Solo with no BCD?

[SlugLife]

Are you throwing away 30 years of development? What kind of suggestion is this one?

It sounds like: guys, let's drive our cars without safety belts and airbags, and our motorbikes without helmets, because 30+years ago they did it like that!

I'd encourage us to keep the discussion more mild. We don't want to push people into becoming defensive, as that's rarely productive. There are plenty of lesson to learn on "both sides" of diving with or without a BCD.

 

[Member002]

To many modern divers, a BCD is a necessary safety feature.

• Divers have become massively over-reliant on their BCDs, and are frequently overweighed.
• Divers are unaware that it is practical to safely dive without one, or safely handle a complete BCD failure (if they're not overweighed)
• Modern divers haven't trained or practiced diving without a BCD.

If someone practices doing complete dives with an empty BCD, or surfacing with an empty BCD, then the BCD itself becomes a redundant safety feature.

From a solo-diving perspective, I think it's amazing if we can reduce reliance on any of our equipment, and increases safety significantly.

I completely agree. I've made similar posts before about new divers and buoyancy control.

My point was just that "we used to do it and I'm still alive" is not, in itself, an actual argument and I always roll my eyes at it.

 

[Wibble]

Are you throwing away 30 years of development? What kind of suggestion is this one?

It sounds like: guys, let's drive our cars without safety belts and airbags, and our motorbikes without helmets, because 30+years ago they did it like that!

This is missing the point.

Firstly, this isn't a beginner question, it's a solo question and therefore a more advanced question by someone who's got experience and a higher standard of skills.

Today's standards are to dive with a buoyancy compensation device which we all know is frequently used as a cover for poor underlying skills, specifically it can compensate for poor weighting. Just as modern vehicles compensate for bad driving skills by breaking/steering/beeping/"assisting".

As divers we should be overweighted by exactly the amount of weight that will be removed from us as we dive, e.g. gas and SMB+reel. This should include the additional weight required by a drysuit that's been inflated for comfort. We have lost this skill because the BCD allows the poor practice of being overweighted, often grossly.

Thirtyish years ago we didn't use BCDs, nor a lot of other modern inventions for that matter. We did have devices such as the horse collar or ABLJ, or maybe not at all. This question wouldn't be relevant to be asked in those days as nobody would be diving with a BCD; they would have been diving correctly weighted.

Nowadays, we pay lip service to the "must be correctly weighted" and promptly jump in many kilos/pounds overweighted, and then rely on the BCD to get us out of Dodge.

We haven't always moved forwards despite the technology which often masks poor core skills. Jacques Cousteau and friends could teach us a lot about diving techniques. Diving without a BCD is not dangerous. Unusual maybe, but not intrinsically dangerous.

 

[ginti]

This is missing the point.

Firstly, this isn't a beginner question, it's a solo question and therefore a more advanced question by someone who's got experience and a higher standard of skills.

Today's standards are to dive with a buoyancy compensation device which we all know is frequently used as a cover for poor underlying skills, specifically it can compensate for poor weighting. Just as modern vehicles compensate for bad driving skills by breaking/steering/beeping/"assisting".

As divers we should be overweighted by exactly the amount of weight that will be removed from us as we dive, e.g. gas and SMB+reel. This should include the additional weight required by a drysuit that's been inflated for comfort. We have lost this skill because the BCD allows the poor practice of being overweighted, often grossly.

Thirtyish years ago we didn't use BCDs, nor a lot of other modern inventions for that matter. We did have devices such as the horse collar or ABLJ, or maybe not at all. This question wouldn't be relevant to be asked in those days as nobody would be diving with a BCD; they would have been diving correctly weighted.

Nowadays, we pay lip service to the "must be correctly weighted" and promptly jump in many kilos/pounds overweighted, and then rely on the BCD to get us out of Dodge.

We haven't always moved forwards despite the technology which often masks poor core skills. Jacques Cousteau and friends could teach us a lot about diving techniques. Diving without a BCD is not dangerous. Unusual maybe, but not intrinsically dangerous.

First of all, sorry, I was a bit aggressive. It was not my intention.

