More than "Advanced", but not really "Technical"

[Rhone Man]

I agree. But where do you draw the line. If someone is doing aggressive dives that take them right up to the NDL it's likely that if you give them the tools to do light deco they will start pushing those limits and start doing more involved deco...all on recreational gear. There has to be a line somewhere. Single tanks don't belong in decompression diving.

Well, the line doesn't sit still. When I did my PADI OWD in 1984 they were content with the idea that recreational divers might need to do mandatory decompression stops.

I heard that they changed their policy on this though.

Too bad that image is truncated, because you don't see the bit where it says "Wait 4 hours after diving before you fly, or 12 hours if it was a decompression dive."

 

[DevonDiver]

BTDT. Cavern is THE single most under-appreciated course that exists in dive instruction. Did you really put it in the same sentence with deep and wreck?

If it sounds funny in the same sentence as deep and wreck, then it's a graphic illustration of how under-performing those two courses are.

Wreck qualifies for exactly the same penetration limits as cavern. That's scary...

 

[boulderjohn]

Well, the line doesn't sit still. When I did my PADI OWD in 1984 they were content with the idea that recreational divers might need to do mandatory decompression stops.

I heard that they changed their policy on this though.

IIRC, the PADI RDP, with no decompression stops included, was first published in 1984. You just missed it.

 

[rhwestfall]

YMCA, 1988 - Class utilized Navy Tables, gas calculations, and an understanding of deco, all from the above referenced text (New Science of Scuba Diving). The YMCA didn't need to develop its own materials so as to profit further. Class was much more than any AOW "mainstream" covers now (and even had major components of Rescue, and almost all of my recent NAUI MSD). I agree with the statement above that it did more to dissuade one from venturing "too far". There are many reasons that this is no longer the approach, but I'm not thinking any of them are really good ones. Knowledge can be an important tool.


Maybe its the engineer in me, but I have really preferred the "science" based programs instead of the "rules" based ones.

YMMV

 

[victorzamora]

Maybe its the engineer in me, but I have really preferred the "science" based programs instead of the "rules" based ones.

YMMV

As a fellow engineer, I feel safe in saying it's definitely the engineer in you.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk

 

[RickyF]

I just completed the IANDT Advanced Nitrox course and had an excellent instructor. What started me down that path was that I was constantly staying within NDL's and surfacing from 100'-120' dives on Nitrox with 1500 lbs of air. What I found is that I have an RMV of between .32 and .38. What I was taught in this course is how to plan and accomplish extended dives using tables with a single 80 with an H-valve configuration and 40 CF pony with 50% O2 and to properly using the tables to plan my dives and the computer as a backup with no more than 15 minutes of deco and dives to no more than 140'. I plan to progress to the tech courses, but finding people and a boat to do them here in Oahu is not easy!

 

[rx7diver]

I just completed the IANDT Advanced Nitrox course and had an excellent instructor. What started me down that path was that I was constantly staying within NDL's and surfacing from 100'-120' dives on Nitrox with 1500 lbs of air. What I found is that I have an RMV of between .32 and .38. What I was taught in this course is how to plan and accomplish extended dives using tables with a single 80 with an H-valve configuration and 40 CF pony with 50% O2 and to properly using the tables to plan my dives and the computer as a backup with no more than 15 minutes of deco and dives to no more than 140'. I plan to progress to the tech courses, but finding people and a boat to do them here in Oahu is not easy!

RickyF,

You've described a planned decompression dive involving a gas switch (to a deco gas) which means (to me) that you've described a planned *technical* dive. I don't think this is the kind of thing the OP was referring to.

Safe Diving,

rx7diver

 

[Pullmyfinger]

I think one thing that should be taught more aggressively is proper gas planning.

Yes! I completely agree. It's largely ignored in OW and AOW training.
I believe that gas planning needs to be understood before worrying about pushing NDL.

Honestly, many divers don't really grasp NDL....not in real terms of planning based on it.
Which would bring me to computers....not computers themselves...but how many divers employ them.

 

[shoredivr]

It is my impression that BSAC and CMAS teach light deco procedures like Lowviz is describing as part of their more advanced OW courses (or whatever their terminology is). This is single gas *without* accelerated deco (switching to second bottle with 50% or 100%). I don't see evidence of mass bending events in Europe or Britain with this extra knowledge. Certainly we can all agree that redundant gas is important for decompression diving, and personally I would be uncomfortable with a single tank doing deco. But the point seems to be that awareness of how and what to do for single gas light deco: a) is still taught in Europe and Britain and b) used to be taught in NA agencies, with no ill effects- if anything, divers in this thread taught before it was dropped from the curriculum seem to have better respect for deco and NDLs. It could be argued that removing this knowledge from the curriculum in the Great Dumbing Down of 1984 was in fact an error in judgement.

 

[DevonDiver]

It is my impression that BSAC and CMAS teach light deco procedures....

It depends how you catagorize "teaching light deco procedures".

BSAC '88 tables extend to 50m, with air deco and limited deco times. You are limited in diving to that until after Dive Leader qualification, followed by progressive 'sign-offs' after accumulating dive experience. However, nothing specific is 'taught' on that Dive Leader course in relation to "deco procedures", as most would recognize it.

Here is how BSAC describe Sports Diver:

"Qualified BSAC Sports Divers are ready to take part in dives with other Ocean Divers or higher grade divers. Depth can be built progressively to a maximum of 35m after qualifying"
Reference

Here is how BSAC describe Dive Leader:

"As a BSAC Dive Leader you are are becoming an expert in your field of dive leadership. You will also be competent in planning dives for groups of divers and managing diving on the day including, if necessary, managing rescue situations. This comprehensive course is a mix of classroom-based and practical lessons that will give divers confidence to plan, lead and manage dives, and deal with emergencies. Leading a dive will develop enjoyment, confidence and experience as a diver. After qualfying, and if you wish, depth can be built progressively to a maximum of 50m. Dive Leaders are eligible to progress to Open Water Instructor."
Reference

I'm not sure how being a DM equivalent, with substantial verified/supervised post-qualification experience, would help most recreational divers? A Tec40 or Adv Nitrox course would be a LOT simpler, cheap and a fraction of the time...

BSAC do have a separate syllabus that formally teaches "deco procedures" - this is in line with the technical training provided by other agencies. Those specific courses include; Accelerated Decompression Procedures (Sports Diver to 35m/Dive Leader+ to 50m), Sport Mixed Gas Diver, Explorer Mixed Gas Diver and Advanced Mixed Gas Diver.