Aspiring Solo Diver

[Colo Hippie]

Outstanding thread - and great responses.

I started solo diving when the wife ( my best and favorite dive buddy) did not want to dive as much as I did. I started low and slow and she would sit on the dock and watch my bubbles and I would stay close and shallow and progressed from there.

One thing that most of the previous posts allude to but don't say is SITUATIONAL AWARENESS both before and during the dive. If you are going to dive solo you need to know what is going on around you and that includes your gear.

Solo diving can be incredibly rewarding but can also be intimidating.

 

[NAM001]

gcbryan,

I like your post. Preticularly regarding the limits you have imposed on yourself. Solo diving IS a mind set, and in my opinion the most important aspect to this type of diving. Diving solo is not necessarily diving alone. I always dive solo even with others.

 

[lweatherall]

gcbryan,

I like your post. Preticularly regarding the limits you have imposed on yourself. Solo diving IS a mind set, and in my opinion the most important aspect to this type of diving. Diving solo is not necessarily diving alone. I always dive solo even with others.

The last sentence in note #32 pretty much sums it up for me also, "I always dive solo, even with others"...... THAT is pretty much why I'm going to get signed up for a Solo Diver class and get the card. I've had two solo dives in The Crater in UT (there was a class going on and that's why they let me in the water) and they were some of the most peaceful and enjoyable of my 200 dives (so far). Great thread and posts!

 

[davidbaraff]

To the original poster:
Obviously lots of great advice offered already.

I can add only one data point: my own. By SB standards, I'm still a pretty novice diver with only about 120+ dives. While not recommending what you do one way or the other, I can say that (in my opinion) even some fairly novice divers can safely do solo --- under the right conditions. In my case, they are extremely similar to what you're considering: I've solo dove Casino Pt. quite a number of times, as well as very shallow sites in Monterey (that I am well familar with, having dove them with groups already.) But I keep it shallow (40 ft), and I dive the most unaggressive, boring, way-in-the-middle of the safety envelope dives you could imagine. That's really the point of a solo dive like that --- zero stress, pure enjoyment.

And it's solo in the sense of being alone underwater -- on land there are people around, and when I surface, I also know there are people around (typically other members of my group if I'm in Monterey), or at Casino Pt., I could at least signal someone on land in the park (there's always someone around).

I didn't decide to do solo myself --- it was gently suggested by someone who was very familiar with my diving, and said they thought it was fine, and had me do it on a max 20' dive in Monterey, under excellent conditions. I was surprised as heck that it was suggested, but oh man --- the serenity of that one dive really hooked me. (The statement was that when you go lobster hunting at night: you're solo diving, effectively. So it's a good idea to learn to dive by yourself during the day --- if you can handle it.)

That said, even now for shallow 40' dives, I do them with a Spare Air, which I practice with at least twice a year in a pool, doing a drill. (Why bother if the depth is 40'? Because while I'm pretty sure I could do a CESA, if I needed to from 40', I would greatly prefer in that unfortunate event to take just 3-4 breaths of air on the way up and do it really, really slowly. I know for a fact that at 40', I've got at *least* 10 breaths on that device, in the worst case, even with a high stress level. At normal breathing rates its at least 20 from 40'.)

I'm also pretty careful with gear, so it enjoys a high level of maintenance: if I do any kind of servicing, into the pool I go for a 15 minute check to make sure it's like I like.

As long as you're not treating the solo dive as a place to push an envelopes (it's the time to be the most ultra-conservative you can), I don't think it's a ridiculous proposition even with less than 100 dives. But it really, really depends on how well you dive and what your mindset is.

 

[Tim R Alcoser JR]

To the original poster:
Obviously lots of great advice offered already.

I can add only one data point: my own. By SB standards, I'm still a pretty novice diver with only about 120+ dives. While not recommending what you do one way or the other, I can say that (in my opinion) even some fairly novice divers can safely do solo --- under the right conditions. In my case, they are extremely similar to what you're considering: I've solo dove Casino Pt. quite a number of times, as well as very shallow sites in Monterey (that I am well familar with, having dove them with groups already.) But I keep it shallow (40 ft), and I dive the most unaggressive, boring, way-in-the-middle of the safety envelope dives you could imagine. That's really the point of a solo dive like that --- zero stress, pure enjoyment.

And it's solo in the sense of being alone underwater -- on land there are people around, and when I surface, I also know there are people around (typically other members of my group if I'm in Monterey), or at Casino Pt., I could at least signal someone on land in the park (there's always someone around).

I didn't decide to do solo myself --- it was gently suggested by someone who was very familiar with my diving, and said they thought it was fine, and had me do it on a max 20' dive in Monterey, under excellent conditions. I was surprised as heck that it was suggested, but oh man --- the serenity of that one dive really hooked me. (The statement was that when you go lobster hunting at night: you're solo diving, effectively. So it's a good idea to learn to dive by yourself during the day --- if you can handle it.)

