Mr Chattertons Self Reliance Article...

[BlackPatch]

Hi all,

My names Pete and I am a new diver (Certified in August 2012). 6 open water with 22 deep tank. (I will get into the deep tank number a little later on) Reason 6, is down to the fact that I live in Alberta and don't get to the mountains very often because of a ridiculous work schedule. (Poor excuse I know)

I have read the "Who is responsible for what" Article by Jim Lapenta and I find myself in total agreeance with Jim as to the responsibilities of each individual.

Having just read John Chatterton's excellent article on Tech Diving and Self Reliance, I find myself very much in agreeance with John also.

A little bit about me:

I have been climbing for 16 years now, all sorts of different climbing, including Single pitch Traditional leading and Multipitch.
I have climbed Alpine style in Groups and as part of fast moving slab ascents in the middle of weather fronts. Mountaineering in the Alps and in Scotland both in the Summer and the Winter. I have free climbed in Wales on a few slab routes of long length and height.
I have bouldered in Fontainbleau and my on my beloved Gritstone Crags.

The reason I mention all of the above is that, just like Diving, Climbing is a Solitary Sport enjoyed in the company of others. (I say this because, even though you may have a belayer or spotter, depending on the climbing type, they cannot be relied upon to get you out of the position you have placed your self in or to save your life in the event of an emergency) that said, Climbing is also just as friendly.
Climbing (once again dependant on the type) is equipment and training intensive, you don't train, you lose the ability to rig systems quickly, effectively or safely. Example: Rigging "In The System" when you needed to be "Out of The System" purely down to not practising a skill set enough.

Back to Diving:
On the Open Water course I was instructed time and time again to "practice, practice, practice because no one is coming to get you". Familiarize your self with equipment until operation and placement become's part of the muscle memory pattern.You have to be able to get yourself out of the situation that has arisen, either as a result of your actions or through those that are outside your sphere of immediate control. Maintain a good buoyancy control.

So I took all of this information, with my newly found "AWESOME SET OF SKILLZ!" and ignored everything:

Example:
Diving in Jasper. Lake Annette. First time in Dry Bag. Trouble Equalizing. "I am doing this dive, no ****ing matter what " Attitude.
DM (A very good friend of mine) instructs me not to touch another diver under the water.
DM, with reservation (because I was Gung Ho, which he quickly sorted), leads me to the underwater Cairn. Skills review. Reg retrieval, BCD removal, entanglement drills, weight ditching, Mask clearance, Mask removal. Buddy breathing. Buddy tow, emergency buoyant ascent...ETC.

The only one I had an issue with is the mask removal, I rip the mask, cold water hits a previously warm space. Dive Reflex. I have a hood on and gloves. A little water goes down my nose. Breathing irregularly, mask back on, trouble sealing due to gloves and Hood. I get the bloody thing back on but cannot clear. At this point, my DM taps me on the head and assists. I put my hands in the air and surrender to the assistance. Although I was in a seriously uncomfortable position I never touched my DM. Just was not going to happen. The reason: I was so annoyed with requiring assistance. My thoughts had turned to "well, what if there was no one to help?" I realised, right then and there, I had broken every rule I had been taught.

My "AWESOME SET OF SKILLZ!" ego trip shuffled out of the door with a serious kick in the Ass.

At the end of the dive I felt very annoyed with my performance on the mask drills. Determined to do better I got my DM to show me, to give me constructive criticism as to points of improvement throughout the whole dive. I returned to Edmonton and got straight in the Pool and started ripping my mask off in every position first without a Hood on then with hood then with 7mm gloves. I got that problem nipped in the bud pretty quickly.

Along with organising my mask drills I worked on getting my buoyancy sorted along with differing propulsion techniques, V -Drills, S- Drills, Entanglements. etc,etc,
Now every-time I get into the pool I treat it as a training dive and practice every one of the skills taught on the OW and on my Stress and Rescue (if it is at all possible)

As John and Jim have both said, my DM was available for assistance, but was not there to save my ass. I had to do that.

As a new diver I was guilty of the following points (Plus many more probably)

Failing to correctly plan my dive and dive the plan.
Putting too much reliance on another human being.
Ill prepared, mentally and skill wise.

Now, when I dive I take planning exceptionally seriously.
I dive my plan and do not deviate from it.
My contingency plans are strictly adhered to and reviewed thoroughly with my buddy pre dive.
Even though I am in the company of another Human Being, in my head I plan the dive to include them, to help them if necessary , but I am always cognisant that I am the one who will get me out of trouble.

