Sharing air to extend bottom time

[Tigerman]

how about chasing the google car in scuba gear and with pitchforks? lol

I never claimed norwegians to be sane..
Thats actually a fishing tool btw
Shine a light into the river and fork that fishie.

 

[t4e]

I never claimed norwegians to be sane..
Thats actually a fishing tool btw
Shine a light into the river and fork that fishie.

hehe

treasure those pics, since then google has blurred them out rofl

 

[DevonDiver]

Andy, SeaCobra, SuperG, et al: a (semi)serious question. Do any of you have a problem with people practicing air sharing during a dive? Not doing an ascent, but just practicing the act of sharing air? I'm not asking about the purpose or intent -- merely the act itself. As an instructor, I do advise ALL of my students to practice the ACT of sharing air during a dive and remind them that "you use it or lose it" applies.

I don't really see how you can call it 'practice' without defining the purpose or intent. From an educational perspective, effective practice should really have a goal. S.M.A.R.T. objectives tend to work well - agencies do this through the procedures taught on IDCs and training standards.

On an entirely personal note, my experience as an instructor shows me that students/divers have the biggest problem with the 'ascent' portion of the skill. I've read more than enough accident reports (BSAC Incident Reports '95-'11) that illustrate where critical failings on the ascent and surface phases have led to incidents - some fatal. Retaining buoyancy control, ascent speed, buddy contact/security, communication and mutual support on ascent and when reaching the surface, are the most critical factors and the ones student divers most struggle with. Air-sharing itself is just one phase of a critical technique, and probably the one that requires least emphasis and repetition.

Do I feel whether practice of the act itself has merit? Yes, I do. But not at the exclusion of other critical elements, forming the entire technique needed to get an OOA diver safely to the surface and establish positive buoyancy. You can 'break down' a skill into various phases (which I think is what you're suggesting), but all phases still do require practice. If those are neglected, or under-valued, then I feel it de-merits the overall practice.

Likewise, is your practice "focused on practice"... or is it distracted by something else? Does it lead to appraisal and feedback? Are there performance requirements? Without these...and a goal/purpose.... then I find it hard to call it 'practice'.

IF the ACT of an air share is OK during a dive, what difference does it make as to the actor's intentions?

Again, goals are important:

"Today we will practice air-sharing"
"Why?"
"For the purposes of air-sharing"

The practice ceases to be the development of OOA ascent procedures - it becomes something else.

"Today we will practice air-sharing"
"Why?"
"As a sub-skill of an air-sharing ascent"

The practice remains a development of OOA ascent procedures - but neglects critical skill attributes needed for the whole.

"Today we will practice air-sharing"
"Why?"
"As a sub-skill of an air-sharing ascent, which we will subsequently develop into practice of a full air-sharing ascent"

The practice remains a development of OOA ascent procedures - broken down into critical skill attributes but, in a progressive/staged manner, builds them into a singular drill.

IMHO, a skill is only as good as its weakest link. Splitting a skill into critical sub-phases is a valid approach (we do this as scuba instructors every day). However, prioritizing one sub-skill to the detriment of others does not lead to an improvement of "the skill" at a whole.

Andy -- would I teach my tech students to immediately begin their ascent if they had a non-working reg? Well, it depends -- is it non-working because they forgot to turn on the valve?

I wouldn't classify an 'off' valve as non-working. It is still functional and gas still remains. The tech diver would have the skillset to manipulate the valve and access the gas. In virtual all instances, I wouldn't expect a student to require air-share in order to resolve the issue - certainly not as a 'graduation' standard.

(And don't ask me how I know that!)

Oh... I know it. It's a semi-regular occurrence (by students) when I teach tech. Especially on sidemount, where it's easier to forget to open cylinder valves on the boat before entering the water. I can normally 'task load' a tech sidemount trainee into handing me a 'dead reg' on a S-Drill. That pleases me. It's even better when combined with a trapped long hose. If they didn't make such mental gaffs, then I'd be unable to teach them about the critical need to adhere to strict procedural processes.

