Dangerous psychology- Diving beyond one's training
- Thread starter tstormdiver
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
R
redacted
Guest
So not knowing what you don't know is not the point. You just need to acquire the necessary knowledge (skills and abilities) for the dives you plan to do.
Dr. Lecter
Contributor
Without in any way defending the sloppy overhead skills and gear-selection choices shown in the videos Britton has posted, this argument is among the most obnoxious of those I regularly see advanced to "educate" a diver with whose risk choices the "wiser" poster disagrees.
No diver, whether "properly" trained or otherwise, has any right to expect rescue from anyone outside their immediate team should things go wrong. Nor do they have a right to expect someone else to come get their corpse if they die. Personally, I think leaving them in there would serve a number of useful functions, though in certain sites I'm sure the sheer aggregate volume of bodies and gear would eventually cause problems.
But no rescuer has any obligation to go in after someone reported missing/overdue/dead, and those who choose to do so are making their own risk assessment and doing the rescue/corpse recovery of their own free will. It is freely choosing to do a risky dive out of the goodness of their hearts that makes rescuers like Edd Sorensen such heroic bad
s. To the extent the argument is that there are public servants whose job requires them to conduct rescue/recovery dives, I will remain unpersuaded until we start forcibly conscripting people into those jobs.Any claim that "proper" certification negates, rather than reduces, the chance of needing rescue or recovery is laughable, so if potentially putting would-be rescuers/recovery divers at risk was really something we had a moral obligation to consider, we should all be avoiding any dive with the potential for their involvement. And that would really cut down on available dive sites.
The point of the "catchy phrase" is to encourage a recognition that one may not have sufficient background to make an informed judgment about the relative safety of performing a particular dive. Britton apparently fails to recognize this, particularly as [-]he[/-] she is confused at the very basic level of knowing just what safety "rules" and procedures the cavers are making reference to. In other words, [-]his[/-] her knowledge clearly has gaping holes of which [-]he[/-] she is blissfully unaware.
kotik
Contributor
Oh, DL you are picking nits by focusing on two words and are going off on a rant by giving them a particularly strict interpretation. Yes, there are people who are obliged to go in and attempt rescues--these divers are typically uniformed public safety divers; and then there are the volunteers like Edd, who, while they may not have any contractual obligation to attempt rescues or body recoveries, do feel a moral imperative to help if they can. So I'll just stick with my "have to" phrasing, thank you very much.Without in any way defending the sloppy overhead skills and gear-selection choices shown in the videos Britton has posted, this argument is among the most obnoxious of those I regularly see advanced to "educate" a diver with whose risk choices the "wiser" poster disagrees.
No diver, whether "properly" trained or otherwise, has any right to expect rescue from anyone outside their immediate team should things go wrong. Nor do they have a right to expect someone else to come get their corpse if they die. Personally, I think leaving them in there would serve a number of useful functions, though in certain sites I'm sure the sheer aggregate volume of bodies and gear would eventually cause problems.
But no rescuer has any obligation to go in after someone reported missing/overdue/dead, and those who choose to do so are making their own risk assessment and doing the rescue/corpse recovery of their own free will. It is freely choosing to do a risky dive out of the goodness of their hearts that makes rescuers like Edd Sorensen such heroic bad
Any claim that "proper" certification negates, rather than reduces, the chance of needing rescue or recovery is laughable, so if potentially putting would-be rescuers/recovery divers at risk was really something we had a moral obligation to consider, we should all be avoiding any dive with the potential for their involvement.
Dr. Lecter
Contributor
Stick with whatever you want, my point that nobody has to do what you claim they have to do stands unrebutted.
I see you also haven't addressed the issue that most, if not all, overhead dives involve a relatively higher chance of resulting in a need for rescue or recovery... and so we're all guilty of putting those poor would-be rescuers/recovery divers at higher risk, whether we're certified out the wazoo or totally incompetent strokes like Britton.
