Buddy Line (Poll)

Lee Bell wrote:
> Except for the fact that it seems more complex than a system with a
> similar purpose and function that was not only described in the same
> thread, but shown on a site reference in the thread. It's OK that
> Nigel likes technically sophisticated answers to problems he
> perceives, like his upside own twinset. That does not, however,
> preclude someone suggesting a simpler answer to the same question.

More than sense but I admit I use technology to deal with problems with me.
I feel am the weakest link diving ('natural' divers make me soooo jealous).
There has been some discussion in certain forums based on recent dual
fatalities that suggest that one party had a medical problem decoing after
trimix depths and the other ran into problems redescending to attempt a rescue.

That took me to a deco-buddy line so the rescuer need not descend but,
while a piece of string tied to a D-ring each end is the obvious 'keep it
simple' solution (both party's have cutting devices), I decided on a more
complex solution as we are dealing with a very rare incident so I reason
the tool could well cause more problems than it saves.

My system, which could probably be improved, simply involves one party
passing the other the line as they start to ascend which is clipped onto a
chest area D-ring and then ignored. If it snags you have a line trying to tow
you standing out from your chest so the release toggle is ready to hand but
if the 'buddy looses the plot' scenario occurs you adjust bouyancy and
haul them back in. If they have a reason and object to you pulling they
snap the toggle.

I picked the piston clip to attach to the diver because it is thick glove friendly
and I picked the pin clip for the line as it is a yottie part in stainless and is
designed to let go cleanly under a lot of load with a pull that is just 'away from
the line'.

I'll try to get the other bits at the weekend and find somebody to blob at 6m
or so and we can die on one another and see how it goes.

nigelH

Nigel: Why do you want to reinvent the wheel. This buddy line can do for
you. Try to make one - it only takes 10£ worth of garden hose parts and ½
hours light labour . You can always work on your own more complicated
line if it doesnt suit your purpose.

/Søren

"Ken" <ken@k1at.freeserve.co.uk> skrev i en meddelelse
news:e81ih302o8i@news1.newsguy.com...
>
> "Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:GVVog.9739$Ud4.8721@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>> Nigel Hewitt wrote
>>
>>> I've been thinking about this and I've ordered the parts to make one.
>>> What I want is two nice diver style gate clip attached to two of those
>>> yottie pull the pin clips that will release under huge sail loads and
>>> then 2 or 3m of 2cm, gloved hand friendly ribbon between them.
>>
>> Sounds more complex than the device you've already been shown. A simple
>> grab and pull on the hose connection will release the line and, because
>> it's plastic, it won't corrode, rust or any of the other nasty things
>> that are likely to cause it not to release if/when it needs to.
>>
>>> However if your buddy just starts to fade away rather than you don't
>>> realise that he left until he's drifted 20m below you and is
>>> picking up speed what happens is you get a wakeup call at 3m to put some
>>> extra gas in your wing then haul him in hand over
>>> hand for a quick assessment.
>>
>> This all sounds like a great solution to a problem that doesn't, and
>> shouldn't exist. Personally, I've not had a buddy fade away, let alone
>> had one do so unnoticed long enough for him to descent 20 meters below me
>> without notice. Were I to be so inattentive as to allow something like
>> that to happen, I don't think I'd have the nerve to call myself that
>> person's buddy and I'm reasonably certain that I'd not be teathered to
>> someone who is not my buddy. Perhaps your experience is different, but
>> I'd be surprised if it is.
>>
>> While I've never had a buddy drift away, I've had a rare one or two bolt
>> for the surface at a speed I would not chose to imitate. I'm not at all
>> certain that I, or anyone else, would be able to realize what was
>> happening, realize I'm teathered to the rocket man and disconnect myself
>> from him before any damage that can be done, is done.
>
> As ever the thread has become something it wasn't!
>
> I think we are all agred that there are times when being tethered to one's
> buddy would be useful, and at times it would be dangerous. Nigel's plan to
> have a line that can be disconnected easily by either, yet strong enough
> to haul an unconscious diver close is an ideal, to have a line where it
> would be of benfit to have one but to be able to dispense with it when it
> is useful NOT to have it.
>
> Ken
>

Soren <sv@fjerndanflavour.dk> wrote:

> Nigel: Why do you want to reinvent the wheel. This buddy line can do for
> you. Try to make one - it only takes 10£ worth of garden hose parts and ½
> hours light labour . You can always work on your own more complicated
> line if it doesnt suit your purpose.

I think your solution is admirable.

Enough of my rebreather adaptors come from B&Q
so getting the parts is no problem but I'm afraid
I have already started down this road and picked
connectors a that are a bit more extreme than
garden hose fittings. I did particulary want a
clip that was designed to let go under a lot of
load.

