Solo divers' obligations to other divers

[FritzCat66]

One issue that came up often in the thread discussing a pony diver assisting another OOA diver revolves around the level of obligation a solo diver has to other divers who happen to be in the water with them.

So, let's discuss that here; among the questions that arise, I think the critical ones are:

1. What are the obligations - if any - a solo diver has towards other divers who happen to be in the water?
   
   
2. Should a solo diver reserve gas or other resources for another OOA or troubled diver? Why or why not?
   
   
3. It's probably important to define "obligation" in this context as well; for example, is a solo diver truly obligated to plan gas for other divers, the way a buddy is? Or is it simply something which "might be wise"?

I considered posting this in the solo-friendly Solo Divers opt-in forum, but since this involves the interaction between solo divers and other divers, I thought it best to keep it in the open Advanced forum to get the opinions of non-solo divers as well.

However, I would appreciate it if we could limit the discussion to these issues, and not have it become a forum for either pro-solo or anti-solo rants. Let's presume, for the sake of argument, that we have legitimate divers who are trying to be responsible within a solo context.

_______


I'll go ahead and kick off the discussion with the observation that, while the SDI Solo course - and I presume others as well - do not distinguish between different "kinds" of solo dives and solo divers, nevertheless it seems useful to delineate a few categories:

• Purely solo dives, where the diver is the only one in the water within any reasonable distance and unlikely to come in any contact with other divers while underwater. I suggest we refer to these simply as Solo Divers.
  
  
• Situationally solo dives, where the diver intends to remain self-sufficiently solo regardless of the presence or absence of other divers; that is, the dive is buddyless by design, but the diver is aware that they may run into others underwater. I suggest we refer to these divers as Self-Sufficient Divers.
  
  
• Accidentally solo dives, where the diver intends to buddy-dive but somehow becomes separated from the buddy. I won't say what I suggest we call these divers. :devious:

It occurs to me that there may be a special sub-category of self-sufficient divers who might be termed "same ocean, same day" or SOSD Divers, where perhaps the boat has teamed up some individual divers as "instabuddies", but who have no real intention of buddy diving. I'm sure those will come up in this discussion as well.

For the purposes of this conversation, let's leave out the last category of "accidentally solo" divers; that's a well-known and well-discussed separate issue.

It's that middle category where the bulk of the questions lay. No doubt, a solo diver should have sufficient knowledge and understanding to be just that: purely solo. Nevertheless, I think it's very common for those divers to simply plan to be self-sufficient divers without a buddy, or SOSD divers if "forced" to buddy up. In fact, I think a large part of the appeal of the Solo certification courses from SDI and others is for divers like some bug hunters, spearos, and photographers, who would prefer to focus only on themselves and their hobby while diving and thus desire a level of self-sufficiency.

So, what do you think? Are these categories fair? Just what kinds of obligations towards others do these divers have? What other questions arise? Should SDI and other agencies certifying these kinds of divers change their curriculum to cover these situations?

 

[TSandM]

Obligation? How are you defining it? Moral obligation? Legal obligation?

A solo diver ought to be carrying enough gas to get him to the surface in the event of a failure of his primary supply (at least I think he should). Assuming that is true, how would one justify refusing to share that supply with another diver who is out of air? I don't know how I could live with myself, if someone came to me in distress and I pushed them away because I wanted my gas for ME. (If I don't have enough for both of us, that's different, but then, shame on me.) Maybe it's the part of my personality that made me become a physician, but I feel we have a moral obligation to try to help, so long as the risk to self of doing so is acceptable -- and each person has to define that point for himself.

 

[FritzCat66]

Personally, I presume a certain level of moral obligation to assist others in dire need, at least as far as our own capacity for doing so. Therefore, I don't think the question is so much whether any diver, solo or otherwise, should or would share resources for an ailing diver. Although perhaps some would like to discuss that as well. But there's a big difference between being a planned buddy and incidentally providing aid.

As in the example of that other thread, where a buddyless diver does indeed try and help another, it seems the debate comes more along the lines of planning. I presume a responsible buddy diver plans on carrying sufficient gas to assist their buddy. Should someone who plans to dive sans buddy make similar reservations?

 

[FishDiver]

IMO, and in the context of this thread, there are two "kinds" of dives. Solo dives and Team/Buddy dives. Solo divers are obligated to plan air only for themselves. Solo divers, like any other divers, are obligated to share air with anyone that needs it in an emergency. It's the same question as asking if you are obligated to share air with a diver that isn't part of your team.

 

[redacted]

First, accidental solo and SOSD are not what I consider solo divers.

Until another problem occurs, a solo diver should always have enough gas to get two divers with compatible SAC rates safely to the surface. That is because his redundant source is not to be used until a problem occurs. Should I encounter an LOA/OOA diver during my solo dive, I will take whatever actions I can safely take to assist. It is little different than encountering someone in an emergency situation anywhere on land or water. I guess I see it as a moral obligation to render aid when possible.

