Should I go back to traditional reg set-up? (vs. primary donate)

[rjack321]

If a person maintains and checks their octo in a standard set up it shouldn’t have any seaweed sand mud or junk in it anyway. A bungees octo that never gets used could be the same way. Everyone is supposed to check their gear before every dive anyway.

There are more octos dragging around on coral & sand than secured.
As the OOA diver I don't want some regulator you may or may not have checked 30mins ago on the surface and forgot about. I want the only regulator that was verified not to have crap in it and was working 1 breath ago - the one in your mouth.

 

[UTscuba]

I view the decision to use primary donate or traditional set-up to be a very close decision for a rec diver,

I've always been of the opinion that primary versus secondary donation is rarely the decision of the guy who has air.

The out of air diver is not going to sit there politely asking for a reg with delicate sequence of hand signals, they're probably just going to snatch the first reg they can see working, and that's most likely to be your primary.

All other considerations are moot.

 

[formernuke]

I've always been of the opinion that primary versus secondary donation is rarely the decision of the guy who has air.

The out of air diver is not going to sit there politely asking for a reg with delicate sequence of hand signals, they're probably just going to snatch the first reg they can see working, and that's most likely to be your primary.

All other considerations are moot

This did not happen to me.... a guy I used to dive with told me he was solo diving from a boat. There were other divers on the boat who had buddies. While doing the dive one of the others ran out of air and went to the closest bubbles my friend, and ripped the reg out of mouth in panic, my friend grabbed his pony reg, the panicked diver having trying to breathe without clearing the primary was still panicking and ripped that out too.....

Being able to reach your breathing device quickly while trying to deal with a panicked diver results in you staying cool and dealing with the situation which results in no one showing up on the news rather than two deaths.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

There are more octos dragging around on coral & sand than secured.
As the OOA diver I don't want some regulator you may or may not have checked 30mins ago on the surface and forgot about. I want the only regulator that was verified not to have crap in it and was working 1 breath ago - the one in your mouth.

I’m a bungeed second long hose diver myself for the time being.
My argument is that if the octo is secured properly, kept clean, checked before the dive, etc. it should be fine. in other words if the diver does what they’re supposed to do and hopefully were trained to do the right thing then it shouldn’t be a problem. There are way more standard setups being used in the world than long hose set ups.
The diver that owns the setup should be the one comfortable with the configuration. If the recipient is not ok with an octo then get another buddy. You have no business telling another diver to change their configuration just to suit you..

 

[UTscuba]

This did not happen to me.... a guy I used to dive with told me he was solo diving from a boat. There were other divers on the boat who had buddies. While doing the dive one of the others ran out of air and went to the closest bubbles my friend, and ripped the reg out of mouth in panic, my friend grabbed his pony reg, the panicked diver having trying to breathe without clearing the primary was still panicking and ripped that out too.....

Being able to reach your breathing device quickly while trying to deal with a panicked diver results in you staying cool and dealing with the situation which results in no one showing up on the news rather than two deaths.

oh boy... now I'm going to go sidemounted WITH a pony

and a spare air

and snuba

 

[ScubaWithTurk]

Reminds me of when I did I refresher course because I had out of water for a while. I told them I dove long hose with necklace and would change just for a refresher, they said that was fine. The instructor had me do the take out the second stage throw over shoulder and retreive.....

What did I do removed second stage, tossed over shoulder, popped my necklace into my mouth and retrieved my primary.

When we came back up the instructor said "that was not what was briefed, you cheated......but you pass because you 1. Showed me you you know your setup, 2. You did it in the safest way possible."

This is a bit off topic but that skill has always bothered me. I have two working regulators. One is ripped from my mouth. Why would we not put the second one in and THEN find the other one? Why do we tell divers to never hold their breath but then put them in a position where they may do just that? My students will ALWAYS switch to a working reg before finding the lost one.

