Dive buddy for air? No thanks.

[tna9001]

There would be many advantages to eliminating the buddy system for air. Im sure that for most recreational divers the possibility of running out of air and then having to deal with it under the current standard is the greatest stressor they face while diving.

How much easer would an OOA emergency be for the majority of divers, if they had their own redundant source rather than getting to their buddy alerting him and finding his secondary and then get to the surface?

Its also a much simpler task to teach and learn and its got to be safer. The reality of recreational diving is that training is severely limited due to the need to make the sport attractive to the most people. That is a difficult balance. By eliminating the current standard for OOA emergency (buddy) and replacing it with a simpler standard (redundant air) instructors would have more time to teach other skills and students would have less stress and more reserve brain power to spend on learning other skills.

By the way I know this is the Basic Scuba section and folks are suppose to be nice but, I have thick skin so flame away if need be:shocked2:

In response to Web Monkeys question, replacing the secondary second stage with a dedicated 1st an second stage with a pony bottle of at least 13 cu. Ft. would do the trick. Mounting the pony bottle to the main tank would eliminate compatibility issues with BCD. This is a inelegant solution but, the equipment manufactures respond to demand and Im sure there would be a better solution if the community demanded it.

 

[shoredivr]

2) I'm a small woman. Carrying a complete redundant air system would significantly increase the difficulty level of me managing my own gear, climbing in and out, etc. without doing myself injury. It would also increase the difficulty of managing in currents due to added resistance. (I've never used one of these systems so maybe this is not significant

I'm short. I've dived with 30ALu and 80 ALu slung. It's not an issue IMO. You can remove the tank if needed to get in and out.

 

[danvolker]

Thanks for the response.

The question I have is why do we rely on another diver for the most important piece of support gear? Is it because thats how its always been done it?



If the standard was for each diver to have redundant air and someone had the idea to rely on the "buddy" system instead what kind of response would the diving community have?

If you let the dive manufacturers and some training agencies have their way, this was pretty much the way things were headed about 8 years ago...the reality is, that the most important gear choice you make, "is" your dive buddy. To me, it is far more foolish to dive with someone you don't know anything about( as a buddy) than it is to dive with cheap rental gear.

With a "good buddy", you have a redundant air source that is self powered ( you don't have to lug it around, wasting gas with extra drag), it is always right there next to you if needed, and would often be shoving the reg over to you even before you asked for it--as good dive buddies are proactive about your needs....And, if ever you managed to get tangled up in line or were somehow unable to reach around for a redundant air source, your buddy would be getting air into your mouth, and getting you disengaged from your problem ( I would like to see a "spare air or pony bottle do that

These are all "minimal" contributions a good buddy would make..there are many more. It sounds to me as if you have no awareness of what it takes to be a good dive buddy, or what a dive buddy is supposed to do. I don't know who is to blame for this lack of awareness, but you should figure this out, and make some changes in who is mentoring you in diving.

It is your job to find good buddies to dive with. Bad ones are pretty easy to spot...I could post much more on this, if you like.

Regards,
Dan V

 

[Melicertes]

My question is if you were starting from scratch designing a protocol to address the out of air diver would it make sense to use your dive buddy?

The concept of redundancy for critical equipment in recreational diving breaks down with the rubber O-ring.

So, why not use a truly redundant system for recreational diving?

It depends on what you call a truly redundant system. If it means having spare air available for emergencies then there is still the concern about equipment failure at the time you need it most. However, the probability of having your O-ring fail at depth and having a problem with your spare air source at the same time when you switch over is not all that likely, provided you look after your gear and keep it well maintained.

If you consider a buddy a truly redundant "system," then you should be aware that buddies too can fail. Either by not staying close enough to you to be of any use to you in an emergency, or perhaps not planning and managing his or her gas properly for you to reliably make use of their air as an alternate air source.

IMHO, buddies are better alternates than extra gear for two reasons; first, adding more gear to compensate for bad planning is just not a good idea. If you and your buddy plan the dive properly and do not exceed the logical limits, whether that means not exceeding NDLs or depleting your available breathing gas, then you do not need extra gear that makes you less streamlined, adds extra weight, and costs you more $$. Second, a spare air source that can think for itself, assist you when you are stressed out of your bracket, and able to adapt to the situation will IMHO beat any product on the market today, so I say investing in buddy skills is probably more productive than spending more on more gear. On the other hand, relying on your buddy as a backup for an emergency inherently means that your strategy then includes some decent gas planning and management practices that will allow you to safely rely on your buddy being an alternate source of air in the event of an emergency with your own primary breathing gas source.

