How often do you run a line?

[aainslie]

Well, let's see what sort of answers this provides. I still get a weird mix of PM's and emails, some in favour of my stirring the pot, some against.

It's my contention that most people don't always run lines, but are afraid to say so in public. I'd like to see how true that is. Your input is anonymous, so please be honest - no one will yell at you, only at me.

My reason for asking is that I believe that this needs to be addresed more formally. If a majority of people don't run lines, yet there is no agreed basis on which to decide when to run them and when not, we're all reinventing the wheel on our own. And avoidable accidents could be... well, avoided if we had a better set of rules when deciding whether to run one or not.

[phillip1]

Good poll, I wonder what the rational is behind not running a line & doing visual jumps?
No matter how well you may know a cave or how many dives you have should you not always run a line? seems to me that some people don't and are needlessly increasing the risks out of laziness or complacency.

[Ken Hill]

All,
Please understand that your answers are not anonymous! They are read by property owners, state officials and others trained and untrained logged on to an open forum. The pole is not scientific since the people answering can be ANYONE!

Ask yourself, what will this poll do for you? Is it any good if it influences you to make a bad choice and you die! What if it gives argument to close down a site or restrict it to guided dives that will ensure lines are run.

I truly don't understand the mentality of the initiator or the motivation. It certainly isn't in the best interest of cave diving. These are classic topics for workshops and discussion groups or private emails. Even a blank sheet left at fill stations would be more accurate and less harmful to the sport than this nonsense.

/Ken

[aainslie]

All,
Please understand that your answers are not anonymous! They are read by property owners, state officials and others trained and untrained logged on to an open forum. The pole is not scientific since the people answering can be ANYONE!

Ask yourself, what will this poll do for you? Is it any good if it influences you to make a bad choice and you die! What if it gives argument to close down a site or restrict it to guided dives that will ensure lines are run.

I truly don't understand the mentality of the initiator or the motivation. It certainly isn't in the best interest of cave diving. These are classic topics for workshops and discussion groups or private emails. Even a blank sheet left at fill stations would be more accurate and less harmful to the sport than this nonsense.

/Ken

Ken, who are you to be the ultimate arbiter of what is good or bad for cave diving?

In opposition to Ken's oft repeated argument, I (once more) offer the argument that debating this in public leads to safer practices in the long run, by preventing new divers from reinventing the wheel on their own.

Not that either of these arguments are new to anyone following these threads...

On the point of accuracy of the survey... well, each member of this board has one vote. they can use it any way they want. It's far more controlled than your fill station nonsense. And Sludge, FW or any other moderator can let us know if a bunch of accounts are suddenly set up to somehow sway the votes.

[jj1987]

Ken, who are you to be the ultimate arbiter of what is good or bad for cave diving?

In opposition to Ken's oft repeated argument, I offer the argument that debating this in public leads to safer practices in the long run, by preventing new divers from reinventing the wheel on their own.

Not that either of these arguments are new to anyone following these threads...

On the point of accuracy of the survey... well, each member of this board has one vote. they can use it any way they want. It's far more controlled than your fill station nonsense. And Sludge, FW or any other moderator can let us know if a bunch of accounts are suddenly set up to somehow sway the votes.

But if I vote that I sometimes don't run a primary, and I always run jump/gaps, it sounds as if I'm flipping a coin on what I'm going to do today, when the real story is I'd never not run a reel in Orange Grove where goldline is cut back a ways, but I don't see the need in Peacock where goldline comes to 2-3ft within the OW zone. Nothing separates my vote from the guy who doesn't run a primary at sites where it's cut way back.

If this were in a private, certified cave divers only forum, I might be willing to elaborate a bit more. But as it is, if people start posting that they never run a line at peacock (which ends only a few ft out of ow), landowners who don't know this might be lurking and think we're all taking huge risks breaking the rules that we like to boast about so often.

Reminds me of having a bible study at a bar. It just doesn't look good, even if people suspect it might be going on anyways. I would support the idea of a limited access forum for these conversations. I think your idea of opening the floor is good, but I'm not sure I like it being a public forum.

[Ken Hill]

Ken, who are you to be the ultimate arbiter of what is good or bad for cave diving?

.


Since its not a scientific poll its Andrew's poll ... who is exactly what to cave diving? As said before join an organization, go to a workshop, hold discussions on a topic of any interest to the community.

/Ken

[YBWET]

All,
Please understand that your answers are not anonymous! They are read by property owners, state officials and others trained and untrained logged on to an open forum. The pole is not scientific since the people answering can be ANYONE!

Ask yourself, what will this poll do for you? Is it any good if it influences you to make a bad choice and you die! What if it gives argument to close down a site or restrict it to guided dives that will ensure lines are run.

I truly don't understand the mentality of the initiator or the motivation. It certainly isn't in the best interest of cave diving. These are classic topics for workshops and discussion groups or private emails. Even a blank sheet left at fill stations would be more accurate and less harmful to the sport than this nonsense.

/Ken

I for one agree with Ken 100% and also don't understand the mentality of the initiator or the motivation.

[Kelly Jessop]

How foten do you run a line?

Is this German profanity?

[aainslie]

Since its not a scientific poll its Andrew's poll ... who is exactly what to cave diving? As said before join an organization, go to a workshop, hold discussions on a topic of any interest to the community.

/Ken

What exactly is a "scientific poll"?


How foten do you run a line?

Is this German profanity?

I know - I only spotted it after posting and couldn't correct. Sorry!

[RN]

But if I vote that I sometimes don't run a primary, and I always run jump/gaps, it sounds as if I'm flipping a coin on what I'm going to do today, when the real story is I'd never not run a reel in Orange Grove where goldline is cut back a ways, but I don't see the need in Peacock where goldline comes to 2-3ft within the OW zone. Nothing separates my vote from the guy who doesn't run a primary at sites where it's cut way back.

This is within some agency standards. In fact, making a primary tie off in a safe exit zone is within standards. So Peacock I doesn't count as not running a line.

[BabyDuck]

well, if peacock doesn't count, then i amend to 'always both places'.

[DA Aquamaster]

I ran a line at Peacock during training.

I'm another "always except a primary at Peacock" vote.

Happy 200th post sweety!

[stairman]

Always in OG never in P1 unless O.W vis is poor.

[FW]

Ken, who are you to be the ultimate arbiter of what is good or bad for cave diving?

Andrew, if you don't know the answer to that, you need to do a little research.

[aainslie]

Ken, I don't care what you say, there are some interesting lessons in those numbers there. Empirically, it's exactly what I thought - most divers do not always run lines. 1/3 don't always put in lines, at both entrances and jumps.

Do you really think that this isn't a point of discussion amongst divers after they finish their classes? And do you really think that this is best left to them to learn the hard way when it's good to run a line, and when not? Since they can't ask their instructor (s/he will simply say "always run a line" one more time) they ask arbitrary people with arbitrary levels of common sense and experience. The result - arbitrary practices, occasionally (perhaps often) resulting in dangerous situations.

I learned the hard way. I didn't bother in the top left of Ginnie. I missed a jump on the way back, and had a pretty nerve wracking time swimming a pretty big loop. I actually run a lot more jump reels now than I did in the early days. I won't give you my own internal rule system as it's probably not a great one. But given that we know that a lot of divers do this, why not talk about when it's safe and when it isn't?

This reminds me of excessively harsh parenting. If a parent says "You shouldn't have sex. And I don't ever want to hear about you having sex", that kid will go off and do so in uncontrolled ways, often extremely irresponsibly. The parent runs a fine line - but discussion about sex rather than the pretence that it doesn't exist is more likely to lead to reasonably responsible behavior. At least with any luck s/he won't end up being a 16 year old parent, or having an STD.

There's a huge difference between "always run a line" (that's as likely to be obeyed by most divers as the speed limit is by drivers) and "Here is a way to think about when it's a dumb idea to NOT run a line".

Not to mention those moments when cookies and jump reels are not enough... and MORE thought needs to be paid to what to do.

Cave diving is complicated. Pretending that it's simple (and hence amenable to a simple rule system) won't make it so

[aainslie]

Andrew, if you don't know the answer to that, you need to do a little research.

Forrest, with respect, no-one has earned that title. And no one ever should. Learning dies when we elect emperors, kings, tsars, caesars etc..

[atedeschi]

http://www.cavediver.net/forum/showthread.php?t=9918

this is a poll i had a lil while ago, just to get an idea of where people are doing what.

[quarrydiver]

With all due respect Andrew, it is my personal opinion that it is absolutely NEVER OK not to run a line. One should always maintain a continuous line to OPEN water, even if the gap between open water and the overhead is as little as 1 ft.

There is no question that many people who dive Ginnie regularly do not put a primary in and carry out a lot of visual and/or blind jumps. They obviously get away with it most of the time. However, when unforeseen circumstances arise, whether this be a decrease in visibility, an out of air or low air situation, a delay of some sort, a medical problem, an ear problem, etc…., the last thing one needs is increased stress arising from having to think about which way to go back on a visual jump, rather than simply following a continuous line to open water. This isn't simply one of the 5 rules/guidelines of cave diving developed by Sheck Exley, but something the ancient Greeks figured out over 5000 years ago, albeit in the context of a Cretan Labyrinth (remember Theseus and the Minotaur).

In addition, when diving with a buddy, placing jumps serves to maintain communication and make safe transitions. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind, as I wrote in another thread, that visual and blind jumps were a major contributory factor in Bruce's accident at every level of the dive, and contributed to lack of situational awareness and buddy separation.

The bottom line, in my view, is that not placing jumps simply reflects a high degree of complacency, particularly as there is nothing difficult or time consuming about running a reel or spool if one practices. (If one doesn't, of course, it's a whole different story). One can get away with complacency for much of the time, but eventually it will get you, particularly in a cave.

If one wants to make an analogy to the above water world, I would equate running lines as the equivalent of wearing a seat belt in a car. Unless one is involved in some sort of accident/collision, the seat belt really doesn't do much; i.e. one can get away with not wearing a seat belt much of the time. But it only requires one incident to make the difference between coming out of an accident unscathed versus a severe injury or worse. That's why not wearing a seat belt is illegal.

Marius

---------------
Marius Clore
NACD Equipment & Technology Chair

All opinions are personal.

[SuPrBuGmAn]

I've run a primary at P1 before, but its not something I do every time. There has been a few occassions when I haven't run a primary at JB, but typically, I'll run one even if the team decides it isn't necessary.

Lots of the caves I dive have line coming out to OW anyway, that kinda makes things easy :P

[Slüdge]

This isn't simply one of the 5 rules/guidelines of cave diving developed by Sheck Exley, but something the ancient Greeks figured out over 5000 years ago, albeit in the context of a Cretan Labyrinth (remember Theseus and the Minotaur).

Not to mention Hansel and Gretel...

[Marc Bryan]

This is within some agency standards. In fact, making a primary tie off in a safe exit zone is within standards. So Peacock I doesn't count as not running a line.

Like you said - Counts for some of us (safe exit standards), and not for others of us (o/w standards).

I would say it counts, although I do not run a line at P1.

[Marc Bryan]

even if the gap between open water and the overhead is as little as 1 ft.

If one wants to make an analogy to the above water world, I would equate running lines as the equivalent of wearing a seat belt in a car. Unless one is involved in some sort of accident/collision, the seat belt really doesn't do much; i.e. one can get away with not wearing a seat belt much of the time. But it only requires one incident to make the difference between coming out of an accident unscathed versus a severe injury or worse. That's why not wearing a seat belt is illegal.

Marius

---------------
Marius Clore
NACD Equipment & Technology Chair

All opinions are personal.

While driving my truck around the family farm, I do not find a logical argument from a safety standpoint, nor am I compelled by law, to wear a seat belt. Absolutes are rarely so.

I feel the same about running a line at P1.

I support the open communication. If the mods feel it is bad for the board, or our sport, why not create a private vetted forum? Are the logistics just that time, or monetary consuming. I would volunteer some time to vett members.

[tmcdonal]

I find follow-up posts annoying me when they vilify/defend the poster (usually in a smarmy manner) without actual discussions of why you personally do something. That seems to be the case here.

Also, the poll has to draw lines somewhere. While my answer isn't pigeonholed quite the same as othersin the same category, I feel pretty comfortable with my answer.

So... I voted for sometimes and sometimes on both.

Rationale:
1) If I'm not familiar with the layout of the entrance OR low viz OR it's been a while ("permanent" line does get moved) OR it's low flow (yes, just low flow is enough), I'll run a line. If I'm entering a high flow, familiar cave where it's next to impossible to not be ejected near the entrance, I'll skip the primary.

2) On jumps, for caves I know AND in large tunnels AND with high flow AND with clear viz, I'll *SOMETIMES* (lots of caveats) do a visual for a first jump off the mainline. Never a second visual, no matter how tempting that I "know where I'm going".

I'm thinking Jackson Blue and Ginnie in general for both of these. AGAIN, NOT FOR A NEW DIVER, but for someone familiar, I can't imagine making it back to the entrance of either (even in zero viz) and not being pushed out (#1).

For #2, there's places in JB and Devil's where one of the "AND" reasons is not true and a jump reel is used. There's other places where all are true and the first visual is skipped.

So, that's my answer. Let the flippant replies commence...

-Tom

[FW]

Forrest, with respect, no-one has earned that title. And no one ever should. Learning dies when we elect emperors, kings, tsars, caesars etc..
And so do arrogant cave divers, when they don't follow procedures developed by analyzing 50 years of body recoveries.

Ken isn't the Czar, he is just stating evidence from all the accident reports. Sadly a lot of the accident victims were just like you, they thought they were immune.

Do what you want, leave the rest of us out of the discussion!

To misquote a famous USSR Premier, "We will recover you".

[FW]

If the mods feel it is bad for the board, or our sport, why not create a private vetted forum? Are the logistics just that time, or monetary consuming. I would volunteer some time to vett members.
We have, but Andrew wants to drag the entire cave diving community into using his non-standard techniques. We won't censor or ban him, but I will say that if you follow him, you will end up a Lemming.

[Kelly Jessop]

AGAIN, NOT FOR A NEW DIVER, but for someone familiar,

So, that's my answer. Let the flippant replies commence...



No flippant reply,but where is the dividing line of new cave diver and someone familiar. The only reason I mention this because cave diving is peer pressure oriented. I know intro divers who fight for the right to dive doubles at a site because they don't want to stand out as someone different while heading to the water with a single tank. I have seen newer cave divers just nod when the dive plan calls for a visual because they don't want to be the person in the team to say they aren't comfortable with a dive plan,and show their newness to their buddies. Claim of familiarity of a cave system,is something that concerns me because complacancy seems to occur. I know two very veteran cave divers who have died in the last 5-6 years because they knew the system extremely well,and evidence suggests they had some very creative rules for gas planning. Where do we leave new cave diver and enter familiarity-is it 200 cave dives?....

[sandy]

Our instuctor taught us to start/run a line from open water to a secondary tie off just inside the cavern zone and then on to the permanent line. So we do that at every cave, even P1. Even though the distance from open water to either line in P1 is short, running a line here (or Ginnie or JB) allows us to maintain/practice our reel/spool techniques.

Interesting thread - thanks.

[BobK]

Not to mention Hansel and Gretel...

So what's the take away here ? Guidelines should not be edible ?

:-)

[MORGAN]

There can be value in developing the habit of doing the same thing the same way every time, especially in a potentially stressful or dangerous situation.

Working as a paramedic and an ER, ICU, & critical care transport RN, I have developed a lot of habits that save me time and make things go more smoothly when I'm in a hurry. I always set up my equipment the same way. I always do procedures in the same way. I always wear my seat belt, in my own vehicle, or in an aircraft or ambulance. If I have to unhitch my seat belt to do something, I buckle it back up as soon as I sit down. I don't have to wonder whether a piece of equipment works and has all its pieces and parts - I know that it does because I checked it. I don't re-invent the way I do my job every day. There are so many uncontrollable aspects of the job that I like to control the variables that I can.

In cave diving (a perfect sport for the OCD critical care nurse) I always run a line at jumps and gaps. I don't have to think about it, I just do it.

Trying to develop good habits doesn't mean being rigid - as long as the habits are well thought out and you're willing to change to new habits when new data shows that they are superior. Having a solid base in practice, good habits, and being organized allows for more flexibility when flexibility is needed.

I confess to having a little ICU nurse OCD to go along with my ER nurse ADD. I wear my seatbelt driving my farm truck on a woods road or in a hayfield at 5 mph. Do I need it? Not likely. But I put it on without taking time to consider "Do I or don't I?" when I get in the truck.

Last week I wanted to get something out of the glove box of my truck, which was parked in the driveway. I got in, put on my seatbelt, opened the glove box, got what I wanted, closed the glove box, took off the seatbelt, and got out. I was halfway back to the house before it struck me what I'd done.

Mike

[phillip1]

What does it cost you to always run a line? 1-2 minutes as opposed to a possible disaster, I think this poll so far if accurate has revealed a serious disregard for following a very basic safety rule, 32% don't always run a reel at jumps!!!! and some of you actually think this is somehow ok or acceptable? Not running a reel from OW to the mainline if the mainline is almost in OW (although I don't agree) I can understand, but doing visual jumps, what the hell is wrong with you?