Good job on doing what you knew worked best and congrats to the instructor for not failing you or forcing you to do it over the way they told you.

 

[wstorms]

Yes I understand that Im considering a risk that has a TINY CHANCE of arising. The problem with your equation above is that you take the smallest component of that risk -- that someone will actually need to donate (1/10,000), and only consider it for one of the options.

That tiny risk (1/10,000) - that someone will need to donate a reg - is the same for either options, primary donate or traditional set-up. So logically, we would need to remove it from your equation above.

As I said throughout, we are all weighing a TINY RISK either way. If the need ever arises to donate a reg, in that small, not very likely circumstance (for both options), would me/my buddy prefer a reg that is:
a) confidently secured in my mouth/ below my chin, but may have my spit on it; or
b) possibly on my hip, possibly dangling, but doesnt have my immediate spit on it.

That, to me, is a very close question,

Even if you take the OoA scenario and that your buddy has corona as given facts, the chance that the regulator is the single event that causes you to get infected is really small. You are more likely to get infected from helping the OoA diver at the surface, or from high fiving each other after surviving the event (yes I know you wouldn't knowingly, but fairly good chance your judgement might be less rational in the heat of the moment).

So IMHO, the answer to your original question is no. It is not worth it to change your setup for that particular chance alone, because the risk mitigation is not really relevant and introduces other risks on its own.
If you zoom out a bit more and take other potential infections, say something like a cold sore, into account, than yes, transitioning to alternate donate might be for you.

 

[BlueTrin]

Reminds me of when I did I refresher course because I had out of water for a while. I told them I dove long hose with necklace and would change just for a refresher, they said that was fine. The instructor had me do the take out the second stage throw over shoulder and retreive.....

What did I do removed second stage, tossed over shoulder, popped my necklace into my mouth and retrieved my primary.

When we came back up the instructor said "that was not what was briefed, you cheated......but you pass because you 1. Showed me you you know your setup, 2. You did it in the safest way possible."

I guess it’s not cheating if you retrieve your primary after getting your necklace in your mouth ?

You could still ‘tease’ him by just following the hose from the right side which is either under the belt or maintained by a retainer ...

 

[BlueTrin]

Yes I understand that Im considering a risk that has a TINY CHANCE of arising. The problem with your equation above is that you take the smallest component of that risk -- that someone will actually need to donate (1/10,000), and only consider it for one of the options.

That tiny risk (1/10,000) - that someone will need to donate a reg - is the same for either options, primary donate or traditional set-up. So logically, we would need to remove it from your equation above.

As I said throughout, we are all weighing a TINY RISK either way. If the need ever arises to donate a reg, in that small, not very likely circumstance (for both options), would me/my buddy prefer a reg that is:
a) confidently secured in my mouth/ below my chin, but may have my spit on it; or
b) possibly on my hip, possibly dangling, but doesnt have my immediate spit on it.

That, to me, is a very close question,

I think you don’t understand why people keep repeating the same thing.

The only statistic that is useful for me is whether it is worth changing.

This is simply computed as what is the cost/benefit of switching vs not switching.

Therefore all probabilities have to be taken in account.

Of course if you’ll frame it for the 0.0001% case you can make all sort of hypothetical scenarios ? Maybe you should sit by the door in a plane because it can crash ? Maybe you should stay in the bus by the exit door because it could have an accident ? Or maybe you should avoid the bus because there is no belt ?

What people keep telling you is that the gain insignificant in the scenario you have. Personally I would be more concerned about swapping regs during training than meeting a random OOA diver ... because I have taken the frequency of events in account.

Also have you considered that outside of training, if I have the long hose and I am donating then it is the person who takes it who is at risk rather than me ?

Once I am on the boat I can clean the reg for example or just skip the second dive ?

All of this being said, since you seem also very strongly opiniated, about this topic, you should switch. Just because you’ll feel better and that’s part of the cost/benefit analysis and that will make you happier.