Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
On Thu, 30 Jun 1994, Dr. Neal Harman wrote: RE: Solo deep diving > We accept that there are some additional risks --- however, other risks are > reduced. The trick is to minimise the risks, and sometimes it's better to > be alone. This pretty-much sums up my own perspective on the relative merits of solo/buddy diving. The bottom line on all dives, as far as I'm concerned, is to minimize the risk. In my experience, the broad generalization that buddy diving ALWAYS involves less risk than solo diving is simply not true. It really depends on the particular dive conditions, mission, etc. I have been in situations analagous to Falco's, where a buddy CLEARLY did/would have helped solved a problem (sometimes one was there, sometimes I was alone). However, I have also been in situations where the presence of a buddy has nearly got me killed. Although the latter situations usually involve less-than-brilliant actions on the part of my buddy, they don't always. The point is, buddies can sometimes be a liability instead of an asset. I'll admit, they're more often an asset (presuming they are competent, etc.), however, I find the deeper & more complicated the dive, the more likely a buddy will pose a liability. In terms of real-world numbers, the number of times a buddy has got me INTO trouble on deep/technical dives exceeds the number of times a buddy has helped get me out of trouble by a factor of about 6:1. I have been in 2 situations underwater wherein a problem I encountered truely needed the help of a buddy (only one of which a buddy actually helped). I can't count the number of times risk to my life increased as a result of having a buddy. Please remember, this is not advice I give to everyone - I'm only speaking for myself. Aloha, Rich
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]