Innovation in diving

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

gianaameri

Contributor
Messages
793
Reaction score
162


A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

this thread has been split off from a side discussion in the Accidents and Incidents forum as it is discussing a totally different dive from the actual incident. Marg, SB Senior Moderator


The difference is between what constitutes foolishness/stupidity and what constitutes a calculated risk.

Today I went cave diving and before taking my rebreather down into the cave (having carried everything else down a long way), oooops, I realised I left the tapperware box with the rebreather Secondary pPO2 monitoring system + the Dive Computer + the Bottom Timer in the garage.

After a bit of pondering, I chose NOT to dive rebreather on Primary only (that was a quick and easy decision), unclipped the rebreather from the sidemount harness/buoyancy system, and went diving, on scooter, sidemount, with no Dive Computer, and no Bottom Timer, in a cave (solo).

Went in 600 meters, then back out 400 meters, then back in 200 meters, then back out 200 meters, then recovered the jump line, then around and about here and there within 250 meters of the entrance, then went exploring a line the very last bit (leading to a small dry chamber) I never dared to follow before with the rebreather due to size/buoyancy considerations, and then got out (having had more fun than if I had done my otherwise planned exploration rebreather dive for the day).

That was a calculated risk. The cave was known to me. The lines were known. The depths were known. The distances were known. I had trained before to handle a situation with no electronics whatsoever (i.e. total electronic failure). I had never done this actual dive this way before (without Dive Computer/Bottom Timer) and was wondering what could it be that I had not taken into account in my risk assessment, but it turned out that nothing occurred which had not been accounted for and contingencies planned for.

On the other end, to take your minor son who had no prior dive training whatsoever into a cave environment for which you as an adult had no formal training whatsoever, and had no way of knowing what to expect or what not to expect, and how to risk assess the environment, is pure stupidity/foolishness/death-wish (as in the specifics of this sad incident).

You just cannot make a calculated risk (and accept the risks) when you are completely ignorant of the risks you are facing (i.e lacking cave training, the Dad, and any training whatsoever, the son).

Instead, if you know the risks, then you can make a risk assessment (i.e. not being able to know depth/time in my case) and then based on that risk assessment make an informed decision in respect of the risk you are prepared to accept.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

this thread has been split off from a side discussion in the Accidents and Incidents forum as it is discussing a totally different dive from the actual incident. Marg, SB Senior Moderator


The difference is between what constitutes foolishness/stupidity and what constitutes a calculated risk.

unclipped the rebreather from the sidemount harness/buoyancy system, and went diving, on scooter, sidemount, with no Dive Computer, and no Bottom Timer, in a cave (solo).

Went in 600 meters, then back out 400 meters, then back in 200 meters, then back out 200 meters, then recovered the jump line, then around and about here and there within 250 meters of the entrance, then went exploring a line the very last bit (leading to a small dry chamber) I never dared to follow before with the rebreather due to size/buoyancy considerations, and then got out (having had more fun than if I had done my otherwise planned exploration rebreather dive for the day).

That was a calculated risk. The cave was known to me. The lines were known. The depths were known. The distances were known. I had trained before to handle a situation with no electronics whatsoever (i.e. total electronic failure). I had never done this actual dive this way before (without Dive Computer/Bottom Timer) and was wondering what could it be that I had not taken into account in my risk assessment, but it turned out that nothing occurred which had not been accounted for and contingencies planned for.

You just cannot make a calculated risk (and accept the risks) when you are completely ignorant of the risks you are facing (i.e lacking cave training, the Dad, and any training whatsoever, the son).

Instead, if you know the risks, then you can make a risk assessment (i.e. not being able to know depth/time in my case) and then based on that risk assessment make an informed decision in respect of the risk you are prepared to accept.

