UP4AIR:
There are some excellant points here being made by all. I have just one thought for all to ponder.
If you ain't diving like you are depending on YOU to save your backside....then perhaps you should re-address your methods/skills. When you get in the water, have a plan, dive that plan, and have YOUR OWN contingencies when that plan goes to pieces. Isn't this striking similar to solo?
Unless the buddy you are diving with is armlengths away when the "o" ring on the primary goes, and be honest, they never are ; you are going to be in a world of ----!
I dive with a buddy....I enjoy it more that way....but I dive in support of myself...and never rely on my buddy to get me out of a jam......strikingly similar to solo diving don't you think?
Just a thought
I believe you have it correct.
But so does Vayu - it is safer to have a buddy (if the buddy can actually help). Trouble is, if you are in 10 meters of water, and your buddy is 20 meters away, going up is safer. In 30 meters of water, with a buddy 10 meters away, go for the buddy.
Finley would like a check list of skills - but skills depend on the area and the conditions. What might be safe in one place is not safe in another. If one needs someone to tell them if they can dive solo, the answer for them is NO. If you need a checklist, another "NO"
I know people that dive an area so much, that they know every rock, so in that case, navigation is meaningless. They might dive solo there, but not in other places.
I, and most people I know, do not like solo diving, not because of the danger, but because diving tends to be almost as much social as personal. Solo divers are, for the most part, mission orientated people, where that is not an issue. Even when you can safely solo, you may never do it, because you like diving with people or feel uncomfortable diving by yourself.