RAID vs SDI vs GUE vs...

[Jim Lapenta]

On the Scuba Academie website, it says this about configuration for TDI Intro to Tech:

Double 12 + wing (no bungee)
Double regulator set with long hose setup
Spool + SMB
Reel (on loan if needed)
Drysuit
Canister light + backup light
Wetnotes
Mask + backup
Compass + Bottom timer/computer
Sturdy fins

I couldn't find any specific configuration requirements om the TDI website.

Gear requirements can also be instructor specific. I always required Shearwater computers for tech courses along with a back up bottom timer or second Shearwater.
It was also acceptable to be in doubles or sidemount after I verified sidemount skills.
I also required the student to have at least 25 dives in the configuration they were going to use because I was not teaching a doubles or sidemount class.
Gear was also subject to changing things around when necessary and for rejection of equipment if it didn't make sense or posed a risk to the diver.
When you start tech training, you basically have to empty your head of all the BS that you got in recreational classes. There's no such thing as "good enough" when it comes to buoyancy and trim, buddy skills, communication skills, and planning.
You either have it or you don't. If it's not good enough as determined by a pool session or fun dive and an interview, you get to go away and work on those things.
Otherwise the diver is a risk to themselves and their buddy as well as a drag on the class.
If not up to snuff there's always the option of a private class where those things can be addressed for appropriate compensation and additional time required. That was never a favored option.
I rejected a few people for tech training who didn't have the necessary entry skills or didn't understand the level of commitment required.
And one who wanted to argue about the fact that if I felt he wasn't up to standards at the end of the class, he wasn't getting a card. Could not grasp the fact that he was paying for training and not a certification.

 

[dumpsterpurrs]

So, do the other options besides GUE have the same, or functionally equivalent, gear setup demands for people taking their courses? Do they care whether your harness is a single continuous piece of webbing or one of the deluxe type harnesses?

I'm not a RAID pro so don't quote me on this, but from what I've read and can recall now, they require long hose for training only, nothing else, and after training you're free to dive your own config customized to your needs.

 

[rjack321]

I'm curious about this. In past discussions about GUE on the forum, one issue that's come up regarding GUE Fundamentals is their required gear configuration. It's not just that they require BP/W, but stipulate what sort of harness (e.g.: it was my understanding my Hollis deluxe harness wouldn't meet their criteria).

I went to confirm just now, and interestingly, I see what used to be called GUE Primer is now GUE Fundamentals Part I per Wet Rocks Diving (here's the page); I then went to GUE's website and opened their general training standards, procedures and policies document and dropped down to page 28 and onward (the portion dealing with GUE Fundamentals).

It says applicants for GUE 1 have to be non-smokers have the GUE base equipment configuration. On page 117:

"Backplate system:

1. Is held to the diver by one continuous piece of webbing. This webbing is
   adjustable and uses a buckle to secure the system at the waist."

So, do the other options besides GUE have the same, or functionally equivalent, gear setup demands for people taking their courses? Do they care whether your harness is a single continuous piece of webbing or one of the deluxe type harnesses?

At least with GUE there's a reason for this once you move to Cave1 or Tech1. Pretty much every student in these courses has their primary light go out (per the instructor) then removes their backup light incorrectly and it's promptly "dropped" aka taken away because they failed to turn it on before removing it. That's usually the last time that happens. But you are deploying backup lights over and over and over cause nearly every cave1 "problem" either starts or ends with one or more light failures.

Having all kinds of redundant D rings, buckles and padding is unnecessary (remember Bill Hogarth Main here) and gets in the way of cleanly/efficiently deploying backup lights by either the diver or in some cases the buddy. The last thing you want to be doing is turning an annoying primary light failure (not an emergency) into a genuine emergency because you or your buddy unclipped your padded buckled harness and your doubles are now separating from you in the dark.

 

[Bowers]

So you're saying: "one of these agencies still uses old materials, and I would avoid them. Just not going to say which one."
I would love to check out their training materials before I enroll in any course. Where can I find that material without having to enroll first?

I have been impressed with RAID and bridged over to be a RAID instructor a couple years ago.
One of the awesome ways they stay progressive is to open up the elearning to everyone for free. All you need to do is create an account (also free) then go to the list of free elearning and download what you want to check out. You only pay if you want to do the test and get credit toward the course.