When it comes to new protocols, as you put it, I'd say the very, very first thing that needs to be addressed is the eroneous perception people have of OOA situations. I'm taking a comment in one of the recent threads here on SB to illustrate my point:

Running out of gas on scuba is not a life or death emergency either. You did have some plan for redundancy, didn't you??? If not, better take another look at golf.

The idea that so many divers view OOA situations as acceptable and perhaps even common events that can be dealt with by using redundant equipment or strategies, and therefore should be of no concern, is IMHO just inviting trouble and playing russian roulette with the fish(es for some here in the US ;o).

An OOA situation is serious, no matter how you look at it, or plan on responding to it when it occurs. Just blindly trusting that your emergency planning strategies will always bail you out when you're in trouble smacks, for me at least, a little too much of overconfidence, something the ocean does not tolerate lightly. I know this sound so cliche but I do think that prevention is always better than cure, or in context of a diving OOA situation, prevention is always preferable to having one.

So I would say the first thing that should be addressed when rethinking OOA management protocols is to address the common lackadaisical approach so many divers have towards gas planning and managementfor their dives. Being able to correctly perform a CESA does not elimminate the risks associated with ascending fast to the surface, you may be lucky enough to not have complications, but what if The Goddess Who Must Not Be Named (a.k.a. Lady Luck) is off having a facial at the spa when you're doing your aaaaaah sound to the surface?

The second thing I think should be addressed, and no I don't want to turn this thread into yet another standards being substandard argument, is to enocurage divers to build their knowledge of good gas planning and management strategies and then encourage them even more to implement them as early a spossible in their diving careers. Whether this happens during OW training, which I personally prefer, during AOW, or reading up here on SB and asking the perceived "dumb questions" so many people are afraid to ask. Regardless of how the knowledge and the importance of it is conveyed, just let it be conveyed quickly and effectively, and hopefully, just hopefully it will raise the bar just a little to make your new instabuddy on your next trip to some island paradise, a better buddy, and a step closer to being a more reliable redundant system, if for some reason you do run into an unforeseen and unexpected OOA situation.

 

[shoredivr]

In response to Web Monkeys question, replacing the secondary second stage with a dedicated 1st an second stage with a pony bottle of at least 13 cu. Ft. would do the trick. Mounting the pony bottle to the main tank would eliminate compatibility issues with BCD. This is a inelegant solution but, the equipment manufactures respond to demand and Im sure there would be a better solution if the community demanded it.

Again, NWGratefuldiver has posted a good reason why this is not the best solution.

One fatality here a few years back was due to a diver who was relying on a pony bottle ... but when it came time to deploy it, he had inadvertently trapped his reg and couldn't. Since he was diving solo, there wasn't an alternative ... he drowned with a full pony bottle on his back.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

With a side slung tank, you can easily see the 2nd stage, and read the SPG of your slung tank....I've been doing that for 5 years now no problems.

 

[Reg Braithwaite]

How much easer would an OOA emergency be for the majority of divers, if they had their own redundant source rather than getting to their buddy alerting him and finding his secondary and then get to the surface?

Let's do a little problem solving together, shall we?

If getting to my buddy and alerting him is stressful, how do I eliminate the stress? By carrying redundant air? Or by staying with my buddy and watching her attentively while she watches me? How about by checking each other every few minutes? Ok? Ok! This reduces stress.

If finding her secondary is stressful, perhaps we are not set up correctly? Perhaps we didn't review each other's gear at the beginning of the dive? Perhaps we didn't practice deploying our secondaries for each other in the water to make sure they worked?

I'm out of air, I'm struggling to deploy the third regulator in my kit. I'm under pressure and trying to remember to grab the extra octo and not the octo attached to my OOG single tank. This is very stressful.

Wouldn't it be easier if I start to have trouble breathing, I start to stress out, and my buddy--who is attentive--flashes me the ok??? sign when she sees me stop and start to look for an octo? Wouldn't it be easier if she deployed a reg for me in the time it takes me to ditch my own reg and start fumbling for my spare?

