Switching gasses at depth?

[ZenDiver.3D]

They do teach "you."

-You should find a good buddy.
-You should know your buddy.
-You should be familiar with your buddy.
-You should be next to your buddy, not just in the same ocean.
-If you're buddy decides to take off and YOU don't notice it, then YOU are obviously in the wrong in addition to him/her. From his/her perspective, YOU took off instead. YOU should have followed him if YOU were paying attention and are such a dependable buddy in the first place. Loyalty goes both ways, ya know?

That's what I learned in my OW course in Key Largo, at least.

Then your open water course sucked. I teach the you's:
You are responsible for your equipment. Check yours.
You are the one who needs your own safety equipment.
You should be navigating as well as the one in front.
You should be able to affect self-rescue.
You should pay attention to your surroundings and conditions.
You should plan your own dive, and not just let your buddy do it..
You should not trust Anyone else with you life.
You should choose a trustworthy dive partner, and communicate.

Many aren't teaching people to be thinking, independent divers. It's just lazy.

If both buddies are doing the yous, then all have a good dive.

 

[Sonic04GT]

redundancy.... nevermind

Where in Kuwait are ya?

 

[rstofer]

Then your open water course sucked. I teach the you's:
You are responsible for your equipment. Check yours.
You are the one who needs your own safety equipment.
You should be navigating as well as the one in front.
You should be able to affect self-rescue.
You should pay attention to your surroundings and conditions.
You should plan your own dive, and not just let your buddy do it..
You should not trust Anyone else with you life.
You should choose a trustworthy dive partner, and communicate.

Many aren't teaching people to be thinking, independent divers. It's just lazy.

If both buddies are doing the yous, then all have a good dive.

Were I an instructor, this is exactly what I would teach. You can't help your buddy if you can't take care of yourself.

Richard

 

[String]

You should not trust Anyone else with you life.

Is the most important lesson of all.

 

[Sonic04GT]

You should not trust Anyone else with you life.

Upon deploying to Iraq, that philosophy changes real fast. And my dive buddy happens to be a fellow comrade. :cool2:

 

[String]

Upon deploying to Iraq, that philosophy changes real fast. And my dive buddy happens to be a fellow comrade. :cool2:

Still ridiculous relying blindly on someone else for your own safety. No matter who they are humans arent robots and arent 100% guaranteed to react in a known way 100% of the time.

 

[Reg Braithwaite]

Still ridiculous relying blindly on someone else for your own safety. No matter who they are humans arent robots and arent 100% guaranteed to react in a known way 100% of the time.

Seriously?

When diving with a buddy, you are only blindly relying on someone else if you don't select your buddy carefully, if you don't actively plan your dive with your buddy, and if you don't aggressively maintain contact with your buddy during the dive. If you are careful about buddy selection, dive planning, and dive practices, you are not blindly relying on your buddy, you are judiciously relying on your buddy. The word "blindly" suggests a Ronco Buddymatic "Set it and Forget It!" attitude, which is not always the case.

Furthermore, this is not an all-or-nothing proposition. This flavour of the thread started with the question of whether you should rely on your buddy for air on a recreational dive. That is not relying 100% on your buddy for 100% of the things that may go wrong, it is relying 100% on your buddy for one specific thing that may go wrong. You will probably still choose to carry your own cutting tools for extricating yourself from entanglements, for example, while accepting that for certain entanglements you are better off having your buddy cut you free.

The distinction is important because we should be careful not to equate a very specific strategy of treating air as a team resource with the obviously dangerous practice of leaping into the water without planning and assuming that your buddy will save you from any misfortune that befalls you.

If you want to arrange your affairs such that you are capable of self-rescue no matter what goes wrong, rock on and enjoy your dives. However, if you are ridiculing the concept of team diving, I cannot go along with you on that.

 

[JeffG]

Still ridiculous relying blindly on someone else for your own safety. No matter who they are humans arent robots and arent 100% guaranteed to react in a known way 100% of the time.

and other people still ridiculously put their faith in a piece of hardware that only solves one of a many potential problems.

 

[Blackwood]

Still ridiculous relying blindly on someone else for your own safety.

How can you use the word "still" in conjunction with something that hadn't previously been suggested?

No one anywhere said it's a good idea to "blindly" rely on anything.

No matter who they are humans arent robots and arent 100% guaranteed to react in a known way 100% of the time.

That statement applies equally to buddies and to "you", the individual.

Which is why there is efficacy to be found in leaving yourself multiple outs. This isn't poker. It's life/death. So don't go all in with only 1 card left in the deck that can help you.

A team is only as strong as its weakest member, and thus an appropriate dive team is comprised first and foremost of self-reliant and competent divers.

 

[String]

How can you use the word "still" in conjunction with something that hadn't previously been suggested?

No one anywhere said it's a good idea to "blindly" rely on anything.

If you're relying a 3rd party to get you out of trouble that is blind reliance - you either need them or you dont. I fail to see why ANYONE would want to delegate their own safety of life to somebody else and then take the decision not to carry the required equipment to get themselves out of trouble in the blind hope that the tactic pays off.