Fortunately, its not the case as much today, but unfortunately, this was not always so. The real underlying problem that this is alluding to is the unfortunately all too common tendency for some people to believe that there is such a thing as a perfect system that contains no risk whatsoever, or that they must listen to the opinions of others for what's an acceptable level of risk.
hh, it must be mind boggling to be as omnipotent in all diving aspects as you. It must be great, O' all wise one to sit back and parse the correct formula in diving and to pontificate all answers,this must truly be hh-. Strive for the perfect system or profile, ignore less than perfect, as we all know, there is no perfection, and sit back and snipe at all other inputs that are counter to hh. Both of these are choosing to take the easy way out with a pat answer/response , rather than to holistically see the overall problem for what it is: a highly complex set of interactions with primary, secondary and terciary contributing factors.
Can we spread more babble to confuse the uneducated and "tertiary" factors that result in risk analysis. Hmm, let's consider all the possible risks, prioritize the most probable ones, decide on a risk probability for our dive and accept that factor, and completely ignore anyone elses input other than our own. Let no other input from other divers who have taken these aforementioned dive risks influence our decisions. hh, you sound much more like Karl in your omniscient analysis of all things DIR. Call me back when you pass Cave 3 or Tech 3. Oh, BTW, I am sure you are already proficient to any of the above levels already or the equivalant, just humor me.
Sure - having functional gear tends to be important to the enjoyment of a dive.
However, the question of which reg to donate and what hose lengths to use become irrelevant if there is no buddy to provide the context for why certain things are necessary. To dive with a buddy is an accepted constraint of the DIR system for risk management: it is not a constraint because it is some immutable law of physics.
Immutable law of physics, hmmm like needing to breathe underwater. To accept that as a constraint, you need to move beyond that. You can dive underwater withouts a buddy, or air, or a compressed air cylinder, or etc. It is dependant upon you to accept whatever level of risk or physical law of nature you will accept.
Amongst other things, this means that other possibilities are possible, although its likely that they'll result in different levels of risk. Granted, see above.
And because of that complexity again, since there's proverbially a million contributing risk factors, its also possible for one "shortcoming" to be compensated somewhere else, resulting in the same net risk. It can actually be quite hard to maintain perspective objectively.
Yes, that is what comes into play with risk/probability assesment. Am I more likely to win the Mega Millions Lottery or be a victim of a crime? How you assess the risk and plan for resolution with your dive partner determines your profile. Objectivity comes into play with deciding the risk probabibility and threat level of each risk to our dive. Losing a pencil versus losing your gas have decidedly different outcomes. Perceptions of a risk may vary, but the severity of the risk seldom change.
Sure, and so do I. But here's one of the important questions to ask: of these three variables (gear config - training - attitude), which one is the most important?
IMO, there should be absolutely no hesitation in being able to realize what the right answer is here...
Which is the most important? Training with a reg that fails will not help you. Believing that you can dive the Empress in reversing current when you can't won't help you. Diving with an AIR 2 withour ever using it in a OOA will likely not help your dive buddy
Sure, and this mindset is the proper approach to risk management. The mind is a powerful thing. I have witnessed surgical patients take placebos in lieu of anesthetics and mental patients taking sugar water injections versus thorazine and believing they were all right. This does not preclude anyone deluding themselves into taking an improper risk/dive and ending up on the wrong end of the equation.
The Devil's Advocate Question is to ask who taught you this? Because even if your answer happens to be GUE, why couldn't someone learn this a lot sooner, such as during OW-I?
Why aren't we in the Garden of Eden? Why isn't my scuba instruction the be all/end all?
FWIW, it's also quite possible that they learned and knew this long before they even became a scuba diver....
Unfortunately hh, many of us have to experience that humans, can, and have made wrong choices and have, at times, learned lessons in a hard way. Not many have had the opportunity to study under such a learned solon, as yourself.
-hh