Why don't you articulate an objective distinction between your (or any "properly" certified diver) undertaking a dive that increases the chances someone will have to come get you, and (by all appearances soon to be former) cave diver Britton doing the same thing. One is OK, the other is arrogantly putting people at risk. Why?
Risk is a matter of perspective and 'knowledge.'
20 years back I went up to 280kmh on two wheels. Now I shudder to think about going beyond 150kmh. Some here would stil consider that insane. Perspective.
Perspective of a new diver is: why am I told 18m is my limit when my friends in the same course taken elsewhere have gone to 25m? In most cases the almighty dollar drives behaviours of the dive staff and some less scrupulous owners. The alternative of not entertaining your customers' request is a bad review of the instructor or business splashed all over the internet less then 30 minutes after touchdown at the dock/shore. Who drives silly behaviour?
When I was diving recreationally (not yet a pro) a short swim (not a dead end cave) through of up to 15m to 25m in length is a nice thing to do. After turning pro and starting to teach and seeing what people can get themselves into I wouldn't attempt it with students unless I know I can get them out of a tunnel if they panicked for any of 2 dozen reasons - the risk is too high. Makes me a 'boring' instructor and 'less value for money' is the perspective of some students I've taught. Perspective.
Took many years to glean knowledge of diving, of decompression, of dive safety. Going full tech (save CCR) all the way into instructing puts diving in a different perspective once again and even skills picked up in tech become ingrained into rec diving though no manual says it is necessary. But this took years of reading, diving, watching others and hearing horror stories. Even participating in a few horror stories as a rescuer.
I've met CDs / ITs / 'gods' of teaching diving who've told students certain sites/destinations can ONLY be dived with CCRs, sold them the course, sold them the gear then had the local dive guide and me as another guest on OC for the entire trip. Is it any wonder the instructors who try to pass on 'good' information are brushed off by the learning public? This is just an example, please do not turn this into a CCR thread.
I'd imagine the students in this CCR course would go back and tell their friends that not everything an instructor (regardless of rank) says is true and that at least 50% or more should be discounted. Especially since 2 of 4 Mk VIs suffered critical failure (fortunately discovered during pre-dive checks) and they went back on OC with rental gear - diving the same sites that they were first told could only be dived on CCR. 'Knowledge' of this nature drives a lot of diver behaviour these days.
More 'knowledge' students pick up come from dive operations who use equipment that are ill fitting and have not been serviced properly - in order to cut cost - in order to present CHEAP prices to attract divers. Reminds you of anyone you know? 99 of 100 will live through the experience. Ever have anyone tell you what they invested in / bought really s**ked because the buyer was a cheapskate? No, we are proud. We will only tell you the good stuff! The politically correct stuff!
How do the two examples of 'knowledge' gleaned by new divers compute? And in this day and age where the younger folk and some others feel that information should be free guess who picks up on this knowledge as well? Do you consult your friends or the internet prior to taking up some new sport or activity?
As a tec instructor I've had students with 25 dives with both OW and AOW taught resort style (in a couple of days a piece) sign up because "it looks fun and I want to go deep." What would you do?
What I've read here and in other threads suggest strongly that courses are not a 'must have.' And I agree. I'm self taught in compressor and outboard motor servicing. Never taken a course on those in my life to date. My mentality: not necessary, hands on is more important.
If a diver has had a responsible instructor would did not cut corners and baldly lie in order to sell they've had a good deal (though usually not cheap) and were lucky. In order for instructors to be responsible it costs more. More time, more equipment, more money, more experience.
Who's footing the bill?
IMO, when I take someone underwater, theirs lives are in my hands. Even at the OW stage where its supposed to be all fun and games as espoused by most agencies and as such taught as so by many instructors. This is the knowledge that Joe Public has about diving. This perspective carries even into higher levels of diving, often into the instructorship levels and is perpetuated by those who refuse to tell it like it is (I've 'failed' OW and AOW students and all I've gotten was a bad rep*) and those who believe in cutting costs on both buyer and seller sides.
