I don't understand what you're referring to when you say: "Risks are not mitigated by 'avoidance'." What do you see that I am avoiding? Or what should I be preparing for that I am not preparing for?
For me, it is comments like "I dive only where it is safe", or "I won't dive where there is risk of entanglement" - that show avoidance, rather than mitigation.
Don't get me wrong... avoidance is crucial.... but mitigation still needs to exist.
As an example, you don't assure safety by 'avoiding entanglement' - the bottom line is that safety is assured by possessing training, equipment and psychological robustness to 'deal with entanglements'
The same is true for another multitude of issues that you could otherwise convince yourself 'are not going to happen' due to prior diligence, preparation and conservative approach to your diving. For instance, equipment malfunction cannot be avoided by proper maintenance.... access to the surface is not 'guaranteed' by remaining within comfortable CESA depths.
As mentioned, sometimes Murphy dives at your shoulder and (as they say in the military); "
no plan survives contact with the enemy". This mindset is determined by whether the diver enters the water in the assumption that nothing is going to go wrong, or whether they assume that - sooner or later - they will encounter an emergency. It is further determined by whether they assume that the emergency will be simple and stress-free to deal with, or whether it may require specific response, problem-solving, adaptation and, most importantly, an ability to retain psychological composure.
Another issue is the 'accident chain'. Most divers prepare for (and evaluate their capability against) a single, isolated incident. When you read accident reports, you notice that there is rarely a 'single issue' that killed someone - there tends to be either simultaneous incidents or a progression/flow of back-to-back issues that ultimately lead to the disaster.
Start putting issues together and what you need to prepare for expands exponentially.... as does the psychological stress created and the importance of problem-solving rather than resolution via a simple procedure.
One of the big differences between recreational diving courses and technical (and solo) courses is that recreational diving training rarely, if ever, presents a student with multiple simultaneous failures/issues. Recreational divers are taught to deal with an isolated problems, with a specific resolution/procedure. Nobody ever claimed that recreational diving courses were absolutely comprehensive - they are simple and uncomplicated (in recognition of buddy support being available). In contrast, Tech/Solo training tends to emphasize the possibility of concurrent failures/issues - and, in doing so, raises the bar considerably... in the acceptance that a real emergency is often anything
but 'simple and uncomplicated'.
Murphy's Law is a law of probability. Some divers dismiss probability and are content to dive in the assumption that 1/10,000 is inconsequential. Others choose to respect that potential, and guard against it. Acceptance of risk versus mitigation of risk. When people die on scuba, it is usually that 1/10,000 occurrence.
Diving solo merely serves to shorten those odds - because it decreases the chance of outside intervention, which is a factor that has, and will, ensure that many otherwise fatal situations have/can be resolved prematurely.
in the conditions that I mention, in your lifetime of diving: what are 2 or 3 specific things that have occurred to you personally, where if you were diving like I am diving, and with my level of experience, might do me in? I'm not talking hypotheticals: i'm asking for specific things that have really occurred. Conditions being less than 40', daylight, a dive sight you are familiar with, no currents, close to land, well rested, etc. Assume that weighting is good, all that sort of stuff.
From my personal experience - non-hypothetical:
1. Hypothermia: A qualified diver died in my hometown due to hypothermia on a shallow, benign dive in temperate water (UK springtime). The onset of hypothermia wasn't noticed/realized and mental acuity decreased, further preventing an appropriate resolution. Eventually the diver passed unconscious and drowned.
2. Venomous Sting: I was stung by a stonefish, which had a rapid and debilitating impact on my capability. Luckily, I wasn't solo diving at the time and was directly under the dive boat when it occurred. If I had been solo diving, some distance from shore, then I would predict that my decreased capability would have significantly jeopardized my survival - the pain was overwhelming and utterly distracting... to the extent that I seriously doubt my ability to deal with anything else that might have gone wrong. If you dive where you might encounter stonefish, lionfish, jellyfish, fire-coral, etc etc etc, then this remains an issue to be considered.
3. Non-Diving Related Health Issues: People die of heart attacks all the time - and there is good debate about whether chance of survival would be increased by having a buddy, or not, should such an event occur underwater. However, over the years I've experienced less radical health issues on dives - everything from severe double-leg cramps, to respiratory distress (inhalation of water spray etc), to reverse blocks on ascent, to vertigo, to........... All of those issues, and hundreds of other potentials, have the capacity to degrade your performance to a critical level - even more so, all of those (especially when combined with any other issue that may arise) have the ability to create a panic state.
Again, be wary of isolating factors - it's easy to discount a 'minor' risk if it is considered in isolation. Accidents tend to happen where multiple 'minor' factors coincide (or failure to resolve one, creates multiple others) - rather than a single, easily identifiable, 'catastrophic' risk.
I never suggest solo diving to anyone I haven't had a fair bit of experience observing underwater and know their reaction to emergency situations. Since I rarely dive with a buddy, that means I don't suggest it to anyone.
As an instructor (
particularly from teaching technical level courses), I get to witness 'breaking strain' on a semi-frequent basis. It's not uncommon for a technical diving student to experience 'melt-down' when tasked with multiple failures, under ambient, simulated conditions. I experienced it myself when first venturing onto a tech course - I'm sure that the other technical divers on this forum would claim similar experiences - all of whom had significant experience and confidence when embarking on that training (I was a DM, 8 years/300+ dives experience).
Solo diving courses (in design/syllabus) draw heavily from technical diving programs - especially in regards to situational awareness, task-loading and assessment of psychological response. For that reason, if no other, their value is undeniable. A good solo diving instructor should be pushing a student towards melt-down, albeit through simulated issues, so that the student gains a realistic appreciation of their physical and mental tolerances.
It's all to easy to let our egos hypothesize about our tolerances and capabilities. It's better to know for sure.
A person can have all the proper equipment including great redundancy, but end up dead because of one thing that many people never know until it happens... how they respond to emergencies. If you panic, all the equipment in the world may not save you.
Absolutely. This is the crux issue, regards 'experience'... and where I believe that 'not all experience is equal'. Positive reinforcement
through a lack of negative stimulus teaches us nothing in that respect.
Although I've only had a very few emergency incidents in my diving career, I have learned that I don't panic but seem to approach them with a reasonably clear head. So far that has allowed me to extricate myself from a few serious situations... so far.
I share that experience - I believe that my panic threshold is quite well developed. I retain 'functionality' through absolute/tested (not hypothetical) knowledge of my own capabilities. Put simply, I know what I
can survive, what I
might survive and what I
won't survive. For as long as that remains true, I am not prone to panic.
I believe that everyone has a threshold - determined by personal attributes and also by confidence born through experience and training. I don't know where my threshold lies - but I suspect that there would come a time where no options appeared to exist - and I would lose functionality. To me, that is the moment of "
you are screwed" realization.
Increased capability - and proven confidence in that capability - helps to defer that moment, but every diver has a breaking point, where skill, experience, confidence and equipment is not sufficient to give them a resolution.
As a solo diver, you should be assured that the 'moment of that realization' is deferred beyond anything likely to occur on the dives you do. Such assurance is not gained through hypothetical assumptions about either capability or risk.
