How often do you check up on your buddy during a dive?

[DeepSeaExplorer]

I find swimming side by side isn’t very practical.

When I dive with an inexperienced buddy, I keep a close eye and prefer to bring up the rear so I can see what everyone is doing.

When diving with more advanced divers, I’m going to assume you’re ok, unless you signal or start making a lot of movement.

 

[Lorenzoid]

I'm not sure I agree with terminology being used by some here. As I see it ...

If you're following buddy procedures exactly as you were taught in whatever class, that is the "buddy system." I don't know of a precise definition, but from what I recall way back in OW class, you were supposed to always know where your buddy is, and be close enough that if you or your buddy signals OOA or otherwise has a problem, the other can be right there to help. For cave and tech divers, the buddy system means something slightly different--maybe you always know where your buddy is because you signal with your lights--and if you strictly follow whatever you were taught in that regard, then the same thought applies.

If you're doing something else, that is not the "buddy system," and that person is not your "buddy." If you say that when you dive with a more experienced diver like yourself, you allow yourselves to dive more independently, that is not the buddy system as the training agencies teach it. Maybe it's a form of solo diving, or some hybrid system--fine if that's what you intend to do--but it's not the buddy system and you are not buddies. If what you're doing is in fact solo diving or some kind of hybrid, then in my opinion you're not in a position to answer the question the OP asked.

 

[TMHeimer]

ALWAYS DIVE WITH A BUDDY
Diving with a buddy is just one of those scuba-rules, an inherent habit that comes with the underwater world. Your buddy is there to help you should you need them: you run out of air, your equipment malfunctions, you see something incredible that no one else will believe unless you have a witness.

Your buddy is there to hold you accountable, to encourage you, to calm you down should panic arise. A good buddy thinks not only of themselves, but of their counterpart as well. Your dive buddy could be a stranger you’ve just met on the boat or a lifelong friend with whom you share a passion.

You and your buddy enter the ocean on each other’s terms, agreeing on a dive plan, understanding that while each person is responsible for himself, they are also there to lend a helping hand. You share the dive together, exit the water together, drifting along in a sort of dependent independency.

Going through life without a buddy, without someone with whom you can communicate, without someone to be there should you need them, is not an ideal way of life.

That’s not to say that there’s anything wrong with being alone. I think being alone is important in order to figure out who you are. We need to be able to be alone with ourselves, to love ourselves independent of others, in order to make ourselves happy.

But there’s something to be said for having a shoulder to lean on, an ear that listens to you, a heart that beats more soundly knowing that your heart is beating too. We can’t isolate ourselves too much, closing ourselves off from the rest of the world. We thrive on connection, on acceptance, on belonging to something bigger than ourselves.

In this big old adventure we call life, swimming alone can get, well, lonely. There is too much that can be shared, too many things to experience, too much that is beautiful to only see with one set of eyes.

You and your buddy, whether they’re a partner, parent, or best friend, can allow each other to appreciate the solitude found in our world while remaining there for each other should you need one another. The world has a way of throwing curveballs at us, and its comforting to know that your buddy will be there, or will need you too, when one of those curveballs hits just a little too close.


10 Life Lessons That Scuba Diving Taught Me

I can feel the love can you feel the love

First, I agree completely with what Lorenzoid just posted.
But regarding your statement (which lermontov called one of "your rules"), much of it makes sense. I would however change it to "Always dive with a GOOD buddy". This is not at all always possible, especially if you're a single diver on a charter. Gets back to the old discussion of which is safer--going solo or with a buddy who could pose more of a danger to yourself than being alone?
Personally, I lean toward it still being maybe slightly safer to be with ANY buddy, but feel I have the training to deal with a panicked one. With a (good?) buddy you MAY survive a heart attack, serious entanglement, or a catastrophic unforeseen OOA situation (why redundancy is always advised when going solo).

Re" "Going through life without a buddy.....is not an ideal way of life"---Agree if you're talking about life in general. If you're talking regarding scuba -- sorry, IMO that's just silly.

 

[drrich2]

Had a pretty heated discussion about this today, so many divers (instabuddies, anyone?) dive solely thinking about themselves and not really caring about the fact that you're a team.