OK mine wil be a bit more expensive but that is
diving. My kit will still be less than the cost
of a gas fill for the sort of deco I see it
applying too.

nigelH



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

I'm coming at this from a differnt perspective than you lot with your deco
diving. as a nervous novice, I was very glad of a buddy line in poor vis. I
think we arranged it so that it was round each of our wrists but easily
detachable. Both me (novice) and dive leader were OK about buoyancy; we
werent deep. It meant we were both aware the other one was there without
having to spend the whole time looking for each other. (an alternative is
holding hands of course)

--
Rita Daggett

"Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6yZog.1484$IF2.502@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
> Ken wrote
>
>> As ever the thread has become something it wasn't!
>
> Yes, but it's still a diving related thread. There haven't been enough of
> those lately.
>
>> I think we are all agred that there are times when being tethered to
>> one's buddy would be useful, and at times it would be dangerous.
>
> I'm not so quick to believe all are agreed that there are times when it's
> good to be teathered. Most of the responses I've seen suggest otherwise.
>
>> Nigel's plan to have a line that can be disconnected easily by either,
>> yet strong enough to haul an unconscious diver close is an ideal, to have
>> a line where it would be of benfit to have one but to be able to dispense
>> with it when it is useful NOT to have it.
>
> Except for the fact that it seems more complex than a system with a
> similar purpose and function that was not only described in the same
> thread, but shown on a site reference in the thread. It's OK that Nigel
> likes technically sophisticated answers to problems he perceives, like his
> upside own twinset. That does not, however, preclude someone suggesting a
> simpler answer to the same question.
>
> BTW, I intend no criticism of his upside down twinset. I kind of like
> technically sophisticated answers myself.

As one who has insufficient range of movement of his shoulders to permit
reaching my own single-cylinder valve, were I to have manifolded twins I
would need them to be upside down too!

Ken

Ken wrote

> As one who has insufficient range of movement of his shoulders to permit
> reaching my own single-cylinder valve, were I to have manifolded twins I
> would need them to be upside down too!

Were that the case for me, I think I might consider an inverted single as
well. I've always considered being able to reach one's valve while in the
water as an essential element of safe diving.

You can't do it even if you lift the tank from the bottom with your other
hand?

Lee

"Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:qvgpg.80876$qd2.4200@bignews6.bellsouth.net.. .
> Ken wrote
>
>> As one who has insufficient range of movement of his shoulders to permit
>> reaching my own single-cylinder valve, were I to have manifolded twins I
>> would need them to be upside down too!
>
> Were that the case for me, I think I might consider an inverted single as
> well. I've always considered being able to reach one's valve while in the
> water as an essential element of safe diving.
>
> You can't do it even if you lift the tank from the bottom with your other
> hand?

No. Even when as last week was diving wearing a T-shirt only under my BCD,
unrestricted by any wet or drysuit. I can just reach the valve to touch it,
but I can do nothing with it as my arm hurts too much when I've gone that
far. And I tend to wear it rather higher than most folk. I've seen very many
people with their valve level with the lower border of their shoulder
blades. But why would I want it upside down as a single? A twin I can
understand, given that I would need to do isolating procedures in the event
of a major loss of gas from somewhere or other. A single is my ONLY source
of gas, and it's on when I jump in. I can't imagine I'd want to turn it off
midway through a dive under any circumstances. Were I to have a major loss
of gas, it's an aborted dive immediately. Turning the cylinder off is hardly
going to help, is it?

Ken

andre.maier@gmx.net schreef:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm about to investigate the pros and cons of using a buddy line on a
> scientific basis. In the first step I need to acquire as much data as
> possible.
>
> So I'd be glad if you could post your opinion and experience by
> answering the two questions below.
>
> The only purpose of this poll is to collect as much ideas as possible,
> so at this point your level certification or experience doesn't matter.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Andre
>
> P.S. Please: I don't want to raise a quarrell or endless discussions
> about this matter. Whether your answers prove to be correct would have
> to be tested under precisely defined conditions.
>
> -----------------------
>
> 1. Under what circumstances do you think a buddy line could improve
> safety?
> During the first open water lessons under low-visiiblity circmstances
it's a good idea to give the non-experienced diver the chance to
concentrate upon other things than "where is my Instructor".
Altough, I think that it is a good thing that the non-skilled diver is
tought to learn as quickly as possibly to dive without a line.



> 2. In what kind of other situations and under what circumstances do you
> consider a buddy line of 1.5m (5ft) up to 2m (6.5ft) to be dangerous?
> None.
> -----------------------
>