[MORGAN]

Not to mention Hansel and Gretel...

I tried this - the bread crumbs got all soggy and the catfish ate 'em.

Mike

[cmalinowski]

...There's a huge difference between "always run a line" (that's as likely to be obeyed by most divers as the speed limit is by drivers) and "Here is a way to think about when it's a dumb idea to NOT run a line".I don't agree that running a line and the speed limit are exactly the same, or really the same for the context of this argument... er discussion. I'm not sure what the correct analogy would be, but I don't think it's the speed limit.

Of course, I'm still a rookie. I always run a line and I plan on doing that into the foreseeable future. It's a personal preference.


We have, but Andrew wants to drag the entire cave diving community into his insane techniques. We won't censor or ban him, but I will say that if you follow him, you will end up a Lemming.
So, if someone besides Andrew put this pole up would there be a problem?

I don't agree with not running a line as it seems to contribute to deaths in my eyes. But to say that open discussion about it is a bad thing doesn't sit well with me either. Obviously there are people doing it besides Andrew.

The argument that these discussions should happen in private seems like a bad idea too. If you're not in the in crowd, you'd miss the opportunity to hear and discuss this. Or is it only the in crowd that should benefit from discussions and Darwin will take care of the others?

EDIT: FW, didn't mean to insinuate that you were against open discussion like this read. It seems that others were though.

How many land owners are close to shutting down access to their properties and why might be a good discussion topic. Engaging those land owners and letting them know that these sorts of discussions take place may not be bad either.


No flippant reply,but where is the dividing line of new cave diver and someone familiar. The only reason I mention this because cave diving is peer pressure oriented. I know intro divers who fight for the right to dive doubles at a site because they don't want to stand out as someone different while heading to the water with a single tank. I have seen newer cave divers just nod when the dive plan calls for a visual because they don't want to be the person in the team to say they aren't comfortable with a dive plan,and show their newness to their buddies. Claim of familiarity of a cave system,is something that concerns me because complacancy seems to occur. I know two very veteran cave divers who have died in the last 5-6 years because they knew the system extremely well,and evidence suggests they had some very creative rules for gas planning. Where do we leave new cave diver and enter familiarity-is it 200 cave dives?.... Peer pressure is huge in everything in life, and cave diving is no different. So are you saying that more should be drilled into people about the dangers of peer pressure during cave diving? I know of at least one story where it killed someone (and their peer pressuring buddy) in Mexico years back.


All I know is that I don't know a lot.

Chris

[phillip1]

If one wants to make an analogy to the above water world, I would equate running lines as the equivalent of wearing a seat belt in a car. Unless one is involved in some sort of accident/collision, the seat belt really doesn't do much; i.e. one can get away with not wearing a seat belt much of the time. But it only requires one incident to make the difference between coming out of an accident unscathed versus a severe injury or worse. That's why not wearing a seat belt is illegal.

Marius

---------------
Marius Clore
NACD Equipment & Technology Chair

All opinions are personal.
I agree with the seat belt analogy, however there are two differences I think, 1. by not wearing a seat belt you are not putting other people's lives at risk and, by not running a jump reel you are, 2. Roads and highways will not be closed if someone dies because he or she was not wearing a seat belt, but caves could be closed by weary land owners after someone drowns.

[Squirrel Girl]

What does it cost you to always run a line? 1-2 minutes as opposed to a possible disaster, I think this poll so far if accurate has revealed a serious disregard for following a very basic safety rule, 32% don't always run a reel at jumps!!!! and some of you actually think this is somehow ok or acceptable? Not running a reel from OW to the mainline if the mainline is almost in OW (although I don't agree) I can understand, but doing visual jumps, what the hell is wrong with you?

Well, there is a greater cost if you're doing a loop. If you're doing one dive and doing a loop you have to go back and get the reel on a separate dive. (Or post up asking someone to fetch the reel for you).

I'm not saying that's a good idea, or that big a deal, or that I like to do that (I don't), but I'm thinking it might be a contributing factor to why some people don't use a reel at some gaps.

[phillip1]

I would like to add something else too, I read many replies here saying this and that about Andrew, now I don't know Andrew and his advanced techniques. The poll is not about some super advanced scooter deep trimix gas planning deco computer theory, it is about the most basic safety rule in cave diving -always have a continuous line to OW- However I am reading that over 33% sometimes do and don't run jumps, don't you think that THAT is a huge problem in the cave diving community? I read in reply that Andrew does this or that but that is not the point of this poll at all, the point is is that MORE people are NOT running a line than ARE, to me this seems like a big problem and instead of arguing over Andrews advanced techniques, instructors and peers alike should try and figure out how it got this bad, and try to fix what looks like a pretty dangerous mindset.
I live in the DR and if one of the people who voted to "not always run a jump", does a visual jump in a cave here or anywhere in the world and drowns as a result of such risky practices don't you think that there is a real mindset problem.
I have heard from various divers in Mex that divers from FL have sometimes done visuals in caves in Mex too, I am not saying this is a US divers problem as I am sure it happens in other countries too but if the above poll result if accurate I would think you guys in the US have a safety issue right now and should try and change people's mindset and approach to the most basic cave diving safety guideline.

[phillip1]

Well, there is a greater cost if you're doing a loop. If you're doing one dive and doing a loop you have to go back and get the reel on a separate dive. (Or post up asking someone to fetch the reel for you).

I'm not saying that's a good idea, or that big a deal, or that I like to do that (I don't), but I'm thinking it might be a contributing factor to why some people don't use a reel at some gaps.

I see your point but to me it is just that some people get lazy and would rather save time as opposed to increasing safety.

[icestac]

My reason for asking is that I believe that this needs to be addresed more formally. If a majority of people don't run lines, yet there is no agreed basis on which to decide when to run them and when not, we're all reinventing the wheel on our own. And avoidable accidents could be... well, avoided if we had a better set of rules when deciding whether to run one or not.


...but if the above poll result if accurate I would think you guys in the US have a safety issue right now and should try and change people's mindset and approach to the most basic cave diving safety guideline.

I think it is interesting that to this one point, both sides seem to agree -- if there is a significant number of divers "modifying" the rules, there should be some discussion on how to resolve it, because everyone agrees that this is not good.

One camp thinks the rules could be improved and the other camp thinks the "end-users" need to improve. In either case, you're still working on the same problem.

I don't necessarily think that the rules should be modified, but I also think that an honest discussion of the rules can be a good thing. Maybe they end up being modified for the better and maybe the review re-enforces that the rules are perfectly fine as they are. In either case, I think it could result in a renewed acceptable and more strict adherence to whatever the outcome is.

Just my 02,
Jeff

[chimie007]

I think it is interesting that to this one point, both sides seem to agree -- if there is a significant number of divers "modifying" the rules, there should be some discussion on how to resolve it, because everyone agrees that this is not good.

One camp thinks the rules could be improved and the other camp thinks the "end-users" need to improve. In either case, you're still working on the same problem.

I don't necessarily think that the rules should be modified, but I also think that an honest discussion of the rules can be a good thing. Maybe they end up being modified for the better and maybe the review re-enforces that the rules are perfectly fine as they are. In either case, I think it could result in a renewed acceptable and more strict adherence to whatever the outcome is.

Just my 02,
Jeff

Very well said Jeff.....

[Squirrel Girl]

I see your point but to me it is just that some people get lazy and would rather save time as opposed to increasing safety.

I agree with you. I was just saying......

[FW]

Well, there is a greater cost if you're doing a loop. If you're doing one dive and doing a loop you have to go back and get the reel on a separate dive. (Or post up asking someone to fetch the reel for you).

I'm not saying that's a good idea, or that big a deal, or that I like to do that (I don't), but I'm thinking it might be a contributing factor to why some people don't use a reel at some gaps.
A good solution to this would put a "T" at all the popular circuits (loops) like the "Merry-Go-Round" at Little River.

[phillip1]

Just to make my position 100% clear, I think the cave diving community in the US should somehow make it very clear to all divers no matter what your level, that you should always run a line to OW and especially at jumps, if over 30% of divers (according to the poll so far) are not doing that, then they have the wrong mindset to be cave diving. I think this is not a rule that can be changed or modified in any way, I don't see how you could modify this rule to make it safer, just run a line, ALWAYS period.
Although so far I don't agree, I could see some of the other rules being modified and possibly made safer, but not running a line is just plain stupidity/laziness.
Similar to not doing a bubble check 70% of the time.

[Oister]

I’m not sure who said it but it was good. “When the recovery team shows up they will run a line when they are recovering your body“.

[Cleric]

How foten do you run a line?

Is this German profanity?

nah, if it were German, it would be ge-foten!

Sounds Dutch to me.

[aainslie]

Just to make my position 100% clear, I think the cave diving community in the US should somehow make it very clear to all divers no matter what your level, that you should always run a line to OW and especially at jumps, if over 30% of divers (according to the poll so far) are not doing that, then they have the wrong mindset to be cave diving. I think this is not a rule that can be changed or modified in any way, I don't see how you could modify this rule to make it safer, just run a line, ALWAYS period.
Although so far I don't agree, I could see some of the other rules being modified and possibly made safer, but not running a line is just plain stupidity/laziness.
Similar to not doing a bubble check 70% of the time.

Instructors DO make it very clear. The cave diving community DOES make it very clear.

(Actually not even that is true. On scooter classes, many instructors don't bother with jumps onto the Hill 400 line. That's DURING THE CLASS!! Even more don't bother running a line into the Ear. Someone was recounting this point to me last night on the phone. I know at least 3 instructors with this approach.)

Yet that same community is largely ignoring the rule.

Kelly and Forrest, I want to point out that I am NOT offering a solution. I pointed out that I nearly hurt myself by breaking this rule,and that I run lines MORE OFTEN now than I did prior to this incident.

If one makes overly strict rules, they tend to get broken because they just seem so silly. There are a lot of jumps in Ginnie that just don't seem necessary, particularly on/off the Gold Line. And circuits is a great example of why people often break this rule.

So... when a majority are breaking something that is viewed as a cardinal rule, it's at least worth discussing it. Why is it happening? Is the solution to just hammer it home harder (and will that ever stop people from doing circuits they do all the time without running a relll on a prior dive)? Is there an intermediate solution? Or should we do nothing, and be happy that over half the divers are just making stuff up as they go along - a dangerous situation?

Once more, NO prescription from me, guys. I actually think this is pretty dangerous, as I do much of the ad-hoccery that I see in deviations from the "rule of thirds", such as the usage of a "1/2 + 200" approach to stages (which puts all your eggs in one basket - a really bad way to do risk management).

It continues to amuse me that a lot of you think I am the irresponsible one here. The irresponsible thing to do is to be complacent about a dangerous situation.

[BabyDuck]

i've been thinking about this, and i think i get what andrew's saying. lemme put it another way. if i'm wrong, i'm sure he'll correct me!

*if* we were starting to cave dive *now*, with current equipment, would we come up with the exact same rules stated the same way? or - if we look at deaths in just the last 5 or 10 years, would we come up with the exact same rules?

if we were just starting to cave dive *now*, for instance, would we have a 3 lights rule? or a 2 primaries rule? or what? because the lights are so different & more reliable now than earlier, but smaller. maybe 2 primaries makes sense now & not so much when you had to carry motorcycle batteries. maybe 1 primary & 1 backup. maybe the rule wouldn't be different.

*but*, if we were starting fresh with recent incidents, would we have the same rules? more rules? stiffer? laxer? more 'if a then b but if c then d'? he's not calling for no rules. he's calling for making sure the ones we have make the best sense for now.

a very off topic analogy - if you've ever taken home ec or learned to cook from your grandmother, i bet you were told to crack eggs one at a time in a dish before putting them into whatever you were cooking to make sure they were good. that made sense when your eggs came from a local farm & might really be last week's just found today instead of today's egg. but when was the last time you had a bum egg from the supermarket? it's happened once in my presence in 40 years. to me, that's not a big enough risk to clean an extra dish every time i use an egg. maybe to you it is. but that's an old, hungover rule example. maybe the rules would be exactly the same. but what if we're chasing problems that don't really exist in that form anymore?

no answers from me, just a restatement of the question.

[Squirrel Girl]

A good solution to this would put a "T" at all the popular circuits (loops) like the "Merry-Go-Round" at Little River.

Well, get yer buildin' supplies out, cuz I can think of quite a few place like this---that I've been to with YOU!
:smt079 :yawinkle: :smt003

[Squirrel Girl]

Do what ya like, Baby Duck, but I want at least 3 lights when I go in a cave, be it dry or flooded! OK, I'll concede that last year when I was doing my research and only going in a couple hundred feet, I did only take 2 lights, but I still think 3 is a *good* idea.

And as far as eggs go, I like cracking eggs into a separate bowl mainly because on rare occasions a bit of shell breaks off and I'd like to see it before it goes straight into the goodies I bring to work. I have a reputation to maintain! Oh, and when I cook for myself, I sometimes push the expiration date for the eggs, and I want to see if the yolk breaks before I use it.

There are many reasons for doing something that's a good idea. Usually it's not needed, but on those rare case, you sure want the backup!

[phillip1]

Instructors DO make it very clear. The cave diving community DOES make it very clear.



If one makes overly strict rules, they tend to get broken because they just seem so silly. There are a lot of jumps in Ginnie that just don't seem necessary, particularly on/off the Gold Line. And circuits is a great example of why people often break this rule.

So... when a majority are breaking something that is viewed as a cardinal rule, it's at least worth discussing it. situation?

.
I think that running a line is one of the most inviolable safety guidelines and should be as strict as possible as in my opinion there is just no safe alternative, and no room for not running a line, period.

[quarrydiver]

I'm 100% with Philip in this regard.

Marius

[phillip1]

So let's go over these silly strict rules.
1. be trained in cave diving and stay within the limits of your training, any comments?

2. Use only one third of your gas for penetration and keep a third in reserve for emergencies, now this I really do not agree with, I think it is not conservative enough. I you are diving to thirds and your buddy looses all his/her air at maximum penetration, you do not have enough to get out.
So on rule #2 I say thirds +30 bar

3. Always use a continuous guideline to OW, now I really fail to see what is so strict and silly and why people would break this rule, I say ALWAYS run a line, period.

4. Bring at least 3 sources of light one primary and two backups, now given today's super small sized lights why not bring at least 3?, I always bring 4, one primary, one backup primary and two backups and they are all very very small and take up no room at all. And anyway rule #4 is further reinforced if you don't violate rule#3 in the first place, if you run a line to OW you should be able to get out in more or less the same time from anywhere you are with no light or viz.

5. No deep dives in caves on air, now this is something I do not do, but I can understand that super experienced deep air divers feel they can safely do this, but you are talking about a few people and NOT the general cave diving community.

Now I am talking about swimming dives not scootering which I know nothing about, but as to regular cave diving what does anyone think is wrong with theses guidelines? I think that if cave diving were to start today you would have the same amount and types of accidents as you did in the early days.
The only real difference is light size and tank valves, the hazards are exactly the same.

[icestac]

3. Always use a continuous guideline to OW, now I really fail to see what is so strict and silly and why people would break this rule, I say ALWAYS run a line, period.

To stick with this thread's original topic and to throw something out. Let's say we all agree with the "have a continuous guideline to OW". Sounds good, but people do not seem to be doing it. So could this mean that we have too many "simple" jumps/gaps? Are the lines close enough to OW that people feel "safe" not running a line?

Going back to something Forrest pointed out earlier in this, what if it was a T instead? What if the line was extended to OW -- OR -- what if the line was brought back further into the cave? Maybe we can try to mitigate some of this behaviour by modifying the "rules" that the line committees use when deciding where/how to lay the lines? I would suggest that most of the people who skip running a line do it because the feel comfortable doing so -- reasons probably include "it is only a couple of feet", "it is basically OW anyways", etc.

Just a thought of another way to look at the problem/solution.

Cheers,
Jeff

[LiteHedded]

So let's go over these silly strict rules.
1. be trained in cave diving and stay within the limits of your training, any comments?

2. Use only one third of your gas for penetration and keep a third in reserve for emergencies, now this I really do not agree with, I think it is not conservative enough. I you are diving to thirds and your buddy looses all his/her air at maximum penetration, you do not have enough to get out.
So on rule #2 I say thirds +30 bar

3. Always use a continuous guideline to OW, now I really fail to see what is so strict and silly and why people would break this rule, I say ALWAYS run a line, period.

4. Bring at least 3 sources of light one primary and two backups, now given today's super small sized lights why not bring at least 3?, I always bring 4, one primary, one backup primary and two backups and they are all very very small and take up no room at all. And anyway rule #4 is further reinforced if you don't violate rule#3 in the first place, if you run a line to OW you should be able to get out in more or less the same time from anywhere you are with no light or viz.

5. No deep dives in caves on air, now this is something I do not do, but I can understand that super experienced deep air divers feel they can safely do this, but you are talking about a few people and NOT the general cave diving community.

