How many of you think solo is OK to do and why?

[TMHeimer]

Not wanting to be a prick, but the Rouses died (diving U 869) because, in part, they were not willing to pay for trimix on the day of their last dive. I am NOT saying your diving solo because of gas prices makes you wrong, I just read that and though instantly of the Rouses. For those that don't know, they were a father-son buddy team that died, neither was diving solo, but they were were doing an extremely dangerous, deep dive.

No offense taken (yeah I meant gasoline). But your point does get to the crux of it so to speak. I COULD just spend the $ and drive to all those far sites. I also would actually prefer to do some of them more often--go to 70-100' shore dives with a buddy, as opposed to the somewhat less interesting close to home shallow solo dives (these are only slightly more interesting than Meigs Point in Hammonassett State Park which you may be familiar with). It all gets down to choices to a great degree.

 

[kr2y5]

Does "check" mean yes? If so, the entire list is invented, baseless, completely incorrect, a collection of mostly simple-minded statements with no substance or relevance.

See, that's exactly the point I was making... people don't react quite this emotionally to motorcycles.

30x more dangerous? Where did this absurdity come from? This is an invention so off the mark as to be hilarious. Not much data exists, but what does exist indicates that solo diving results in fewer accidents and fatalities.

As far as the statistic, I randomly pulled it from the article on motorcycle safety (remember, I was talking about motorcycles).

I been solo diving for 50+ years. Not every day, but for a long time and usually. No problems at all. I have gotten pretty nervous diving with some people, and seen some scary things done by thoughtless fools.

Just as with motorcycles: some people ride them their whole life and stay safe, even if motorcycles are more dangerous than cars... as pointed out above, there's no contradiction between one and the other.

Unnecessary? Most people who solo dive do so not out of necessity but because it's more enjoyable and probably safer.

You're repeating, in your own words, pretty much the exact points I raised... it's not technically necessary, but some people don't care if it's necessary, and simply enjoy it. What exactly are you disagreeing with?

Some folks think that taking a subway in NYC or flying is brain dead stupid. These people, including those who think solo diving is brain dead stupid are in fact themselves brain dead stupid. QED

Same as above...

Does it pose unique dangers? No. Everyone is, in a profound sense, always diving solo. There is no taboo. Using commuting in a car as compared commuting on a motorcycle as the equivalent of buddy diving as compared to solo diving is completely devoid of any logic or statistical foundation and is completely specious, just plain silly.

See... we are, in fact, agreeing on many of the points... yet, look at the intensity of your immediate emotional reaction. That's the absurdity of the whole situation. There's no need to have two opposing camps vigorously arguing against each other, and feeling an intense need to defend their own adult choices because the other camp is questioning them.

 

[agilis]

See, that's exactly the point I was making... people don't react quite this emotionally to motorcycles.



As far as the statistic, I randomly pulled it from the article on motorcycle safety (remember, I was talking about motorcycles).



Just as with motorcycles: some people ride them their whole life and stay safe, even if motorcycles are more dangerous than cars... as pointed out above, there's no contradiction between one and the other.



You're repeating, in your own words, pretty much the exact points I raised... it's not technically necessary, but some people don't care if it's necessary, and simply enjoy it. What exactly are you disagreeing with?



Same as above...



See... we are, in fact, agreeing on many of the points... yet, look at the intensity of your immediate emotional reaction. That's the absurdity of the whole situation. There's no need to have two opposing camps vigorously arguing against each other, and feeling an intense need to defend their own adult choices because the other camp is questioning them.

You began with 'Much of the debate would sound...the same" This implicitly indicates that the activities are comparable because the risks are comparable.

There is no debate, really, and there is no comparability without parallel circumstances. Otherwise, you might just as well discuss foot bone deterioration in ballet dancers or ocular degeneration among micro engravers.

Any emotional reactions on my part are caused by the use of mercury in traditional hatmaking.