A buddy is spare air with a brain and two extra hands. Put them to work and your stress will be lower, not higher.

 

[rstofer]

There would be many advantages to eliminating the buddy system for air. Im sure that for most recreational divers the possibility of running out of air and then having to deal with it under the current standard is the greatest stressor they face while diving.

Why do you believe this to be the case?

I have an SPG on my left hip D-ring and I look at it from time to time - more often when I am deep. I kind of know how long a tank should last based on some idea of depth and I have a computer for time/depth numbers. If I know how deep I will be diving, I will already have an idea of how long I can stay down (NDL). I check my initial tank pressure so I have some idea of whether the SPG and common sense are in agreement. In fact, I can watch the SPG go from zero to high pressure so I have some belief that it works.

Basically, I know that if I want to live, I need to watch my SPG. I don't belong in the ocean, it is not my environment and I live or die based on my air supply. I pay attention!

I did blow an o-ring one night (high current, long swim) but even that didn't approach the level of an emergency. There was more than enough air forced into the first stage to make a safe ascent from 60'. It was exciting!

It just doesn't occur to me to ever worry about the problem of OOA. I watch my gauges, I watch my buddy's gauges and I have no problem deciding when to head back. I try not to dive deep; I prefer 40-60'.

I have certainly considered a pony bottle (probably 19 cf) but, at the moment, the utility of carrying such a thing just isn't there.

Entanglement might be a problem but it would be more of a problem with a sling bottle.

I don't do dives with deco obligations and I don't do wreck or cave penetrations. I consider these to be outside of the concept of recreational diving. I am always allowed to do a direct, non-stop, ascent to the surface.

The issue of OOA just isn't high on my list of concerns.

Richard

 

[micklock]

Ok, got your attention

My question is if you were starting from scratch designing a protocol to address the out of air diver would it make sense to use your dive buddy?

The concept of redundancy for critical equipment in recreational diving breaks down with the rubber O-ring.

So, why not use a truly redundant system for recreational diving?

I like my independent doubles with independent regs and spg's. One tank fills my wing and the other fills my drysuit. I have the left reg on a necklace around my neck and the other clipped to a d-ring when not being used. I dive this way with or without buddies. If I have a freeflow or some other problem I will switch to my other tank, let my bubby know if (I'm diving with one) and surface.

 

[String]

So, why not use a truly redundant system for recreational diving?

I advocate (and teach) that divers should never blindly rely on a third party for help so always carry a redundant air source adequate for the dive (be that a pony if shallow, or a twinset if deeper).

 

[DaleC]

It was glossed over but I will return to the point: If I were developing a protocol for dealing with rec OOA emergencies the first on the list would be proficiency in developing and following a proper gas plan. I think that the instances of OOA in rec diving from catastrophic equipment failure are far less than those from operator error so dealing with the latter would eliminate most OOA situations.

Perhaps the single greatest cure for OOA is to "look at the SPG once in awhile".


Once you are in the soup your choices are limited; ESA, make it to your buddy and access the secondary reg successfully, access your own redundant air source. Of these:

ESA. Not necessarily a bad option for shallow diving if the diver knows how to do one and has good enough situational awareness to be aware of depth and possible overheads. It allows no buffer for a second issue at or near an OOA though (suit flood, entanglement etc...).

Buddy system. It's good when it works but sole reliance on it depends on a lot of variable factors. Will the buddy always be close enough, aware enough and will the secondary work. A good buddy team addresses and rectifies those issues while an ista buddy team can leave a lot to be desired. Even a good buddy team may be challenged in low vis, high current situations.

Redundant air source. A good option with or without a buddy but only if it is configured correctly. As noted previously, if it is back mounted and unaccessible or if the reg is misplaced it may only be extra weight and of little value.

I think all the systems have their place but need to be tested against less than optimal conditions. To see how "successful" each is, one should train for an OOA on an expelled breath. This cuts the reaction time down quite a bit and should be the gauge for practicality (not a calm, premeditated full breath).

Nothing too original; Just my 2CW.
Dale.

Ha Ha! I see that six people posted in the time it took for me to reply and covered most of my points.