Now I am talking about swimming dives not scootering which I know nothing about, but as to regular cave diving what does anyone think is wrong with theses guidelines? I think that if cave diving were to start today you would have the same amount and types of accidents as you did in the early days.
The only real difference is light size and tank valves, the hazards are exactly the same.

does that EVER happen? are we planning for unrealistic failures here?

[PfcAJ]

I think the cave diving community needs to remember why we have lines in the first place. They aren't for training, they are for safety. Safety for cave divers.

If an OW diver 'might' follow a goldline into a cave, they could just as easily follow my temporary line into the cave. Saying that having the goldline to OW will entice OW divers into the cave isn't a very good argument.

If instructors want to train students to run a primary line (which I feel is a very important skill), have them run it as far in as the instructor sees fit. You don't have to tie off as soon as you come across the mainline...

I also feel that there should be less jumps and more T's. The T at LR is a pretty good example. To my knowledge, there has not been a fatal accident because of it. That being said, T's might be appropriate in more locations than we currently have them. There are certainly places where they should be and aren't.

If we take a step back and rethink why we are doing what we do, we could make the system safer for everyone that uses it.

[BobK]

2. Use only one third of your gas for penetration and keep a third in reserve for emergencies, now this I really do not agree with, I think it is not conservative enough. I you are diving to thirds and your buddy looses all his/her air at maximum penetration, you do not have enough to get out.
So on rule #2 I say thirds +30 bar



does that EVER happen? are we planning for unrealistic failures here?

It happened to Sheck Eckley and a buddy of his.

Personally I'd prefer to have enough gas in a situation like that so that I don't get even more stressed because I don't know if I have enough gas.

[jj1987]

It happened to Sheck Eckley and a buddy of his.

Personally I'd prefer to have enough gas in a situation like that so that I don't get even more stressed because I don't know if I have enough gas.
How did it happen? Were they diving doubles without an isolator?

Knowing it happened without knowing the root cause doesn't help much. Would more gas have helped, or could they have had 10x the cu ft of gas and still lose all of it?

I see a lot of people asking for help turning on a valve...if you can't reach your valves, the solution is to fix that, not add more gas. If you can reach your valves, the solution might be more gas, but solving the problem always beats a work around, IMO.

[BabyDuck]

sg, i promise i'm not saying change *anything*, just restating what i think is andrew's central point. ;) continue to dive and break eggs as you desire!

and phillip, please show where anyone said the current rules are silly or too strict. *nobody* is saying to ditch them, just rethink them & make sure they make sense for today.

[tmcdonal]

No flippant reply,but where is the dividing line of new cave diver and someone familiar. The only reason I mention this because cave diving is peer pressure oriented. I know intro divers who fight for the right to dive doubles at a site because they don't want to stand out as someone different while heading to the water with a single tank. I have seen newer cave divers just nod when the dive plan calls for a visual because they don't want to be the person in the team to say they aren't comfortable with a dive plan,and show their newness to their buddies. Claim of familiarity of a cave system,is something that concerns me because complacancy seems to occur. I know two very veteran cave divers who have died in the last 5-6 years because they knew the system extremely well,and evidence suggests they had some very creative rules for gas planning. Where do we leave new cave diver and enter familiarity-is it 200 cave dives?....

I guess that's another caveat for me - peer pressure doesn't play into it. I was cave trained with a longtime friend and we're the only buddies for each other. Prior to that, we spent many years diving deep in doubles and cave diving was not a rush to jump to the next "stage". With a new buddy this would be a different situation.

I'm not talking about creative gas management and I don't have a hard and fast rule for X number of dives means you have enough experience for Y situation. Kind of like Abe Davis setting minimum standards for some dives. Some divers are ready before then, some after 100 still need more work.

I'm also not talking about changing the training rules. However, with the recent fatality, to say he didn't run a line and that's why he died is like saying somebody crashed their car because he didn't have is hands at 10 and 2 as we were taught.

At the end of our training I very clearly remember my instructor saying "I warn you not to do visual jumps." I would say the same to a new cave diver.

-Tom

[scububa]

What exactly is a "scientific poll"?


Copernicus???

Sorry, I am confusing "What's My Line?"
with "Where's Your Line?"

[phillip1]

does that EVER happen? are we planning for unrealistic failures here?
Most OOA situations are unlikely some even more unlikely, yet everyone plans and trains for them. I think that since it is possible to loose all your air at any point, why not plan for the worst case scenario and reserve more than thirds in case it does happen
I would rather have as many angles covered as possible especially since the solution is so simple, reserve a bit more than thirds, the cost? maybe 10 mins less of dive time.

[LiteHedded]

Most OOA situations are unlikely some even more unlikely, yet everyone plans and trains for them. I think that since it is possible to loose all your air at any point, why not plan for the worst case scenario and reserve more than thirds in case it does happen
I would rather have as many angles covered as possible especially since the solution is so simple, reserve a bit more than thirds, the cost? maybe 10 mins less of dive time.
certainly.
I'm just wondering if it ever happens. with modern equipment and isolator manifolds.
will you ever lose both posts? let alone at max penetration.


we can plan ourselves right out of a dive if we plan for every conceivable failure. where is the line drawn?
i'm just thinking out loud here...

[LiteHedded]

Copernicus???

Sorry, I am confusing "What's My Line?"
with "Where's Your Line?"

http://thefurtiveglance.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/rim-shot-johnny-utah.jpg

[phillip1]

sg, i promise i'm not saying change *anything*, just restating what i think is andrew's central point. ;) continue to dive and break eggs as you desire!

and phillip, please show where anyone said the current rules are silly or too strict. *nobody* is saying to ditch them, just rethink them & make sure they make sense for today.

Quoted from Andrews post a few pages earlier
"If one makes overly strict rules, they tend to get broken because they just seem so silly. There are a lot of jumps in Ginnie that just don't seem necessary, particularly on/off the Gold Line. And circuits is a great example of why people often break this rule"

I think that the "5" safety rules of cave diving are by no means too strict and even less appear "silly"
Correct me if I misunderstood, but there might be some additional rules that should be included in the 5 basic ones, but none are silly and adhering to all of them is why there are few cave accidents deaths today.
Not adhering to them is almost always why there still are a few cave diving deaths today.

Also what is different today apart from better dive gear? the cave hazards are the same maybe even worse because people think that the "better" gear won't fail and they become "immune" and go way beyond were they should be going.
I may be wrong but apart from scooters which I assume have a completely different set of rules, I don't see any difference in the potential hazards, gear failure, caves, gas mixes etc.

[FW]

Short of a collapse, or medical problem, I don't know of any accident that occured when the divers were following the rules. All this discussion in nice, but if you follow all the rules, your chances of survival are greatly increased.

There was some comparison to speeding, and it may be more accurate than it seems. A lot of people do drive over the speed limit, but eventually they will get a ticket, or even die as a result.

Phillip, don't let anyone convince you are wrong. Like Oister said, they *will* use a line to recover those that died for lack of using one.

I was looking at all the accident reportss on the IUCRR website, and I noticed one in Thunderhole (late '90s). The line ended in open water, but with very low visibility, the person managed to come up under an overhang, and was stuck for 5 hours, before she was rescued. When the rules first came out, the rule said "continious guideline to the surface" I still do this in low visibility.

[LiteHedded]

Short of a collapse, or medical problem, I don't know of any accident that occured when the divers were following the rules. All this discussion in nice, but if you follow all the rules, your chances of survival are greatly increased.

There was some comparison to speeding, and it may be more accurate than it seems. A lot of people do drive over the speed limit, but eventually they will get a ticket, or even die as a result.

Phillip, don't let anyone convince you are wrong. Like Oister said, they *will* use a line to recover those that died for lack of using one.

I was looking at all the accident reportss on the IUCRR website, and I noticed one in Thunderhole (late '90s). The line ended in open water, but with very low visibility, the person managed to come up under an overhang, and was stuck for 5 hours, before she was rescued. When the rules first came out, the rule said "continious guideline to the surface" I still do this in low visibility.
incident free isn't the same as safe

[Ken Hill]

Most OOA situations are unlikely some even more unlikely, yet everyone plans and trains for them. I think that since it is possible to loose all your air at any point, why not plan for the worst case scenario and reserve more than thirds in case it does happen
I would rather have as many angles covered as possible especially since the solution is so simple, reserve a bit more than thirds, the cost? maybe 10 mins less of dive time.

Phillip,

To answer your very sensible post and tidy up some other points made. Every death has been the result of an out of gas scenario barring those attributed by medical authority to a health issue beyond drowning/embolism.

Divers run out of air because of poor gas management. 1/3rd consumption is the minimum starting point for a plan and that depends on the systems outflow, team configuration(s) and always based on the smallest cylinder volume of the team. Siphons the minimum rule is 1/6 of the smallest cylinders starting pressure. Failure to run a line, whether within a series of simple or complex jumps and reliance on an exit reserve of 2/3rds of your starting gas is absurd.

Those found within the systems reveal that their exit was delayed because they were lost or may have encountered a time consuming dilemma. Some because there was not a continuous line to assure a safe exit. This delay may have been caused by poor visibility, confusion, carelessness, misjudgment or something as simple as indigestion let alone diving malady. We'll never know so we stress redundancy and adherence to the rules.

The autopsy table ALWAYS reveal embolism as that occurs because the deceased does not off gas on recovery.

Running a reel needs to be second nature even in zero viability and ample reels need to accompany every dive team.


/Ken

PS : Maybe the next poll should be:

( ) Would I want to die because I was lazy?
( ) Would I want to die because you were careless?
( ) Would I want to die because I planned my dive by the latest poll?
( ) Would I want to die telling my grandchildren I had one hell of a ride?

[icestac]

When the rules first came out, the rule said "continious guideline to the surface" I still do this in low visibility.

No truer words have been spoken. I recall one dive in Orange Grove when the basin was blown out. A team of three descended to go into the cavern... we all ended up surfacing in different corners of the basin (as I recall it, I was at least above the entrance of the cavern ;)). We ended up making a tie off in open air above the cavern. I felt good knowing that on the way out.

On another note, the look from the cavern to the basin when you have the wall of clear water up against the dark murky water was a really cool sight.

Cheers,
Jeff

[Tanked Monkey]

we can plan ourselves right out of a dive if we plan for every conceivable failure. where is the line drawn?
i'm just thinking out loud here...

I once heard someone say "you can plan for 2 major failures, but 3 will kill you"

Safe diving,
Mike

[phillip1]

I agree with you.
I always run a line no matter what or how many jumps there are. If the mainline was not properly thought out of in the first place and too many jumps exist, bring more spools and and plan your dive accordingly.
Those Neptuno mini spools are really cool for short jumps and you can bring many as they are so small.
We used them in Mex a lot.

[Burke]

If one wants to make an analogy to the above water world, I would equate running lines as the equivalent of wearing a seat belt in a car. Unless one is involved in some sort of accident/collision, the seat belt really doesn't do much; i.e. one can get away with not wearing a seat belt much of the time. But it only requires one incident to make the difference between coming out of an accident unscathed versus a severe injury or worse. That's why not wearing a seat belt is illegal.

Marius


Actually, seatbelts are required because we have a strong Insurance lobby, not because anyone really cares about our safety. If that were not the case, it would be mandatory to install seatbelts in school buses and make the kids wear them. So somewhere, someone is making consious decisions about the dollar value of a life. If they make you wear your seatbelt, it doesn't cost them anything; and ultimately, they may save some money. On the other hand, if we make kids on school buses wear them, well, who is going to pay to install seatbelts in millions of buses nationwide?

As far as landowners reading comments on the forum... Let's find out who they are and close their accounts... :)

[Slüdge]

Does anybody find it ironic that in Florida, if you're riding a motorcycle you don't have to wear a helmet, but if you're riding in a car you have to wear a seat belt?

[Oister]

Does anybody find it ironic that in Florida, if you're riding a motorcycle you don't have to wear a helmet, but if you're riding in a car you have to wear a seat belt?
It's the same in PA

[FW]

As far as landowners reading comments on the forum... Let's find out who they are and close their accounts... :)
They don't need accounts to read this forum, or the main forum.....

[aainslie]

So let's go over these silly strict rules.
1. be trained in cave diving and stay within the limits of your training, any comments?

2. Use only one third of your gas for penetration and keep a third in reserve for emergencies, now this I really do not agree with, I think it is not conservative enough. I you are diving to thirds and your buddy looses all his/her air at maximum penetration, you do not have enough to get out.
So on rule #2 I say thirds +30 bar

3. Always use a continuous guideline to OW, now I really fail to see what is so strict and silly and why people would break this rule, I say ALWAYS run a line, period.

4. Bring at least 3 sources of light one primary and two backups, now given today's super small sized lights why not bring at least 3?, I always bring 4, one primary, one backup primary and two backups and they are all very very small and take up no room at all. And anyway rule #4 is further reinforced if you don't violate rule#3 in the first place, if you run a line to OW you should be able to get out in more or less the same time from anywhere you are with no light or viz.

5. No deep dives in caves on air, now this is something I do not do, but I can understand that super experienced deep air divers feel they can safely do this, but you are talking about a few people and NOT the general cave diving community.

Now I am talking about swimming dives not scootering which I know nothing about, but as to regular cave diving what does anyone think is wrong with theses guidelines? I think that if cave diving were to start today you would have the same amount and types of accidents as you did in the early days.
The only real difference is light size and tank valves, the hazards are exactly the same.


What cracks me up, Phillip, is some of the most vociferous complainers on this thread themselves push these rules.

Rule 1 - Forrest and his Home Depot Special. He clearly thinks that he's sufficiently clever to self-train on the device. He seems to think Rule 1 is silly.

Rule 2 - a special case of the Rule of Doubles (patent pending) and I agree, often insufficiently conservative. Hence, silly.

Rule 3 - someone just pointed out to me that Kelly can clearly be seen doing visual jumps on some commercially sold videos (cavex2 I believe). So Kelly - What's good for the goose ain't good for the gander? Or do you think that's a silly rule, Kelly?

Rule 4 - seriously, only 3? I take 2 on my helmet, a couple more in pockets and on my harness, and a primary. Why only take 3? They're cheap, and with LED's they last forever. What a silly rule!

Rule 5 - well, sort of obvious. No deep air is an agreed rule in every area of diving. Silly to apply it to cave diving.



How did it happen? Were they diving doubles without an isolator?

Knowing it happened without knowing the root cause doesn't help much. Would more gas have helped, or could they have had 10x the cu ft of gas and still lose all of it?

I see a lot of people asking for help turning on a valve...if you can't reach your valves, the solution is to fix that, not add more gas. If you can reach your valves, the solution might be more gas, but solving the problem always beats a work around, IMO.

James, it's a fascinating story. I'm going from memory but I think the basics are here. When the (I think) freeeflow started, Exley's buddy THOUGHT IT WAS EXLEY and started swimming to him to give him air. By the time he'd worked it out he was empty. Underwater it's easy to make this mistake. A nice aspect of modern training I think is that your immediate reaction is to isolate - it makes it automatic. But it's a nice example of where having a buddy can have unintended negative consequences.


i've been thinking about this, and i think i get what andrew's saying. lemme put it another way. if i'm wrong, i'm sure he'll correct me!

*if* we were starting to cave dive *now*, with current equipment, would we come up with the exact same rules stated the same way? or - if we look at deaths in just the last 5 or 10 years, would we come up with the exact same rules?

if we were just starting to cave dive *now*, for instance, would we have a 3 lights rule? or a 2 primaries rule? or what? because the lights are so different & more reliable now than earlier, but smaller. maybe 2 primaries makes sense now & not so much when you had to carry motorcycle batteries. maybe 1 primary & 1 backup. maybe the rule wouldn't be different.

*but*, if we were starting fresh with recent incidents, would we have the same rules? more rules? stiffer? laxer? more 'if a then b but if c then d'? he's not calling for no rules. he's calling for making sure the ones we have make the best sense for now.

a very off topic analogy - if you've ever taken home ec or learned to cook from your grandmother, i bet you were told to crack eggs one at a time in a dish before putting them into whatever you were cooking to make sure they were good. that made sense when your eggs came from a local farm & might really be last week's just found today instead of today's egg. but when was the last time you had a bum egg from the supermarket? it's happened once in my presence in 40 years. to me, that's not a big enough risk to clean an extra dish every time i use an egg. maybe to you it is. but that's an old, hungover rule example. maybe the rules would be exactly the same. but what if we're chasing problems that don't really exist in that form anymore?

no answers from me, just a restatement of the question.

Well, it's not just about new equipment,although it is in part. I think two things have made me feel that the rules need updating. 1) Currently, it's EXPERIENCED divers that are dying; 2) As this poll shows, and even the most casual empiricism corroborates, people break them all the time. Why is this? What should we do about it?

[FW]

.... He clearly thinks that he's sufficiently clever to self-train on the dievice.....

Slip of the tongue (er keyboard)? :roll:

[aainslie]

Slip of the tongue (er keyboard)? :roll:

Oops... corrected.