* But I sleep better at night with a clear conscience.
20 years back I went up to 280kmh on two wheels. Now I shudder to think about going beyond 150kmh. Some here would stil consider that insane. Perspective.
Perspective of a new diver is: why am I told 18m is my limit when my friends in the same course taken elsewhere have gone to 25m? In most cases the almighty dollar drives behaviours of the dive staff and some less scrupulous owners. The alternative of not entertaining your customers' request is a bad review of the instructor or business splashed all over the internet less then 30 minutes after touchdown at the dock/shore. Who drives silly behaviour?
When I was diving recreationally (not yet a pro) a short swim (not a dead end cave) through of up to 15m to 25m in length is a nice thing to do. After turning pro and starting to teach and seeing what people can get themselves into I wouldn't attempt it with students unless I know I can get them out of a tunnel if they panicked for any of 2 dozen reasons - the risk is too high. Makes me a 'boring' instructor and 'less value for money' is the perspective of some students I've taught. Perspective.
Took many years to glean knowledge of diving, of decompression, of dive safety. Going full tech (save CCR) all the way into instructing puts diving in a different perspective once again and even skills picked up in tech become ingrained into rec diving though no manual says it is necessary. But this took years of reading, diving, watching others and hearing horror stories. Even participating in a few horror stories as a rescuer.
I've met CDs / ITs / 'gods' of teaching diving who've told students certain sites/destinations can ONLY be dived with CCRs, sold them the course, sold them the gear then had the local dive guide and me as another guest on OC for the entire trip. Is it any wonder the instructors who try to pass on 'good' information are brushed off by the learning public? This is just an example, please do not turn this into a CCR thread.
I'd imagine the students in this CCR course would go back and tell their friends that not everything an instructor (regardless of rank) says is true and that at least 50% or more should be discounted. Especially since 2 of 4 Mk VIs suffered critical failure (fortunately discovered during pre-dive checks) and they went back on OC with rental gear - diving the same sites that they were first told could only be dived on CCR. 'Knowledge' of this nature drives a lot of diver behaviour these days.
More 'knowledge' students pick up come from dive operations who use equipment that are ill fitting and have not been serviced properly - in order to cut cost - in order to present CHEAP prices to attract divers. Reminds you of anyone you know? 99 of 100 will live through the experience. Ever have anyone tell you what they invested in / bought really s**ked because the buyer was a cheapskate? No, we are proud. We will only tell you the good stuff! The politically correct stuff!
How do the two examples of 'knowledge' gleaned by new divers compute? And in this day and age where the younger folk and some others feel that information should be free guess who picks up on this knowledge as well? Do you consult your friends or the internet prior to taking up some new sport or activity?
As a tec instructor I've had students with 25 dives with both OW and AOW taught resort style (in a couple of days a piece) sign up because "it looks fun and I want to go deep." What would you do?
What I've read here and in other threads suggest strongly that courses are not a 'must have.' And I agree. I'm self taught in compressor and outboard motor servicing. Never taken a course on those in my life to date. My mentality: not necessary, hands on is more important.
If a diver has had a responsible instructor would did not cut corners and baldly lie in order to sell they've had a good deal (though usually not cheap) and were lucky. In order for instructors to be responsible it costs more. More time, more equipment, more money, more experience.
Who's footing the bill?
IMO, when I take someone underwater, theirs lives are in my hands. Even at the OW stage where its supposed to be all fun and games as espoused by most agencies and as such taught as so by many instructors. This is the knowledge that Joe Public has about diving. This perspective carries even into higher levels of diving, often into the instructorship levels and is perpetuated by those who refuse to tell it like it is (I've 'failed' OW and AOW students and all I've gotten was a bad rep*) and those who believe in cutting costs on both buyer and seller sides.
* But I sleep better at night with a clear conscience.
Similar threads