 

[drrich2]

At least with GUE there's a reason for this once you move to Cave1 or Tech1.

Thanks. If that's the basis then it's something that won't come up for a lot of divers who just want to elevate their dive skills using GUE Fundamentals, but good to know.

 

[PfcAJ]

Thanks. If that's the basis then it's something that won't come up for a lot of divers who just want to elevate their dive skills using GUE Fundamentals, but good to know.

Fundamentals teaches good skills, but that’s not it. Nor is it the purpose.

Good skills, base understanding of the equipment, pre-dive considerations, and an intro to buddymanship in the water. The purpose is to get you prepared to dive with GUE folks, and that needs the whole package. It would be a half measure to do anything less.

Many divers choose not to continue down that path. That’s fine of course, and I’m happy for anyone to learn these techniques and enjoy better diving. But the course teaches the full deal. The single tank rec pass pathway is great for people who need or want a smaller bite, but the core principles remain the same.

About the hogarthian harness, it is chosen because it is simple, reliable, has what you need and nothing you don’t. Properly adjusted, it’s easy to get in and out of. Even the most absurd dives do not need more than the base d rings. There are no plastic buckles to get smashed and break. No adjustments to work loose. No stitching to come undone. No loose straps to get snagged. No padding that requires extra weight to sink. The components are user replaceable and modular; you can change wings in a matter of seconds. Plainly stated, it works.

 

[dumpsterpurrs]

I have been impressed with RAID and bridged over to be a RAID instructor a couple years ago.
One of the awesome ways they stay progressive is to open up the elearning to everyone for free. All you need to do is create an account (also free) then go to the list of free elearning and download what you want to check out. You only pay if you want to do the test and get credit toward the course.

As an educator and a curriculum developer, I'm extremely impressed with RAID's syllabi (I haven't read all, but their Rescue, DM, and Instructor materials are top-notch). I like their materials much better than several other agencies (PADI - good demo and media but horribly poorly written, also outdated; SSI - well-written but very basic, doesn't cover much, I did SSI DM and now I'm going through RAID DM e-learning, which is kicking my butt; SDI - great if you have a very experienced and technical instructor adding their own knowledge to the elearning, not too great if your instructor is none of those things; NAUI and CMAS have excellent programs, but the curriculums freely accessible online aren't detailed enough in actual teaching contents, which I assume would be supplemented when you take their courses). Most rec dive instructors should read RAID Instructor's Playbook, IMHO.

 

[Cthippo]

I don't think i have ever seen a shop that was RAID affiliated. Are there any in WA?

 

[Wibble]

When you start tech training, you basically have to empty your head of all the BS that you got in recreational classes. There's no such thing as "good enough" when it comes to buoyancy and trim, buddy skills, communication skills, and planning.

Great statement and true.

Good enough isn't. Sort your core skills out -- which is hard for most people -- then everything else is so much easier... and safer.

 

[drrich2]

I don't think i have ever seen a shop that was RAID affiliated.

Was somebody asleep in marketing? That's a brand name in the U.S. associated in the mind of the general public with pest killer, aerosol spray cans for taking out roaches, ants, wasps and hornets, etc..., and related poisonous products. Raid.com takes me to the pest killer site.

Not exactly the warm, welcoming, family-friendly name I'd have expected.

Fundamentals teaches good skills, but that’s not it. Nor is it the purpose.

Good skills, base understanding of the equipment, pre-dive considerations, and an intro to buddymanship in the water. The purpose is to get you prepared to dive with GUE folks, and that needs the whole package. It would be a half measure to do anything less.

Thank you! Your excellent post cuts to the heart of a key issue. GUE Fundamentals is often recommended on SB as an option for divers who wish to increase their skill at diving, to 'up their in-water game,' as opposed to taking a Dive Master (or similar) course. Reports from people who've taken it indicate it can do that well. Unfortunately, when viewed from that perspective (e.g.: the rec. diver with no plans for tech. diving, cave diving, formal GUE team diving, etc...), some demands like the harness thing sound over-bearing and unnecessary, a bit on the 'control freak' side. Hence some of the critical pushback, and I speculate that might be the sort of thing that gave the OP the impression their approach seemed like a 'doctrine.'

What you and rjack321 posted puts it in perspective. I hope other people researching the option in the future run across your posts.