From original post, since that situation may've spawned this discussion.

If you're following buddy procedures exactly as you were taught in whatever class, that is the "buddy system."

If you're doing something else, that is not the "buddy system," and that person is not your "buddy."

Reminds me of years ago being told the difference between De Jure and De Facto. From the Washington Univ. in St. Louis School of Law: "De facto means a state of affairs that is true in fact, but that is not officially sanctioned. In contrast, de jure means a state of affairs that is in accordance with law (i.e. that is officially sanctioned)."

At issue is to what extent the buddy system is defined by mandate of certifying agencies vs. by real world practice in the dive community.

If what you're doing is in fact solo diving or some kind of hybrid, then in my opinion you're not in a position to answer the question the OP asked.

I see your reasoning, but if he wants to hear 'both sides,' or a range of perspectives, he's not going to get that if only people who do it rigidly 'by the book' answer. Otherwise he'll just get an ideological 'echo chamber' with people sharing his position on it. That may be affirming, but it won't be much use next time he's on a dive boat and put with someone with a more 'liberal' interpretation.

 

[Scubagolf]

About 1x a minute. Almost always my buddy is my wife and I need her to continue fixing dinner.

 

[jlcnuke]

I'm not sure I agree with terminology being used by some here. As I see it ...

If you're following buddy procedures exactly as you were taught in whatever class, that is the "buddy system." I don't know of a precise definition, but from what I recall way back in OW class, you were supposed to always know where your buddy is, and be close enough that if you or your buddy signals OOA or otherwise has a problem, the other can be right there to help. For cave and tech divers, the buddy system means something slightly different--maybe you always know where your buddy is because you signal with your lights--and if you strictly follow whatever you were taught in that regard, then the same thought applies.

If you're doing something else, that is not the "buddy system," and that person is not your "buddy." If you say that when you dive with a more experienced diver like yourself, you allow yourselves to dive more independently, that is not the buddy system as the training agencies teach it. Maybe it's a form of solo diving, or some hybrid system--fine if that's what you intend to do--but it's not the buddy system and you are not buddies. If what you're doing is in fact solo diving or some kind of hybrid, then in my opinion you're not in a position to answer the question the OP asked.

The thing is, everything taught (in both my OW courses anyway), left most of what you discussed open to a large range of interpretation. Do buddies need to be able to touch each other at all times? Not according to any training I've ever had. So how close to buddies have to be? Never seen that defined by any training agency in a matter of distance or a matter of "how long" it takes to be there to help each other. What does "knowing where your buddy is" actually mean? Do you have to stare at them the entire dive (the only way to be sure of their precise location and ensure they can never get out of your sight)? Not sure any agency would say that's the standard. So now it's a judgement call to determine exactly how often you're going to look at them, how often you're going to communicate with them, how close you're going to be, and all of that without violating any standards or specific training really.

The average person can go around 3 minutes without air I believe from my research in the past, so is "within a three minute swim of each other" close enough to be considered close enough to buddies? I'd say not in most conditions. A reasonably fit diver should be able to easily go 30+ ft without a breath if necessary, so is 30 ft close enough? Not if there's only 10 ft of vis I'd say it's not. In 100 ft vis, do I need my buddy so close that we're routinely kicking each other if someone turns? I'd say that's a bit extreme too. I think how often you check on your buddies, and how close you need to be to them, depends on the environment, the experience and skill levels, and the conditions of the dive just to start with.

If I dive with a diver for their first dive after open water, in 15 ft of vis in the local quarry, I'm going to be within 3-5 ft of them and to their side so they're in my peripheral vision at all times, and I'm going to look at them frequently. Because that is prudent with such a diver. If I'm in the tropics, in 30 ft of water, with a marine researcher with a full-cave cert as my buddy, we're both probably going to be just fine as long as we glance at each other every once in a while and stay within line of sight. What is appropriate monitoring of a buddy I think is a variable scale depending on the totality of the circumstances.