That said, even now for shallow 40' dives, I do them with a Spare Air, which I practice with at least twice a year in a pool, doing a drill. (Why bother if the depth is 40'? Because while I'm pretty sure I could do a CESA, if I needed to from 40', I would greatly prefer in that unfortunate event to take just 3-4 breaths of air on the way up and do it really, really slowly. I know for a fact that at 40', I've got at *least* 10 breaths on that device, in the worst case, even with a high stress level. At normal breathing rates its at least 20 from 40'.)

I'm also pretty careful with gear, so it enjoys a high level of maintenance: if I do any kind of servicing, into the pool I go for a 15 minute check to make sure it's like I like.

As long as you're not treating the solo dive as a place to push an envelopes (it's the time to be the most ultra-conservative you can), I don't think it's a ridiculous proposition even with less than 100 dives. But it really, really depends on how well you dive and what your mindset is.

I really love this post, and will take it to heart, like the other posts as well.

When the time comes, I plan on performing my first solo dives in the pool, doing basic skills solo such as mask clear, reg retrieval and CESA, before heading to 10-15 feet of water off of the Casino Point Dive Park.

 

[DevonDiver]

I can say that (in my opinion) even some fairly novice divers can safely do solo --- under the right conditions.... way-in-the-middle of the safety envelope dives you could imagine. That's really the point of a solo dive like that --- zero stress, pure enjoyment.

David, whilst diving 'safe conditions' is the right attitude, it should not be to the exclusion of preparing for the worst conditions. As I mentioned in my first post, diving on the basis of "everything will be ok" is self-deceptive... and not an effective way to mitigate risk.

Risks are mitigated by equipment, training, mindset and experience (particularly in respect to stress/panic control).

Risks are not mitigated by 'avoidance'. To think otherwise is to dive purely in the assumption that your luck will hold out indefinitely.

And it's solo in the sense of being alone underwater

Which is where you are quite likely to die, should an issue arise. Again... unless you have gills...

...on land there are people around, and [-]when[/-] if I surface,

Edited to reflect a vast array of issues, that could impact on a solo diver.

I also know there are people around (typically other members of my group if I'm in Monterey), or at Casino Pt., I could at least signal someone on land in the park (there's always someone around).

That's not an assumption that I'd personally rely on. Firstly, without dedicated/trustworthy surface support, there is no guarantee that anyone would be there. Even if you were reasonably sure that there would be 'someone', you have no guarantee that they would be competent to assist you - or even bother to act in your assistance.

As long as you're not treating the solo dive as a place to push an envelopes (it's the time to be the most ultra-conservative you can), I don't think it's a ridiculous proposition even with less than 100 dives. But it really, really depends on how well you dive and what your mindset is.

Personally, I see this as a statement that reflects the mindset of a diver for whom nothing has [yet] gone wrong - positive reinforcement through lack of negative stimulus. It's common with low-intermediate experience divers, who've spent enough time underwater to develop high confidence, but not sufficient time underwater to have yet encountered Murphy and had cause to re-evaluate their confidence in that light.

With less than 100 dives, it is highly likely that you've not [yet] encountered a 'worst case scenario'. Therefore, all risk assessments and analysis of personal competence are skewed towards pre-existing understanding of performance in the 'best case scenario'.

Divers don't die unless something goes wrong... so making decisions based upon the 'best case scenario' is ultimately flawed.

Just my opinion... having done enough dives to meet Murphy a few times...

 

[drbill]

Hmmm, I thought I had already posted here but a quick glance through the pages suggests otherwise.

Although I've dived solo since my very first descent 50 years ago, I never suggest solo diving to anyone I haven't had a fair bit of experience observing underwater and know their reaction to emergency situations. Since I rarely dive with a buddy, that means I don't suggest it to anyone.

A person can have all the proper equipment including great redundancy, but end up dead because of one thing that many people never know until it happens... how they respond to emergencies. If you panic, all the equipment in the world may not save you.

Although I've only had a very few emergency incidents in my diving career, I have learned that I don't panic but seem to approach them with a reasonably clear head. So far that has allowed me to extricate myself from a few serious situations... so far.

 

[davidbaraff]

Devon: far be it from me to argue with someone whose experience exceeds mine by a factor of, er, 20x or so...

... but not too far.

I don't understand what you're referring to when you say: "Risks are not mitigated by 'avoidance'." What do you see that I am avoiding? Or what should I be preparing for that I am not preparing for?

You also say: With less than 100 dives, (well, it's more than 100, but compared with 2500, who's counting -- I take concede your point) it is highly likely that you've not [yet] encountered a 'worst case scenario'. Therefore, all risk assessments and analysis of personal competence are skewed towards pre-existing understanding of performance in the 'best case scenario'.