But do you have an answer? Why are you personally OK with breaking that rule?


...Or do you perhaps think it needs modifying?

...Or are you above it?

[phillip1]

Ok I misunderstood your calling the rules "silly" and I agree with you that an even more conservative approach is needed to the "rules".
However if people are breaking basic cave diving rules that are the absolute bare minimum in safety standards then there is a very serious safety issue with the mindset of such people, and if they are breaking very basic bare minimum rules I unfortunately doubt they would adhere to an even more conservative approach.

[jj1987]

James, it's a fascinating story. I'm going from memory but I think the basics are here. When the (I think) freeeflow started, Exley's buddy THOUGHT IT WAS EXLEY and started swimming to him to give him air. By the time he'd worked it out he was empty. Underwater it's easy to make this mistake. A nice aspect of modern training I think is that your immediate reaction is to isolate - it makes it automatic. But it's a nice example of where having a buddy can have unintended negative consequences.
So it's a training issue that's being told as if it were a gas issue? I don't see what the motivation for that might be.

BTW- I know this is taught currently differently by various instructors. I think isolating should be a secondary concern if you're team diving. If you're team diving, alerting your buddy should be the #1 goal, as you can always get out with their gas (if you planned well), saving your gas should be the #2 goal. Fortunately with light signals, these are near simultaneously accomplished, but I would hate to know that I isolated and forgot to signal a buddy, causing buddy separation and gear failure on the same dive. The opposing view, I guess, is that you save the gas ASAP and then let your buddy know it's time to exit.

This is where accident analysis get's interesting. Reminds me of a story recently where a diver died right near the entrance of a cave because his isolator was closed and even though the SPG (should have) read full, he got on o2 real deep because he thought it was his last option. I've heard lot's say that was a clear case of diving beyond your training, because the system required 100 post full cave dives to get in and the diver was intro. However the cause of the accident was a situation not a direct result of that system and could of happened in OW. Not sure if the training was done in doubles or not, but I guess my point is I observed several people jumping to the conclusion they were diving beyond their training level, when that's not the CAUSE of the accident. It almost seems that accident analysis is often "let's figure out how to fit this within the 5 rules, or consider it a medical incident".

I think we need to reevaluate training in many areas, as we've all seen or heard about classes that make us scratch our heads. I for one, would be a HUGE fan of having the student initial next to each of the required skills stating they were completed, and turning in a short summery of each dive done during training that's sent in when the instructor files the paperwork for the certification card.

[Kelly Jessop]

Rule 3 - someone just pointed out to me that Kelly can clearly be seen doing visual jumps on some commercially sold videos (cavex2 I believe). So Kelly - What's good for the goose ain't good for the gander? Or do you think that's a silly rule, Kelly?

Safety diver on each dive that put in ALL jumps. The videographer didn't want the detraction of a reel placement,except at Cow. The safety diver put everything in,and the plan was choreographed such that if the safety diver couldn't complete a part of his task,the whole dive was dumped. I hated this when a couple places had to reshot,but in retrospect I appreciated the safety diver. Hence due to the proximity of the safety diver,and working as a well choregraphed team,I had a continuous line to exit,and this was needed for the nether reaches of Bonnett.

[Slüdge]

A nice aspect of modern training I think is that your immediate reaction is to isolate - it makes it automatic.

Any instructor that teaches that "your immediate reaction is to isolate" doesn't really understand how doubles work. Of all things that go wrong with gas delivery underwater, something that would be solved by isolating probably happens 0.00000001% of the time.

(I've never heard of it happening.)

[cloudboy55]

A good solution to this would put a "T" at all the popular circuits (loops) like the "Merry-Go-Round" at Little River.

I support that idea.

[aainslie]

Safety diver on each dive that put in ALL jumps. The videographer didn't want the detraction of a reel placement,except at Cow. The safety diver put everything in,and the plan was choreographed such that if the safety diver couldn't complete a part of his task,the whole dive was dumped. I hated this when a couple places had to reshot,but in retrospect I appreciated the safety diver. Hence due to the proximity of the safety diver,and working as a well choregraphed team,I had a continuous line to exit,and this was needed for the nether reaches of Bonnett.

a) Nice story!

b) Even if it were true, how could you condone a video for sale to anyone (regardless of training) wherein it appear that jumps without a reel are OK?

[aainslie]

I support that idea.

That will only encourage blind circuits. Even more than they're currently done.

...Hmmm... i see another poll coming on...

[Slüdge]

I miss Karl.

[RN]

does that EVER happen? are we planning for unrealistic failures here?

Using that logic means no one should ever run a primary at Devil's or JB because no one has ever died from not running a line in those places...

It is possible to have a catastrophic gas loss at or close to your farthest penetration. And when a loss occurs I guarantee you won't get situated as quickly as you might in drills. It's completely different when you have a jet stream of air propelling you around the cave while you're trying to shut down your valves losing site of the line because you will silt out the passage. Thirds is not conservative enough for 2 person teams, even in high flow systems. I am confident I will have enough gas if I have a 1st stage or valve failure. If you want to see more of the cave, improve your consumption or bring a stage but don't dive the extreme limits of your gas volume.

[LiteHedded]

Using that logic means no one should ever run a primary at Devil's or JB because no one has ever died from not running a line in those places...

It is possible to have a catastrophic gas loss at or close to your farthest penetration. And when a loss occurs I guarantee you won't get situated as quickly as you might in drills. It's completely different when you have a jet stream of air propelling you around the cave while you're trying to shut down your valves losing site of the line because you will silt out the passage. Thirds is not conservative enough for 2 person teams, even in high flow systems. I am confident I will have enough gas if I have a 1st stage or valve failure. If you want to see more of the cave, improve your consumption or bring a stage but don't dive the extreme limits of your gas volume.

I know. I've had it happen. it's no fun.
well...i wasn't propelled around the cave. but i've had to shut down a post on a dive or two. certainly not as smooth as a valve drill

I'm just wondering if you'd ever lose all your gas. nothing wrong with reserving more than thirds at all. I often do. I'm just wondering if, out of all the good reasons to save more gas than thirds, is losing all your gas at max penetration one of them?

[RN]

It is one of them for me but not the only one.

[Marc Bryan]

A good solution to this would put a "T" at all the popular circuits (loops) like the "Merry-Go-Round" at Little River.

I agree.

[wingman]

a) Nice story!

b) Even if it were true, how could you condone a video for sale to anyone (regardless of training) wherein it appear that jumps without a reel are OK?

Andrew, that's a little over the top...i'm sure it is exactly as kelly described and your point about the illusion of visuals and that message is well taken.

There are certainly times when a visual transfer from one continuous line to the surface to another is fine (at least to me). For example a roller coaster circuit at ginnie. Put in a real going into the roller coaster that you pull on the way out. Go to the end of the roller coaster line and visual onto the gold line and exit via gold line. That 10 foot or so jump from one continuous line to the surface to another does not require a reel. The dogleg (coat hanger) is in a large dome room with good vis and high flow. Granted the exit via the roller coaster is a bit quicker but by only a minute or so, this verified by a test. Why would anyone put in a reel from the end of the roller coaster to gold line on that circuit? If scootering a whole different set of incremental risk calculations arise. All those risk calculations require judgement and experience. For those whose judgement and experience are not well developed decision making using the rule always run a reel works well. Bill

[Marc Bryan]

I would also propose that it is higher than 1/3 doing visuals at Ginnie, especially to and from the gold line, if you do not count classes/students. With the thousands of dives done there every year that is a pretty large data set of its own. Not saying it proves you shouldn't run a continuous line. Maybe it just says a lot of us are really stupid, dangerous, lazy, etc......

I do agree with Andrew that there is a lot of do as I say not as I do, in this community. I have personally dove with many who do not put lines in at gaps while doing the Grand Traverse at Peacock, but still tell others that they should always run a continuous line, or a line to O/W, etc.....

I disagree with Marius (and I dive frequently with Marius) that not running a reel from harry's crack to the gold line was a large contributing factor in the recent incident. Even if he missed the gold line, and if visibility was zero, and he accidentally ended up on the hill 400 line there are several indicators of exit direction. First is the flow and the fact you would have been swimming against it. Second, he would have only had to swim the line 60ft before hitting a distance marker. If he missed that, in less than another 100 ft he would have hit the two jump arrows at July Spring. Of course this is just my opinion, and we all know what that is worth.

Great discussion, and I would like to thank all for keeping it civil and at least semi productive for me.

[aainslie]

Any instructor that teaches that "your immediate reaction is to isolate" doesn't really understand how doubles work. Of all things that go wrong with gas delivery underwater, something that would be solved by isolating probably happens 0.00000001% of the time.

(I've never heard of it happening.)

For starters, I think we're on different tracks. You're probably talking about closing the isolator valve, I'm talking about isolating the gas flow. My bad, I wasn't clear. Often the best way is to shut down a valve, not the isolator.

I suppose "isolate" is also different with different configs. With sidemount, I definitely isolate first. Why not? It's so easy - and it cures any problem except a burst disk, giving you time to work out a) your options, followed by b) is any of the gas salvageable, perhaps by feathering or changing the reg out? Sometimes it's as simple as stopping a freeflow caused by scootering.

But personally, gas comes first for me. I first stop the gas exit, then worry about the rest.

[Kelly Jessop]

a) Nice story!

b) Even if it were true,


Unfortunately the videographer lost his battle with a long term illness,but if you need verification the safety divers are still around.

Mr Aainslie I hope your comments to people who question you at the NACD workshop where you are a speaker,don't end with the above comments.

Moderators the needle is into the yellow zone of a civil discussion when we have people being called liars.

[Slüdge]

Moderators the needle is into the yellow zone of a civil discussion when we have people being called liars.

When someone continues to badger two of the most respected cave divers in history, a meeting of the moderators is in order.

[FW]

a) Nice story!

b) Even if it were true, how could you condone a video for sale to anyone (regardless of training) wherein it appear that jumps without a reel are OK?
Andrew, we won't ban you for your theories on the rules, but we can, and will ban you for flaming another member of the forum.

Consider this an official warning!

[atedeschi]

If scootering a whole different set of incremental risk calculations arise. All those risk calculations require judgement and experience. For those whose judgement and experience are not well developed decision making using the rule always run a reel works well. Bill

So why are things different for divers that scooter? Why do they not have rules to follow? I think that was the point Andrew was trying to make about in his psi/ft thread. There seems to be rules for swimming but when you get a scooter, its ok good luck don't dive thirds its not conservative enough and take AL along with you. I may be completely from because I do not scooter, just what it appears from an outsiders perspective.

[OFG-1]

Andrew, we won't ban you for your theories on the rules, but we can, and will ban you for flaming another member of the forum.

Consider this an official warning!

Just out of a morbid curiosity, which is worse? You referring to Andrew as "insane" or Andrew implying that Kelly is mis-stating something?

Sludge - I miss Karl also. I believe that if you were to extend a personal invite to him, he would return.

[FW]

Just out of a morbid curiosity, which is worse? You referring to Andrew as "insane" or Andrew implying that Kelly is mis-stating something?

Sludge - I miss Karl also. I believe that if you were to extend a personal invite to him, he would return.
I was referring to his techniques, not him. I changed my post now anyway.

[wingman]

So why are things different for divers that scooter? Why do they not have rules to follow? I think that was the point Andrew was trying to make about in his psi/ft thread. There seems to be rules for swimming but when you get a scooter, its ok good luck don't dive thirds its not conservative enough and take AL along with you. I may be completely from because I do not scooter, just what it appears from an outsiders perspective.

I simply said it changes the risk computations...while you can do some silting swimming imagine what can be done scootering, especially with a runaway scooter...back in jb there's some evidence about what can happen with a runaway scooter. Scooters add to the risk and alter what you do to manage it. All i was saying was that cave diving is about risk management and decision making.

[aainslie]

Unfortunately the videographer lost his battle with a long term illness,but if you need verification the safety divers are still around.

Mr Aainslie I hope your comments to people who question you at the NACD workshop where you are a speaker,don't end with the above comments.

Moderators the needle is into the yellow zone of a civil discussion when we have people being called liars.

It was intended as humour. Still, a bit heavy handed. My apologies. I just found it amusing that there are videos of you apparently doing jumps without a line.

Which still leaves the question... why make a video where it appears you're doing jumps without a line?

Russell - the badgering, I want to point out, has been thoroughly reciprocated by those same two. Still, if you think banning is the way to handle this, so be it. You could add Ken to the list of badgerees in your prosecution. Do I get to appoint a defence?


I was referring to his techniques, not him.

Huh - an interesting piece of sophistry.

__________________________________________________ ________________

Anyway this thing has gotten hugely off track. Problem is, I do sometimes enjoy debate per se, and I let humour get in the way of making a point. Bad idea - my bad.

This thread has run its course anyway. 1/3 always run a reel. 1/3 sometimes don't run one at an entrance, but do at jumps (however some of those accidentally entered it thinking of locations like Peacock where many would argue the line runs to open water - so let's say 1/6). And 1/3 often don't run at either.

So something like 1/2 of divers regularly ignore this rule. I propose that this needs addressing. Any rule so widely broken is no longer working.

[deepdiverbob]

So... why make a video where it appears you're doing jumps without a line?



I think the point of the videos is to show the cave system, not to be a guide on how to cave dive. While its easy for those of us trained in cave diving to pick up things like that, I dont see it being as big of a deal as long as there was a plan in place, as Kelley has clearly shown that there was in his video.

The sad part is, this thread had a chance to grow some legs and becomes a decent discussion, but instead it has turned into the kind of threads I am use to seeing over on Scubaboard.

[Kelly Jessop]

It was intended as humour. Still, a bit heavy handed. My apologies. apology accepted,although I don't see intent of humor or satire that is self evident


So... why make a video where it appears you're doing jumps without a line?
Need a Ouija board to ask the videographer his intent. He wanted video through cave passages with a person in front for reference to size,not a study on cave diving techniques. FWIW I was unfortable with a couple aspects,and had specific instructions for the safety diver,especially lines


Russell - the badgering, I want to point out, has been thoroughly reciprocated by those same two. Still, if you think banning is the way to handle this, so be it.

I want to call it civil debate,and discussion. If it is more than you desire then any party can sign off. I don't think I have said anything deragatory,especially in a negative context to character.

[atedeschi]

Ok now back to the poll, one thing that can be said as more people vote, it can be seen more then half of everyone that voted is breaking the cont. guideline rule to OW.

[Rich]

Do I get to appoint a defence?


Since you're an American now, that'd be defense...... ;)

Safe diving,

Rich

[tmcdonal]

This thread has run its course anyway. 1/3 always run a reel. 1/3 sometimes don't run one at an entrance, but do at jumps (however some of those accidentally entered it thinking of locations like Peacock where many would argue the line runs to open water - so let's say 1/6). And 1/3 often don't run at either.

Not to be too much of a stickler on word choice, but if the poll had been phrased with that last sentence, I wouldn't have selected sometimes/sometimes on reels. I also suspect the poll numbers would shift. "Often" is not a way I'd describe not placing jumps.

-Tom

[FW]

....So something like 1/2 of divers regularly ignore this rule. I propose that this needs addressing. Any rule so widely broken is no longer working.....
Maybe it isn't the rule that needs addressing, but the placement of jumps that needs addressing.

I still contend that very popular jumps should be properly marked "T"s, not gaps. This is especially true of popular circuits.

Little river has "T"s at the Merry-go-round, and there have not been any problems there. Jackson blue has dozens of "T"s, and I don't know of any problems there either. Mexico has had "T" for years, and the only problem I know of was a place where they had left gaps, instead of "T"s.

I am not suggesting "T" every place there is a gap, just at the popular ones. There are some tunnels that are not safe enough for new divers, so those gaps should remain.

The bottom line is that if you have a continuous guideline to the exit, your chances of becoming lost are greatly reduced.

[Jay]

The bottom line is that if you have a continuous guideline to the exit, your chances of becoming lost are greatly reduced.


Very true.

We talk about complacency as a contributor to many accidents.

The poll may be indicating a wider spread of complacency then anyone previously acknowledged.

I am as guilty as a lot of the responders.

Do I think the rule needs to be changed because so many people 'violate' it?

Absolutely not.

Maybe we should start another thread on how to deal with the 'complacency' that appears to be so prevalent.

[LiteHedded]

Very true.

We talk about complacency as a contributor to many accidents.

The poll may be indicating a wider spread of complacency then anyone previously acknowledged.

I am as guilty as a lot of the responders.

Do I think the rule needs to be changed because so many people 'violate' it?

Absolutely not.

Maybe we should start another thread on how to deal with the 'complacency' that appears to be so prevalent.

there's an idea
the poll results are shocking

[deepdiverbob]

Maybe it isn't the rule that needs addressing, but the placement of jumps that needs addressing.

I still contend that very popular jumps should be properly marked "T"s, not gaps. This is especially true of popular circuits.

Little river has "T"s at the Merry-go-round, and there have not been any problems there. Jackson blue has dozens of "T"s, and I don't know of any problems there either. Mexico has had "T" for years, and the only problem I know of was a place where they had left gaps, instead of "T"s.

