No solo diving in overhead environment

[JahJahwarrior]

---

---

A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

Please note that it is against the Scubaboard ToS to promote unsafe diving activities. One example of an unsafe diving activity is diving in environments beyond your certification level.

Training agencies have similar, if not identical, definitions for many diving environments. SDI and TDI define any overhead as a place where an inflated SMB cannot reach the surface without touching something other than water.

The NACD defines a cavern zone as having a clear view of ambient lighting not to exceed 200 linear feet from the surface.

Thus, a cave is any overhead environment more than 200 linear feet from the surface.

Promoting diving in a cavern or cave without the proper certification, either solo or with a buddy, is not permitted.

Definitions cannot properly encompass all of the risks of a diving environment, but they provide a consistent basis by which to moderate.

Because we cannot make assumptions about the safety of a diving environment, moderators are forced to assume that, when a poster uses the term cavern or cave, they are talking about an environment that meets the definition. Additionally, when a poster describes an environment that meets the definition, we must moderate appropriately, regardless of whether a poster uses the term cave or cavern to promote diving in that environment.

Any posts advocating diving in a cavern or cave without the appropriate certification might be removed and posters might receive infractions or bans.

As always, it is important to remember our goal, mission and focus. We're here to have fun, and it's great to discuss the many types of diving we do around the world. Just remember to focus on setting a good example, and to not suggest that anyone should dive in a cavern or cave without the appropriate certification.

-JJW

---

 

[Dr. Lecter]

---

---

A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

One example of an unsafe diving activity is diving in environments beyond your certification level.

---

I am solo diver who routinely dives deep wreck penetrations involving multi-gas staged decompression, but I have avoided this thread because I'm not interested in promoting foxfish's attitude or dealing with the sermonizing from the other side. If you want to solo dive, regardless of where you want to do it, go ing do it already and stop trying to argue about whether you can/should/are allowed to do it. Whether you come back from such a dive is on you, and you alone. If you have questions about whether you are ready for a dive, you aren't.

However, I will say that a Moderator's using the term certification rather than training in the above statement is unprofessional, bordering on reprehensible. That kind of irresponsible wording from someone representing a quasi-official body provides a cheap and easy citation for those looking to increase third-party regulation of diving. Shame on you.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I am solo diver who routinely dives deep wreck penetrations involving multi-gas staged decompression, but I have avoided this thread because I'm not interested in promoting foxfish's attitude or dealing with the sermonizing from the other side. If you want to solo dive, regardless of where you want to do it, go ing do it already and stop trying to argue about whether you can/should/are allowed to do it. Whether you come back from such a dive is on you, and you alone. If you have questions about whether you are ready for a dive, you aren't.

However, I will say that a Moderator's using the term certification rather than training in the above statement is unprofessional, bordering on reprehensible. That kind of irresponsible wording from someone representing a quasi-official body provides a cheap and easy citation for those looking to increase third-party regulation of diving. Shame on you.

I thought you were a lawyer ... if so, the reason for the choice of wording should be obvious.

Training can mean a lot of things to a lot of different people. Certification means that a recognized training agency has determined that you meet the qualifications to do a specific type of diving. From a legal and liability perspective, certification is what matters.

Why else do you suppose dive ops so routinely want to see a piece of plastic, rather than a real-time evaluation of your fitness to do the dive?

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

---------- Post added January 29th, 2014 at 07:56 PM ----------

Actually no, the book clearly indicates otherwise. Have you read it?

Yes I have, and I'm not even remotely interested in wasting my time arguing the point with you.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Dr. Lecter]

I thought you were a lawyer ... if so, the reason for the choice of wording should be obvious.

Training can mean a lot of things to a lot of different people. Certification means that a recognized training agency has determined that you meet the qualifications to do a specific type of diving. From a legal and liability perspective, certification is what matters.

Why else do you suppose dive ops so routinely want to see a piece of plastic, rather than a real-time evaluation of your fitness to do the dive?

