Best way to structure technical training

[Diving Dubai]

I see this a fair bit. There are people who don't want to go deep but are just tired of their short NDL on a 110' dive and would like to stay longer on the site to get their money's worth. I have a couple I am working with, the husband is keen to go full tech but the wife has no desire to go deeper. She also has a SAC rate that makes me cry in my mask every time I ask her how much gas she has. She has now gotten into photography, so a "130', slung stage and mostly backgas deco for 10-15 min" course is something I could get her excited about but thats as far as it goes. Personally I am glad that some of these certs exist for these people, but they do lead to some confusion and generally clutter up the course progressions.

I'm totally with you on this one.

There is a "market" for people who just want to stay down longer, to a max of 40m /130' while adhering to the max 60 min run time for the dive schedule. Entry level Tech covers the majority of the theory, and all the fundamental practices. And 50% is fine for this in addition to Backgas

If in the future they want to progress (extra tanks or maybe He if not included) then that can take another course as require

A great many people would be happy (comfortable) to take a course with a max depth of 40m/130 but would be totally put off if that same course required dives of 50m/160 to complete and certify

 

[CAPTAIN SINBAD]

UTD tech1 has a 130ft limit, with O2 deco. The idea was to break up an "150ft" T1 since its 5+ days of exhausting otherwise.

Some people like smaller long weekend type classes

This is incorrect. UTD Tech 1 is 160' ft.

Technical Diver Courses

I do remember Tech 1 being 130 ft with pure O2 in the earlier days of UTD but that was changed. Now it is 160' for Tech 1 and 200 for Tech 2.

 

[jadairiii]

Here is one person's opinion on this, I was not a "card collector", I would dive, push my limits then realize I should get training. I came through IANTD in the mid/late 90's for tech training,(NAUI for all of my rec training, PADI Assist Instructor). There was zero training for "trim" or buoyancy in those classes (and my instructor was one of the first IT's and Director of IANTD). First real work on trim and buoyancy came with my IANTD Trimix classes in 1997, but that instructor was a WKPP diver and was involved in forming GUE at the time, so the focus was beginning to change. It was very late in the 2000's when fundies was taken, then 4 years ago Cave 1.

So, IMHO, the "science" of advanced training takes all of about 30 min to teach. Tech training should spend the majority of the time, early on, shallow, working on trim and buoyancy. Take those skills "deeper" and when comfortable, add deco bottles, back shallow and train and become solid on shallow wrecks/reefs switching to the deco bottle(s) then take them deep. Same with Stages/scooters, or whatever. Learn the skills first then go deep.

 

[NothingClever]

So, IMHO, the "science" of advanced training takes all of about 30 min to teach.

I’m definitely the lowest denominator in the class. Learning fundamental gas laws, variable permeability, Workman’s M-values, the difference between diffusion and perfusion and Type I versus Type II DCS took me a lot longer than 30 minutes to learn (and I still like to crack open the books because I don’t retain it like I want).

Back to Sinbad’s question about the ideal progressive structure for technical training.

 

[jadairiii]

I’m definitely the lowest denominator in the class. Learning fundamental gas laws, variable permeability, Workman’s M-values, the difference between diffusion and perfusion and Type I versus Type II DCS took me a lot longer than 30 minutes to learn (and I still like to crack open the books because I don’t retain it like I want).

Back to Sinbad’s question about the ideal progressive structure for technical training.

Not minimizing that aspect but think about it, Fundamental gas laws should have been learned during OW or AOW, same with DCS, at least a working understanding. You dont or should not show up to a Tech class with an "empty tool box". And as to advanced deco theory, (variable permeability, Workman’s M-values, the difference between diffusion and perfusion) grasp that bounce diving decompression (what we do in tech diving) is just now being studied.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

I tell every AN/DP student that it's not just about going deep. Underwater photographers may want to spend much longer than the NDL's to get the shot they want. Some dives in the 100-130 ft range can be made safer by planning more conservative profiles with decompression. Especially when you are looking at very cold water, heavy gear and drysuits that increase the workload, etc. I do wreck dives in Lake Erie that are only 120 feet to the mud with much of the dive at 100. But I want to spend 25-30 minutes on the bottom. Not 18. That means going into deco.

 

[rjack321]

Which is fine. The time taken between courses or the dives that they want to do after class is up to the individual. This is a discussion about the 'best' (if there is such a thing) breakdown of tech courses. The SSI course with 130' and only 50% is the definition of something that is half baked. I have no idea how someone could make the arbitrary decision before training that they want deco, but don't want to go beyond 130. As soon as they want to do a dive a little deeper (140') they have to either take a new course of violate their training. They also don't have access to 100% O2.

We can keep using Tech 1 as the example, but other courses would fit. What dives are actually done after class is an individual choice, but the best certs should be meaty enough that they allow flexibility and open up an large array of dive options, not a narrow cookie cutter approach.

well the NDL for 130ft is pretty short lol

in the UTD version you get access to 25/25 and 100%. I'm not defending the SSI version but mostly because its an "air" class and 130ft on air is not something I think is generally prudent.

 

[rjack321]

This is incorrect. UTD Tech 1 is 160' ft.

Technical Diver Courses

I do remember Tech 1 being 130 ft with pure O2 in the earlier days of UTD but that was changed. Now it is 160' for Tech 1 and 200 for Tech 2.

That is the "new" version naming
for a decade they called "tech1" 25/25 & O2 deco
"tech2" was the second half and added 160ft, 21/35 and 50%
200ft was trimix 1 (or something like that)
250ft was trimix 2

But AG loves to just change sheet for marketing purposes - which was the original reason for calling 25/25 & O2 "tech1". I guess he finally figured out that it wasnt a selling point.

But the reality is that nobody is really taking those classes anyway.

 

[rjack321]

Back to Sinbad’s question about the ideal progressive structure for technical training.

Well agencies all fly by the seat of their pants and make up courses and limits based on experience and their gut.

People like John Adsit (I cant seem to tag him here) actually study how people learn - and those principles are rarely incorporated into scuba courses at all.

 

[CAPTAIN SINBAD]

@boulderjohn We would love to hear from you.