I am not suggesting "T" every place there is a gap, just at the popular ones. There are some tunnels that are not safe enough for new divers, so those gaps should remain.

The bottom line is that if you have a continuous guideline to the exit, your chances of becoming lost are greatly reduced.


I have wondered for a while about putting in a "T" like that back at the pit in Cannonball.

After reading that the lines in Peacock didnt count in the poll, I voted that I always run a line. I did at Peacock before it was extended up the wall, but not now. We did run it at Ginnie, and also at JB. My life is worth the extra minute it takes to run it. Besides, whats wrong with a little more practice?

[aainslie]

Very true.

We talk about complacency as a contributor to many accidents.

The poll may be indicating a wider spread of complacency then anyone previously acknowledged.

I am as guilty as a lot of the responders.

Do I think the rule needs to be changed because so many people 'violate' it?

Absolutely not.

Maybe we should start another thread on how to deal with the 'complacency' that appears to be so prevalent.

Jay,

I'd really like to explore this. Sorry for picking on you. But how do you

a) Break a rule that
b) You absolutely believe in?

How do you handle this contradiction?

It seems to me that either one believes in a rule (and therefore never breaks it) or one doesn't (and therefore is willing to break it).

I would suggest that there are times when you just don't see the point. Ginnie on a Sunday with 6 lines going in (half of which are flapping in the breeze). The Hill 400 on your 20th swim down it.

In which case, the rule isn't absolute.

_____________________________________

Now onto my problem. the REAL complacency is when you begin to think that you can get away with this everywhere. You find yourself not running a reel on white-to-white. In new caves. At a multi-directional fork. Stuff like that. And suddenly youv'e crossed a line and are testing fate.

And one day find yourself lost.

So... is the secret to say ALWAYS run a reel, and then find yourself backsliding, or is it so say "OK, the following places don't seem too hurtful. But DO NOT GET COMPLACENT and make sure that you run a reel in situations a, b, c, etc"

I've formed such a set of rules for myself after a bad incident. White to white (and in particular, drop an arrow!). Low flow (again mainly for the arrow). High silt out probability. New (to me) cave. All these get a line.

I'm unapologetic about not running one on pretty much any jump off the gold line in Ginnie. Even after Bruce's death.

But THAT'S ME! And that's the problem. This is a PERSONAL rule, where a universal set of guidelines would be useful.

50% of us are cheating. And each of us has a different set of rules. That's scary.

[uncle ricky]

There is one almost exception to my "always" - if there is an existing man-made structure that isn't a line but is adequate for tactile following (like a hose or a pipe) then I will consider it a "line" for the purposes of navigating that piece of cave and skip the additional line.
Rick

[wingman]

Jay,



Now onto my problem. the REAL complacency is when you begin to think that you can get away with this everywhere. You find yourself not running a reel on white-to-white. In new caves. At a multi-directional fork. Stuff like that. And suddenly youv'e crossed a line and are testing fate.

And one day find yourself lost.

So... is the secret to say ALWAYS run a reel, and then find yourself backsliding, or is it so say "OK, the following places don't seem too hurtful. But DO NOT GET COMPLACENT and make sure that you run a reel in situations a, b, c, etc"

I've formed such a set of rules for myself after a bad incident. White to white (and in particular, drop an arrow!). Low flow (again mainly for the arrow). High silt out probability. New (to me) cave. All these get a line.

I'm unapologetic about not running one on pretty much any jump off the gold line in Ginnie. Even after Bruce's death.

But THAT'S ME! And that's the problem. This is a PERSONAL rule, where a universal set of guidelines would be useful.

50% of us are cheating. And each of us has a different set of rules. That's scary.

There are a lot of similarities between cave diving and flying. The federal aviation administration over the last decade has done a lot of work in the area that is being discussed here, in fact your poll is a question that would appear in their hazardous attitude inventory process. As a current flight instructor i have looked at a lot of that material in the aeronautical decision making and risk management areas. Much of what they have done is directly transferable into cave diving...just change pilot to cave diver, aircraft to equipment and gasses, and environement from atmosphere and meteorology to aquatic cave. In the FAA this is a part of the training process. Cave agencies that manage the instruction process and standards could learn a lot from what the faa has done in flight training. The FAA stuff was developed to reduce fatalities associated with pilot error those strategies and methods could be applied to reducing diver error as well.

[Ken Hill]

Cave agencies that manage the instruction process and standards could learn a lot from what the faa has done in flight training. The FAA stuff was developed to reduce fatalities associated with pilot error those strategies and methods could be applied to reducing diver error as well.

I agree, and one of the very first posts I wrote addressed one bonehead gas management plan that advocated turn around similar to doing a "bingo fuel" calculation relying on a tail wind. I had a long discussion with the FAA rep at Sun & Fun and they are working hard to reduce incidents from the time the airplane leaves the chocks until it gets back. The FAA approach has a lot has to do with personal responsibility and the ability to administrativly sanction rule breakers.

One thing I'd like to see in cave diving is a dive plan simply left on a dashboard. There are many false alarms reported because there is no way of telling if a team is overdue. And if they are a timely search will know where to look. Cave diving remains a free and unsupervised activity unlike flying that has a controller to remind you if you go astray. I'd give any money to see the invention of an underwater transponder and EPIRB. /Ken

[Jay]

Nice twist on words Andrew.

I said I believed absolutely the rule should not be changed. The complacency should be addressed.

There is a difference. And to me it is about the complacency.( And I am just as guilty as most)

I personally believe when we discuss complacency as an accident contributor we don't give enough thought to our own complacency.

Where do we draw the line?

The majority of folks surveyed (68.25% when I posted this) do not alway's run a continuous guideline to the surface. (counting all situations in which we were trained to run a line)

Does that mean we can change the rule? No, I don't believe that.
Does that mean complacency is OK? No, I don't believe that either.

Do we just say "alway's run a continuous guideline" *nudge* *nudge* *wink* *wink*

Do we address the complacency somehow?

Do we start teaching "here's your card, your a big boy/girl now, these are the rules that are OK to break, but only in cave x,y,z under x,y,z conditions"

Maybe we should just stop talking about it before the agencies revoke our cards. :)





Jay,

I'd really like to explore this. Sorry for picking on you. But how do you

a) Break a rule that
b) You absolutely believe in?

How do you handle this contradiction?

It seems to me that either one believes in a rule (and therefore never breaks it) or one doesn't (and therefore is willing to break it).

I would suggest that there are times when you just don't see the point. Ginnie on a Sunday with 6 lines going in (half of which are flapping in the breeze). The Hill 400 on your 20th swim down it.

In which case, the rule isn't absolute.

_____________________________________

Now onto my problem. the REAL complacency is when you begin to think that you can get away with this everywhere. You find yourself not running a reel on white-to-white. In new caves. At a multi-directional fork. Stuff like that. And suddenly youv'e crossed a line and are testing fate.

And one day find yourself lost.

So... is the secret to say ALWAYS run a reel, and then find yourself backsliding, or is it so say "OK, the following places don't seem too hurtful. But DO NOT GET COMPLACENT and make sure that you run a reel in situations a, b, c, etc"

I've formed such a set of rules for myself after a bad incident. White to white (and in particular, drop an arrow!). Low flow (again mainly for the arrow). High silt out probability. New (to me) cave. All these get a line.

I'm unapologetic about not running one on pretty much any jump off the gold line in Ginnie. Even after Bruce's death.

But THAT'S ME! And that's the problem. This is a PERSONAL rule, where a universal set of guidelines would be useful.

50% of us are cheating. And each of us has a different set of rules. That's scary.

[phillip1]

I think that if "there are too many jumps were there should be T's" is a very poor excuse to not run a line.
I think the problem here seems to be a bunch of complacent/lazy/stupid/ divers completely disregarding the most basic of basic cave diving safety procedures and actually trying to rationalize this.
The problem is not relining a cave with T's instead of jumps so that lazy/complacent divers don't need to run a jump, the problem IS the divers actions and how to change that, not change the line to accommodate unsafe behavior.
The poll indicates to an extent what problem is out in the "open" so to speak, but I can only imagine what additional safety violations some divers are doing on a routine basis.
I have never dove in FL but I have dove a bunch in Mex and the caves there have numerous jumps, reach gaps, T's some very complex too, doing 4-5 jumps or more is a fairly routine thing, and it is a non issue, always run a line, period. I can't imagine the lines in FL being more complex than Mex, (I could be wrong) and it is not an issue, I just do not understand the mindset of people who don't run a line no matter how well you think you know a cave.

[icestac]

I can't imagine the lines in FL being more complex than Mex

I think the vast majority are not skipped because they are more complex, but actually the extreme opposite -- appear simple and trivial "How could I NOT find my way back from here?"

The way I read the suggestion was to either make it a T so it is a non-issue or make it more of a jump so that the "simple" threshold is passed and the diver says "I need to put a line here".

It would be great if the rule was adhered to 100% of the time, but in the absence of that, can we do something to improve the acceptance rate?

Cheers,
Jeff

[Jay]

I think that if "there are too many jumps were there should be T's" is a very poor excuse to not run a line.
I think the problem here seems to be a bunch of complacent/lazy/stupid/ divers completely disregarding the most basic of basic cave diving safety procedures and actually trying to rationalize this.


Pretty much.

[aainslie]

Ken,

"Bonehead" eh?

I'm sure that's not aimed at me. It's aimed at my theory, therefore not derogatory. Right?

Sheesh. Gotta love the onesidedness of rule application around here.

Jay,

So given this thread, is is your intent to always run lines in future? That's commendable... but I predict that one day, going into a Ginnie-like entrance with scooters and stages, you'll backslide...

There's a middle ground. I think it makes sense to explore that middle ground - the alternative is to leave everyone finding it for themselves, as they currently do. Once a rule is broken by 50%, it's just not an effective rule.

Your comment on "Do we just say "alway's run a continuous guideline" *nudge* *nudge* *wink* *wink* " is a great example. Many instructors cease to run lines with their students once they hit advanced classes like sidemount, stage, scooter etc.. So taht's exactly what our community is doing.

[Marc Bryan]

I just do not understand the mindset of people who don't run a line no matter how well you think you know a cave.

Maybe I can help you understand one scenario where I do not run a line, and my reasoning for having a lazy/stupid/complacent mindset.

Following the gold line to a jump that is a U shaped tunnel that is 200ft long and reconnects with the main tunnel five feet from the gold line.

Install a jump line from the gold line to the white line in the tunnel. Swim the tunnel. Return to gold line without running a jump/gap reel.

Pull first jump reel on exit.

My reasoning:

There are numerous times when diving the gold line in caves when divers are more than 5 feet from it. Nobody is screaming that we do not have a reel tied off.

In one of the most popular caves in FL, Ginnie Springs Devils system, the majority of swimming divers enter the system and choose a path that is high and to the left. The gold line is on the right, sometimes more than 20 ft away. Nobody wants to write a rule to protect these lazy/stupid/complacent divers.

Have you ever been more than a couple of feet off the line you were following? If so, did you deploy a reel first?

Maybe I am being extremely dangerous. I am very opened minded to arguments against my reasoning in this situation. Maybe my mind could be changed.

Absolutes, rarely are.

[Jay]

Jay,

So given this thread, is is your intent to always run lines in future? That's commendable... but I predict that one day, going into a Ginnie-like entrance with scooters and stages, you'll backslide...


Andrew,
Please stop "predicting" what I am going to do or say or twisting my intentions or anyone elses. It adds no value other then demeaning yourself.

[wingman]

Cave diving remains a free and unsupervised activity unlike flying that has a controller to remind you if you go astray. I'd give any money to see the invention of an underwater transponder and EPIRB. /Ken

Flying vfr outside of certain airspace classifications does not require a controller. You are free to fly into a thunderstorm if you wish and there are people who do not listen or simply ignore...a student pilot here in pensacola chose to fly his cessna skymaster (center line thrust twin) that he was learning to fly in out of the area prior to one of the hurricanes two years or so ago. He put his wife and 2 kids on board (a student is prohibited from carrying passengers) took off, crashed and all 4 were killed. Point is flying is not as supervised as you might think. General aviation flyng can be considered dangerous...at least you get fairly good data:

http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/08nall.pdf

[aainslie]

Andrew,
Please stop "predicting" what I am going to do or say or twisting my intentions or anyone elses. It adds no value other then demeaning yourself.

I'm just trying to work out what you're saying here.

It ties in with your other thread. I suppose it's a philosophical issue of whether not running a line at somewhere like the Ear is "complacent", or "sensible". I'm not sure how one differentiates. But if there's no good reason otehr than pattern formation for running one at Ginnie, the chances of falling back to one's prior behavior one day are pretty high.

[phillip1]

Maybe I can help you understand one scenario where I do not run a line, and my reasoning for having a lazy/stupid/complacent mindset.

Following the gold line to a jump that is a U shaped tunnel that is 200ft long and reconnects with the main tunnel five feet from the gold line.

Install a jump line from the gold line to the white line in the tunnel. Swim the tunnel. Return to gold line without running a jump/gap reel.

Pull first jump reel on exit.

My reasoning:

There are numerous times when diving the gold line in caves when divers are more than 5 feet from it. Nobody is screaming that we do not have a reel tied off.

In one of the most popular caves in FL, Ginnie Springs Devils system, the majority of swimming divers enter the system and choose a path that is high and to the left. The gold line is on the right, sometimes more than 20 ft away. Nobody wants to write a rule to protect these lazy/stupid/complacent divers.

Have you ever been more than a couple of feet off the line you were following? If so, did you deploy a reel first?

Maybe I am being extremely dangerous. I am very opened minded to arguments against my reasoning in this situation. Maybe my mind could be changed.

Absolutes, rarely are.

For some reason I can't picture excately what you are describing but I can say this, yes many times on the mainline in caves here or in Mex I am off the line a bit, but I am following a line and paying attention to the line, if at any point something goes wrong I am never far off to the point that I could not immediately swim back and reconnect to the line. The big difference is that if you do not run a continuous line to OW you are at some point disconnected from the exit, now say some sort of emergency happens be it small or big you need to be able to get out and follow the line without even having to guess which way is out and not add stress and risk to an already potentially bad situation.
To each his own I guess the people who don't run jumps will continue to do so and think it's ok.
I dive fairly extreme conditions here as we are doing mainly exploration and almost every exit is zero viz, deep inside an unexplored cave in zero viz the meaning your life hangs by a thread takes on a whole new meaning, that line sliding through your hand feels real good.
But when I dive known caves and do some "recreational" cave diving in systems that don't silt out etc.. I always run a reel no matter what, even on reach gaps that are only a foot apart, I respect each cave as much as an unexplored one.
I think it is more dangerous to dive a nice cave you think you know real well that has been dove thousands of times, "recreational" cave diving it appears has people loose respect for the cave environment and they start becoming complacent.
When you are in a unexplored cave you have your guard up 100% and I think it should be like that in every cave on every dive.
I think that you guys who don't always run a line should take cave diving way more seriously, it is a potentially deadly activity that has many risks involved as it is, why unnecessarily increase the risks?
Many deaths have occurred either directly or indirectly from not having a continuous line to OW, should you not learn from that and always run a line?
So it will take a few precious minutes more to run a line, or maybe require a second incredibly painstaking dive to retrieve a jump a reel, so what? do you not consider you and your buddy's increased safety worth it?
Why not stop doing bubble checks and S drills too while we're at it, oh yeah and don't rinse your regs anymore and leave all the sand and silt in them too, there is such a small chance anything will happen to them and anyway you always have two so why bother...

[Ken Hill]

Flying vfr outside of certain airspace classifications does not require a controller. ............ General aviation flyng can be considered dangerous...at least you get fairly good data:

http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/08nall.pdf

You're right I got caught up thinking about the east coast being as congested as it is. The CEO of MacAfee virus software has an ultra light school in several areas of SW NM and SE AZ. You can go there cold and in a week get a ticket to fly UL's from one site to another. Some are several hundred miles apart and there are four degrees of difficulty. An "A" ticket gets you rights to fly over the desert. "B" gets you permission to go 500AGL over populated areas and C and D are mountain and canyon routes.

Throughout this thread not one mention that Ginnie, Devils and Peacock being primarily training caves. Some instructors require plenty of reel work, others long swims and yet others a mix of these skills. Since they are training sites seasoned divers need to behave like seasoned divers and follow the rules. The basins and entrances are well travelled and crowed and often covered in reels, but so what. Setting a good example is a good thing.

What is apparent is that there are many goal oriented people wanting to go to new places in the cave and some do so by leaving the rules of the sport behind in order to meet whatever goal they set. The line is there to get you out of the cave and in an emergency you need to be on it like glue, Those that did not make it out of a cave have no voice in this discussion so right or wrong I've elected to say something. I do know that everyone person who has exited with a problem says they were glad the line was there. /Ken

[DA Aquamaster]

There are some competing arguments about lines.