So I have to ask: in the conditions that I mention, in your lifetime of diving: what are 2 or 3 specific things that have occurred to you personally, where if you were diving like I am diving, and with my level of experience, might do me in? I'm not talking hypotheticals: i'm asking for specific things that have really occurred. Conditions being less than 40', daylight, a dive sight you are familiar with, no currents, close to land, well rested, etc. Assume that weighting is good, all that sort of stuff.

I am not challenging your assertions: I am asking for incidents that have truly occurred so I can think more about this.

 

[DevonDiver]

I don't understand what you're referring to when you say: "Risks are not mitigated by 'avoidance'." What do you see that I am avoiding? Or what should I be preparing for that I am not preparing for?

For me, it is comments like "I dive only where it is safe", or "I won't dive where there is risk of entanglement" - that show avoidance, rather than mitigation.

Don't get me wrong... avoidance is crucial.... but mitigation still needs to exist.

As an example, you don't assure safety by 'avoiding entanglement' - the bottom line is that safety is assured by possessing training, equipment and psychological robustness to 'deal with entanglements'

The same is true for another multitude of issues that you could otherwise convince yourself 'are not going to happen' due to prior diligence, preparation and conservative approach to your diving. For instance, equipment malfunction cannot be avoided by proper maintenance.... access to the surface is not 'guaranteed' by remaining within comfortable CESA depths.

As mentioned, sometimes Murphy dives at your shoulder and (as they say in the military); "no plan survives contact with the enemy". This mindset is determined by whether the diver enters the water in the assumption that nothing is going to go wrong, or whether they assume that - sooner or later - they will encounter an emergency. It is further determined by whether they assume that the emergency will be simple and stress-free to deal with, or whether it may require specific response, problem-solving, adaptation and, most importantly, an ability to retain psychological composure.

Another issue is the 'accident chain'. Most divers prepare for (and evaluate their capability against) a single, isolated incident. When you read accident reports, you notice that there is rarely a 'single issue' that killed someone - there tends to be either simultaneous incidents or a progression/flow of back-to-back issues that ultimately lead to the disaster.

Start putting issues together and what you need to prepare for expands exponentially.... as does the psychological stress created and the importance of problem-solving rather than resolution via a simple procedure.

One of the big differences between recreational diving courses and technical (and solo) courses is that recreational diving training rarely, if ever, presents a student with multiple simultaneous failures/issues. Recreational divers are taught to deal with an isolated problems, with a specific resolution/procedure. Nobody ever claimed that recreational diving courses were absolutely comprehensive - they are simple and uncomplicated (in recognition of buddy support being available). In contrast, Tech/Solo training tends to emphasize the possibility of concurrent failures/issues - and, in doing so, raises the bar considerably... in the acceptance that a real emergency is often anything but 'simple and uncomplicated'.

Murphy's Law is a law of probability. Some divers dismiss probability and are content to dive in the assumption that 1/10,000 is inconsequential. Others choose to respect that potential, and guard against it. Acceptance of risk versus mitigation of risk. When people die on scuba, it is usually that 1/10,000 occurrence.

Diving solo merely serves to shorten those odds - because it decreases the chance of outside intervention, which is a factor that has, and will, ensure that many otherwise fatal situations have/can be resolved prematurely.

in the conditions that I mention, in your lifetime of diving: what are 2 or 3 specific things that have occurred to you personally, where if you were diving like I am diving, and with my level of experience, might do me in? I'm not talking hypotheticals: i'm asking for specific things that have really occurred. Conditions being less than 40', daylight, a dive sight you are familiar with, no currents, close to land, well rested, etc. Assume that weighting is good, all that sort of stuff.

From my personal experience - non-hypothetical:

1. Hypothermia: A qualified diver died in my hometown due to hypothermia on a shallow, benign dive in temperate water (UK springtime). The onset of hypothermia wasn't noticed/realized and mental acuity decreased, further preventing an appropriate resolution. Eventually the diver passed unconscious and drowned.

2. Venomous Sting: I was stung by a stonefish, which had a rapid and debilitating impact on my capability. Luckily, I wasn't solo diving at the time and was directly under the dive boat when it occurred. If I had been solo diving, some distance from shore, then I would predict that my decreased capability would have significantly jeopardized my survival - the pain was overwhelming and utterly distracting... to the extent that I seriously doubt my ability to deal with anything else that might have gone wrong. If you dive where you might encounter stonefish, lionfish, jellyfish, fire-coral, etc etc etc, then this remains an issue to be considered.