 

[kr2y5]

You began with 'Much of the debate would sound...the same" This implicitly indicates that the activities are comparable because the risks are comparable. There is no debate, really, and there is no comparability without parallel circumstances. Otherwise, you might just as well discuss foot bone deterioration in ballet dancers or ocular degeneration among micro engravers. Any emotional reactions on my part are caused by the use of mercury in traditional hatmaking.

I don't claim they're comparable to the last digit of precision in every statistic, but... do you genuinely believe that solo diving is inherently safer than buddy diving, or do you simply want to assert your own perfectly valid right to make your own adult decisions about the risks that affect you, and nobody else? If it's the former, oh well... I guess it's always going to be like the Jews and the Palestinians...

 

[Zieg]

But you forgot the redundant helmet. What if the strap breaks? Then what? HUH? How about the redundant GPS? What if the primary GPS fails during the ride? You would be lost! Do you have your radar detector? I know you're not going to speed but you can never be too safe. Remember this is life support equipment.

 

[AfterDark]

Hey there's people that think solo sex is dangerous! You could go blind doing that!

 

[Z Gear]

You began with 'Much of the debate would sound...the same" This implicitly indicates that the activities are comparable because the risks are comparable.

There is no debate, really, and there is no comparability without parallel circumstances. Otherwise, you might just as well discuss foot bone deterioration in ballet dancers or ocular degeneration among micro engravers.

Any emotional reactions on my part are caused by the use of mercury in traditional hatmaking.

You had me at ocular degeneration among micro engravers.
I'm sorry but I might need a translator for this one.
You know you remind of the character "SHELDON" on the show the "Big Bang Theory".

Frank G
Z GEAR - Z Gear

 

[drbill]

Hey there's people that think solo sex is dangerous! You could go blind doing that!

Whew... fortunately I can still see these posts!

Although I am almost entirely a solo diver, I do not think solo diving is necessarily safer than buddy diving. Buddy diving with a competent buddy who is capable of making the right decisions and acting on them should something go wrong would be safer. Unfortunately most of the divers I'd feel that way about are either spending their time in the water as a professional teaching classes and guiding dives or live too far away to buddy up with with any frequency.

 

[scagrotto]

I will think the best approach is to call the dive in the correct moment, that will safe you from more things

Whether it's scuba or something else, almost every serious accident is the result of a chain of events where removing any single deficiency would likely have prevented the bad outcome that results from the uninterrupted chain. Solo or not, recognizing the little problems and fixing them is a good thing.

I know he wasn't a diver but look at what happened to Aron Ralston

That's a very instructive example for solo diving. His problem wasn't being alone, and it probably would have happened even if he had a dozen people with him. His problem was failure to plan properly, failure to assure his environment was safe, and some bad luck. Having a buddy would have made little real difference. When park authorities removed his hand after the fact it was a significant undertaking. Simply telling somebody where he was going and when to worry that he hadn't made it back would have gotten him the help he needed; a buddy could have notified rescuers of the nature of the problem, so he could have been extricated a bit sooner. Considering that his arm was smashed by an 800 pound rock I suspect the only difference that outside help would have made is that his stump might be a little longer.

I think it's also a good illustration of another important point. The odds of getting into trouble because you're solo diving are probably no greater than when diving with a buddy. It certainly eliminates the possibility of getting into trouble because of your buddy. OTOH, if you do get into trouble there are a few problems that you can't resolve satisfactorily by yourself.

You began with 'Much of the debate would sound...the same" This implicitly indicates that the activities are comparable

When I read it I though that it explicitly said that the debate is comparable.

Wish I had 12-18 in my pants...

Even at the short end of the range, that's too much of a good thing.

 

[DivemasterDennis]

A properly trained, properly equipped, competent diver can dive solo safely with appropriate boat or shore support. That is a big part of safety when diving alone- having someone know where you are, what the dive plan is, when you left and when you are due back. I do a lot of solo diving on training weekend to set and retrieve platforms and navigation lines and courses. The same happens when searching for/ retrieving lost or dropped equipment, another notorious divemaster function. Always, someone on shore knows where I am and what I am doing and when I should be back
DivemasterDennis