Recreational Wreck Diving vs Cave Diving. Why the Inconsistency?

[String]

I'll restate my view here which was on the instructor forum as its more general viewing here...

I view wrecks as unstable caves.

There are in my mind 2 types of wreck dive. The "swim around the outside sticking your head through some hatches on the way". This is the standard wreck dive most people do. It requires NO further training, NO extra equipment and certainly doesn't need any fanciful watered down speciality course to do.

The 2nd type involves wreck penetration. This to me needs redundant gas sources, long hose or similar for air sharing, lights and backups, proper line drills and far more rigorous dive planning. In short, its very similar in requirements to cave diving regarding what is needed and hazards.

I fail to see why anyone would pay for a speciality to do the first type of dive and the recreational agency courses certainly dont cover what is needed for the 2nd type of dive.

FWIW i can teach the padi wreck spec however i generally don't as i dont think its beneficial for the students who could learn just as much doing some wreck guided dives! I do a fair bit of wreck diving myself some involving penetration and have training from elsewhere on how to do that!

 

[DevonDiver]

Recreational wreck diving is not technical diving and it doesn't rise to the level of training necessary for cave diving.

I was hoping that people could justify their opinions. What's your rationale for this?

I would not support making a wreck class required. What problem are we trying to solve, exactly? Cave training developed because people were dying in caves.

And people never die in wrecks??

I've dived at leat 8 wrecks that have killed divers...

Now, technical wreck diving, with major penetration, okay that's different.

What's the difference? How do you define 'major' penetration?

If you think about the difference between Cave and Cavern diving...there is a stated difference. It's easy to understand. I've been asking why there is no formal definition that applies to wreck diving...

Even cavern diving requires a cave trained instructor....

Wreck training requires nothing.

I don't support the type of regulation you're talking about. And, yes, I too consider it a money grab.

My point is that regulation would ensure better quality for all. How can it be a money grab to expect properly qualified instructors....and courses that covered the actual info that is needed..

 

[LiteHedded]

Just how restrictive do you plan on being to my liberties, in the pursuit of validating some one elses ego and or inflating their wallet? You can not "fix stupid" through specialties or education. If there was a DUI specialty in drivers education do you think people would do it less or more?
Eric

no but you can fix ignorant

 

[Superlyte27]

Guys:

If you read some of my threads/posts like the one "A card for everything, including how to tie your shoe", You'll know my position on agencies and their money grubbing tactics. I feel there really is an over abundance of stupid and unnecessary certifications. However, making penetrations into wrecks is absolutely as dangerous as cavern and cave diving. All of the risks (and more) of cave diving are present in the middle of a giant ship.

With that said...
Do I think someone doing wreck penetrations should have a course specifically designed to do penetration diving? Absophuckanlutely. Do I think there should be more oversight and regulation on doing penetrations? I'm not sure. I'm not really big into YOU telling ME what I can or cannot do.

So... I'm a firm believer in the fact that "stupid kills, just not enough to really change anything". If you're dumb enough to go to the middle of the Spiegel Grove and die, well, you probably deserve what you got. I think you should take a course, but If I were supreme ruler of the universe, I wouldn't force you to take a course. Got it? Good!

 

[Cave Diver]

I'm not familiar with the standards for wreck diving.

Having said that, in my mind I separate it into two distinct things. Penetration and non penetration.

A non penetration wreck diving class could cover an introduction to the different type of wrecks (naturally occurring, purposefully sank for artificial reef, etc.) and the environments they can be found in (warm tropical, cold, dark Atlantic) and the hazards unique to those environments (current, fishing line entanglement, etc.) I would think a good wreck course would also include a bit of history about the wrecks that are planned to dive as part of the course. In addition I would hope they would cover descent techniques (live drop, shot line, anchor line) recovery/separation techniques, shooting a bag etc. It would also talk about the hazards of wreck diving and how to avoid (cuts, penetration, collapse, etc) and stress the importance of not penetrating without training. Maybe a slight not to a cavern class, teaching students how to handle a reel and use it to navigate around the wreck and the debris field as well, so they don't lose their bearings. A good instructor could find enough material to easily spend a day or two of classroom discussing even non-penetration diving.

Penetration diving would cover all the unique hazards to wrecks and the techniques for navigating it successfully. It would run very similar to a cave course covering penetration, advanced line skills and anti silting techniques.

I think both have merits.

 

[drbill]

Requiring a certification to do any specialized diving is only as good as the enforcement of that requirement. Requiring a cert for wreck diving hardly ensures that a rec diver will not engage in it. As for me, there's only one thing I penetrate and it isn't wrecks or caves.

 

[waterpirate]

I am sorry if you find me a pixie or ignorant, that is not my intent. My intent is that since there are no scuba police what would be the point in any further regulation? There are allready infinite paths for training and certification to any level you desire. Why continue to add layers upon layers? It does not promote common sense or keep Darwin from entering the picture. What it does do is add a layer or boundry that can only be percieved as elitist. I.E. take this course and I will decide who is worthy, or I dive wrecks where people have died.
I drive every day on roads where people die.
Eric

 

[LiteHedded]

I am sorry if you find me a pixie or ignorant, that is not my intent. My intent is that since there are no scuba police what would be the point in any further regulation? There are allready infinite paths for training and certification to any level you desire. Why continue to add layers upon layers? It does not promote common sense or keep Darwin from entering the picture. What it does do is add a layer or boundry that can only be percieved as elitist. I.E. take this course and I will decide who is worthy, or I dive wrecks where people have died.
I drive every day on roads where people die.
Eric

sorry. wasn't calling you ignorant. that's not what I was trying to say there

 

[waterpirate]

No problem

 

[fnfalman]

If divers think that one quickie course would train them well enough to penetrate ship wrecks, then let them do it. There's too many people in the world already, let Darwin claim some.