Bolting to the surface...

[dytis-sm]

I've met John Chatterton, like the man a lot, and respect his accomplishments. However, I do not agree with his premise that solo diving is the answer to poor buddy skills. Better buddy skills are.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I originally thought that he promoted solo diving but when I read it again and thought about it, I do not think that this is what he meant. I think that some divers may rely on others for some of their deficiencies. When I was starting to dive, I couldn;t even put put my gear on without asking my buddy for help (and do not mean a buddy check)...

 

[redsky@night]

Fixed it for you.

Don't be so arrogant. Buddy or no buddy, you are responsible for your own gas management. It is good to buddy check but it is still his own fault.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I originally thought that he promoted solo diving but when I read it again and thought about it, I do not think that this is what he meant. I think that some divers may rely on others for some of their deficiencies. When I was starting to dive, I couldn;t even put put my gear on without asking my buddy for help (and do not mean a buddy check)...

I read the article. John's promoting a style of diving that works well for experienced divers in the conditions he likes to dive. Some of the things he said are so far from how I would choose to dive that I would probably not want to get in the water with someone who displayed that attitude, however experienced he might be. We just wouldn't be compatible ... and dive buddies need to be on the same page with respect to how they see their roles as dive buddies.

Buddy teams break down for a lot of reasons, but different habits and expectations are two very common ones. The whole notion of diving with a buddy is predicated on the concept of knowing what to expect of each other. Whatever choices you make, when those expectations aren't met, the buddy team breaks down.

I also believe there's a big difference between solo and self-reliance. Again, it boils down to expectations more than methodology. When I'm diving with a buddy, I may show up completely prepared to take care of myself in an emergency. And my buddy may do likewise. But I will still want to be familiar with all of my buddy's equipment, make sure we both are completely familiar with and committed to the dive plan, and are on the same page in terms of communication. If there's a problem, regardless of whether or not we can each handle ourselves, there WILL be an expectation that we're there to support each other. There WILL be an expectation that if my buddy comes to me for gas, I'll donate gas ... and vice versa. And there WILL be an expectation that if one of us has to end the dive, we BOTH end the dive.

Without that commitment, there's no point to having a buddy.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[RJP]

Don't be so arrogant. Buddy or no buddy, you are responsible for your own gas management. It is good to buddy check but it is still his own fault.

I didn't say the blame should be SHIFTED to the OP. If you want to split hairs, sure... the buddy is responsile for going OOA. The OP was responsible for making sure he didn't find out that was going to happen at the the same time the buddy did.

 

[The Chairman]

Afterall how do I know he has enough air for me?

Were you serious when you asked this? That's why I check my buddy's air as well as my own. I want to be sure that in case of a catastrophic gas failure that we both have enough gas to get both of us to the surface safely. This should be taught in every OW class and it is in mine.

Octo is fine, not sucking hard.

Then you use it and give him the one in your mouth. It's obvious that the one in your mouth is working just fine.

At the end please remember that this was not an OW class and part of the problem was assumptions that we were both "self-sufficient" to (a certain extent) as both being Rescue level certified...(and of course both failed).

Again, it's a good reason to make sure you both have enough air for a safe ascent. Don't make an assumption that can hurt either of you.

The whole point of being a buddy is to provide redundancy during the dive. An extra brain, an extra set of eyes, additional gas and alternative propulsion. if you can't or won't provide that, then you are just an SOB (Same Ocean Buddy). Only a SOB would allow their buddy to run out of air. Think about it. No one deserves an SOB on their dive. Do your best to avoid being one.

 

[Chatterton]

I like and respect you as well, Bob. However, I am not sure you fully understand my perspective?

Recreational diving is one thing. Deep diving, hard or soft overhead diving, or technical diving are all something else. Recreational divers jump in the water typically with a single regulator, single tank, with a primary and an "octopus" second stage regulator attached. In general, novice recreational divers are less likely to avoid problems, like being out of air, simply due to inexperience. So, reliance on the presence of a buddy, is not only acceptable, it makes total sense for a lot of reasons. This is also why it is important for them to acquire experience in shallow water, where they have the option of swimming directly to the surface. Any skill practice for recreational divers, is good, and will pay dividends. The answer to poor buddy skills, is more diving skill.

However, IMHO, when divers go deeper, enter into wrecks, conduct decompression dives, or conduct dives that require gas switches, then they need to take on greater responsibility for themselves, because the environment is far less forgiving. The buddy becomes less reliable in an emergency, due to the increase in inherent risks. I feel that technical divers can better utilize their time training to be self-reliant and responsible for themselves, than training to be dependent upon a buddy.

