"Complete Wreck Diving" (manifold vs independent)

[daniel f aleman]

Doc, please reread your last post, please. Then reread the first link again, there you find writings from four different authors. They are not asking for your approval or agreement. Feel free to rebut any article linked; or, write one of your own describing actual wreck dives that you've made and your experiences concerning team diving.

"I would be interested in seeing any rational argument or evidence to the contrary, but I'm not finding it in the above linked URLs."

One can never read anything rational unless one is rational...

 

[Gilldiver]

With all due respect, quoting the author(s) in those citations is like quoting Wikipedia in an academic paper.

I am certainly willing to concede that caves and wrecks comprise two separate environments. I would have expected to see genuine variations set forth such as:

Wrecks rust - all steel surfaces oxidize in the ocean over time. Caves do not rust.

Wrecks have electrical wiring hanging down inside them. Caves have no electrical wiring.

Wrecks have cable trays, plastic coated cables, and debris such as ceiling tiles hanging down inside passageways. Caves do not.

Wrecks often have more than one exit point. Caves generally only offer one exit point (unless you manage to traverse one system that opens into another).

Wrecks have hatches that can close behind you or catwalks that can fall from "above", thereby obstructing your exit. Caves do not have hatches that can close behind you or catwalks, pipes, or other metal structures that weaken and can collapse in your wake.

Sunken vessels often have floorplans and offer multiple decks one above the other, ladderwells, and distinctive debris that offers aids to navigation. Caves seldom have floorplans, and even if you have a map, there are frequently fewer 'natural landmarks' or items in a cave that can aid navigation.

My point is that I'm more than willing to concede that there are differences - even significant differences - between penetrating inside wrecks and exploring caves.

To move from that foundation to an argument that concludes 'a team approach works well in caves' but 'a team approach does not work well inside wrecks' is a huge leap that is, at least in my opinion, entirely unsupported by any evidence, facts, or empirical data.

Either CAN be done alone.

But both are safer for all divers concerned if performed by a competent and experienced team, IMHO.

I would be interested in seeing any rational argument or evidence to the contrary, but I'm not finding it in the above linked URLs.

FWIW. YMMV.

Doc

I would add that cave don't have nets and mono.

But the real diffrence between caves and wrecks is the distance to the exit. In a cave you have to travel to the exit the same distance as you have gone into it. In some cases this can be well over 1000' plus as we all know.

In a wreck you will rarely be more then 50' or so from an exit to open water. Sure there are many exceptions, I have been 3 hatches and more into a sub and more then a few turns in a large ship and I can see full cave protocalls in deep penetrations of the USS Saratoga for example.

But back to an avg wreck - for the most part you will be within that 50' and say 3 minutes from access to a direct accent. The problem comes with the greater entanglement/entrapment problems a "natural" wreck brings. These are the things you mention above, wires, falling panels, hatches, etc. that can delay your exit.

In these cases the ability to take your tanks off, clear an entanglement or swim with them can be of great value. The problem with this is that if you have all your weight built into the tanks and plate you may end up glued to the overhead.

 

[Soggy]

about all i can say is that you really have no idea what you're talking about...

It's a normal state of affairs for him, it seems.

 

[Mike Edmonston]

I would add that cave don't have nets and mono.

I know at least 2 female cavers that had mono. and I refused to do an s drill with them....

Cheers.

Mike

 

[Doc Intrepid]

"...in a wreck, there is no such a thing as a "team situation". It's all about problem management, instructor. Now, for cave diving... or deep diving... problem management is different.

Daniel,

I am not trying to refute anyone's cherished "truths". I'm trying to understand the rationale behind your statement bolded above.

At issue is whether there is indeed "any such thing as a team situation" when penetrating a wreck. Assume for the moment that I'm open-minded.

The four authors in the URL you supplied as a citation all presented arguments, more or less, in a debate that I'll refer to as "Sport Diver Safety: Solo versus Buddy Diving". The contention on one side is that sport diving with a buddy is safer because a diver is distress may rely on a buddy to respond to issues. The other side contends that to depend on a buddy who may - for any of a number of reasons - not be able to respond is a fallacious reliance that may prove fatal: therefore, the sport diver is safer diving alone.