 

[happy-diver]

Thing is with a buddy do you halve the risk or double it

 

[ScubaRob0311]

I'm new but would think it's a balancing act. If you and your buddy are swimming further apart then I would think you should be visually checking on each other more often then if you were closer together.

My thought process is that if your closer together and there is a problem the person having the issue can hopefully get to buddy and get their attention quickly. Whereas if your diving further apart and there is an issue you would need to see your buddy more often to recognize there is an issue and actively work to get to your buddy to reduce the time they are without your active support.

This like others also comes down to the experience and gear of each diver.

Personally I would like to give or get help within 60 seconds of a problem occuring sooner of possible but again I'm still very new.

 

[Lorenzoid]

The thing is, everything taught (in both my OW courses anyway), left most of what you discussed open to a large range of interpretation. Do buddies need to be able to touch each other at all times? Not according to any training I've ever had. So how close to buddies have to be? Never seen that defined by any training agency in a matter of distance or a matter of "how long" it takes to be there to help each other. What does "knowing where your buddy is" actually mean? Do you have to stare at them the entire dive (the only way to be sure of their precise location and ensure they can never get out of your sight)? Not sure any agency would say that's the standard. So now it's a judgement call to determine exactly how often you're going to look at them, how often you're going to communicate with them, how close you're going to be, and all of that without violating any standards or specific training really.

The average person can go around 3 minutes without air I believe from my research in the past, so is "within a three minute swim of each other" close enough to be considered close enough to buddies? I'd say not in most conditions. A reasonably fit diver should be able to easily go 30+ ft without a breath if necessary, so is 30 ft close enough? Not if there's only 10 ft of vis I'd say it's not. In 100 ft vis, do I need my buddy so close that we're routinely kicking each other if someone turns? I'd say that's a bit extreme too. I think how often you check on your buddies, and how close you need to be to them, depends on the environment, the experience and skill levels, and the conditions of the dive just to start with.

If I dive with a diver for their first dive after open water, in 15 ft of vis in the local quarry, I'm going to be within 3-5 ft of them and to their side so they're in my peripheral vision at all times, and I'm going to look at them frequently. Because that is prudent with such a diver. If I'm in the tropics, in 30 ft of water, with a marine researcher with a full-cave cert as my buddy, we're both probably going to be just fine as long as we glance at each other every once in a while and stay within line of sight. What is appropriate monitoring of a buddy I think is a variable scale depending on the totality of the circumstances.

I agree in general, but I believe the range of variability over which you can make adjustments to take into account experience, vis, etc., and still function as a buddy is smaller than you do. I base my understanding on the skills we were taught, and at the top of that list is how to handle an OOA situation. I think we're on the same page there. An OOA diver in a pair who are strictly relying on the buddy system needs to be able to obtain air from his buddy before he resorts to something else. That means you need to know each other's location well enough that you can reach them in time. So, while I agree there is a range in terms of both distance and precision (of knowing their location), I believe it's a smaller range than you suggest.

I don't know where you got the "3 minutes" and "30 feet" estimates, but I find it hard to believe those numbers hold true in many real-world scenarios. Sure, if someone intentionally holds his breath, he can go for quite a while. But what if he's happily swimming along, thinking about something other than his breathing, exhales, goes to take the next breath, and gets nothing--stuck with empty-ish lungs? Can he really be expected to swim 3 minutes or 30 feet? Even if he manages to do that, will he be calm enough to not jeopardize the air-sharing procedure when the two buddies meet? I have experienced having an OOA buddy (and being OOA myself) more than once--all during training--and I don't think those numbers are realistic. A very experienced diver might be able to remain cool, even with empty lungs, for a few seconds longer than an average diver, but I believe the range of variability is just a matter of seconds. I guess we disagree. A first on SB.

 

[Lorenzoid]

Reminds me of years ago being told the difference between De Jure and De Facto. From the Washington Univ. in St. Louis School of Law: "De facto means a state of affairs that is true in fact, but that is not officially sanctioned. In contrast, de jure means a state of affairs that is in accordance with law (i.e. that is officially sanctioned)."

I bet it does remind you of those terms, because when I was writing I considered saying something about "de facto solo divers," but I decided not to complicate my thoughts even more.