Lets stop being dogmatic and politically correct and instead apply some critical thinking.
Ah ... nice way to start a conversation ... delegitimize opposing thoughts by labeling them "dogmatic" and "politically correct" ...
... you call that critical thinking? Sounds to me like you aren't open to any thoughts except those that agree with yours ...
Well ... I'll give it a go anyway ...
The fact is that the buddy system does fail - on a reliable basis, especially in limited visibility.
Yes, the reality is that the buddy system does fail - on a reliable basis. But it doesn't have to. Being a good buddy doesn't take special skills ... all it takes is learning the things we (instructors like you and I) are SUPPOSED to be teaching in entry level OW classes ... and a desire to do those things.
The 1 minute then surface lost buddy procedure is unrealistic in situations such as deep diving in limited visibility.
I disagree. I dive, and teach, in limited visibility conditions routinely ... conditions such as were described in the article (10-20 feet vis) are typical here ... with vis of 5 feet or less fairly common in summer months. And yet the vast majority of our divers ... even our new divers ... manage to maintain buddy contact.
What causes the breakdown is that the typical OW student is told that they should always dive with a buddy, but they're never actually taught how to do it.
What if the buddy had noticed the missing diver, did a one minute search and then surfaced? The dive should then be over as bouncing up and down to 100' is a really bad idea from a DCS prevention standpoint. In the best case, it means you both just blew a dive. No big deal in the quarry, but if it is half of your 2 dives that day on the boat 6-8 hours from home, the costs are pretty big. I paid 200 in hotel bills and 100 in gas plus 400 for a total of 6 dives (not counting meals or leave taken). Any one dive cost me over $100 and if I have to end it to find the buddy dejure on the surface, I will not be pleased and even a $100 bill will not make me happy as I came to dive, not break even money wise.
That's exactly the sort of thinking that gets people hurt. What's the priority here? A chamber ride will cost you way more than $100. In this case, it cost this diver the ability to dive again ... EVER. Think he'd be willing to pay $100 to get that ability back again? I do.
Yeah, sure, it's painful to call a dive when you've spent big bucks to go somewhere special and bottom time is important. But your health and safety needs to be the priority ... always.
In really low viz, getting separated is highly likely,
No ... it isn't ... not if you have learned how to keep track of each other, and have a will to make it a priority in your diving. After a dozen or so dives ... once you've adjusted your mindset to MAKING it a priority ... it doesn't even require any extra effort.
so the plan needs to be to have a lead and a trailing diver, with the lead diver having the strongest navigation skills. If the trailing buddy loses site of the leading buddy, he or she stops and stays where he or she is at. The lead diver then stops briefly (to allow a trailing diver to catch up) then back tracks when the trailing buddy is missed and still does not appear. That at least keeps both parties in their last know or most likely predicted postions.
That simply doesn't work ... the lead diver has no clue what's going on behind him, and is proceeding on the assumption that the trailing diver will be able to get his attention if there's a problem. In low vis conditions, swimming shoulder to shoulder works much better, because it allows both divers to maintain eye contact and communication by simply turning their head.
Beyond that, the agreement I have with regular buddies is to each proceed on our own unless audible signals indicating distress are heard. That said, I normally prefer to dive with buddies with independent gas supplies and adequate skiills to safely complete the dive solo.
Well ... OK ... but now what you're basically saying is that your plan is to solo dive. Why bother with a buddy at all? And if you're going to plan your dive as a solo dive, then train and prepare to dive that way from the get-go. Don't make assumptions that you're diving with a buddy when, mentally, you're not.
The traditional lost buddy procedure also does not work in a current as if one diver ascends off the ascent line, they are now adrift, having another diver ascend off the ascent line now just means you have 2 divers adrift who are, after the time needed to notice the missing buddy, do a one minute search, an ascent form 100' and a safetey stop, now also widely separated.
That's why God created DSMB's.
In any kind of sea and current state they probably won't be able to sea each other on the surface anyway.
Not necessarily so ... depends on what the current's doing. Generally, the current's going to be pushing both divers in the same direction at the same speed ... so they're likely to surface pretty close to each other.
The boat captain then has to divers adrift that he can't even go get until every one else is up. The search then begins at about $100 per hour in gas, possibly costing the whole boat a second dive if the wind is picking up.
Again, your priority here seems to be dollars above safety. I really don't understand that mentality coming from a scuba instructor.
In short - a really bad idea for all involved that could have been prevented by better planning, better navigation and a redundant gas supply.
I say could've been prevented by better planning, better buddy technique, and better decision-making.
In my opinion, in many situations the lost buddy drill as specified by many agencies just makes the situation worse so for both the monetary and the safety reasons stated above, I am not inclined to use that approach if my buddy wanders off and frankly I know very few divers who actually do it outside the confines of a quarry.
Almost everyone I know ... and certainly any diver I train ... uses the buddy system quite successfully. And we dive in Puget Sound ... a place that's known for bad vis and strong currents. On the other hand, if you don't believe in it, it's unlikely you waste much time teaching your students how to do it.
I did have an inexperienced buddy wander off this weekend in a situation where it was possible for him to lose his bearings as he was in a situation where when last seen about 15 seconds earlier he was in a location where he could see me, but not the wreck. I backtracked, tied off and then did do a quick sweep for him taking a couple minutes, but I did not persist after that as in a current in 2-3 ft seas, from a depth of 90 feet going to the surface would have been pointless and caused all of the above mentioned safety issues. I had no desire to cruise up the coast of NC on my own private surface interval.
In which case, I'd be shooting a bag, tying off the line to the wreck, and ascending up the line.
So lets get real here, stop reguritating dogma and start thinking about the concept of divers planning, training and equiping to the level needed to be self sufficient and when needed self rescue. Then use the buddy system as it should be used - as a great way to share a dive and when possibel add another level of safety. Think of the buddy system like you would social security - it is a nice supplement to retirement but if it is all you have, you are pretty screwed.
Thank you for dragging the level of conversation down to name-calling ... I expected better from you. I'm not talking about dogma ... I'm talking about addressing the reason WHY this accident happened.
You either use the buddy system as it's intended to be used, or give it up altogether ... in which case you train, plan, and equip to dive solo. Giving lip service to a buddy system without training people how to do it is pointless.
In my opinion, DAN was absoluitely on the money with the redudant air source comment. That is an act that you can fully control, while relying on a buddy is essentially the same as doing a "trust me" dive as your fate is in the hands of someone else who despite their best intentions may not be able to meet your needs in an emergency.
In my opinion, by not pointing out in the article that a breakdown in buddy diving is what caused this accident, DAN did a huge disservice to its readers.
FWIW - I do occasionally dive solo. When I do, my plan, equipment and mental approach to the dive reflect the decision to do so. However, when I make a decision to dive with someone, my plan, equipment, and mental approach to the dive reflect the fact that I am diving with another person, and that part of the plan includes beginning, executing, and ending the dive together. If you cannot make the commitment and effort to do that, then you should not be diving together.
This conversation has nothing to do with "dogma" ... and I find your choice of words both insulting and, basically, ignorant of the point. It has EVERYTHING to do with dive planning, executing basic skills you are SUPPOSED to be teaching to your Open Water students, and a mental commitment to diving with another individual.
It's not rocket science ... it's not even particularly difficult. You just have to know how to do it, and decide that you want to ...
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