And you had a total distance of around 4800' on a scooter, solo and without a bottom timer or computer? I really don't know any of cave divers that would think that was a calculated risk. A foolish or stupid decision? Yes, but not a calculated risk. Please explain your "calculations." I bet the father and son felt that they had made a good calculated risk.
I just thought of this. I think that everyone should try and think, "if I were to die doing this what would be posted about my dive." I will almost be 100% sure that everyone would agree, when they pulled your body out, that not wearing a bottom timer or computer was as stupid decision as one could make! Bottom timer, watch, computer is OW 101! Thanks for posting something that hundreds will read and it might make them feel better about their piss poor decisions! At your level of diving you should be the one to mentor and foster better and safer diving habits!
You may not like my words but the truth hurts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And you had a total distance of around 4800' on a scooter, solo and without a bottom timer or computer? I really don't know any of cave divers that would think that was a calculated risk. A foolish or stupid decision? Yes, but not a calculated risk. Please explain your "calculations." I bet the father and son felt that they had made a good calculated risk.
I just thought of this. I think that everyone should try and think, "if I were to die doing this what would be posted about my dive." I will almost be 100% sure that everyone would agree, when they pulled your body out, that not wearing a bottom timer or computer was as stupid decision as one could make! Bottom timer, watch, computer is OW 101! Thanks for posting something that hundreds will read and it might make them feel better about their piss poor decisions! At your level of diving you should be the one to mentor and foster better and safer diving habits!
You may not like my words but the truth hurts.

Maybe we can discuss on a separate thread and I can learn something from you as to why exactly it was a "piss poor decision?"

If you know depth and distance already (all the lines and tie-ups mark this permanently in a cave) and the time to cover it on scooter and by simple finning (there is cave lines and waypoints and have done the same tour about 400 times...), my risk assessment was that it was doable and a good training opportunity and at no point felt like calling the dive.

Easy, peasy!
 
Maybe we can discuss on a separate thread and I can learn something from you as to why exactly it was a "piss poor decision?"

If you know depth and distance already (all the lines and tie-ups mark this permanently in a cave) and the time to cover it on scooter and by simple finning (there is cave lines and waypoints and have done the same tour about 400 times...), my risk assessment was that it was doable and a good training opportunity and at no point felt like calling the dive.

Easy, peasy!

I see what you are saying, you took a calculated risk in a familiar cave. Part of the result of calculated plan is what others perceive to be safe or unsafe. While I am not Cave or GUE I do know that what you did goes against doctrine. You will be judged and criticized by anyone who reads this. Its part of the world of diving. We all strive to be the safest we can and look at the safety of others. While I do not condone what you did, I will say I am impressed at your skill to do what you did without incident. But if I were diving with you and the same circumstances arose I would strongly oppose and abort the dive. There is always another day to dive.

What Tony said makes us all nod our head in agreement. Your posting of your calculated risk poses a bad example for divers of varying levels of experience. Many use this board for guidance in their quest to be better divers. Set good examples and be a leader not monger.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
 
I see what you are saying, you took a calculated risk in a familiar cave. Part of the result of calculated plan is what others perceive to be safe or unsafe. While I am not Cave or GUE I do know that what you did goes against doctrine. You will be judged and criticized by anyone who reads this. Its part of the world of diving. We all strive to be the safest we can and look at the safety of others. While I do not condone what you did, I will say I am impressed at your skill to do what you did without incident. But if I were diving with you and the same circumstances arose I would strongly oppose and abort the dive. There is always another day to dive.

What Tony said makes us all nod our head in agreement. Your posting of your calculated risk poses a bad example for divers of varying levels of experience. Many use this board for guidance in their quest to be better divers. Set good examples and be a leader not monger.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

Scuba 101 rules broken, but cave diving is outside the realm of Scuba 101 and cave diving is the exception to the rules (some rules, on occasion).

Something all can understand first:

1. If you mark accurately a line on the surface every 3 meters for 30 meters, and hang the line with a weight linearly from the surface, those markings will be more accurate than any dive computer. Notably, you may have a dive computer failure and at 30 meters marked on the line the dive computer may read anything other than 30 meters. I have had 2 tech dive computers read 200 meters depth at the surface.
2. Same line, if you count "1001, 1002" and place one fist above the other ascending, that may give you a better estimate of your ascent rate than your dive computer and where there is significant discrepancy between the dive computer and the manual method (i.e. 1001, 1002 going from one knot to the other each at 3 meter distance...), the manual method is likely to be more reliable (having said that depth sensors tend to fail more often that the timer/clock element in the dive computer).
3. Same concept, imagine the line entering a tunnel 250 meters long (a simplified version of a cave) where the topographical map you have tells you it is 250 meters long and at the end the depth is 10 meters. If when you get to the end you read 50 meters depth on your dive computer, and 200 minutes, when normally finning it has always taken you 15 minutes and the depth has always been in accordance to the cave topography 10 meters, which do you trust - the dive computer or the line?

That is why a line calibrated at the surface and a tried and tested topographical cave map in my risk assessment takes precedence (i.e. I deem it a more accurate tool in determining my depth and location) than a dive computer.

Same thing for an ascent. An ascent line correctly calibrated/marked at the surface and properly placed/weighted, I deem more reliable than any dive computer.

Clearly I do not advocate diving without a dive computer, but where you have a marked and calibrated line, I'd go by the line markings and not by the electronics.

Hope this makes a little more sense for those who come from Scuba 101 class.

So, to transpose this to this specific incident, if say there were a marked line stating 30 meters depth/100 meters linear penetration in the Eagle Nest cave, then maybe, just maybe, if the Dad and son were cave trained, even without looking at their dive computer, provided they had followed the line, they would have known they were 100 meters linear distance inside the cave and at 30 meters depth (depth is generally not marked on a cave line, but distance is, and depth would have to be taken from a reliable/good cave topographical map).
 
I see what you are saying, you took a calculated risk in a familiar cave. Part of the result of calculated plan is what others perceive to be safe or unsafe. While I am not Cave or GUE I do know that what you did goes against doctrine. You will be judged and criticized by anyone who reads this. Its part of the world of diving. We all strive to be the safest we can and look at the safety of others. While I do not condone what you did, I will say I am impressed at your skill to do what you did without incident. But if I were diving with you and the same circumstances arose I would strongly oppose and abort the dive. There is always another day to dive.

What Tony said makes us all nod our head in agreement. Your posting of your calculated risk poses a bad example for divers of varying levels of experience. Many use this board for guidance in their quest to be better divers. Set good examples and be a leader not monger.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

I do not agree with you or Tony. Gianaameri is talking about doing a solo dive that he felt he had the training, experience, and equipment to do. He had the knowledge to plan the dive and used that knowledge effectively. I can find no fault in what he did. I will do any dive solo that I would do with a buddy. That includes wreck penetration and deco.

There are those of us who don't see risk the same way that strictly recreational divers and instructors do. Cave or GUE has nothing to do with knowing ones limits and limitations and deciding what is ok for us and what is not. I don't feel he is setting a bad example. In fact I'd say the way he approached the dive he did was a good example of what to do.
 
Scuba 101 rules broken, but cave diving is outside the realm of Scuba 101 and cave diving is the exception to the rules (some rules, on occasion).

Something all can understand first:

1. If you mark accurately a line on the surface every 3 meters for 30 meters, and hang the line with a weight linearly from the surface, those markings will be more accurate than any dive computer. Notably, you may have a dive computer failure and at 30 meters marked on the line the dive computer may read anything other than 30 meters. I have had 2 tech dive computers read 200 meters depth at the surface.
2. Same line, if you count "1001, 1002" and place one fist above the other ascending, that may give you a better estimate of your ascent rate than your dive computer and where there is significant discrepancy between the dive computer and the manual method (i.e. 1001, 1002 going from one knot to the other each at 3 meter distance...), the manual method is likely to be more reliable (having said that depth sensors tend to fail more often that the timer/clock element in the dive computer).
3. Same concept, imagine the line entering a tunnel 250 meters long (a simplified version of a cave) where the topographical map you have tells you it is 250 meters long and at the end the depth is 10 meters. If when you get to the end you read 50 meters depth on your dive computer, and 200 minutes, when normally finning it has always taken you 15 minutes and the depth has always been in accordance to the cave topography 10 meters, which do you trust - the dive computer or the line?

That is why a line calibrated at the surface and a tried and tested topographical cave map in my risk assessment takes precedence (i.e. I deem it a more accurate tool in determining my depth and location) than a dive computer.

Same thing for an ascent. An ascent line correctly calibrated/marked at the surface and properly placed/weighted, I deem more reliable than any dive computer.

Clearly I do not advocate diving without a dive computer, but where you have a marked and calibrated line, I'd go by the line markings and not by the electronics.

Hope this makes a little more sense for those who come from Scuba 101 class.

So, to transpose this to this specific incident, if say there were a marked line stating 30 meters depth/100 meters linear penetration in the Eagle Nest cave, then maybe, just maybe, if the Dad and son were cave trained, even without looking at their dive computer, provided they had followed the line, they would have known they were 100 meters linear distance inside the cave and at 30 meters depth (depth is generally not marked on a cave line, but distance is, and depth would have to be taken from a reliable/good cave topographical map).

