Self Reliant Diving Required?

[redacted]

64 posts back, you'll discover my OP. Very few have actually answered. My question was should all divers be trained in solo or self reliance. The sense I get was that most people agree that this would be a good idea. I thought the best idea was to make it part of a progression. For example, really make AOW advanced. Require individuals to be self reliant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most divers do not have the mindset to dive solo (self reliant).

 

[Nemrod]

64 posts back, you'll discover my OP. Very few have actually answered. My question was should all divers be trained in solo or self reliance. The sense I get was that most people agree that this would be a good idea. I thought the best idea was to make it part of a progression. For example, really make AOW advanced. Require individuals to be self reliant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am good with the buddy system as taught and implemented for decades for recreational divers. I do not think there is any reason for buddy team divers to tote around extra air tanks and extra layers of equipment. If that is the need, and there are diving profiles where it is needed and required, there is GUE and DIR and similar tech level training. I do think there is room for buddy team optimization, actually practicing what is preached.

N

 

[gcarter]

64 posts back, you'll discover my OP. Very few have actually answered. My question was should all divers be trained in solo or self reliance. The sense I get was that most people agree that this would be a good idea. I thought the best idea was to make it part of a progression. For example, really make AOW advanced. Require individuals to be self reliant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In favour of self reliance all the way through - teaching the buddy system without caveats creates a mistaken impression that your buddy will be your saviour. I think most here recognize how often that is not the case. The buddy system needs to have a self reliant component. Whether AOW is advanced has been beaten to death elsewhere.

As another poster pointed out, solo and self reliant are not the same thing, although I would certainly hope a solo diver IS self reliant.

 

[TMHeimer]

In favour of self reliance all the way through - teaching the buddy system without caveats creates a mistaken impression that your buddy will be your saviour. I think most here recognize how often that is not the case. The buddy system needs to have a self reliant component. Whether AOW is advanced has been beaten to death elsewhere.

As another poster pointed out, solo and self reliant are not the same thing, although I would certainly hope a solo diver IS self reliant.

Yes, needs a self reliant component. See: Instabuddy.

 

[RJP]

The buddy system needs to have a self reliant component.

Right... if YOU can't rely on you, how the hell can a buddy!?!

 

[NAM001]

I think most of us agree with your assessment. As odd as it may sound, One must have the discipline to dive the air in the back gas. The pony is emergency air not planned diving air. (Buddy on the D-ring) You are right about the s80's and its air availiability vs NDL. When I got certed in the 60's we talked about deco for about 10 minutes. The outcome of the lesson was. If you are diving with a 72cuft tank you don't have enough air to get your self into a deco situation.

I see, I do not think I had seriously considered just slinging a smaller sized bottle. That would definitely work, at least, for redundant air.

Another point I wanted to make but forgot to in my previous post is the problem that arises when "recreational" divers have such additional air. Now this may be a bit outside the scope of the discussion because it assumes that a rec diver with a pony will misuse it, but I will say it anyway as food for thought: recreational divers may be tempted to use their extra 4-11liters of air to get into some deco or deep trouble. I do not recall the exact logic or wording, but a short time ago a very salty old diver was telling me the story of why a standard bottle holds 11L. He explained, through some magic of numbers that went over my head, that the size of an 11L tank filled with air is generally too small to either be volume-effective at a depth great enough to pass NDLs. Whether or not his story is true is only partially relevant to my point that new divers with potentially twice as much air could more fesibly find themselves past NDLs if they were to use their tank as part of their gas supply.

I do not think it would be too far fetched to envision a diver justifying to themselves the use of an extra bottle and reg set that they schlepped around and paid for, despite their instructions saying it was for emergencies only. Again this all assumes a diver will misuse gear, which isn't necessarily a fair assumption. I am sure that currently quite a few divers utilize a pony for emergency redundancy, but I am not sure it would work so well for the general diving population. Remember that the general diving population has not taken it upon themselves to learn the intricacies of decompression theory, practice, or even remember from their classes why we have depth certifications beyond the "tank don't last as long when you are really deep" answer.

 

[kr2y5]

Why is buddy diving the rule or rather nonredundancy the rule? Wouldn't it make sense for all divers to be trained and equipped for self rescue.

Hmmm... the only way to satisfy this requirement would be to exclude my wife from the set of all divers... that would definitely be no fun... I therefore vote against such regulation.

 

[doctormike]

64 posts back, you'll discover my OP. Very few have actually answered.

On behalf of the ScubaBoard community, I apologize. This sort of meandering topic drift rarely happens in these forums...

 

[DaleC]

The outcome of the lesson was. If you are diving with a 72cuft tank you don't have enough air to get your self into a deco situation.

I subscribe to this as a valid strategy (if one understands the theory behind it).

I dive St72's and find them to be an excellent size for conservative diving in the mid recreational range. Some limiting factors for me, as a solo/self reliant diver, are the effects of cold stress, narcosis and wishing to maintain a direct ascent option. If I am not cold I think and act better, if I am not narced likewise and if I can directly ascend when I have a problem I have a huge advantage maintaining that option in dealing with issues UW.

With a small size tank I know I can do about 45 minutes at 50-60 feet which is enough time to see stuff but not too long. I can go deeper but I know this is for a limited time only. The effect is that I do not bump up against the mandatory safety stop NDL times (allowing direct ascent), limit my time in the water (reduced cold stress) and my time/exposure to depth (reduced narcosis effect). Most of the time I do not even need to look at tables or my PDC and pretty well just dive the 120 rule for air. Easy, safe, reliable. No need for always solving all issues at depth, argon in the suit or a second brain.

A person could dive this way safely for a long time with basic equipment and see most of what there is to see in the rec realm.

 

[tursiops]

So then is it fair to say there are no requirements for Solo or Self-Reliant diving but there are recommendations that everyone should take into account when diving on their own based on skill set and depth?

Why would you even say this unless you have not read the thread, or have a very short memory, or are trolling?

SDI and PADI both require a redundant source gas, such as a pony or isolated or independent doubles. Some of the thread participant have said they view the surface as their redundant gas source....but that is not compliant to the SDI or PADI standards.