Here are my two cents:
(1) one problem with your two answers is that you justified your argument(s) by saying that people have done it for a long time; this is VERY bad. People with little experience may read this post (despite being in an advanced section) and getting the idea that if something was done 30+ years ago, it is still ok to do it now. Well, 99% of the time, it is NOT the case. So please do not write it
(2) There are two essential concepts in diving (and in all those activities that may potentially injure us), with a massive difference between them. Let's call them danger and risk. The danger is when people may immediately and most likely damage themselves, for instance, cross the highway with hands on the eyes at a peak time; I know, stupid example, but it gives the right idea. On the other hand, risks are those that may potentially create a danger, so people need to mitigate them. When we mitigate risks, we need to evaluate the cost of the mitigation action. For instance, we use seatbelts because they have basically no cost, but they seriously mitigate the risk of having a fatal accident (the fatal accident itself is a very low risk in absolute terms). Now, 30+ years ago, this concept was not apparent to the general public; now it is. And this culture shift is one of the reasons why nowadays in diving, we have so many differences with 30+ years ago equipment configuration (together with technology development, different public, agency sift of business interests, etc.).

I agree that diving without a BCD is not "dangerous", but it is risky. I cannot quantify the risks, I have too little experience, but you do not take these risks into account in your argument at all. However, despite being unable to quantify the risks, I can think of so many unlikely situations that may get dangerous. The most likely is a combination of a drysuit failure and a cramp. Depending on the diving fitness of the OP, given the first one, the second one could be (very?) likely. According to his profile, the OP here has less than 100 dives, so how would he manage a situation like this when solo-diving? Does he have the right experience/skills/fitness/whatever?

There are other risks for sure, even if all of the ones I can think of are related to buoyancy control/issues. How can the OP mitigate them? If he can't, is diving in these conditions worth or should he skip the dive? I believe that if a person is diving often enough, skipping some dives isn't a problem. If a person is not diving enough, and a dive may pose some issues, that person probably does not have sufficient experience to manage these problems, so it's better to skip the dive. In other words, if there are some factors that may prevent the dive to go smooth, it's always a good idea to skip it (except in very special situations that are OT).

Does the OP have some equipment malfunction? Just do not dive and come back in a while. That's the easy (and probably best) solution.

 

[jale]

Not true
Now figure out why that's not true.

True. Now go diving and learn how to manage yoir lungs

 

[Julius SCHMIDT]

I went solo sans bc on an o2 rebreather with no formal training last week, but not thirty years ago

 

[Pareto]

Hello all

If someone wants to test how it feels to dive without BC he can do it, best with an experienced buddy and at an easy dive site with shallow entry. However, the question was not about that someone wants to test it because it is cool or wants to improve his skills, it was about that an important piece of equipment is defective and this should be omitted without necessary replacement... I know enough diving accidents that have started just like that and someone has come to harm.

I stick to my recommendation, replace or repair broken equipment before the next dive or rent one as a transition solution. Leaving it out is rarely the best option (who carries unnecessary equipment?). In solo diving you bear the risk yourself, but don't forget the people who have to rescue you or find your bodies if something goes wrong and of course the people who would miss you.

Greetings from the (sometimes overcorrect) switzerland
Pareto

 

[Wibble]

First of all, sorry, I was a bit aggressive. It was not my intention.

Here are my two cents:
(1) one problem with your two answers is that you justified your argument(s) by saying that people have done it for a long time; this is VERY bad. People with little experience may read this post (despite being in an advanced section) and getting the idea that if something was done 30+ years ago, it is still ok to do it now. Well, 99% of the time, it is NOT the case. So please do not write it
(2) There are two essential concepts in diving (and in all those activities that may potentially injure us), with a massive difference between them. Let's call them danger and risk. The danger is when people may immediately and most likely damage themselves, for instance, cross the highway with hands on the eyes at a peak time; I know, stupid example, but it gives the right idea. On the other hand, risks are those that may potentially create a danger, so people need to mitigate them. When we mitigate risks, we need to evaluate the cost of the mitigation action. For instance, we use seatbelts because they have basically no cost, but they seriously mitigate the risk of having a fatal accident (the fatal accident itself is a very low risk in absolute terms). Now, 30+ years ago, this concept was not apparent to the general public; now it is. And this culture shift is one of the reasons why nowadays in diving, we have so many differences with 30+ years ago equipment configuration (together with technology development, different public, agency sift of business interests, etc.).