When I plan to dive solo, I do not plan any gas for another diver. Rather I plan my redundant gas supply. I have dove solo in Cozumel where I was a solo diver with a group of other, mostly buddied divers, and where I was solo but likely to encounter other divers at the very start and end of the dive; and where I was almost surely the only diver in the water on the entire island at the time (1 am shore dive). My gas planning for all three categories was basically the same - my primary gas supply and my redundant supply (often the surface for shallow dives).

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

When I solo dive I didn't make an obligation to someone else ... therefore I don't own that obligation. However, I DO take adequate redundant reserves to get me to the surface safely in the event that for some reason my primary gas supply becomes unusable.

I do NOT plan reserves for two. However, in the event that another diver should swim up to me and signal OOA, I WILL supply that diver with my reserve gas ... at which point we begin our ascent.

In the strictest sense, you cannot PLAN reserves for a second diver if you don't know who that diver will be ... since you have no idea what their gas consumption might be. I've seen divers with a consumption rate three or four times higher than mine.

Bottom line ... I'm happy to help, but I'm not OBLIGATED to plan my dive on the assumption that I should have to ... if I wanted that kind of obligation, I'd have asked you to dive with me in the first place ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[fisheater]

Obligation? How are you defining it? Moral obligation?

As is to be expected, Lynn hit it square on. Moral or legal obligation?

As long as the solo diver did nothing to cause the diver in distress to rely upon the solo diver and did nothing to add to or cause the distress, the solo diver has no legal obligation (under standard U.S. law) to assist.. An out of air diver could signal his need for air and the solo diver would be within his legal rights to turn and swim away.

However, that solo diver should be shunned by the rest of the human race for all time. But that's just my opinion.

 

[copter53]

I do most of my dives with my brother-in-law who got certified with me. We have a mutual understanding underwater and we both look out for each other. We check our own air first then check each others. Yet, don't rely on each other to much and both of us have solo dove before to develop some self-sufficiency. If we are buddy diving and one of us gets separated we are both comfortable enough to finish the dive without going crazy and looking for each other the whole time. I would die for him if the situation arose.

On the other hand, I dove with a guy once who seemed to think that the air in his tank was limitless. Since that is clearly not correct he showed me his air gauge when we were at 60ft and it said 0. Did I share, Yes, I did. Did I have an obligation? No. If a diver chooses to be a stupid diver and neglects himself he is putting you at risk. I have dove with him after that but before we enter the water I tell him & others. I'm doing my own thing, you can follow me or you can go your own way. I'm not going to risk my life for anyone who thinks they are to badass to check their own air.

You don't have an obligation to save anyone. That person has an obligation to dive within their limits and training. That person has an obligation to other divers to stay safe and not put them at risk.

 

[FritzCat66]

In the strictest sense, you cannot PLAN reserves for a second diver if you don't know who that diver will be ... since you have no idea what their gas consumption might be.

I was thinking that same thing. In Beiji's' original thread about assisting an OOA diver with a pony, some complained that a 13cf is barely enough gas to get a diver up from 100' or more, much less two divers. But then another diver chimed in that she just sips air, to the extent of doing long 100' dives on an aluminum 63cf, so for her a 13cf pony is PLENTY of gas. I've met some real air-sippers like that.

Now, I'm kind of middle-of-the-road in terms of gas consumption, but if I were the OOA diver she found herself trying to assist, I might suck all her reserves dry even if she had been diving strict rule-of-thirds for herself, even exclusive of the pony. So, is she being an irresponsible diver for not carrying enough gas even if she planned the dive as a buddyless, self-sufficient diver? I strongly question any context where that answer would be affirmative.

 

[bleeb]

In the original thread, part of the rescuer's decision making process had to have been influenced by him being an experienced diver with low gas consumption near the end of his dive approaching minimum reserves, while the rescuee may have appeared to be a relatively new diver with high gas consumption, near panic which would have increased gas consumption even more. There was uncertainty as to whether the already-panicked inexperienced diver might have to go through one or two more OOG incidents on the way back up, and uncertainty for the rescuer as to coping with the resulting panic if it happened. I'm curious as to how people would handle the situation, and how it might affect how they manage the extra risk they may be incurring.

For the sake of discussion, to throw in an additional twist, around here there are a lot of cold deep wrecks, with both a lot of experienced deco-trained technical divers choosing to dive them as deco dives, and also a fair number of relatively inexperienced divers on the same sites diving NDL. Ms Deco-Diver (and team) with a significant deco obligation is probably quite capable of donating gas (both in reserves available and skills), but would be quite unhappy to be dragged to the surface by a low-skilled panicked unknown. What factors go into someone deciding someone else's emergency may exceed their skill or risk tolerance?