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I am also a lawyer, which is probably why I'm sensitive to the issue of saying what you mean and not something more.

The difference is that SB is not deciding whether to take someone diving, or even saying what they'll allow as to advocacy on their forum, either of which can turn on whatever arbitrary reason they like. Rather, a Mod just came out and made an unqualified statement that any diving beyond your certification level -- regardless of training or experience -- is inherently unsafe diving.

As a factual matter, that's bull. As a practical matter, we don't need to offer any encouragement -- no matter how poorly reasoned -- for making diving more of a PAPERS PLEASE! activity .


Sent from my Shearwater Petrel using Tapatalk

 

[Foxfish]

I asked a simple question in the OP and am looking for direct answers with a sensible explanation. I'll challenge responses that fail to meet those requirements. If that upsets you Dr Lecter then no one is forcing you to post here. At present your comments are off topic and inflammatory.

Do you have any helpful comments to make with regard to the OP?

 

[Dr. Lecter]

Do you have any helpful comments to make with regard to the OP?

Sure. You've confused the statements in a specific agency's manual for an entry level certification with what's appropriate for solo diving generally. Great reason not to confuse certification with safety, btw.

Next thread.


Sent from my Shearwater Petrel using Tapatalk

 

[Foxfish]

Sure. You've confused the statements in a specific agency's manual for an entry level certification with what's appropriate for solo diving generally. Great reason not to confuse certification with safety, btw.

Next thread.


Sent from my Shearwater Petrel using Tapatalk

Actually comments in the book are quite explicit on the matter. I recommend you at least become familiar with them.

 

[Dr. Lecter]

Actually comments in the book are quite explicit on the matter. I recommend you at least become familiar with them.

I regret not making my point inescapably clear. No matter what the SDI solo manual, or the PADI self-reliant manual, or any other entry level solo certification course's manual may say about solo diving--no matter how broad or absolute or explicit or unqualified--it is speaking in terms limited by its audience. That audience is not limited to those qualified (however you wish to define that) for overhead environments.

Similarly, you're missing the fact that when these manuals speak in terms of what "solo divers" should/should not be doing, they're limited to commenting on the activities of TDI/PADI/whatever agency "Solo Divers." Not solo cave divers, not solo wreck divers, not solo technical divers.

 

[Jaydubya]

Just some random thoughts..

Who made SDI the arbiter what types of dives can be done solo? My agency "allows" solo cave diving for full cave divers but not intro or apprentice. I have a full cave card. I also have an OW solo card. The scope of the solo training does not include overhead or technical diving. Like someone said, the training is aimed at OW divers with about 100 dives, it is not aimed at technical or cave divers with many hundreds of dives. They have already been taught self-reliant diving in their advanced training. They've been exposed to the types of things that can go wrong and practice procedures for how to handle them. I learned that my compass navigation is not as good as I thought it was. That is the only thing I learned in the solo course that I did not already know from cave and technical training.

I believe the reason they say no solo diving in an overhead is to discourage people like you from letting a false sense of security engendered by the redundant gear from going into an overhead environment. Overhead diving is not just about redundant gear and the things you learn in the solo class are not enough to get you out of situations that can occur in overheads. I would strongly caution against entering an overhead without proper training whether you are solo or not.

Only a fool would say every overhead is equally hazardous. But how do you even know enough about the hazards to judge that unless you've gotten the training?

Is it a safe swim through in your picture? I'm not so sure. Would I run a line? Honestly I'd have to see it in person to decide. But if I have the slightest doubt about getting out in zero vis I wouldn't enter without a line.

You mentioned the bottom isn't silty. Have you ever been in an underwater sand storm? Have you ever lost a mask? There are other ways than kicking up silt to get in a zero vis situation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dr. Lecter]

Who made SDI the arbiter what types of dives can be done solo?

Indeed. Or for that matter, made any agency the arbiter of what constitutes sufficient training to engage in "safe" diving.