Do you think communication devices can save lifes underwater?

[Hallmac]

I would say there are very few or only one or two instances where being able to talk under water would save lives or injury.

I would say poor skills and incompetence is what leads to deaths in the diving community. Especially in the recreational diving community. Seldom do we hear of an incident where death or injury occured that at least ten people on this board have not personally experienced and survived with little more than a story to share.

The difference was not in communication alone but the ability not to panic and do what was required to fix the problem. While being able to talk somebody down and walk them through a situation could be useful once in a while (ie. lost or disoriented inside a wreck cause they were stupid), most of the time it is faster to just fix the problem, no talking required.

I would say it would be better for most to spend the money on more training in a pool than on communication equipment.

Hallmac

 

[Scuba]

Interesting question, with regards to safety its a self evident YES answer from my point view.

Addressing the issue from a purely communication perspective, not withstanding the shortcomings inherent in these devices today, I believe the upside to communicating underwater far outstrip its downside. The communicating of even minor issues can prove beneficial in averting the compounding cascade of minor problems that often lead to serious problems.

From my knowledge of the available communication gear available today to recreational divers I would agree that it is not quite ready for primetime, yet. But no doubt some find it useful.
Would be good to hear from some of them here.

Some commercial divers use communications gear. I wonder if any of them consider the ability to verbally communicate a detriment to safety.

Isn't it odd how a sport that postulates "buddy" diving finds so many opposed to what is such an effective means of communication? How many above water activities consider verbal communication a detriment to safety? It could be, since nothing is foolproof, but the benefits far outweigh the negatives.

As always some will prefer to do without the technological advances that make our life easier and safer. Some with good reason.

The wonderful thing about technology is that if you don't like it, you can always turn that switch to off, or leave it on and just keep quite. Unless you just feel like saying something.

 

[adder70]

Scuba once bubbled...
Interesting question, with regards to safety its a self evident YES answer from my point view.


Some commercial divers use communications gear. I wonder if any of them consider the ability to verbally communicate a detriment to safety.

Isn't it odd how a sport that postulates "buddy" diving finds so many opposed to what is such an effective means of communication? How many above water activities consider verbal communication a detriment to safety?

The wonderful thing about technology is that if you don't like it, you can always turn that switch to off, or leave it on and just keep quite. Unless you just feel like saying something.

Commercial divers are at a different level of ability (I hope!) in a completely different situation. They have a job to do, and may need specific unforeseen assistance or equipment which can be obtained much more easily through the use of a communication device.

Some consider it detrimental due to a false sense of security. This is a common argument used in fighting helmet laws for motorcycles, ie "Give them more protection, and they will take more chances."

Who says you will have the right to turn it off? What if dive charters require you to use the device and tune it to a certain frequency. Then you are forced to listen to everyone else chattering incessantly. Sure, SOME may restrict conversation on the "safety" frequency, but far more will simply say it is a great social experience and everyone will get to see the neat stuff regardless of who spots it.

50 posts!! Now I have to find an avatar! OMG, how many do they have?! I guess my next post will be in about a week!

 

[pipedope]

While I am not in favor of making comm gear manditory it is a major help in *some* instances.

In commercial diving your 'buddy' is actually a tender and dive supervisor on the surface. There is no chatter and you (and they) only talk when something needs to be said. That is not to say there is not continuous communication. A good dive supervisor can tell a lot about the condition of the diver and progress of the job by listening to the breathing of the diver. Often the diver can communicate without words. This is very handy when there are observers that are not part of the team and you need to get something across without telling everybody.

Remember that it is not as easy as talking on the surface. Open circuit is noisy! You can't hear when you inhale and you have to interrupt your normal breathing to talk.
Rebreather divers have the advantage of quiet.

For tech diving the team probably has such good skills and knows good sign language (hand and lights) that comms are redundant and possibly distracting.

For the rec diver who wants to look at cool stuff comms can be very nice. You can *tell* your buddy what you are pointing at.
The problem is the expense and need of relatively non-rec gear, i.e. FFM (full face mask). Now the FFM is not absolutely required. Only a receiver is needed to hear and some people can actually talk through a microphone in a standard regulator second stage.