In places like Ginnie, so many divers are complacent in terms of not running a line from OW that the line has to be run as far out as it is. If you moved it back to the lips, or even half way through the gallery, most of the divers who think they could get out in a silt out would discover they can't if the real deal
ever occurred and peristed for any significant period of time.

On the other hand, with the diver traffic in P1, having the line 350 ft back would make for some interesting spagetti. Little River on a busy day can get interesting, especially when one or two teams get real inconsiderate about running their lines properly, keeping them out of the way, not running over the top of earlier lines, etc.

Personally, I enjoy the challenge of running a primary line cleanly in places like Little River or Orange Grove and I get a bit irritated with poorly run lines as they create a hazard for all involved. But on the other hand, if you apply it to Ginnie on a holiday weekend, it could get interesting if every team ran their own line. It would require a great deal of skill and consideration to make it all work and I am probably just grateful that not everone runs a line so that I can run mine.

It is much less easy to excuse not marking a jump as having 2-3 teams with lines on a particular jump is not that difficult.

I am not a real believer in the "T everything" solution either. As stated previously it will encourge more blind circuits. And if divers are not wanting to leave a reel, they probably also won't leave a cookie to mark the exit side either and sooner or later, a diver is going to come back for some reason and under stress, make a wrong turn with potentially fatal results.

[Marc Bryan]

For some reason I can't picture excately what you are describing I have included a diagram.
but I can say this, yes many times on the mainline in caves here or in Mex I am off the line a bit, but I am followinga line and paying attention to the line, if at any point something goes wrong I am never far off to the point that I could not immediately swim back and reconnect to the line. Me either. Never more than five feet.
The big difference is that if you do not run a continuous line to OW you are at some point disconnected from the exit, How? I am never more than five feet from a direct Line to OW.
now say some sort of emergency happens be it small or big you need to be able to get out and follow the line without even having to guess which way is out and not add stress and risk to an already potentially bad situation.
To each his own I guess the people who don't run jumps will continue to do so and think it's ok.
I dive fairly extreme conditions here as we are doing mainly exploration and almost every exit is zero viz, deep inside an unexplored cave in zero viz the meaning your life hangs by a thread takes on a whole new meaning, that line sliding through your hand feels real good.
But when I dive known caves and do some "recreational" cave diving in systems that don't silt out etc.. I always run a reel no matter what, even on reach gaps that are only a foot apart, I respect each cave as much as an unexplored one.
I think it is more dangerous to dive a nice cave you think you know real well that has been dove thousands of times, "recreational" cave diving it appears has people loose respect for the cave environment and they start becoming complacent.
When you are in a unexplored cave you have your guard up 100% and I think it should be like that in every cave on every dive. I agree.

I think that you guys who don't always run a line should take cave diving way more seriously, it is a potentially deadly activity that has many risks involved as it is, why unnecessarily increase the risks? I take it very seriously. My responses are not just some flippant remarks. I am interested in a discussion that leads to me learning something/anything. Not just banter of its super dangerous, so stop thinking for yourself. I am genuinely interested in your view of how this scenario increases the risk at all, much less unnecessarily. How does my dive plan do that?

Many deaths have occurred either directly or indirectly from not having a continuous line to OW, should you not learn from that and always run a line?
So it will take a few precious minutes more to run a line, or maybe require a second incredibly painstaking dive to retrieve a jump a reel, so what? do you not consider you and your buddy's increased safety worth it? It is not about saving any time, or a second dive, it is that I am closer to a continuous line to the surface on this dive, than you are when you are more than 5' from the gold line, but somehow I am unnecessarily endangering me and my whole dive team.

Why not stop doing bubble checks and S drills too while we're at it, oh yeah and don't rinse your regs anymore and leave all the sand and silt in them too, there is such a small chance anything will happen to them and anyway you always have two so why bother.. This is not conducive to a productive discussion. Other than that, thanks for your input thus far.

[Meister481]

The only problem I've had with running a line was at Little River with a large team of OW roto-tillers. They grabbed the top of the rod after 3 other teams were on it, didn't use a single tie off til they got to the gold. They crossed 3 lines repeatedly and one guy pulled my line placement off while wallowing in the sand. :mad:

There's nothing like taking a little pride in your line work. I love to see others do the same, it's just another challenge that attracts me to the sport. If I swim in Little River as Team 6 and there are 6 lines run perfectly, I smile the whole time I'm running mine and take a bit more time to check out the placements others used.

[phillip1]

[/HTML]

Ok I see the diagram and I understand what you mean, but I would not do the visual back to the gold line, I would place a second jump reel and retrieve it on a second dive if by myself or have the last diver in the team reel it up, reconnect with the gold line and then exit.
more time consuming 2-3 minutes more to place and reel in but always connected out and safe.
What if in a 3-4 man team you do the visual jump, then a diver causes a silt out and the last buddy comes to the gap were there is no jump line? he does not see you or anyone else and you are now separated, you on the mainline him still on the side tunnel and a gap between you. In my opinion the lack of a second jump reel has just created a potentially dangerous situation for nothing else but not running a reel.
I am by no means a cave diving safety expert but what I have learned so far is that it is ALWAYS better to be more conservative all the time, and in my view always having a line to OW should be a routine safety practice.
Obviously if the mainline ends in OW then I can see not placing a line, but that is not what we are talking about here.

[aainslie]

Ok I see the diagram and I understand what you mean, but I would not do the visual back to the gold line, I would place a second jump reel and retrieve it on a second dive if by myself or have the last diver in the team reel it up, reconnect with the gold line and then exit.
more time consuming 2-3 minutes more to place and reel in but always connected out and safe.
What if in a 3-4 man team you do the visual jump, then a diver causes a silt out and the last buddy comes to the gap were there is no jump line? he does not see you or anyone else and you are now separated, you on the mainline him still on the side tunnel and a gap between you. In my opinion the lack of a second jump reel has just created a potentially dangerous situation for nothing else but not running a reel.
I am by no means a cave diving safety expert but what I have learned so far is that it is ALWAYS better to be more conservative all the time, and in my view always having a line to OW should be a routine safety practice.
Obviously if the mainline ends in OW then I can see not placing a line, but that is not what we are talking about here.

A triumph of dogma over thought...

[wingman]

You're right I got caught up thinking about the east coast being as congested as it is. The CEO of MacAfee virus software has an ultra light school in several areas of SW NM and SE AZ. You can go there cold and in a week get a ticket to fly UL's from one site to another. Some are several hundred miles apart and there are four degrees of difficulty. An "A" ticket gets you rights to fly over the desert. "B" gets you permission to go 500AGL over populated areas and C and D are mountain and canyon routes.

Throughout this thread not one mention that Ginnie, Devils and Peacock being primarily training caves. Some instructors require plenty of reel work, others long swims and yet others a mix of these skills. Since they are training sites seasoned divers need to behave like seasoned divers and follow the rules. The basins and entrances are well travelled and crowed and often covered in reels, but so what. Setting a good example is a good thing.

What is apparent is that there are many goal oriented people wanting to go to new places in the cave and some do so by leaving the rules of the sport behind in order to meet whatever goal they set. The line is there to get you out of the cave and in an emergency you need to be on it like glue, Those that did not make it out of a cave have no voice in this discussion so right or wrong I've elected to say something. I do know that everyone person who has exited with a problem says they were glad the line was there. /Ken

Ken, I think that they are just applying standard risk management practices and not flaunting rules. I am not really sure where the word "rule" came into play but they seem to be interpretted as commandments. Even the word rule is a bit fuzzy. These are not laws or regulations maybe they are rules of thumb? Exley's book used the term "blueprint" which implies a plan. In the forward Exley refers to them as procedures not rules. And on the last page he presents the "Ten Recommendations for Safe Cave Diving." The only place where a "rule" is mentioned is with regard to the third rule. Why is the first recommendation: "Always use a single, continuous guideline from the entrance of the cave throughout the dive."? The words continuous and single seem to imply no jumps period which supports FW's suggestion for Ts not jumps. I also note that the third recommendation is with regard to deep diving. In the text it seems deep is defined as 150 feet but he finally says: "The maximum safe depth for cave diving is 130 ft." He also suggests that the "foolhardy" who insist on diving deeper should contact experienced cave divers for guidance. Recommendation 6 is "Always carry the safest possible scuba." Are OC, OCR, and CCR equally safe?

The "rules" are for training but once trained then it is decision making and risk management that comes into play. When scootering on exit from ginnie and i hit the maple leaf I run through some risk management thoughts:

http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/risk_management/media/ssprocdscrp.pdf

and will do a visual jump onto the big room/bone room line knowing that that line terminates at the park bench in the junction room where i do not have a jump reel attached. I know conditions where i am, what they were when i went by and what i have observed there on hundreds of other dives, I know where the line ends on the curved bench of limestone and i know where the goldline is on that same curved bench. Running through the risk management scenario I feel that's in the green/blue area of the matrix so i decide to do the 2 jumps without a line. As Exley often suggests...contact an experienced cave diver. The problem is that here on the cdf we have a large variance in training and experience. With some experience data I think you could easily explain what is being observed in Andrew's poll. When i was working on my glider pilot rating and flying the schwietzer i envied the high performance gliders and hoped to do the kind of cross countries that they were doing and reaching the altitudes they were getting to. On my first 30 or so solos did i venture far away from the strip? No. Nor did I get above about 5,000 feet. I built my experience and judgement and this after thousands of hours of powered flight. I would highly recommend the FAA publications (2 pdfs) here:

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/CCDD54376BFDF5FD862569D100733983?OpenDocument

Bill

[phillip1]

A triumph of dogma over thought...

Is that unsafe or stupid to do it that way as opposed to do the visual as the diagram shows?
I may be wrong but I don't think so.

[chimie007]

Is that unsafe or stupid to do it that way as opposed to do the visual as the diagram shows?
I may be wrong but I don't think so.

In the diagram shown, the diver goes from a continuous line to exit to another continuous line to exit.... At all time, the diver has a line that he can follow blindly to the exit. IMHO This is not a "visual" jump. (I'm assuming both lines can be seen from the same spot at the same time. We are not talking about having to go through a small silty hole to jump on the other line... we are talking a passage where you can easily see both lines.).

IMHO A "visual jump" is when you jump visually on a line that does not lead to an exit. The issue is when you come back the visibility might not be good enough to see the other line.

The above diagram is very typical of many dives at Ginnie where you can jump (properly with a reel) on a side passage early in the cave (Bone Room, Lip/keyhole bypass, Hill 400, Rollercoaster) and then visual jump back on the main line further in the cave. In that case, you can jump visually on the main line and exit that way. It implies a circuit so gas requirement needs to be considered and need to dive both sides first, etc. These circuits do not require a setup/clean up dive since you can pick up your spool in your way out. In FL, most main line is not white line so you know you are on the main line for sure.

[Ken Hill]

Bill,
I understand what you are saying and the parallels are more than one would think. There is one reality in the cave diving world and it is governed by the people that give us access to sites. That access is only as good liability issues that do not create a potential detriment to the finances of the land owner, criticism of public policy or more importantly a PERCEIVED danger to the public.

Just after Blueprint, SCUBA training issues (or lack of) threatened closure of many dive sites and the permanent destruction by explosive of others. The NACD was formed then the CDS and training to dive in underwater caves became available. This training was initially taught by the NACD and the CDS and virtually ignored by all others commercial training agencies save for the YMCA very briefly. Training, using the five rules of accident analysis dramatically reduced fatalities and those entering caves were permitted to do so with understanding divers would follow the same basic rules as we know them today. There have been other additions to the training as technology developed but the basics remain the same.

Now some are in a discussion of rules on a public forum and keeping a tally of who and how many PEOPLE bend them. (Notice I didn't say trained cave divers.) Not surprising there are the posts that reflect either side of the issue, with none supported by scientific data only anecdotal stories. Scientifically, it’s an effort in futility because we don't know who is answering the poll, we don't know what their qualifications are and we don't know if they are being cute with their answers so as to sway the poll. That makes the poll "rubbish." The individual posters to the thread have valid things to say about the topic but since there is no conclusive answer the default has to be to go back to the basics.

Back to the rules. How many news stories have you seen about general aviation incidents that concluded the with "pilot did not file a flight plan" leaving the uninformed reader to think the pilot did something wrong. It is pretty much the same way after each diving fatality .... the media and authorities want to know who or what do we blame? The pilot may have used poor judgment in bucking the weather or ignored it completely. If so, it can be said a rule was broken. Everyone's happy.

We now have given the appearance that (some say) the rules are broken and not followed. That can't be good for cave diving! There is an assumed risk in cave diving that both the authorities, land owners, insurance underwriters and media are willing to accept as long as the rules are obeyed. Open disregard for "rules" will at some future point cause a public stir or detriment to the land owner. Some future litigant (there have no successful ones to date) may point at these discussions and plant a seed in a jurors head that cave diving rules aren't meant to be followed but get a wink and a nod. If there is a successful suit and a judgment is paid out just wait and see what happens next. The result will be site closure or at best conversion of public and private sites to ones requiring an insured guide. Forget about scootering because of product liability or inability to supervise the dive issues. Same for solo diving, they’ll be history.

So were doing this for the sake of some inquisitive and intellectual people that have been around a couple of years who want to know … exactly what? Then there are a couple of other people on this site that have actively negotiated with land owners, state and county officials to get sites open. In most cases it took years. In some cases the land owner did their homework and wanted to know if mixed gas was required. In some cases they wanted guides. In some cases they banned solo diving or scooters or imposed daily limits.

I have repeatedly suggested that this may be a good topic for a workshop breakout where those with credentials to speak and dive meet and see if there is in fact a better way to do things. The place to discuss topics to amend rules based on new technology and improved performance of tradition SCUBA gear is there not here.

Rules make the world go round but until they are changed they need to be followed. Kind of like waiting for a red light at 0300, no cars anywhere but yours. Go thru it you get a ticket.

Thanks for the post that may help some others understand the importance of this matter. … Dive safe - fly safe. /Ken

[RN]

Ok I see the diagram and I understand what you mean, but I would not do the visual back to the gold line, I would place a second jump reel and retrieve it on a second dive if by myself or have the last diver in the team reel it up, reconnect with the gold line and then exit.
more time consuming 2-3 minutes more to place and reel in but always connected out and safe.
What if in a 3-4 man team you do the visual jump, then a diver causes a silt out and the last buddy comes to the gap were there is no jump line? he does not see you or anyone else and you are now separated, you on the mainline him still on the side tunnel and a gap between you. In my opinion the lack of a second jump reel has just created a potentially dangerous situation for nothing else but not running a reel.
I am by no means a cave diving safety expert but what I have learned so far is that it is ALWAYS better to be more conservative all the time, and in my view always having a line to OW should be a routine safety practice.
Obviously if the mainline ends in OW then I can see not placing a line, but that is not what we are talking about here.

If your buddies are silting out a visual jump like this then maybe it's time to find new buddies...

And if you're by yourself, how are you going to silt out the passage in front of you?!?

Seriously, if you come to the end of a white line circuit back to the main line and you can see the gold line (I'm talking less than 20'), would there really be a concern of silting out that 20'? I've done this 2 different ways. Start the white line circuit at the closest point to exit placing a jump spool. Visual back to the gold line and pull the jump spool at the beginning on the way out. Or, on the way in, place a jump spool at the closest point to exit and visual at the back end (knowing you have placed the jump spool at the other end giving you a continuous line to OW). And before anyone starts bringing up the question of how will I know the white line is intact, the distal visual is typically within 15-20' in an area of limestone and almost no potential for silting out the passage. Should I need to return because of the extremely low chance of a line break and I come back to a silt out for whatever reason, I deploy my safety at the end of the line and run it to the gold. I only do this on perpendicular lines so finding the gold wouldn't be an issue.

[phillip1]

I was just saying that if for some reason viz is lost before and at the jump, for example a small sized side tunnel with a silty floor, percolation, sometimes you end up diving with new buddies that may or may not have good buoyancy many things could happen to mess up the viz.
Anyway to each his own, I will continue to "err" on the side of safety and always place a line I feel more comfortable that way, and the more experience I gain the more I feel I should "even more" always have a line.

[Oister]

Is that unsafe or stupid to do it that way as opposed to do the visual as the diagram shows?
I may be wrong but I don't think so.
You could have your buddy hold the reel you take the end swim to gold line with it, when you get there give 3 quick tugs buddy winds the reel in. This was taught to us in the NAUI Cave Class.

[FW]

You could have your buddy hold the reel you take the end swim to gold line with it, when you get there give 3 quick tugs buddy winds the reel in. This was taught to us in the NAUI Cave Class.
That is a good way to do that type jump, and not have to leave a line behind.

[phillip1]

Whatever the method why not take the extra few minutes and make the dive that much safer? you guys can sit there and rationalize as much as you want why it's ok to do visuals, I think you are wrong.
This may seem a bit harsh but to those of you who think it's ok to not run a line and also have families, ask your wife/husband, kids, parents, close friends even, what they think about whether or not you should make the extra effort to always run a line or not.

Maybe you will listen to them or maybe not, but give it a try.