 

[Teamcasa]

Andy, I see the value in not doing this with a student or a new diver - and have said so. How does your argument hold up when both divers are indeed skilled and proficient at air-sharing?

 

[RTee]

A friend of mine who occasionally post on SB used to say...arguing with an army grunt is like wrestling with a pig in a mud hole. You both get dirty but the pig loves it (or words to that effect)...thanks GDI

 

[DevonDiver]

Andy, I see the value in not doing this with a student or a new diver - and have said so. How does your argument hold up when both divers are indeed skilled and proficient at air-sharing?

The only issue I have is with the claim that it is 'practice'.

It might be 'experience', but it's not practice - practice would refer to specific goals and would relate to a formal, taught, procedure (that being air-sharing ascent).

As mentioned in post #243, 'air-sharing' comprises a single sub-skill of the 'air-sharing ascent'. If it isn't practiced as a 'sub-skill', with equal attention placed on the other 'sub-skills' that form the whole procedure, then it is failing in that goal (the 'weakest link' issue).

To be clear - I don't see that as terribly problematic, but it does detract from any claim to bear relation to the core skill taught on OW courses...and, therefore, its relevance to OW divers. Again, to be fair, some contributors (Peter and TS&M) haven't claimed that it IS relevant to all divers. Others have...

How does my overall argument hold up? Well, this goes back to issues on 'should versus could'... and 'convenience versus correct'. Nothing more, nothing less.

I haven't tried to portray this as any sort of "you're gonna die" issue... at least, not with "skilled and proficient" divers.

I simply feel (my opinion) that there is a better long-term method to deal with the problem of inconsistent air-consumption within a pair/team.... a method that retains the principle of self-sufficiency in conjunction with effective gas planning/management. That principle being: that divers should enter the water with sufficient personal gas to carry out their planned dive.

 

[dumpsterDiver]

... That principle being: that divers should enter the water with sufficient personal gas to carry out their planned dive.

I think I prefer to say that the TEAM of divers should enter the water with sufficient gas to carry out the planned dive.

 

[Doc Harry]

..I've been known to (after asking) grab my wife's octo and suck down a little of her gas to extend our mutual bottom time...

The HORROR! How can you?!?!

My girlfriend says that the only reason I bring her along on dive trips is for the extra air. (Her SAC=0.3 is half of my SAC=0.6)

I don't wait until I'm down to 700 psi, I will wander over to her when I get down to about 1,500 - 1,200 psi and I see that our remaining gas is quite different. Ten or 15 minutes on her octo evens-out our gas supplies quite nicely.


This leaves us both well above rock-bottom gas, too.

The dive master usually gets really interested in us when he sees that I'm on her octo.

The only time we do this is on drift dives in Cozumel where you can stay down for as long as you have gas on your back - and, like Teamcasa says, I can' my hands on doubles.

 

[redacted]

The HORROR! How can you?!?!

My girlfriend says that the only reason I bring her along on dive strips is for the extra air. (Her SAC=0.3 is half of my SAC=0.6)

I don't wait until I'm down to 700 psi, I will wander over to her when I get down to about 1,200 psi.

The dive master usually gets really interested in us when he sees that I'm on her octo.

The only time we do this is on drift dives in Cozumel where you can stay down for as long as you have gas on your back - and, like Teamcasa says, I can' my hands on doubles.

I think I like your dive plan.

 

[Rogersea]

I haven't tried to portray this as any sort of "you're gonna die" issue... at least, not with "skilled and proficient" divers.

I simply feel (my opinion) that there is a better long-term method to deal with the problem of inconsistent air-consumption within a pair/team.... a method that retains the principle of self-sufficiency in conjunction with effective gas planning/management. That principle being: that divers should enter the water with sufficient personal gas to carry out their planned dive.

I agree 100% with Devon Divers position on this.

If divers want to practice sharing air that is fine. If divers want to use their buddies air during the dive and everyone is in agreement, that is an individual buddy team decision.

I would not do this in my personal diving and would not present it as a good tool to use during dive planning to my students or dive customers.

Cheers,
Roger