How might a diver train to be self more reliant, you ask? How about conducting thorough dive computer/gauge checks, and scrolling the menus? How about conducting valve checks, shutdowns, and switching from primary to the secondary regulators? How about conducting equipment checks, and assuring reels, SMB's, knives, lights, tools, and anything else the diver is carrying, are all accessible? How about doing bubble checks?

There is not anything I have mentioned here that I do not do pretty much religiously on every single dive. These are skills I can practice on the anchor line, swimming along, or prior to making a move like entering the wreck. It is easy. I work at being aware of my equipment, where everything is, and verifying that it is working. I know where I am relative to depth, time, and decompression obligation. When something goes wrong, I am ready to manage the problem. It is called situational awareness and it is not all that difficult to practice, whether you are diving with a buddy, or not?

Solo diving is something else, and it is not for everyone. It may be right for me on certain dives, but to tell you the truth I dive the same whether I have a buddy or not? I am self reliant, and responsible, and prepared to manage any potential problem, as though I was diving solo.

All solo divers need to be self reliant, but not all self reliant divers need to necessarily be diving solo. Self reliant, responsible divers are less likely to run into a problem because they have already run operational checks, but should there be a failure, which happens, then they are practiced at implementing the solution. That makes them less of a burden on a buddy, and more fun to dive with, IMHO!!

Cheers

 

[Ice Diver]

There seems to be two very distinct philosophies of diving here, one routed in self-reliance and independence the other in team work and cooperation. Personally i think the best philosophy to have and teach in diving, or any sport for that matter, would be a mindset that met right in the middle, someone who was self-reliant, confident in their ability to handle problems individually, but also recognize the advantages that Bob mentions of having a buddy, an extra set of eyes and two brains to help deal with sh1t storms when they arise. I dont understand why the two philosophies have to be mutually exclusive.

 

[TSandM]

Ice Diver, you nailed it.

Many people think the "team diving" approach implies that the individual diver cedes responsibility for his dive, or that he can execute the dive without proper skills, depending on the "team" to bail him out. Nothing could be farther from the truth! A team is only as strong as the weakest diver in it; anyone who trains through one of the team diving agencies is drilled and tested to a high degree of self-sufficiency AND responsibility. All the checks that John mentions are de rigeur, for example, prior to any GUE dive (perhaps honored in the breach on very minor recreational dives, but not on technical ones) but they are done as a team, so that each member knows that his companions have also checked everything and found it all to be good. And of course, this is only after the planning has been done -- as a team -- so that each diver is confident that the supplies available are adequate for the dive contemplated, and that plans are in place for reasonably foreseeable contingencies.

The two approaches are actually quite compatible.

This is relevant to the original post in that a solid plan which was adhered to would have avoided the problem in the first place, and regularly practiced emergency skills would possibly have prevented the endgame problem.

 

[redsky@night]

John, I read your book "Shadow Divers" and one of the major underlying themes and may even be a direct quote is "underwater problems need to be solved underwater". Another thing I took from the book is that the kinds of problems that you are going to encounter on the kinds of dives that you make aren't going to be solvable by a buddy so you truly are on your own. Personally, I don't want to be responsible for anyone else underwater unless it is a loved one. Otherwise I just assume managing my own diving.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

There seems to be two very distinct philosophies of diving here, one routed in self-reliance and independence the other in team work and cooperation. Personally i think the best philosophy to have and teach in diving, or any sport for that matter, would be a mindset that met right in the middle, someone who was self-reliant, confident in their ability to handle problems individually, but also recognize the advantages that Bob mentions of having a buddy, an extra set of eyes and two brains to help deal with sh1t storms when they arise. I dont understand why the two philosophies have to be mutually exclusive.

Excellent points ... and the two philosophies are certainly not mutually exclusive. Self-reliance isn't the same as solo, and doesn't preclude the adoption of good team skills. John makes that point in the post preceding yours as well when he said that solo divers need to be self-reliant but self-reliant divers need not be solo. There are some dives that lend themselves better than others to a team approach ... which isn't to suggest in any way a dependence on each other, but rather a stronger back-up plan should something go wrong. How desireable it is depends on what can go wrong.

An example might be the dive I've been looking forward to doing on Sunday ... which requires a significant scooter ride to reach the reef. My planned buddy told me the other day he has to bail ... and I haven't been able to line up another suitably experienced dive buddy. Normally in that situation I'd just go solo ... but not this dive. Currents can be too unpredictable, and if I got caught out there with a scooter failure, they could sweep me out to sea. Having a buddy in this case means having a backup plan of being towed in toward shore to get out of the current. Without that redundancy, I won't do the dive ... the current's just too unpredictable and the potential risks are ones I'm not willing to take.

Redundancy and contingency are not the same as dependence ... a good dive buddy can sometimes give you options you might not otherwise have at your disposal if you dive alone, no matter how well prepared you are ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)