[Marc Bryan]

Ken, I think that they are just applying standard risk management practices and not flaunting rules. I am not really sure where the word "rule" came into play but they seem to be interpretted as commandments. Even the word rule is a bit fuzzy. These are not laws or regulations maybe they are rules of thumb? Exley's book used the term "blueprint" which implies a plan. In the forward Exley refers to them as procedures not rules. And on the last page he presents the "Ten Recommendations for Safe Cave Diving." The only place where a "rule" is mentioned is with regard to the third rule. Why is the first recommendation: "Always use a single, continuous guideline from the entrance of the cave throughout the dive."? The words continuous and single seem to imply no jumps period which supports FW's suggestion for Ts not jumps. I also note that the third recommendation is with regard to deep diving. In the text it seems deep is defined as 150 feet but he finally says: "The maximum safe depth for cave diving is 130 ft." He also suggests that the "foolhardy" who insist on diving deeper should contact experienced cave divers for guidance. Recommendation 6 is "Always carry the safest possible scuba." Are OC, OCR, and CCR equally safe?

The "rules" are for training but once trained then it is decision making and risk management that comes into play. When scootering on exit from ginnie and i hit the maple leaf I run through some risk management thoughts:

http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/risk_management/media/ssprocdscrp.pdf

and will do a visual jump onto the big room/bone room line knowing that that line terminates at the park bench in the junction room where i do not have a jump reel attached. I know conditions where i am, what they were when i went by and what i have observed there on hundreds of other dives, I know where the line ends on the curved bench of limestone and i know where the goldline is on that same curved bench. Running through the risk management scenario I feel that's in the green/blue area of the matrix so i decide to do the 2 jumps without a line. As Exley often suggests...contact an experienced cave diver. The problem is that here on the cdf we have a large variance in training and experience. With some experience data I think you could easily explain what is being observed in Andrew's poll. When i was working on my glider pilot rating and flying the schwietzer i envied the high performance gliders and hoped to do the kind of cross countries that they were doing and reaching the altitudes they were getting to. On my first 30 or so solos did i venture far away from the strip? No. Nor did I get above about 5,000 feet. I built my experience and judgement and this after thousands of hours of powered flight. I would highly recommend the FAA publications (2 pdfs) here:

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/CCDD54376BFDF5FD862569D100733983?OpenDocument

Bill

:clapper:clapper:clapper

Standing O for Bill!

[Marc Bryan]

You could have your buddy hold the reel you take the end swim to gold line with it, when you get there give 3 quick tugs buddy winds the reel in. This was taught to us in the NAUI Cave Class.

I see this employed quite often.

[Marc Bryan]

sometimes you end up diving with new buddies that may or may not have good buoyancy many things could happen to mess up the viz.


First let me again thank you for productive input.

In my book diving with someone you do not know, did not checkout with other divers, or did not check out with a test dive around the basin/cavern zone, and then entering a siltable passage with them, is way more dangerous/complacent/irresponsible than not running a jump reel 5ft to mainline as in my scenario.

As you said, we could debate this forever, but in the end I doubt we will come to the same conclusion.

As for the comment about telling my family...I would let Bill (wingman) take my wife on the dive he was just explaining anytime they wanted to go.

[phillip1]

I meant that there is always a chance of a silt out or loss of viz on every dive, be it bad control, or many other factors, that is what you train for cave diving, you need to be able to do everything with no viz.
Since that possibility exists, I find it safer to have a continuous line at all times period. As for being productive, I think I am, I am trying to convince someone to adopt a safer approach to diving, I am criticizing unsafe practices and so far I am not convinced by anyone's rational or reasons for doing visuals.
I think complacency and laziness has taken over and yes I think it is productive to talk about this, but there really is no diplomatic way of putting it.
So don't take it personal and keep doing visuals, i wont be diving with you any time soon or anyone else who thinks it's ok to do visuals ever.

[phillip1]

I may be completely wrong so if I am please forgive me, but it is my understanding that the recent accident at Devil's eye may have been compounded by the fact that visual jumps were made and also may have contributed in part to the diver getting lost.
If so should this not be reason enough to maybe at least think about always running a line?
Just a thought.

[phillip1]

One last thing I would like to point out, I have read many posts stated that the rules are outdated and need to be rewritten, I can see how some rules could be made more conservative and safer, some could argue a more aggressive change is needed, could very well be true.
Always having a continuous line to OW is NOT one of those rules, I think there is nothing you can safely change about that.
Just like "be trained in cave diving and stay within the limits of your training"

There may be a handful of extreme exceptions like the exploration of Blue Springs in Arkansas for example, were the line was found to be more of a hazard than a safety feature, but that will never be the kind of conditions 99.9% of divers will ever face so it should not be taken in any way as reason to ever consider changing the guideline rule.

[uncle ricky]

A few points, in no particular order...
(1) The FAA exists because there is a public safety issue in every flight. If a cave diver screws up he/she isn't likely to crash into an apartment building and take out your grandmother. It's great to draw on concepts & procedures developed by the FAA, but be very careful - the last thing we need is some government regulatory agency getting its nose under our tent! Or even getting the idea they can.
(2) There's room for common sense, even if it breaks a "rule." If I know where I am and can see a gold line that I know and I'm solo, I can swim to it without running a line. If it's silty and we're a four man team, use the "last man cleanup" method... that sort of thing.
(3) Here is a story that appeared on the Deco Stop a few years ago that I have all my students read, as sort of a base for the 'line' or 'no line' decision making process... If you haven't read it, please do.
Silt! (http://murchison.bz/userimages/Silt!.pdf)
Rick

[phillip1]

Great story, reading that just further reinforces my opinion that you should always run a line.
As you stated if you are diving solo and see the gold line you can just swim to it, but I would not.
In zero viz the gold line is just a line, but that's me I am overly cautious and I will not change that, I love cave diving as much or even more that surfing and i don't want to get into trouble for something as dumb as not running a line.
In a cave I have been exploring here now for the past year in most places if you don't run a line even just to go see a few feet away the percolation is so fierce that you loose viz extremely fast almost instantly, but the cave is big and looks cool so I think that divers with a lowered sense of respect for the cave environment would probably not run a line, it just does not look necessary, and they might, god forbid, get caught off guard and get into trouble.
To me always running a line is just doing what you would do in the worst case scenario, zero viz, so why not routinely be prepared for the worse and always run a line?
I don't get it.

[RN]

I was just saying that if for some reason viz is lost before and at the jump, for example a small sized side tunnel with a silty floor, percolation, sometimes you end up diving with new buddies that may or may not have good buoyancy many things could happen to mess up the viz.
Anyway to each his own, I will continue to "err" on the side of safety and always place a line I feel more comfortable that way, and the more experience I gain the more I feel I should "even more" always have a line.

In your small sized side tunnel with a silty floor, percolation I'd run a line. But in Bill's example, I'd likely not run a line. It's all dependent on the passage. The visual jumps I'm talking about don't even require the 3 tugs Oister mentions because you can still see your buddy because the lines are that close!

And I do talk to my wife about these jumps...before every dive we do in which we plan them...

[phillip1]

Taking that approach to diving you would probably also (I hope I am wrong) do visual jumps at Chan-Hol and the Grand Cenote to name just two, as many of the gaps are reach jumps and are only a foot apart in super clear water, and each clearly marked with an exit arrow.
A great way to increase the chances of getting lost.

To each his own, may the force be with you...

[karst.window]

The rules we have adopted today are based upon accident analysis over a long period of time however, they are inherently anecdotal. It is very difficult to do a randomized control trial to test placing lines versus not placing lines. It seems as though some in the community want to change the rules. I am not saying that change is a bad thing. I think discussion is very important and expect that rules will be amended as time goes on and technology/technique advances. Given that the current "rules" have been shown to be safe (nothing is perfect) and accepted it gives the sport stability when its [cave diving] very existence is protected by these rules being in place.

For instance, when a fatality occurs... News media jump in and want to know... why? who's to blame? should we close these caves?

If "standard practice" was violated the diver in question is found at fault and we all move on. Accident analysis is performed and no one screams "dynamite the caves"!

Want to change the rules? Come with some data. Right now the rules seem to be just fine and if you choose not to follow them then accept the consequences.

Again these rules exist first and foremost to promote safe practices. Secondarily they protect our sport in the event of a fatality.

Just my $0.02

Sean

[aainslie]

Three points:

1) Cave deaths are way down over 15 years ago.
2) Far more people are cave diving, and far deeper and more aggressively. Penetrations of 4000 feet are now commonplace.
3) Yet we have roughly 50% compliance on what is claimed is an inviolable rule.

Anyone see any contradictions?

[phillip1]

I agree, but a huge proportion of cave deaths have been from untrained divers I might be wrong but I think it might be upwards of 70-80% even (correct me if i'm wrong).
There is no contradiction (I think), there has been a big effort to educate OW divers in the hazards of cave diving so there are way less deaths today thanks to that and so the number of accidents goes way down, thank god.
Of the trained cave divers deaths, I think many were caused in some way or other by not following standard safety practices.
Anyway what are you insinuating, that since 50% don't always follow standard cave diving rules, the rules are not valid and not worth following? I agree that the rules could be better and even more conservative, but that 50% of divers do not follow them does NOT mean they are not good standard safety guidelines. I think it means that trained cave diver accidents are very rare, and almost all dives will be uneventful, some dives will have small problems and some very rare dives will have full blown emergencies and it is on one of those dives that I think having always followed the established safety standards (or even more conservative modifications of the standards, not the opposite) can make the difference between life or death.

[aainslie]

When you:

a) Have low compliance on a rule, and
b) Few deaths,

Then the rule IS due for amendment.

Plus, as I have reiterated ad nauseam, there is a middle ground - and that's where the danger lies. There are SAFE times not to run a line. And INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS ones. Since everyone is making up their rules as they go along, there are a lot of dangerous violations, that could be avoided by having more sensible rules with higher compliance.

[phillip1]

When you:

a) Have low compliance on a rule, and
b) Few deaths,

Then the rule IS due for amendment.

Plus, as I have reiterated ad nauseam, there is a middle ground - and that's where the danger lies. There are SAFE times not to run a line. And INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS ones. Since everyone is making up their rules as they go along, there are a lot of dangerous violations, that could be avoided by having more sensible rules with higher compliance.

Ok I don't agree with you on the validity of the rules but I understand your point.
Having said that, it is not the rules that are not sensible enough and thus people are not following them, it is the people who don't follow the rules who are not being sensible, not the other way around.
I think that if people cannot see the logic in super basic safety rules, they will be even less likely to follow more stringent ones.

What would you change or add to the existing basic rules to make them safer and "easier" for people less "disciplined" to follow?

I would be interested to read what you would change/add to the current safety guidelines to increase conservatism, you may be right and make things safer, or not.

[aainslie]

Ok I don't agree with you on the validity of the rules but I understand your point.
Having said that, it is not the rules that are not sensible enough and thus people are not following them, it is the people who don't follow the rules who are not being sensible, not the other way around.
I think that if people cannot see the logic in super basic safety rules, they will be even less likely to follow more stringent ones.

What would you change or add to the existing basic rules to make them safer and "easier" for people less "disciplined" to follow?

I would be interested to read what you would change/add to the current safety guidelines to increase conservatism, you may be right and make things safer, or not.

All I can say is, 50% of the cavediving world disagrees with you.

And if by "discipline" you mean mindlessly following anything an authority figure tells you to do, then I'm as undisciplined as they come - and proud of it. Boo-yah! (sp?)

[Ken Hill]

All I can say is, 50% of the cavediving world disagrees with you.





The poll numbers are rubbish by any standard and yet you feel free to quote them!

It appears that you have created something not scientific but something very much like a low end marketing ploy. Have you worded it knowing you would get your results? People that know polling would advise those who have been following this thread to research the internet and discover what real pollsters call SLOPS*. It appears that is what you have cleverly created and call statistics. Then you call for these statistics to modify the rules.

The last line from the below link says something about polls like yours. "Aren’t they just proving why rules and regulations are needed to avoid anarchy?



*( SLOPS were originally “self-selected listener opinion polls” and now often refer to today’s ubiquitous “self-selected online polls.” Read more:

http://weiksner.com/2007/09/07/slops-and-the-unintended-irony-of-freeps/#ixzz0SFLavGy4)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
" Typically, in SLOPS, persons with strong opinions (often negative) are more likely to respond. ... interest is that the clever acronym, SLOPS was ...

Read more: http://www.amstat.org/sections/srms/pamphlet.pdf
- - - - - - - - - -- -

If your education level is as high as someone told me it is, you owe this forum an apology. /Ken Hill

[aainslie]

Ken, I'm getting a little sick of this. I am, indeed, very qualified to talk on this topic.

It was a simple, quick poll of people ON THIS BOARD. I view that as a pretty unbiased sample, given that this board is wholly aimed at cave divers. And I am still unclear who it is you think will truly dive always running lines, yet post that they don't to bias the sample.

And actually, it's YOUR accusation of unprincipled intent that I find egregious. And you, not I, need to do a bit of apologising.

Seriously. I get accused of being:

- Insane
- boneheaded, and
- Unprincipled

by moderators!

And it's ME that get threatened with a banning!

Methinks the moderators SHOULD meet. To get their own house in order. You, and Forrest, are out of line. I apologised for my statement. Neither of you have bothered to.

Man up and apologise, both of you, or admit to your hypocrisy. Or of course do the easy thing and ban me.

And what really gets me is that my intent is to make this sport safer, through the application of exactly the sort of discussion and thought that set up the early rules. You guys just want status quo, silence, and a nice warm fuzzy feeling of pseudo safety. Complacency in short. But are willing to attack me in return.

Ken, one final suggestion. Find the MOST qualified person you know (skip comes to mind) and ask him to create a "scientific" poll. I will eat my words publicly if the responses come out substantially differently, adn demonstrate that a majority always run lines.

One other point - I was incredibly conservative in my interpretation. A raw interpretation is that SITY SIX percent don't run lines. I realized that there might be some confusion over locations like P1 and REDUCED my estimate. IN the interest of not overstating my position.

YOU owe me an apology. Not vice versa.

Edit - I've just read that SLOP stuff. The intent there is to pretend to represent a wider group by polling a biased subset. Most of the posts on this thread have been FOR your side. Interestingly it's a largely silent group that aren't posting that voted that they didn't always run a line. Think about that for a second. Why is the readership of CDS likely to be a subset biased in favour of NOT running lines? I for one cannot think of any plausible reason. I await yours. But do yourself a favour - chat to someone like Skip first (or perhaps Wingman/Bill), since this is a field that you know little to nothing about, and your'e going to get into trouble fast.

[Marc Bryan]

Three points:

1) Cave deaths are way down over 15 years ago.
2) Far more people are cave diving, and far deeper and more aggressively. Penetrations of 4000 feet are now commonplace.
3) Yet we have roughly 50% compliance on what is claimed is an inviolable rule.

Anyone see any contradictions?

4) and a much larger data set in the last 15 years, than the previous 15 years, both in number of dives, duration of said dives, and complexity of said dives.

[Ken Hill]

Ken, I'm getting a little sick of this. I am, indeed, very qualified to talk on this topic.

It was a simple, quick poll of people ON THIS BOARD. I view that as a pretty unbiased sample, given that this board is wholly aimed at cave divers. And I am still unclear who it is you think will truly dive always running lines, yet post that they don't to bias the sample.

And actually, it's YOUR accusation of unprincipled intent that I find egregious. And you, not I, need to do a bit of apologising.

Seriously. I get accused of being:

- Insane
- boneheaded, and
- Unprincipled

by moderators!

And it's ME that get threatened with a banning!

Methinks the moderators SHOULD meet. To get their own house in order. You, and Forrest, are out of line. I apologised for my statement. Neither of you have bothered to.

Man up and apologise, both of you, or admit to your hypocrisy. Or of course do the easy thing and ban me.

And what really gets me is that my intent is to make this sport safer, through the application of exactly the sort of discussion and thought that set up the early rules. You guys just want status quo, silence, and a nice warm fuzzy feeling of pseudo safety. Complacency in short. But are willing to attack me in return.

Ken, one final suggestion. Find the MOST qualified person you know (skip comes to mind) and ask him to create a "scientific" poll. I will eat my words publicly if the responses come out substantially differently, adn demonstrate that a majority always run lines.

One other point - I was incredibly conservative in my interpretation. A raw interpretation is that SITY SIX percent don't run lines. I realized that there might be some confusion over locations like P1 and REDUCED my estimate. IN the interest of not overstating my position.

YOU owe me an apology. Not vice versa.

Edit - I've just read that SLOP stuff. The intent there is to pretend to represent a wider group by polling a biased subset. Most of the posts on this thread have been FOR your side. Interestingly it's a largely silent group that aren't posting that voted that they didn't always run a line. Think about that for a second. Why is the readership of CDS likely to be a subset biased in favour of NOT running lines? I for one cannot think of any plausible reason. I await yours. But do yourself a favour - chat to someone like Skip first (or perhaps Wingman/Bill), since this is a field that you know little to nothing about, and your'e going to get into trouble fast.