I agree that diving without a BCD is not "dangerous", but it is risky. I cannot quantify the risks, I have too little experience, but you do not take these risks into account in your argument at all. However, despite being unable to quantify the risks, I can think of so many unlikely situations that may get dangerous. The most likely is a combination of a drysuit failure and a cramp. Depending on the diving fitness of the OP, given the first one, the second one could be (very?) likely. According to his profile, the OP here has less than 100 dives, so how would he manage a situation like this when solo-diving? Does he have the right experience/skills/fitness/whatever?

There are other risks for sure, even if all of the ones I can think of are related to buoyancy control/issues. How can the OP mitigate them? If he can't, is diving in these conditions worth or should he skip the dive? I believe that if a person is diving often enough, skipping some dives isn't a problem. If a person is not diving enough, and a dive may pose some issues, that person probably does not have sufficient experience to manage these problems, so it's better to skip the dive. In other words, if there are some factors that may prevent the dive to go smooth, it's always a good idea to skip it (except in very special situations that are OT).

Does the OP have some equipment malfunction? Just do not dive and come back in a while. That's the easy (and probably best) solution.

Do agree that it's far better to have a working BCD. Just because Jacques Cousteau used to dive without one doesn't make it viable these days. OK, lets give a hand for the vintage diving mob!

Reminder: this is a solo question.

We all *should* be capable of ending a dive with any piece of kit that's broken, so a BCD where the inflater's broken off will be a challenge if you're grossly overweighted. If you're correctly weighted you'd only have 2kg/5lbs to swim up against (assumes single cylinder) AND you'd be carrying a SMB which you can use as a floatation device AND you'd have a spare SMB (you're diving solo). If diving with a drysuit (Scilly Isles is "cold") then you'd just use the drysuit for buoyancy.

I'd argue that planning is the main thing. If you're taking away the BCD, you need to compensate with something else. Even with Jacques Cousteau skills, one would want to make sure that the last-resort exit would be to get out on a beach.

Asking the question here is part of that planning.

 

[ginti]

Do agree that it's far better to have a working BCD. Just because Jacques Cousteau used to dive without one doesn't make it viable these days. OK, lets give a hand for the vintage diving mob!

Reminder: this is a solo question.

We all *should* be capable of ending a dive with any piece of kit that's broken, so a BCD where the inflater's broken off will be a challenge if you're grossly overweighted. If you're correctly weighted you'd only have 2kg/5lbs to swim up against (assumes single cylinder) AND you'd be carrying a SMB which you can use as a floatation device AND you'd have a spare SMB (you're diving solo). If diving with a drysuit (Scilly Isles is "cold") then you'd just use the drysuit for buoyancy.

I'd argue that planning is the main thing. If you're taking away the BCD, you need to compensate with something else. Even with Jacques Cousteau skills, one would want to make sure that the last-resort exit would be to get out on a beach.

Asking the question here is part of that planning.

Ok, this is a more sophisticated answer. Now:
1) divers are expected to be able to END a dive with a piece broken, not to do an entire dive without that piece of equipment.
2) I still do not get any reason why not to wait that the BCD is repaired or, alternatively, to rent it.

As I said before, if the OP can do a dive in such conditions, he probably dives so much that a break from diving will not be a problem. If he can't manage it (and if he is asking, probably he can't), he shouldn't go.

Anyway, I still see your argument as driving without seatbelts. There isn't any good plan for it, it's just a bad idea. The SMB is NOT a buoyancy device; sure, in an emergency I would use it, but it's a bad idea to rely on it. Drysuit? Well, that depends a lot on the OP's abilities, but if he is dry he probably carries more weight and he needs a PROPER backup, especially if solo. In other words, assuming he can manage a drysuit for buoyancy control, he needs a BCD.

You made a lot of good calculations and assumptions, but accidents happen exactly because you can't take them into account with assumptions and calculations. And because you can't take them into account, extra safety is required.

Again, I really believe that the only reasonable suggestion here is not to dive. I find anything else dangerous, and I am not going to change my mind on this. We need to agree that we disagree on this topic

 

[Wibble]

Absolutely agree.

I am making a few assumptions, the main one being that it’s shallow where he dives. It’s also remote so a replacement may be harder to find.

Totally agree that one shouldn’t start a dive with a major piece of kit that’s broken. Put that in the self evident column.

However, that all said, it is possible to dive in the fashion of decades ago and rely on real skills.