The reason for this post is, I think, that new divers believe a DM / DCS / Instructor is there , exclusively to save your ass and they are NOT. I read this quite a lot on ScubaBoard.

Is it a failing on the part of the training agencies ?
No I wouldn't say so. Purely because I am a new diver.

I think that people in general are "Coddled" in to a position of comfort and require that position of comfort in every part of life, so they place far too much reliance on another Human Being to assist when they should not, necessarily, have been in that position in the first place, either because they don't have the Mental drive for it or the Skill set or both.

I do not yet know which path I wish to travel down within the sphere of Diving, Technical Wrecks have always appealed for the physical size, historical aspect, Human essence and the commitment required. We will see. I am in control of my own Ego enough to say I am NO WHERE NEAR where I need to be to make those kinds of dives.

Once I am confident in my progressed abilities, possibly another 100 to 150 dives as an OW Diver, I will seek the critique of other Instructors so they can tell me exactly how I need to improve to get to where I wish to be within Diving.

Take from the above ramblings recreational divers (if there is anything to take at all):

Technical divers plan everything, they have to, life utterly depends on it.

Don't RELY on another human being to save your life.
Do it yourself: If the answer to that statement is "How"? then why are you in the water?

Stay safe all and hopefully some of this made sense.

Pete.

 

[Peter Guy]

The OP wrote

Technical divers plan everything, they have to, life utterly depends on it.

I'm sorry, I just have to respond with a big B.S. here. I know that "technical diving" has a mystique that somehow makes it "different" from a "simple" dive but, guess what, once you go beneath the surface, "your life utterly depends" on your gear and your training.

Every dive requires planning and preparation and the deeper and longer you are underwater and/or farther from the "big air tank in the sky" the more planning and preparation you just might want to do. But you will die just as dead in 5 feet of water if you can't get to another gas source when yours goes out as you will 400 feet below the surface.

I'm very much afraid that Mr. Chatterton's article will give people, like the OP, the wrong idea about diving. IF you want to be a solo diver, go for it. But if you want to be a buddy, be a buddy. BTW, being primarily responsible for yourself does NOT make you a solo diver -- to the contrary, it makes you a great buddy!

 

[BlackPatch]

The OP wrote [/B]

I'm sorry, I just have to respond with a big B.S. here. I know that "technical diving" has a mystique that somehow makes it "different" from a "simple" dive but, guess what, once you go beneath the surface, "your life utterly depends" on your gear and your training.

Every dive requires planning and preparation and the deeper and longer you are underwater and/or farther from the "big air tank in the sky" the more planning and preparation you just might want to do. But you will die just as dead in 5 feet of water if you can't get to another gas source when yours goes out as you will 400 feet below the surface.

I'm very much afraid that Mr. Chatterton's article will give people, like the OP, the wrong idea about diving. IF you want to be a solo diver, go for it. But if you want to be a buddy, be a buddy. BTW, being primarily responsible for yourself does NOT make you a solo diver -- to the contrary, it makes you a great buddy!

What?!

Where did I say I wish to dive solo?
I did not. I did not elude to such a thought process.

My words were: I plan to get my self out of trouble.

I understand your point though.

I for one agree with both Jim Lapenta and John Chatterton and the requirement of self reliance whilst diving. At any level.

That was the whole point of the piece I put up.

 

[drrich2]

Blackpatch:

I hope Jim sees this thread since his reaction would doubtless be interesting. From his other posts, and cross-referencing that to Chatterson's article, I suspect Jim would:

1.) Agree with emphasizing self-reliance. Yes, you should not run out of gas, or plan your dive assuming your buddy's carrying part of your supply.

2.) Disagree with some of Chatterson's view towards a buddy in distress, and the degree to which one ought to be able to count on a buddy for assistance, if needed.

I post this because, reading your post, I found myself marveling that you would 'agree' with the postings of both men, since some of their views don't seem (to me) to be on the same page. Like I said, hope Jim sees this.

Richard.

 

[BlackPatch]

Blackpatch:

I hope Jim sees this thread since his reaction would doubtless be interesting. From his other posts, and cross-referencing that to Chatterson's article, I suspect Jim would:

1.) Agree with emphasizing self-reliance. Yes, you should not run out of gas, or plan your dive assuming your buddy's carrying part of your supply.