Comunications gear can be very useful but it depends on how you use it and safety depends on the people on both ends of the link.

 

[fmansur]

Scuba once bubbled...
Interesting question, with regards to safety its a self evident YES answer from my point view.

Isn't it odd how a sport that postulates "buddy" diving finds so many opposed to what is such an effective means of communication? How many above water activities consider verbal communication a detriment to safety? It could be, since nothing is foolproof, but the benefits far outweigh the negatives.

That´s an interesting point. In all areas, improving communications improves the activity (whatever it´s a paragliding flight, or a project in a company, or a scuba diving).

I see the hand signals like the "stone age" of the diving communication. It´s just like diving computers. If we have computers available, why not to use them? Why use only diving tables? Of course we can´t let aside the planning and the backup procedures, like having a table or a plan if the computer fails, or know the hand signals if the communication equipment fails.

And saying that using a communication device (as it some people say about using diving computers) makes the diver "lazy" and ignore the principles behind it is the same to say that if you use a computer to write a text you won´t know how to write "by hand" anymore...

Regards

Fábio

 

[Don Burke]

fmansur once bubbled... That´s an interesting point. In all areas, improving communications improves the activity (whatever it´s a paragliding flight, or a project in a company, or a scuba diving).

I don't accept the premise that the addition of voice communications will improve communications in diving. In several fields, I have seen where making communications require more thought than just pressing a PTT button improves team efficiency by reducing idle chatter.

Voice comm gear is an advantage if you are out of sight of your buddy. You are considerably less useful to him in an emergency if you are that far away. THAT is my primary objection.

The original question was about saving lives and I still think allowing that distance to increase will cost us people.

fmansur once bubbled... I see the hand signals like the "stone age" of the diving communication.

Granite is the stone age version of construction. It is still used.

fmansur once bubbled... It´s just like diving computers. If we have computers available, why not to use them? Why use only diving tables? Of course we can´t let aside the planning and the backup procedures, like having a table or a plan if the computer fails, or know the hand signals if the communication equipment fails.

Ask a computer diver about the dive tables some time. Most know little or nothing about them.

How many hand signals do you _really_ need to know to dive? Most are intuitive anyway.

What are you going to tell someone that he can't figure out just by looking at you? I'd like to see some examples.

fmansur once bubbled... And saying that using a communication device (as it some people say about using diving computers) makes the diver "lazy" and ignore the principles behind it is the same to say that if you use a computer to write a text you won´t know how to write "by hand" anymore...

Regards

Fábio

Many people don't write by hand well any more. How many of them are going to get killed by it?

 

[Phish-phood]

It depends on what you mean by communications. My buddy who is an instructor always carries a slate with him on a course. He finds that new divers tend to stress themselves out more because they feel they cannot communicate the concern to him so he makes them write it down for him so that he can deal with it. Pretty much all incidences have been a simple case of new diver, first time in open water, wearing drysuits carrying extra weights etc but had they not been able to write down their concern and get the assurrance from the instructor it is easy to see how it might lead to a panic situation.

I personally don't see the need for video comms, texting or anything of that nature unless you're a commercial diver in which case you are looking at a whole different ball game. When I dive, a small slate and hand signals are what we use and that seems to work absolutely fine for us. We've had problems under the water and managed to deal with them.

 

[Scuba]

Don Burke wrote:

I don't accept the premise that the addition of voice communications will improve communications in diving. In several fields, I have seen where making communications require more thought than just pressing a PTT button improves team efficiency by reducing idle chatter.

[Voice comm gear is an advantage if you are out of sight of your buddy. You are considerably less useful to him in an emergency if you are that far away. THAT is my primary objection.

The original question was about saving lives and I still think allowing that distance to increase will cost us people.

Let's not confuse misuse with proper use and exceptions to the rule as the rule.

Even when using as an example an expert tech diving team, they will most likely not be in "constant" visual and touch contact throughout the dive. Verbal communication can actually close this gap through its ability to provide information faster than touch contact and without the need to get the other diver visual attention. Pipedope gave a good example of constant communication made possible by an audible device. In addition it increases the precision of what is being communicated beyond simple concepts, which can prove to be a safety issue.