Like the hoary debate regarding whether .45 ACP or 9mm is a better round, this one isn't going to be settled to everyone's satisfaction in our lifetime. And for most sport diving it likely doesn't matter.

But to come onto a public board and assert that wreck divers are fundamentally safer by penetrating inside wrecks alone is not only counterintuitive, but also may lead new divers to perform unsafe acts.

First, the four authors you cited refer to general sport diving, and argue that open water divers are safer without buddies than they would be depending on them.

But "buddies" do not a make a team. At the risk of debating semantics, there is a basic difference between a team of two to four divers who train together and plan and execute wreck dives together, and a pair of "dive buddies". Perhaps the difference is based primarily on mental focus or intensity rather than skills alone, however, the fact remains that there are "dive buddies" that I would dive with on a casual open water sport dive that I would not penetrate a wreck with. I suspect that most divers who penetrate wrecks regularly would agree with that statement. Not every "buddy" is a potential team mate. There is a significant difference between a "team" and a "buddy".

Second, none of the four authors in question said anything at all regarding wreck diving, planning penetration of wrecks, or offered any specific arguments regarding why "in a wreck, there is no such thing as a 'team situation'".

Wrecks are potentially hazardous environments for numerous reasons, aside from the fact that they are overhead environments. Entrapment or entanglement is far more likely in an older deteriorating wreck than in casual sport diving. While I'm ready to listen to arguments demonstrating why penetrating inside wrecks solo is inherently safer than doing so as a team, none of the above authors had anything to say at all about penetrating wrecks either solo OR as a team.

We've already established that wrecks are a unique environment. Separate not only from caves, but also from standard open water diving. So an argument regarding whether 'solo or buddy diving is safer for open water diving' may be interesting, but is irrelevant to the basic question at hand, which is your statement that: "in a wreck, there is no such a thing as a "team situation"...

None of the authors you cited said anything about "in a wreck". Unless we want to begin discussing the differences between a "team" of divers and a pair of "dive buddies", your statement remains unsupported by anything that I can find in your citations.

Please feel free to point out where I'm misunderstanding your argument, or where I've missed something. But until then, for any new divers who may be reading this thread, be advised that wreck penetration is an extremely hazardous activity that requires special equipment and training. Until proven otherwise, it is safer to penetrate wrecks with one or two other divers who have the same level of training and equipment that you do, and with whom you have practiced and prepared to penetrate and safely exit wrecks (in zero visibility).

Solo wreck penetration, exactly like solo cave penetration, is an activity best left to those with substantial experience, and who are prepared to accept the consequences of their actions in an environment where any unforeseen event at all may result in their death.

FWIW. YMMV.

Doc

 

[Mike Edmonston]

Daniel,

I am not trying to refute anyone's cherished "truths". I'm trying to understand the rationale behind your statement bolded above.

At issue is whether there is indeed "any such thing as a team situation" when penetrating a wreck. Assume for the moment that I'm open-minded.

The four authors in the URL you supplied as a citation all presented arguments, more or less, in a debate that I'll refer to as "Sport Diver Safety: Solo versus Buddy Diving". The contention on one side is that sport diving with a buddy is safer because a diver is distress may rely on a buddy to respond to issues. The other side contends that to depend on a buddy who may - for any of a number of reasons - not be able to respond is a fallacious reliance that may prove fatal: therefore, the sport diver is safer diving alone.

Like the hoary debate regarding whether .45 ACP or 9mm is a better round, this one isn't going to be settled to everyone's satisfaction in our lifetime. And for most sport diving it likely doesn't matter.

But to come onto a public board and assert that wreck divers are fundamentally safer by penetrating inside wrecks alone is not only counterintuitive, but also may lead new divers to perform unsafe acts.

First, the four authors you cited refer to general sport diving, and argue that open water divers are safer without buddies than they would be depending on them.