2.) Disagree with some of Chatterson's view towards a buddy in distress, and the degree to which one ought to be able to count on a buddy for assistance, if needed.

I post this because, reading your post, I found myself marveling that you would 'agree' with the postings of both men, since some of their views don't seem (to me) to be on the same page. Like I said, hope Jim sees this.

Richard.

Hey there Richard.

Thanks for commenting, I appreciate it. As I have said in my post I am so new to this sport I have much to learn and continue to learn.

My point was probably skewed as I am not an eloquent writer.

I am all about self relience. Correct. However having a REDUNDANT back up is how I wish to dive. I would prefer to Team Dive (both buddies know EXACTLY what to expect from the other) than dive EXACTLY how John Chatterton dives.

As I stated "in my plan I include my buddy, to help them if neccessary" To me That means, two divers go down and within every power that can be, two come back up again safely.

My point was on how SELF RELIANCE should be taught more in Rec classes. Not the fact that I won't give you air if you are totally out.

If that was the case why would I have done the Stress and Rescue course? I want to help.

 

[drrich2]

Sounds good. You might enjoy reading the SDI Solo Diver course manual, since it teaches & emphasizes self-reliance, in terms of mental & gear preparedness, while emphasizing that solo-competent divers make better buddies when buddy diving.

It also emphasizes that people often dive solo inadvertently, such as a seasoned dive with a marginally competent buddy (e.g.: parent/child duo, instructor/student, etc...).

Richard.

 

[BlackPatch]

Sounds good. You might enjoy reading the SDI Solo Diver course manual, since it teaches & emphasizes self-reliance, in terms of mental & gear preparedness, while emphasizing that solo-competent divers make better buddies when buddy diving.

It also emphasizes that people often dive solo inadvertently, such as a seasoned dive with a marginally competent buddy (e.g.: parent/child duo, instructor/student, etc...).


Richard.

Hi Richard.

That's an awesome idea.
I will look into that when I have a little more experience.
I may also mention this to my good buddy Jason who dives also. Kind of sounds like we would fit the same pattern after chatting with him about his diving mentality.

Thanks for the heads up on that course.

Stay safe.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

It seems I need to go read John's post. Haven't had a chance to yet. I'll be back.

Without reading it I have a lot of respect for John. If not for him I would not have met Bernie Chowdhury and his wife. Then I would have needed to find someone else to do the intro for my book.

---------- Post added February 13th, 2013 at 09:56 PM ----------

Blackpatch:

I hope Jim sees this thread since his reaction would doubtless be interesting. From his other posts, and cross-referencing that to Chatterson's article, I suspect Jim would:

1.) Agree with emphasizing self-reliance. Yes, you should not run out of gas, or plan your dive assuming your buddy's carrying part of your supply.

2.) Disagree with some of Chatterson's view towards a buddy in distress, and the degree to which one ought to be able to count on a buddy for assistance, if needed.

I post this because, reading your post, I found myself marveling that you would 'agree' with the postings of both men, since some of their views don't seem (to me) to be on the same page. Like I said, hope Jim sees this.

Richard.

I just went and read John's article. And I have to say that in the context that it is written I agree 100% with everything he says. My "Who is Responsible" article and my book are written with the newer RECREATIONAL diver in mind.

And I stand by every assertion I make. I put a heavy emphasis on buddy skills in all my recreational classes. Separation more than once is actually a fail in my AOW class. In OW classes it is not acceptable at all. Doesn't need to be.


But John's article deals with technical dives. Deep technical dives. Where you are on tight schedules with gas supplies planned for you. Not for you and your buddy. If you even have one. On dives such as the Doria it is understood, or should be, that if you are diving with someone they are unlikely to be able to donate gas once you are on the bottom. And maybe not even then. A "buddy" under these circumstances is more likely there for one of two reasons should you have a serious, catastrophic problem.

Either to send your body to the surface or mark it's location for the recovery divers. You might see them accompany a buddy to the surface only so far as they do not put themselves at risk. Deep technical diving is not unlike solo diving. It takes the same mindset. That being if you have a serious problem you need to accept the fact that you are quite likely going to die.

Just because you may have someone with you on the dive does it mean they can or will help you. I see exactly where John is coming from and his incredulity at the discussion between the divers on the boat. They were falling back on recreational thinking. Not surprising and to be expected. It also provides a nice, albeit false, sense of additional security.

