...ok, let me try to get this straight...

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by kelphead on September 12, 2000 at 12:07:26:

In Reply to: Re: I meant 8, not 9 posted by MHK on September 11, 2000 at 15:12:19:

and please feel free to correct me anytime:

if i'm in a 3 buddy team and one of those individuals
dies while the other 2 buddies are unaware of the
trouble, then the one who died was "solo diving"...???...

i understand what a 'solo death' means (it means
a single death), but i don't understand how
the above scenario can be considered a 'solo dive'...
unless it falls into the same category as others
have mentioned re:solo photography or solo hunting
or teaching a class or diving w/someone you barely
know, etc, etc.

...if i understand your definition of a solo dive,
then it would seem to me that you can really never
prevent it, whether it is a deliberately planned
solo dive or if it was an inadvertant solo dive
that no one had agreed upon beforehand...and if
i do indeed understand your def'n correctly, it would seem
to be in line w/those same people who are arguing
that each diver, no matter if they are deliberately
solo diving or if they are already in a predetermined
buddy team, should be as self sufficient as possible,
no matter what.

no, this is NOT parsing words, this is an attempt
to define terminology so as to understand the issues clearly--
one can't understand the issues and debate them if
one doesn't know what is being discussed and debated.

if i understood that you include w/in that solo dive
def'n those who WERE indeed in buddy systems initially that
did not work out for them ultimately, then i would have to
respectfully disagree w/you about including those
tragic deaths as "solo dives". solo diving is when
one person decides he/she will dive on their own
that day w/o even considering taking a buddy along.

someone who happens to sadly die despite having a
buddy (whom for one reason or another was not there
to help them) is not a solo diver and i THINK those
who found themselves in such tragic circumstances
would agree w/that notion as well.

there seems to be 2 distinct issues here that are
apparently clumped together:

a) those who deliberately decide to dive on their
own w/o taking any other divers w/them in the water


b) poorly skilled buddy systems where one diver is not apparently
paying attention to the other or happens to abandon
them during the dive.

[[the 'gail incident' does not seem to fall into EITHER of
these categories b/c A)she was not deliberately solo
diving and B)she seemed to have a pretty competent buddy
team and some help nearby, thank God. but nonetheless,
i would agree that her incident can be used to illustrate
the ideal rescue situation.]]

from following the threads, i understand that
some people are debating that solo diving is enjoyable to
them no matter the risks (or in spite of the risks) while
AT THE SAME TIME those same people are debating
that buddy teams need to be more attentive and
better skilled or else those same poorly skilled
buddy teams can be just as culpable for injury or
death as not having a buddy at all.


Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]