3. Non-Diving Related Health Issues: People die of heart attacks all the time - and there is good debate about whether chance of survival would be increased by having a buddy, or not, should such an event occur underwater. However, over the years I've experienced less radical health issues on dives - everything from severe double-leg cramps, to respiratory distress (inhalation of water spray etc), to reverse blocks on ascent, to vertigo, to........... All of those issues, and hundreds of other potentials, have the capacity to degrade your performance to a critical level - even more so, all of those (especially when combined with any other issue that may arise) have the ability to create a panic state.

Again, be wary of isolating factors - it's easy to discount a 'minor' risk if it is considered in isolation. Accidents tend to happen where multiple 'minor' factors coincide (or failure to resolve one, creates multiple others) - rather than a single, easily identifiable, 'catastrophic' risk.

I never suggest solo diving to anyone I haven't had a fair bit of experience observing underwater and know their reaction to emergency situations. Since I rarely dive with a buddy, that means I don't suggest it to anyone.

As an instructor (particularly from teaching technical level courses), I get to witness 'breaking strain' on a semi-frequent basis. It's not uncommon for a technical diving student to experience 'melt-down' when tasked with multiple failures, under ambient, simulated conditions. I experienced it myself when first venturing onto a tech course - I'm sure that the other technical divers on this forum would claim similar experiences - all of whom had significant experience and confidence when embarking on that training (I was a DM, 8 years/300+ dives experience).

Solo diving courses (in design/syllabus) draw heavily from technical diving programs - especially in regards to situational awareness, task-loading and assessment of psychological response. For that reason, if no other, their value is undeniable. A good solo diving instructor should be pushing a student towards melt-down, albeit through simulated issues, so that the student gains a realistic appreciation of their physical and mental tolerances.

It's all to easy to let our egos hypothesize about our tolerances and capabilities. It's better to know for sure.

A person can have all the proper equipment including great redundancy, but end up dead because of one thing that many people never know until it happens... how they respond to emergencies. If you panic, all the equipment in the world may not save you.

Absolutely. This is the crux issue, regards 'experience'... and where I believe that 'not all experience is equal'. Positive reinforcement through a lack of negative stimulus teaches us nothing in that respect.

Although I've only had a very few emergency incidents in my diving career, I have learned that I don't panic but seem to approach them with a reasonably clear head. So far that has allowed me to extricate myself from a few serious situations... so far.

I share that experience - I believe that my panic threshold is quite well developed. I retain 'functionality' through absolute/tested (not hypothetical) knowledge of my own capabilities. Put simply, I know what I can survive, what I might survive and what I won't survive. For as long as that remains true, I am not prone to panic.

I believe that everyone has a threshold - determined by personal attributes and also by confidence born through experience and training. I don't know where my threshold lies - but I suspect that there would come a time where no options appeared to exist - and I would lose functionality. To me, that is the moment of "you are screwed" realization.

Increased capability - and proven confidence in that capability - helps to defer that moment, but every diver has a breaking point, where skill, experience, confidence and equipment is not sufficient to give them a resolution.

As a solo diver, you should be assured that the 'moment of that realization' is deferred beyond anything likely to occur on the dives you do. Such assurance is not gained through hypothetical assumptions about either capability or risk.

 

[davidbaraff]

Thank you for the specifics. I understand what you are saying. (And while I might have focused my remarks on avoidance, I'm equally focused about thinking what I can do to prepare for things. Kelp? Keep aware of that overhead environment, and don't surface into it... Ascending? are you listening for that boat? etc.)

I get that it's not one thing: most of the accidents turn out to be a completely absurd chain of things bundled together until at all breaks. I do keep in mind, at all times, the accident chain: (and I read the accidents/incidents section of this board all the time, to learn things and constantly think "what if"). You have to be aware of it, to break it, no doubt. (If you've ever read an account of Chernobyl, you realize how truly remarkable that disaster was: it was if someone had a well-thought out plan to get down a chain of 10-20 steps to cause a meltdown, any one of which could have halted the disaster, or severely mitigated it...)

I have to say, the incident which resonates the most is #2 (being stung). But you did cheat slightly: I said what has happened to *you*: you did not experience hypothermia, yourself. I am curious to know if you imagine that *you* could have this as a danger, diving in conditions like Monterey or Casino Park, for yourself?

I was actually thinking you would relay some catastropic equipment failure that was a severe danger at 40'. I'm sure these things happen: but has it happened to you in 2500 or so dives? (Not a challenge, a question.)

Like I said, I am really curious to know what things are likely to happen, if you keep at diving long enough.

As for medicals, I can't argue with that. Sadly, I know two people who died (likely) from medicals, while diving --- neither solo.

Well, the point is moot, for me, for a while: my next couple of dive trips, certainly all the way through October, are almost certainly going to be nothing but buddy diving, as it turns out.

Mr. Alcoser, if you're reading this far: take my remarks, put them on a scale with one pound, put Devon's remarks on the other side with a weight of about 100 pounds, and make your own decisions from there.