Make no mistake. Recreational divers have no business doing the kinds of dives he is talking about. But if they choose to without the proper training, gear, and realization of just what they are doing and they get hurt or killed then they have no one to blame but themselves.

Buddy diving when done properly is great. But at no time should anyone expect a buddy to save their butt under every circumstance. It's simply not realistic. There are people who disagree and insist on team skills and team diving. I do myself. To a point.

There are dives I've done where I did not want a buddy. A buddy would have actually made the dive unsafe for me. I needed to be able to concentrate on the task at hand. Had a buddy been on the dive they would have been told to not expect any assistance from me. I would not have been in a position to do so.

Deep tech dives like the Doria or even some of the dives I myself have done in Lake Erie were done with the understanding that I was on my own even though I was diving with someone. He was not going to give up his gas and neither was I. If that had not been understood, as John said, we had no business doing that dive.

Newer divers, again, have no business doing these dives.

 

[drrich2]

Jim:

...And I have to say that in the context that it is written I agree 100% with everything he says. My "Who is Responsible" article and my book are written with the newer RECREATIONAL diver in mind.

Very glad to hear your perspective. And interesting to see the very different mindset that that type of diving requires. One thing I wish the article made plainer is what you mentioned...

...in that context...

It's a context I had no grasp of. Considering some of the reactions he's gotten in another thread on this issue, it seems a number of very respected forum members were alarmed at some of his article content. Rather than derail this thread too badly, or create a parallel thread situation, I'll link it here and anyone interested can jump straight to it.

Richard.

 

[DevonDiver]

I think perspective is important when considering John's article. There is a big difference between recreational and technical diving. There are also levels of extremity in technical diving; tech diving is now a common-place activity, but much of what now occurs is quite 'sterile' and far from pushing boundaries or considerable as 'exploratory'.

John is applying his perspective; gained from the most extreme levels of technical diving. These are dives where people have died. When those people died, lessons were learned. One of the lessons (as I interpret it) is that some circumstances can push the concept of 'rescue' beyond the level where it should be an assumed success. The parameters of an incident are simply too challenging for any reasonable diver to expect meaningful assistance from others.

The newer generation of technical divers might struggle to appreciate that scenario. Recreational divers certainly will.

I think there has been a paradigm shift in technical diver mindset over the past 10 years. Regardless of how we educate the issue of self-reliance, newer generations of divers have been suckled upon the notion of being 'nannied' from the second they first donned a scuba kit. We've all participated, or read, debates about the degradation of basic scuba training. We've all read or considered how qualified divers have become more 'sheep-like', following a "responsible" divemaster like a herd.

Self-reliance is a rare thing nowadays. Technical courses attempt to disabuse divers of this reliance. 'Tech Mindset' is a standardized component of most tec course syllabus. That said, I don't feel (or see) such education as being totally successful in re-aligning diver attitudes. The shift from rec-to-tec attitudes isn't happening completely. Shaking off an instinctive tendency for reliance - developed and encouraged by 'nanny dive-pros', over a person's complete diving history - takes more than a few training days, classroom hours or clearly defined prose in a tech diving course manual.

Many technical divers today are 'reliant'. Tech diving is accessible to the community now and is a common aspiration for an increasing proportion divers. Most, if not nearly all, of those divers retain some expectation that somebody will always come to their rescue. When I see divers rushing through the technical program, collecting cards like a child grabbing candy in a sweet shop, I can't help but wonder how they could stomach such fast progression. The only answer, as I see it, is that they aren't progressing their diving in the assumption that their own skills/ability will be their sole source of survival. They must be happy to delegate some responsibility to another...to a mentor or instructor, who they presume will safe-guard them...otherwise how could they honestly feel 100% confident and self-assured to rapidly leap into higher qualifications and more challenging/risk-laden dives?

'Team Diving' is a nice concept. So is communism. Both philosophies share an identical trait... they rely upon a idealized notion of human character and capability. Neither accounts for the reality of human character... human frailties. Team diving does not...cannot... guarantee safety. It provides a theoretical basis upon which safety can be reasonably assured, but that theoretical basis needs to be tempered with an understanding of human weaknesses. Some rescues require bravery. Not everyone is brave. Some rescues require the risk of self-sacrifice. Not everyone can risk that sacrifice. Some rescues require flawless performance. Few, if any, should assume they can perform flawlessly in an emergency.

What I see in John's article is an acceptance of reality. John's experience has shown him that reality. That is why his views differ from those with less experience.