Something as simple as "need air" can be communicated faster verbally than reaching out to your buddy which may now require him to turn his head to look at a further visual signal. A verbal signal will get to the buddy faster preparing him to deal with the situation immediately. As a matter of fact you may not have to utter a single word for your buddy to know your need help, a good buddy will be able to tell a lot by monitoring your breathing while going about his business, without the need for physical or visual contact, yet remaining next to you.

Some divers will no doubt have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use voice communication. But I wouldn't want to be the one arguing the position that voice communications hinder divers safety overall.

I think evolution chose verbal communication over physical gestures as the prefered choice a long time ago, in spite of all the chatter - or was it because of all the chatter.

 

[Don Burke]

Scuba once bubbled... Let's not confuse misuse with proper use and exceptions to the rule as the rule.

I agree. Let us also not confuse the way we want things to be used with the way things are actually used.

Scuba once bubbled... Even when using as an example an expert tech diving team, they will most likely not be in "constant" visual and touch contact throughout the dive.

There was a recent thread about buddy lines that indicated to me that more people dive within arms length than you would think.

If you allow your buddy to get out of sight, you are betting your butt on a battery, something I believe should be held to an absolute minimum.

Scuba once bubbled... Verbal communication can actually close this gap through its ability to provide information faster than touch contact and without the need to get the other diver visual attention.

That's one of my objections. Since voice communications would allow the gap to be closed, the gap can be bigger. That gap is how far away your help is.

Scuba once bubbled... Pipedope gave a good example of constant communication made possible by an audible device.

That is under the supervision of a topside supervisor and there is no party line chatter to deal with. Contrast that to twenty divers on a cattle boat jabbering away at everything that comes to mind, including things that happened years ago.

Scuba once bubbled... In addition it increases the precision of what is being communicated beyond simple concepts, which can prove to be a safety issue.

I've yet to see a workable example of this.

Scuba once bubbled... Something as simple as "need air" can be communicated faster verbally than reaching out to your buddy which may now require him to turn his head to look at a further visual signal.

A truly out of air diver won't be able to verbally communicate, so the additional distance allowed by the communication system could easily be a death sentence.

Scuba once bubbled... A verbal signal will get to the buddy faster preparing him to deal with the situation immediately.

In the case of out of air, the signal won't get there at all. In the case of entanglement, the buddy won't need any extra time.

Scuba once bubbled... As a matter of fact you may not have to utter a single word for your buddy to know your need help, a good buddy will be able to tell a lot by monitoring your breathing while going about his business, without the need for physical or visual contact, yet remaining next to you.

How do you tell the sound of your buddy's breathing from the other nineteen divers in the water? Why not just watch what his light is doing?

Scuba once bubbled... Some divers will no doubt have legitimate reasons for not wanting to use voice communication. But I wouldn't want to be the one arguing the position that voice communications hinder divers safety overall.

I've seen too many boat captains who were legally required to maintain a watch on VHF turn the volume down to an inaudible level because of chatter to think easier communications are always safer. CB went that way and I expect GMRS to be next. Back when I was flying, I saw pilots intentionally navigate through areas where they would not have to maintain communications with anyone so they could better concentrate. I would imagine some still do.

I have absolutely no problem contending that not every development that makes communication easier adds to safety.

Scuba once bubbled... I think evolution chose verbal communication over physical gestures as the prefered choice a long time ago, in spite of all the chatter - or was it because of all the chatter.

Since then, people have gone to great lengths to improve communication by eliminating extraneous noise, not adding it.

If we are talking about a professional (or professional-like) team in the water, like Pipedope was talking about, the parameters are quite different. The communications are well focused and helpful.

Adding voice communications to most diving would be a distraction and would allow divers to get further from help.

Buy the system if you wish, but don't expect me to.

 

[pipedope]

I think that audio comms are an unneeded distraction for the vast majority of sport diving.

For the majority of commercial diving they are very helpfull.

Heck, even in commercial diving we don't always use audio. Line signals are still used a lot
Lots of my dives I just stick my hand up out of the water and use hand signals to my tender to get what I need.