How do you feel about solo diving?

[djhall]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
You asked
"What training do you consider sufficient?"

I am not aware of any. I have said alot already (earlier in the thread) about why I think the SDI course is a joke. If someone chooses to solo dive but I am against anything that encourages recreational divers to do so.

You ask
"Why do you arbitrarily state that two days of training isn't enough time when 1) you can learn to dive in three, and 2) you say the proper training may not exist at all."

The SDI course consists of two dives. Also, I don't believe you can learn to dive in three days. I am not sure the premise of "solo training" is valid.

You asked
"What equipment do you feel is necessary?"
As an instructor with tech and cave training I don't know what equipment is required for recreational solo solo diving. I am also fairly certain that none of the solo instructors that I know do either.

You ask
"Why do you feel that solo diving has no place in the recreational dive industry, since 53% of the poll respondents say they solo dive? 40% say they solo dive -frequently-."

Most of the divers I see have poor technique, awareness and in general make a mess. That doesn't make it a good idea.

You say
"Wouldn't this again, indicate a legion of injury and death if it was as dangerous as you imply?

Can you even think of a solo death last year that didn't happen on a rebreather or in a cave?"

As far as I know the vast majority of diver deaths take place when the diver is solo. Many times they are not intentionally solo but the are solo when they die. Divers who do not have the awareness and control to stay with a team IMO should not dive alone. IMO, what is needed here is better training in team diving.

You say
"Isn't your position rather "head in the sand"?"

Given my experience with the average skill level in recreational diving I don't think it is me who has their head in the sand.

You ask
"How much additional risk does a rec diver assume to become a cave diver? Why is that more acceptable?"

A cave diver learns and develops a specific skill set in preperation fot the cave environment. All the solo rec diver I have seen are just the average rec diver alone. Why don't you compare a rec diver and a cave diver in the water and you tell me what you think the difference is.

Would it be fair to say that your main objections are 1) you don't see valid reasons for people to solo-dive, 2) you don't think the existing solo-diving course is rigorous enough, 3) you think solo-diving courses would encourage more people to solo-dive, and 4) the people who solo-dive are usually not proficient in the basics, let alone advanced diving skills?

If so then 1) shouldn't people make that evaluation for themselves, 2) why not work to make the courses truly rigorous (multiple class sessions, several weekends of pool sessions, and several weekends of OW diving with a real possibility of failing), 3) at least having solo certifications would officially acknowledge that there are minimum skills, knowledge, and experience necessary before taking on this kind of risk, and 4) couldn't this be helped by additional training and skills work performed in the quest to become a certified solo-diver if the standards were set high enough? Why not make solo-diver somewhere above rescue diver or at the master diver level? How does telling crappy divers to dive together make them better or safer divers? Aren't they still just two crappy divers?

Isn't there a real risk in saying that certain activities are not "safe," even if large numbers of people engage in them, and therefore we are not interested in establishing standards, procedures, and training for them? That kind of attitude makes me think of cave diving, wreck penetration diving, ice diving, decompression diving, deep diving to 165 feet or greater, mixed gas diving, and many other activities that were deemed "not safe" until training agencies were forced to either acknowledge them as legitimate practices or risk being deemed irrelevant by much of the diving public. Look at the numbers here in this poll: 40% do it frequently, another 40% either have or may do it, and only 20% haven't and won't. PADI says never, ever dive alone. Which is more likely: that 80% are going to suddenly realize that PADI is right, or that most people will simply acknowledge that PADI is too conservative and liability conscious to be taken seriously.

 

[pops]

I'm actually a returnee to scuba, after a 30+ year hiatus. In the 60s I dove solo often, with my buddy in a boat above. We were catching lobsters out of season. The only incident I can remember is chasing a mullet into an illegal underwater gill net and getting tangled - skin diving - no air. I still thank God to this day I had a knife, or I'd be dead. The knife was made by Buck - a big, pretty, razor-sharp device that sliced through monofiliment so easily, that I was forced to cut the entire quarter mile of net to shreds.
Anyway - I have no problem diving alone in clear open water to free ascent depths near a beach with offshore wind - not risky. I would NEVER dive, free or scuba, without a big, sharp knife.

 

[pops]

that's only MY feelings. i don't want to encourage risky behavior - my dives off Kailua beach in Oahu were really not much riskier than diving a swimming pool. i wouldn't think for a second about diving alone deep, overhead, an unfamiliar place, within more than a couple hundred feet from shore, like that.

 

[Popeye]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
Popeye,
Fair enough questions and I'll take a stab at answering them based on my own experience.

You asked
"What training do you consider sufficient?"

I am not aware of any. I have said alot already (earlier in the thread) about why I think the SDI course is a joke. If someone chooses to solo dive but I am against anything that encourages recreational divers to do so.

> Having read the entire thread at this point, you refer more than once to the observation that most recreational divers shouldn't dive without supervision. While that has not been my experience, from that position I don't think you can objectively answer the question I asked. We can train for Trimix, we can train for Wreck Penetration, we can train for Cave Diving, but you seem to think we can't train for solo. You can't critique the SDI course, because no matter what it entailed, if it was for "recreational" divers, it wouldn't be good enough.

> I don't know where you find so many incompetent divers with AOW and 100 dives, I'm just glad I never see them.

You ask
"Why do you arbitrarily state that two days of training isn't enough time when 1) you can learn to dive in three, and 2) you say the proper training may not exist at all."

The SDI course consists of two dives. Also, I don't believe you can learn to dive in three days. I am not sure the premise of "solo training" is valid.

> I learned to dive, and learned nitrox, in three days.

> I was solo night diving within the first two weeks.

> I was working as a dive guide on a West Palm boat 60 days later.

You asked
"What equipment do you feel is necessary?"
As an instructor with tech and cave training I don't know what equipment is required for recreational solo solo diving. I am also fairly certain that none of the solo instructors that I know do either.

> If you don't know what equipment would be needed as an advanced tech diving instructor, I would see that as a personal learning potential (attempt at being polite). I know what equipment is required (because there's very little needed), and I'm not even an instructor.

> This hardly seems possible. More likely it's something that you don't want to know.

You ask
"Why do you feel that solo diving has no place in the recreational dive industry, since 53% of the poll respondents say they solo dive? 40% say they solo dive -frequently-."

Most of the divers I see have poor technique, awareness and in general make a mess. That doesn't make it a good idea.

> See above. It's gotta be where you dive.

You say
"Wouldn't this again, indicate a legion of injury and death if it was as dangerous as you imply?

Can you even think of a solo death last year that didn't happen on a rebreather or in a cave?"

As far as I know the vast majority of diver deaths take place when the diver is solo. Many times they are not intentionally solo but the are solo when they die. Divers who do not have the awareness and control to stay with a team IMO should not dive alone. IMO, what is needed here is better training in team diving.

> I would say this is grossly misleading. First, very few divers die. Secondly, Most of those that die solo are separated buddies (he was fine at the safety stop...). That possibly indicates that if they had learned a solo perspective, some of them may have survived. The only solo death I remember last year was Reinhart, solo, trimix, rebreather, >200fsw, and possibly killed by a shark.

> While I certainly agree that team training is important, it would be my opinion that most divers know that, and become complacent. Not that they didn't learn it to begin with.

You say
"Isn't your position rather "head in the sand"?"

Given my experience with the average skill level in recreational diving I don't think it is me who has their head in the sand.

> I can see that now. I'm glad I don't experience what you do. I'd hate to do all those rescues (having done two in 800+dives, a drysuit up-ending, and a tired diver), and dodging all the ambulances. But the bottom line is, more than half of all divers dive solo, and 40% do so regularly.

You ask
"How much additional risk does a rec diver assume to become a cave diver? Why is that more acceptable?"

A cave diver learns and develops a specific skill set in preperation fot the cave environment. All the solo rec diver I have seen are just the average rec diver alone. Why don't you compare a rec diver and a cave diver in the water and you tell me what you think the difference is.

> I'm preparing for Cave 1 now. I doubt cave divers learn excellent buoyancy in a five day class that doesn't focus on buoyancy.

> Where then, did they learn it?

No disrespect meant, you just have a very, very dark perspective on the abilities of your fellow divers.

 

[Scuba]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
What is proper equipment and training for solo diving. IMO, the proper training (if there is such a thing) is not available in the recreational dive industry.

Without shifting the debate as to what is or is not proper equipment for solo diving, let me address your other issue. I have stated fefore the need in this industry for a quality solo course. I don't know if the present course (s) availabe fall in this category or not. The same case of poor education can be made for any other type of diving, yet instead of seeking to ban the practice, the solution sought is better training.

I recall some news reports a while back before I was a diver, mentioning the high number of divers dying in Florida caves, and a mention of a possible need for regulation or a ban on the practice. I assume the industry took the course of better education and training instead of seeking a ban. Yet solo is the black sheep of diving.

On another subject you mentioned. Its possible the reason there are a lot of unqualified solo divers is because the industry has failed ot provide an alternative. If you don't properly educate and offer the necessary training for solo, cave, diving, whatever, some will attempt it anyways resulting in more accidents. As someone mentioned if we consider the present situation with respect to solo training and the number of participants who engage in solo diving, it possibly indicates that it is safer than cave diving. Put these divers in a cave and see how many come out. The training and skills necessary for safe cave diving would appear to be greater than that necessary for rec level solo diving. What is the most responsible course of action for training agencies to take?

Regarding the contradiction you see in: how do you train someone to dive solo? People are trained everyday to do all sorts of much more demanding tasks - solo.

I think the best course would be to not let the presently widespread poor training practices many believe exist dictate diving, but instead direct our efforts into improving the system.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Popeye said...
"No disrespect meant, you just have a very, very dark perspective on the abilities of your fellow divers."

That's true. I see alot of divers and it aint pretty. Take a look at the new ïssue of "Sport Diver" magazine I think page 44. IMO, it's worse than just bad it's so bad that few even know the difference.

 

[Bob]

PS: I have never personally dove "officially" solo, though I consider most buddy dives to be solo dives in many respects. Self-reliance is a prime tennent of mine

Well said djhall,
I don't dive in overhead environments, period. I am strickly a recreational diver Most of my dives are with "buddies" assigned to me by the divemaster, which in fact end up to be solo dives. Most buddies aren't real buddies. I learned a long time ago to be well prepared and self reliant. In the open water arena, by necessity, I depend on me and I'm comfortable with that. :tree: Bob

 

[djhall]

Bob once bubbled...
Most buddies aren't real buddies. I learned along time ago to be well prepared and self reliant. In the open water arena, by necessity, I depend on me and I'm comfortable with that.

Exactly. What truly surprises me, however, are the number of people who are even hostile to this self-reliant-solo-with-a-buddy philosphy. I sometimes start to think they believe there is something noble about relying on a buddy. Absolutely, your buddy just might save your life someday. On the other hand, they may not. IF they come through for you, fanstastic, you got a second chance at life. But why be opposed to making damn sure you never have to find out? Perhaps it stems from the "very, very dark perspective on the abilities of your fellow divers" that was mentioned here. Perhaps keeping people from being indepenent is simply a manipulative attempt to limit the activities they may be tempted to engage in, rather than an honest attempt to enable divers to engage in their chosen activities in the safest manner possible.

 

[Genesis]

whether I like it or not.

I usually spearfish. While we can occasionally stay together, hunting that way is less productive. If the current and vis permit, I and my buddy will often go our ways at the anchor. We know roughly where the other is, but we're in no way within half a breath!

This is one reason, by the way, that I am considering diving double HP120s or 100s this summer - once the new PST "E"s are available. Fully redundant gas supplies are a good thing when you're 100' down with no buddy in sight.

Anyway, you can garf about solo diving all you want, but many people do "SOB" (same ocean buddy) diving all the time. Is it more dangerous than "regular buddy" or "DIR-style-buddy" diving? Yes.

If you spearfished with "DIR-style-buddy" diving, only one of you would be shooting - the other would be effectively a game bag holder. No way around it.

 

[Bob]

Exactly. What truly surprises me, however, are the number of people who are even hostile to this self-reliant-solo-with-a-buddy philosphy. I sometimes start to think they believe there is something noble about relying on a buddy

jdhall,
Check out the diving philosphy of the majority of those who are hostile to the idea of self reliance while diving with a buddy. That particular idealogy demands uniformity and discourages individualism which in itself isn't bad, EXCEPT when those that promote this regimen aren't able to distinguish been cave diving or wreck penetration and a simple cruise down the reef patch. The methods and gear configurations just aren't the same. Thus, the endless and mindless arguements here on the board that seem to work their way into every thread. :tree: Bob