But "buddies" do not a make a team. At the risk of debating semantics, there is a basic difference between a team of two to four divers who train together and plan and execute wreck dives together, and a pair of "dive buddies". Perhaps the difference is based primarily on mental focus or intensity rather than skills alone, however, the fact remains that there are "dive buddies" that I would dive with on a casual open water sport dive that I would not penetrate a wreck with. I suspect that most divers who penetrate wrecks regularly would agree with that statement. Not every "buddy" is a potential team mate. There is a significant difference between a "team" and a "buddy".

Second, none of the four authors in question said anything at all regarding wreck diving, planning penetration of wrecks, or offered any specific arguments regarding why "in a wreck, there is no such thing as a 'team situation'".

Wrecks are potentially hazardous environments for numerous reasons, aside from the fact that they are overhead environments. Entrapment or entanglement is far more likely in an older deteriorating wreck than in casual sport diving. While I'm ready to listen to arguments demonstrating why penetrating inside wrecks solo is inherently safer than doing so as a team, none of the above authors had anything to say at all about penetrating wrecks either solo OR as a team.

We've already established that wrecks are a unique environment. Separate not only from caves, but also from standard open water diving. So an argument regarding whether 'solo or buddy diving is safer for open water diving' may be interesting, but is irrelevant to the basic question at hand, which is your statement that: "in a wreck, there is no such a thing as a "team situation"...

None of the authors you cited said anything about "in a wreck". Unless we want to begin discussing the differences between a "team" of divers and a pair of "dive buddies", your statement remains unsupported by anything that I can find in your citations.

Please feel free to point out where I'm misunderstanding your argument, or where I've missed something. But until then, for any new divers who may be reading this thread, be advised that wreck penetration is an extremely hazardous activity that requires special equipment and training. Until proven otherwise, it is safer to penetrate wrecks with one or two other divers who have the same level of training and equipment that you do, and with whom you have practiced and prepared to penetrate and safely exit wrecks (in zero visibility).

Solo wreck penetration, exactly like solo cave penetration, is an activity best left to those with substantial experience, and who are prepared to accept the consequences of their actions in an environment where any unforeseen event at all may result in their death.

FWIW. YMMV.

Doc

Well put Doc,

May I add 1 thing. I believe that a team is safer if for no other reason then to get you out of an entanglement. Wreck penetration diving is dangerous, caves don't jump out and bite you, wrecks do. (not talking animal life either.. different discussion), but a true wreck has wiring, catwalks, rusted metal etc... having someone watch my back is very comforting if I get in trouble. I will have a much better chance to get out alive. And that's what it really boils down to.

Cheers

Mike

PS: Even though caves don't "jump out at you" thay are very dangerous. only 1 way in or out generally. I am not saying that cave diving isn't as dangerous as wreck penetration. They are different animals, and very much alike in respects. I wanted to nip this one in the butt before someone posted that I think cave diving is safer etc... blah blah blah.

 

[daniel f aleman]

Well, I can tell none of you has dived a real wreck.

Carry on.

 

[Soggy]

Well, I can tell none of you has dived a real wreck.

Carry on.

Please give us an example of a real wreck.

For example, I have dived the Jodrey, the Empress of Ireland, and most of the < 200 fsw wrecks worth diving in the the Boston area ranging from intact oil tankers to debris fields covered with fishing nets. Do any of those qualify as real wrecks?

 

[loosebits]

Well, I can tell none of you has dived a real wreck.

Carry on.

Man, you're just as bad as GI3.

 

[Doc Intrepid]

Well, I can tell none of you has dived a real wreck.

Carry on.

I suppose we will just have to carry on then.

But until we hear otherwise, we must assume that with respect to this quote:

"...in a wreck, there is no such a thing as a "team situation"

one of two situations is the case --

Either you can't find any citations or evidence that would support the argument that 'in a wreck, there is no such a thing as a "team situation"';

Or you won't produce any citations or evidence that would support that statement.

Which makes your statement "in a wreck, there is no such a thing as a 'team situation'" basically your personal unsupported opinion.

By all means dive any way you choose, but if you're going to sling unsupported opinion on the board as if it is an acknowledged truth then you should be able to support your statement or else identify it as your personal opinion.

A whole lot of new divers read this board, and I'd hate for any of them to get the idea that penetrating deep inside a wreck by themselves is the way that REAL wreck divers routinely do it.

Doc