How often do you run a line?

[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/a...sprocdscrp.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...3?OpenDocument

Bill

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.