Wow!

[phillip1]

all this arguing is really stupid.
Anyone who does not always run a line is just lazy and rationalizing that laziness into something else, like: it is safe to not use a line all the time and do visual jumps, cause "I know the cave", "the gold line is right there" "there are too many lines already" "the tunnel does not silt out and I know there are no side tunnels" etc..the reasons go on and on...
In the end though I think it all boils down to laziness.

I think the mindset starts out something like this: Oh my god the tedious placing of yet another jump reel, shheeesh how many times do I need to do that, I know this cave inside out and I have dove here so many times, what the hell I'll do a visual, after all what could go wrong I know this cave like the back of my hand, hey that worked out great, it saved me 3 minutes and the hassle of placing the reel and it is just as safe since I know the cave so well, that's a stupid rule you don't always need to place a line, just sometimes as long as you know the cave, they lied to us at training.

[DA Aquamaster]

Here's an interesting observation.

We were at Ginnie on Sunday from about 10am until 6pm and, while not super busy, it was steady with several teams there entering exiting or in the system while we were in there. But oddly enough the only line I saw the entire day was ours. Same goes for jump lines - we did not see any other than ours from the lips to the Maple leaf.

So I'd be willing to bet that the only people running lines at Ginnie are anal retentives like me and students taking classes. It would be intersting to do a pole on who does/does not do lines just in regard to Ginnie.

[atedeschi]

did a poll like that already, and posted the link in this thread somewhere.

[alias]

did a poll like that already, and posted the link in this thread somewhere.

I don’t think your poll addressed what kind of divers ran the lines at Ear (Eye) either. It might be interesting to know is it only students on courses/divers still practicing towards Full/newbies/instructors/divers with deranged personalities/divers afraid that someone will bust them not doing it/divers who have no concern for others/divers at night/most experienced divers/men/women or divers from all walks of life

[phillip1]

Here's an interesting observation.

We were at Ginnie on Sunday from about 10am until 6pm and, while not super busy, it was steady with several teams there entering exiting or in the system while we were in there. But oddly enough the only line I saw the entire day was ours. Same goes for jump lines - we did not see any other than ours from the lips to the Maple leaf.

So I'd be willing to bet that the only people running lines at Ginnie are anal retentives like me and students taking classes. It would be intersting to do a pole on who does/does not do lines just in regard to Ginnie.

Sounds very dangerous, I never dove in FL less Ginnie, really I fail to understand the logic of this kind of behavior, no matter how well you think you know a cave.
To me it seems (god forbid) that this kind of behavior is an accident waiting to happen.

[wingman]

Sounds very dangerous, I never dove in FL less Ginnie, really I fail to understand the logic of this kind of behavior, no matter how well you think you know a cave.
To me it seems (god forbid) that this kind of behavior is an accident waiting to happen.

Well maybe you should reserve judgement till you get one or two dives in there. So where do you dive? Bill

[billybones519]

I don’t think your poll addressed what kind of divers ran the lines at Ear (Eye) either. It might be interesting to know is it only students on courses/divers still practicing towards Full/newbies/instructors/divers with deranged personalities/divers afraid that someone will bust them not doing it/divers who have no concern for others/divers at night/most experienced divers/men/women or divers from all walks of life


In Response:

Dove Devils on Sat with a buddy.
- we are both full cave
- not instructors
- not deranged
- could care less what others think
We installed a primary in the ear and all three jumps required for our dive. Left primary in on exit as we were planning a second dive that day.

Dive 2

Agreed to join another 2 man team for this dive. Planned the dive as 2 2man teams not one 4 man team although we were all diving together.

- They were both full cave
- one an instructor and the other Abe Davis qualified.
- I have dived with both before and know their skill level.
We put in both the required jumps for the dive.

Hope this helps you

John

[phillip1]

Well maybe you should reserve judgement till you get one or two dives in there. So where do you dive? Bill

I don't care what cave it is I always run a line, no matter how safe it may look. I live and dive in the Dominican Republic, been to Mexico a few times too to film for an upcoming cave diving documentary, that's it only dove DR and Mex so far but I do plan on doing a dive trip to FL in the near future, and yes I will be running a line all the time, lol..

[phillip1]

In Response:

Dove Devils on Sat with a buddy.
- we are both full cave
- not instructors
- not deranged
- could care less what others think
We installed a primary in the ear and all three jumps required for our dive. Left primary in on exit as we were planning a second dive that day.

Dive 2

Agreed to join another 2 man team for this dive. Planned the dive as 2 2man teams not one 4 man team although we were all diving together.

- They were both full cave
- one an instructor and the other Abe Davis qualified.
- I have dived with both before and know their skill level.
We put in both the required jumps for the dive.

Hope this helps you

John

I think that is how it should be done all the time, regardless of your experience level or how well you know the cave.

[brockbr]

Here's an interesting observation.

We were at Ginnie on Sunday from about 10am until 6pm and, while not super busy, it was steady with several teams there entering exiting or in the system while we were in there. But oddly enough the only line I saw the entire day was ours. Same goes for jump lines - we did not see any other than ours from the lips to the Maple leaf.

So I'd be willing to bet that the only people running lines at Ginnie are anal retentives like me and students taking classes. It would be intersting to do a pole on who does/does not do lines just in regard to Ginnie.

If you had been there the Sunday prior, you would have seen me (in sidemount) enter without a primary - But then again, that's not the whole story.

The whole story is that there were 3 primaries run to gold from the eye. One happened to be for a team that my daughter was a part of. I was doing a short dive (< 700'p), and would meet them on their way out.

So, someone else's observations would have been:
1) A sidemount diver entered without a primary and broke a cardinal rule
2) That rule should never be broken

In reality, common sense prevailed because of the situation:
1) There WAS a primary in that I knew wouldn't be taken out before I exited, therefore I didn't break the rule.

2) There were 3 cave classes occurring at the same time at (~100'p - 200'p), which meant me running a line would have just made a bigger mess.

As someone said earlier, "Absolutes rarely are".

[DA Aquamaster]

I don’t think your poll addressed what kind of divers ran the lines at Ear (Eye) either. It might be interesting to know is it only students on courses/divers still practicing towards Full/newbies/instructors/divers with deranged personalities/divers afraid that someone will bust them not doing it/divers who have no concern for others/divers at night/most experienced divers/men/women or divers from all walks of life

Exactly. Whether divers run a line or not at Ginnie is only part of the question - the rest of it is why do they do or do not do it and what level are they at?


If you had been there the Sunday prior, you would have seen me (in sidemount) enter without a primary - But then again, that's not the whole story.

The whole story is that there were 3 primaries run to gold from the eye. One happened to be for a team that my daughter was a part of. I was doing a short dive (< 700'p), and would meet them on their way out.

So, someone else's observations would have been:
1) A sidemount diver entered without a primary and broke a cardinal rule
2) That rule should never be broken

In reality, common sense prevailed because of the situation:
1) There WAS a primary in that I knew wouldn't be taken out before I exited, therefore I didn't break the rule.

2) There were 3 cave classes occurring at the same time at (~100'p - 200'p), which meant me running a line would have just made a bigger mess.

As someone said earlier, "Absolutes rarely are".I agree with you on common sense. That was my point. The observation was that we put the only line in there and followed teams who had clearly entered without a line and then saw other teams coming out who clearly went in without a line. We also passed teams entering during our exit, but again saw only our line entering the system. Clearly, the issue was not an over abundance of lines.

If there had been a line there before we entered, I would not have made the same observation or conclusion.

Your observation supports mine. You saw 3 lines and 3 classes, begging the question of whether people run lines in Ginnie outside of a class.

Also, using another team's line is fine, but only as long as they know you are "using" it. We had a similar arrangement with a pair of divers diving to Into limits. And the agreement was they would cookie the line and pull the cookie after they left. Given that we were planning a 90 minute run time, I was confident the cookie would be gone when it was time to pull the line, but if not we would have left the line in.

[cloudboy55]

I think it's clear from the responses and the poll itself (as well as my own observation) that many experienced cave divers and even instructors at times forgo running a line at either a well known jump, a jump that is physically close to the mainline, or to a cave entrance they feel they could exit from in zero visibility due to flow or other factors. Creating more rules or refining the existing ones isn't a panacea.

I think we call can agree that running a continuous guideline to the surface is safer. Whether we put that into practice or not is quite another matter.

[aainslie]

I think it's clear from the responses and the poll itself (as well as my own observation) that many experienced cave divers and even instructors at times forgo running a line at either a well known jump, a jump that is physically close to the mainline, or to a cave entrance they feel they could exit from in zero visibility due to flow or other factors. Creating more rules or refining the existing ones isn't a panacea.

I think we call can agree that running a continuous guideline to the surface is safer. Whether we put that into practice or not is quite another matter.

That's not the question. it's subtler than that.

Given that everyone agrees with you, the question becomes what's the tipping point? Everyone becomes TOO complacent because they see everyone else not laying line... then one day they go TOO far.

That's the problem with not discussng this. Each person is inventing their own safety standard. This is really dangerous.

[Meister481]

We were the 4th team in at Little River this morning. First reel in! I guess the 1st team could have run one, but they did 2 dives so I figured I would have seen it. Very sad indeed. At least the intro group came over and asked if they could use our primary as an egress, and I just asked them to cookie it so we wouldn't pull it with them in the system.

[aainslie]

We were the 4th team in at Little River this morning. First reel in! I guess the 1st team could have run one, but they did 2 dives so I figured I would have seen it. Very sad indeed. At least the intro group came over and asked if they could use our primary as an egress, and I just asked them to cookie it so we wouldn't pull it with them in the system.

Do me a favour. Next time you're at little river, when your deco obligation is over, swim to the end of the gold line. Go slightly negative (say a pound or so, so that when you breathe in deeply you go neutral to positive). Close your eyes and release everything. Report on what happens.

[RN]

Taking that approach to diving you would probably also (I hope I am wrong) do visual jumps at Chan-Hol and the Grand Cenote to name just two, as many of the gaps are reach jumps and are only a foot apart in super clear water, and each clearly marked with an exit arrow.
A great way to increase the chances of getting lost.

To each his own, may the force be with you...

I've only been in Chan Hol and Gran Cenote a few times. My approach is only in caves I am very familiar with.

[RN]

Sounds very dangerous, I never dove in FL less Ginnie, really I fail to understand the logic of this kind of behavior, no matter how well you think you know a cave.
To me it seems (god forbid) that this kind of behavior is an accident waiting to happen.

Ahhhh...now your posts make sense. Florida caves are very different than Mexico. I have been diving in both. In Florida I will swim past Ts and not place my own marker because I know the marker there is a permanent one and that no one is going to come in behind me and remove or change it. In my limited experience diving Mexico caves I have already experienced a change in the lines of a system while I was diving that system!

[Jay]

That's not the question. it's subtler than that.

Given that everyone agrees with you, the question becomes what's the tipping point? Everyone becomes TOO complacent because they see everyone else not laying line... then one day they go TOO far.

That's the problem with not discussng this. Each person is inventing their own safety standard. This is really dangerous.

The tipping point is a good choice of words.
That is what I was hoping to discuss in the complacency thread.

[crawford]

Do me a favour. Next time you're at little river, when your deco obligation is over, swim to the end of the gold line. Go slightly negative (say a pound or so, so that when you breathe in deeply you go neutral to positive). Close your eyes and release everything. Report on what happens.

Don't forget to record the date as well. Some days Little River is pumping ferociously, some days there is very little flow, so much so that you can easily hover motionless in the cavern. Some days it is reversing, just ask the carcass that is in there now.

[sskasser]

Don't forget to record the date as well. Some days Little River is pumping ferociously, some days there is very little flow, so much so that you can easily hover motionless in the cavern. Some days it is reversing, just ask the carcass that is in there now.

And I'll never forget the "dive" I made in there where you couldn't see sunlight from the bottom in the basin. Yes, I aborted when I saw the viz wasn't going to clear up once inside, but it was a good lesson. Being able to see the exit isn't just affected by siltability.

[aainslie]

Don't forget to record the date as well. Some days Little River is pumping ferociously, some days there is very little flow, so much so that you can easily hover motionless in the cavern. Some days it is reversing, just ask the carcass that is in there now.


And I'll never forget the "dive" I made in there where you couldn't see sunlight from the bottom in the basin. Yes, I aborted when I saw the viz wasn't going to clear up once inside, but it was a good lesson. Being able to see the exit isn't just affected by siltability.

Agreed guys (and gals!). And those would be good days to run a line. That's exactly what a lot of divers do - there are sensible days to run and sensible ones NOT to.

What worries me is this type of scenario - a new diver sees a few teams not putting lines in on a pumping day. So they say "Oh - no one puts lines in here. Cool!". Next trip, 3 months later, it's reversed and tannic. They don't put a line in, and try to follow the RH wall, and end up lost in Catfish Alley. That would suck. But since they ONLY learn quietly and with no guidance, they come to think it's ALWAYS cool to not run a line.

That's the problem. People are learning from otehr divers' actions but not from conversations with them. So they end up doing stupid stuff.

[ScubaBob-Squaretank]

How many certified cave divers have died between the begining of the main line, and open water while exiting a cave??
Bob Klauck

[FW]

How many certified cave divers have died between the begining of the main line, and open water while exiting a cave??
Bob Klauck
At least two, that I have heard about.

[crawford]

How many certified cave divers have died between the begining of the main line, and open water while exiting a cave??
Bob Klauck

Most likely they wouldn't die between the end of the line and the entrance, but deeper in the system trying to find the entrance. There are a couple of examples in "Blueprint for Survival" which are old and of course complicated by other issues, but Andrew's point is valid IMO that it's what you do with that bad habit later or somewhere else that gets you.

My point was really about making assumptions, and the fact that caves are dynamic. The more complicated our plans, the more susceptible they are to being undermined by bad assumptions. So you can exit Ginnie on x00 psi from the Hill 400 jump. On what day? Well Ginnie is Ginnie. But apply that assumption to last months dive at Little River where the flow varies greatly and BAM...or worst in TN or somewhere where conditions vary from day to day.

I see it all the time in managing engineers in my job. Very intelligent, bright folks. One has a phD from Stanford, another a masters from Rutgers, etc. And I regularly get looks of terror during the 11th hour of a project when a basic assumption proves to threaten months or years of work. We lose money or miss a product launch deadline, but in the business of cave diving, that assumption costs you your life.

[phillip1]

Agreed guys (and gals!). And those would be good days to run a line. That's exactly what a lot of divers do - there are sensible days to run and sensible ones NOT to.

What worries me is this type of scenario - a new diver sees a few teams not putting lines in on a pumping day. So they say "Oh - no one puts lines in here. Cool!". Next trip, 3 months later, it's reversed and tannic. They don't put a line in, and try to follow the RH wall, and end up lost in Catfish Alley. That would suck. But since they ONLY learn quietly and with no guidance, they come to think it's ALWAYS cool to not run a line.

That's the problem. People are learning from otehr divers' actions but not from conversations with them. So they end up doing stupid stuff.
I agree and not to seem annoying but if you always run a line then that problem is a non issue.
I do not think that running a line or not should depend on cave conditions, I think you should be prepared for the worse and make it routine a routine procedure to run a line, like doing thorough bubble checks, that's super easy and should be a routine thing too.
Although very unlikely the conditions could change during a dive, you could be doing a long dive and a dive team seriously silts out a passage or jump etc..
I did a dive once, ran a line form the entrance as always and went off, when I got back near the entrance viz went to almost zero, turns out there was a really big thunderstorm and the rain dumped allot of mud and silt near the entrance. Could have been a bit of a problem but was a non issue, cause I had a line.
Now I know nothing of cave conditions in FL and how they could or could not change, but why not assume the worst since it really costs nothing to add a line other than a few extra minutes of your time, and carrying a few extra reels.
I dunno, just a thought...

[FW]

I did a dive once, ran a line form the entrance as always and went off, when I got back near the entrance viz went to almost zero, turns out there was a really big thunderstorm and the rain dumped allot of mud and silt near the entrance. Could have been a bit of a problem but was a non issue, cause I had a line.
Now I know nothing of cave conditions in FL and how they could or could not change, but why not assume the worst since it really costs nothing to add a line other than a few extra minutes of your time, and carrying a few extra reels.
I dunno, just a thought...
That can happen in FL too. I have seen the head pools at Peacock, Little River, and Telford have extremely reduced visibility due to thunderstorms.

[YBWET]

So were doing this for the sake of some inquisitive and intellectual people that have been around a couple of years who want to know … exactly what? Change the rules ?? Furget about it !!

[DA Aquamaster]

+ on the problems caused by poor assumptions. I work with too many attorneys and statisticians who start with assumptions that really don't accruately reflect the real world, and they get irratable when you point out that their data and or assumptions are badly flawed.

I often refer to the advantages of cave diving as it quickly kills those who rely on poor assumptions or making incorrect assumptions based on flawed or over aggragated data. If the same thing happened in DC, we'd have infinitely more effective government in about 6 months once Darwin had a good crack at it.