Aborting A Dive...

[Reku]

I apologize for taking this way past "basic scuba discussion".

 

[Storker]

I apologize for taking this way past "basic scuba discussion".

So let me try to pull it back towards "Basic"

You don't die if one torch fails theres often a combination of events, one torch fail out of 9 is not a life threatening issue

Quite. However, any proper safety protocol follows the "swiss cheese" principle. When you realize that all safety measures have "holes", it's only common sense to use several layers of safety measures. If you try your best to not have those holes lining up, you have a decent chance of making it through without adverse consequences. It applies to diving as much as it applies to gun safety or workplace safety. If one of those layers fail, you are less certain that all holes are covered, and you need to take proper action (i.e. resolve the issue or quit whatever you're doing in a controlled manner).

In a high-risk sport like cave diving, it's apparently proper protocol that if anything is not quite right, you either fix it or you abort the dive. In normal OW diving, a single light failing when each diver has three seems like overkill. It's not that far removed from OW night diving, though: Each diver should have minimum two lights, and if one light fails it's thumb time. I follow that protocol myself when I'm night diving.

BSAC introduced the concept of the incident pit. Every failure takes you closer to the deep end of the pit and to the steep walls of the pit. To avoid the incident pit, you should fully resolve any issue before continuing the dive. That's a universal principle that applies as much to a simple reef bimble as to cave diving a kilometer inside the rock

 

[Neilwood]

So let me try to pull it back towards "Basic"


Quite. However, any proper safety protocol follows the "swiss cheese" principle. When you realize that all safety measures have "holes", it's only common sense to use several layers of safety measures. If you try your best to not have those holes lining up, you have a decent chance of making it through without adverse consequences. It applies to diving as much as it applies to gun safety or workplace safety. If one of those layers fail, you are less certain that all holes are covered, and you need to take proper action (i.e. resolve the issue or quit whatever you're doing in a controlled manner).

In a high-risk sport like cave diving, it's apparently proper protocol that if anything is not quite right, you either fix it or you abort the dive. In normal OW diving, a single light failing when each diver has three seems like overkill. It's not that far removed from OW night diving, though: Each diver should have minimum two lights, and if one light fails it's thumb time. I follow that protocol myself when I'm night diving.

BSAC introduced the concept of the incident pit. Every failure takes you closer to the deep end of the pit and to the steep walls of the pit. To avoid the incident pit, you should fully resolve any issue before continuing the dive. That's a universal principle that applies as much to a simple reef bimble as to cave diving a kilometer inside the rock

I like the concept of this - it gives people quite a good mental reference for how things can get bad. The other that I like is the cone of safety

 

[lermontov]

I like the concept of this - it gives people quite a good mental reference for how things can get bad. The other that I like is the cone of safety

this is a very good thread worth a read