Mr Chattertons Self Reliance Article...

[DevonDiver]

I think one thing is apparent to me now after thinking about it for a while. Although what Andy says sounds logical, actions in a panic situation will rarely be logical or predictable. Perhaps this is the point you were trying to make, and I am just finally getting it

I think LiteHedded's example still fits my hypothesis/observation. The diver concerned had already secured an air source, albeit not an ideal one.

"When someone is panicked, they want the first regulator obviously available to them".

There's no regulator quite so 'obviously available' as one that's already in their mouth.

 

[rjack321]

Where Chatterton states that his gas is his gas, and he would fight off a reg mugger---our DIR position is that we can't be in the water, with the guys that Chatterton is suggesting may need to be fought off. We( DIR/GUE) won't give the reg to the unsafe diver, because we will never be diving with this person near us on a tech dive. Chatterton will not donate to the unsafe, but may need aggressive techniques, because the dangerous divers may be on the dive with him.

It's a whole helluva lot easier to just buddy up with the clueless, watch their gas for them, and thumb the dive before they go OOA in the first place. You might not accomplish your goals for the dive babysitting the muppet; but you also don't have any body recoveries or pesky police or coroner's investigations either.

 

[DevonDiver]

Good divers make anything look natural and just don't seem to have "emergencies" where split second muscle memory reactions are life and death anyway. Any problems they encounter are methodically addressed without drama - so unlike the steely metal fortitude the article claims the big tough tech diver needs.

I still disagree. It's just the natural balance between diver competency and the nature/level of the emergency.

A 'good' diver possesses a surplus of competency for most emergencies they will encounter. A bad diver possess a deficit of such. That really boils down to not much more than diving within your comfortable limits and skill level. Virtually any diver can be 'good', if they realistically assess their capabilities and dive within them.

For any of us, there exists a stage where the requirements to extract from an emergency overwhelm our competence or the resources at our disposal. Granted, some individuals retain self-control under more desperate circumstances than others... but self-control is not a solution in itself.

If an emergency exceeds the competence and/or resources needed to survive it, then the diver will fail. At that point, self-control only determines whether they'll die clawing frantically at a metal bulkhead or cave roof... whether they give up and write a last message to their wife in their wetnotes... or whether they calmly expire in a controlled manner in the midst of their fruitless search for a lost guideline etc..

There's been a few 'good' divers who didn't make it. Do we conveniently re-write our opinions on their 'goodness'... or do we accept that some situations can occur that aren't survivable... or that even the 'good' make mistakes? i.e. humans are ultimately fallible... all of us.

 

[LiteHedded]

I think LiteHedded's example still fits my hypothesis/observation. The diver concerned had already secured an air source, albeit not an ideal one.

"When someone is panicked, they want the first regulator obviously available to them".

There's no regulator quite so 'obviously available' as one that's already in their mouth.

one diver had air. one had nothing. both refused my reg



btw I don't want to be lumped in with 'DIR divers bashing john chatterton'
I don't give a baker's **** how he dives. his line about "breathe your own gas, even the wrong one" is pretty good though.

 

[rjack321]

btw I don't want to be lumped in with 'DIR divers bashing john chatterton'
I don't give a baker's **** how he dives. his line about "breathe your own gas, even the wrong one" is pretty good though.

I don't care how he dives either. Wouldn't invite him on a (rare) charter I've arranged or my personal boat tho. Of course there are various other posters on this thread who can find their own transport to the dive site too... With a lite head you'd probably be ok tho

 

[chillyinCanada]

Too funny. I'm chuckling to myself at you guys that won't have John Chatterton on your boat. Wait, no, I'm LMFAO. Hey John I'll dive with you . . . ahahaa

 

[lowviz]

If I've been following correctly, they seem train to only save their own kind and avoid any situation where they may be called upon to provide assistance to others. Thus, they are correct. John does not belong on that boat.

 

[LiteHedded]

If I've been following correctly, they seem train to only save their own kind and avoid any situation where they may be called upon to provide assistance to others. Thus, they are correct. John does not belong on that boat.

You have not been following correctly.

 

[rjack321]

Too funny. I'm chuckling to myself at you guys that won't have John Chatterton on your boat. Wait, no, I'm LMFAO. Hey John I'll dive with you . . . ahahaa

Why? I don't know him, he's not interested in diving with an actual buddy (except maybe HowardE or his own son). There are alot of people I wouldn't bother to invite on a charter and a few I'd actively avoid. Not really any different than anyone else nor any other recreational pursuit amongst friends.

I probably would invite DanVolker, but only to point and laugh when his hands turn blue up here

 

[lowviz]

Real life experience with you guys leads me to a totally opposite conclusion than the one I just posted. Possibly this thread is a bit of an anomaly.