rick

 

[Scared Silly]

Well, when I did the swim through in Cozumel you saw, it would have been a PITA to run line through it, because we weren't coming back. Same with the Rhone. You can't realistically lay line unless you're going to go back, take the line out, and then go somewhere else. Any time you're doing a one way swim through something, it's just not feasible.

Okay first I have never taken a DIR Course so please excuse my ignorance and if needed remove my post. But I do not buy this. Now please bear with me here. What is wrong tying off the line and having the first person lay the line then have the last person take up the line? Yeah there is the issue of taking up the line that is not on a reel which I can not answer (i.e. how is 'abandon' line removed when it can not be put back on reel). I not know if such is DIR or not. I also realize that there is also an issue of how far one gets away from their buddy when doing such a "swim through".

Now here is another but I have absolutely no idea if this would work underwater but there are some ticks climbers and canyoneers use use rappel but then retrive all of their gear. I.e the first person lays the line that is tied off. The second also lays a line but when pulled hard enough undos the first line. Both lines are then reeled in. I will see if I can find a decent reference.

 

[TSandM]

RTodd, I was unclear. Somebody asked why not just run a line any time, every time you have anything over your head. I was just trying to point out that, in the case of the swimthroughs (simple, open, see-both-ends kind of swimthroughs) laying line would be a PITA because you don't intend to come back the way you went.

Scared Silly, I don't know how much experience you have handling line underwater, but it's nasty stuff. It wraps around anything it gets near, and it knots itself almost instantly and in very creative ways. One of the primary principles of running a reel is to avoid slack at all costs. There's no really reasonable way to have the guy following clean up the line, even assuming you would open enough separation between team members to allow the first to exit when the second was still waiting at the entrance. I mean, if you can keep team members within gas donation reach and have one exiting and the other entering, the swim through is pretty darned short, and almost certainly wouldn't merit running line