1) Cave diving is not outside the "realm of scuba 101" but an addition to the basic rules. No one has ever said, "those rules are useless in the caves except for a snorkle." So with your mind set you knew that your scooter would not breakdown? You also talked about, "then went exploring a line the very last bit (leading to a small dry chamber) I never dared to follow before with the rebreather due to size/buoyancy considerations." So you did not know the line. Right?

2) There are no depth markings on any cave line I have ever seen. Care to explain or please tell us what cave you were in?

3) Good question as to the line and the computer reading different depths. As for me, I will verify the depth with my backup computer. Which I always carrie. Sorry to inform you but your mind cannot be more acturate than a computer or depth guage and no training group will ever tell you to dive without either. If you don't think that your mind is less acurate, asked anyone with a few hundred dives about the times that they thought the right direction was this way but the compass said differently. Why do you think that pilots learn instruments only training? Your mind and eyes will fool you sometimes.

---------- Post added January 4th, 2014 at 05:05 PM ----------

I do not agree with you or Tony. Gianaameri is talking about doing a solo dive that he felt he had the training, experience, and equipment to do. He had the knowledge to plan the dive and used that knowledge effectively. I can find no fault in what he did. I will do any dive solo that I would do with a buddy. That includes wreck penetration and deco.

There are those of us who don't see risk the same way that strictly recreational divers and instructors do. Cave or GUE has nothing to do with knowing ones limits and limitations and deciding what is ok for us and what is not. I don't feel he is setting a bad example. In fact I'd say the way he approached the dive he did was a good example of what to do.


OK, I'll play. I agree with you that there is no dive that I will not do solo...I am trained for for self efficancy and I do not rely upon a buddy to save my butt. So, as I have in the past, showed up at a dive site and buddy could not make it. Do I call the dive? No. Now, if I show up at a dive site and my gear is not there or or broken beyond field repair...I walk away from the dive. It really is that simple. There was really no dive plan in the case stated above.
 
I wonder if the father was a regular here on ScubaBoard or DecoStop? If he was only OW certified where did he learn how to rig doubles and dive caves? It wasn't through his Basic OW class.

I hope anyone Reading this does not find your cave, jump in and use your dive plan WITHOUT PROPER TRAINING.

What I'm saying Jim is that some new diver with craigslist gear and 4 checkout dives under their belt may look at this and say 'yeah I can do that".

No they can't.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

I can't say I find gianaameri's approach to that dive safe. I would be greatly surprised if he was indeed capable of maintaining a reliable pace in case some problem occurred (DPV failure, silt out, entanglement). However, he was not proposing this method to be used by beginners. In fact, it is applicable solely by people who should have enough training and common sense to decide for themselves what is safe or not.

Now, is it dangerous to publicly distribute this information? Well, consider that Caverns Measureless to Man has been available for far longer, describes practices much more risky, and nobody thinks that it is a public hazard.
 
I can't say I find gianaameri's approach to that dive safe. I would be greatly surprised if he was indeed capable of maintaining a reliable pace in case some problem occurred (DPV failure, silt out, entanglement). However, he was not proposing this method to be used by beginners. In fact, it is applicable solely by people who should have enough training and common sense to decide for themselves what is safe or not.

Now, is it dangerous to publicly distribute this information? Well, consider that Caverns Measureless to Man has been available for far longer, describes practices much more risky, and nobody thinks that it is a public hazard.

Yes we as a community do think that it was a public hazard and we have learned so much from the risk that were taken. The book, "Basic Cave Diving: A Blueprint for Survival," is a better choice. Sheck has longed passed away and we need to learn from his explorations and his mistakes. Just like this forum.
 
Yes we as a community do think that it was a public hazard and we have learned so much from the risk that were taken. The book, "Basic Cave Diving: A Blueprint for Survival," is a better choice. Sheck has longed passed away and we need to learn from his explorations and his mistakes. Just like this forum.

I am not sure what you are saying that is a hazard. If you refer to the way he used to dive, there is no argument here. That is why I chose that book as an example. If you mean the book itself, I have to disagree. As you yourself imply, Exley recognized that and published other books, such as the "Blueprint for Survival", to try and set good examples. It doesn't mean people shouldn't know the mistakes he and others have committed, and the risks they took, to formulate the rules followed nowadays.
 
Last edited:
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/
http://cavediveflorida.com/Rum_House.htm

Back
Top Bottom