I was taught team bailout, mathematically it sounds nice... I've been questioning if it's simply an extension of the buddy system with the same basic flaw... you have to insure a functional buddy is involved.
Practically that is beyond my risk tolerance. I dive with a buddy as a bonus, not a necessity. At the end of the day an al80 fits most places a 30 does. Same goes for multiples. I've had dives where I'm happy a pair of cave filled lp131s were involved, even when my back complained getting them out of the water after. Why do we often try to keep the absolute minimum reserves possible?
In the extreme... If I'm unable to return to the surface I don't want my buddy to also risk death because he wasn't willing to strip my corpse of the bailout required to safely finish his dive in the case of cascading failures.
Diver separation is a reality in all levels of diving, particularly reading accident reports. Planning like it doesn't happen (even though it shouldn't) seems unnecessarily risky.
For those of you comfortable with team bailout, what factors have you accepting it's risks?
Regards,
Cameron
Practically that is beyond my risk tolerance. I dive with a buddy as a bonus, not a necessity. At the end of the day an al80 fits most places a 30 does. Same goes for multiples. I've had dives where I'm happy a pair of cave filled lp131s were involved, even when my back complained getting them out of the water after. Why do we often try to keep the absolute minimum reserves possible?
In the extreme... If I'm unable to return to the surface I don't want my buddy to also risk death because he wasn't willing to strip my corpse of the bailout required to safely finish his dive in the case of cascading failures.
Diver separation is a reality in all levels of diving, particularly reading accident reports. Planning like it doesn't happen (even though it shouldn't) seems unnecessarily risky.
For those of you comfortable with team bailout, what factors have you accepting it's risks?
Regards,
Cameron
Last edited: