Certification for 40 (+?) meters

[tursiops]

The PADI Deep specialty is intended for divers with AOW, not sure where you’re getting the idea that it’s a class for OW students. It IS the “upgrade” you are looking for.

“Adventure Diver” or AOW is a prerequisite to take Deep; you can’t enroll in it with just an open water cert. (“Adventure Diver” is a subset of AOW, basically three of the five AOW dives).

Whether or not it’s worth it depends a great deal on who you take it with. PADI standards require the course to cover things like how to conduct emergency decompression stops, what to do if you go into deco by accident (but miss your stop), etc. A great instructor will cover dive planning, dive contingencies, secondary air sources, etc.

I agree completely. PADI Deep can be an excellent class, or a waste of time, which it is depends on the instructor and the logistics/location.

After I taught AOW Deep, I followed it up for the graduates with a seminar on "going into deco" which required use of two computers, one set on air and one on Nitrox. We all dived Nitrox, but used the air computer to plan and guide the dive. We went to 100 ft (10 ft within our Nitrox MOD) and stayed there until all the air computers showed deco, but all the Nitrox computers were still within NDL, of course. We tried to stay at 100 ft long enough to accumulate a few minutes of deco at 10 ft on the air computer, if not a minutes or two at 20 ft, but not so long that any of the Nitrox computers (which were actually controlling our NDL dive) got within a couple of minutes of NDL. Then we all ascended together, following our air computers, and holding whatever deco stops the air computers required. We we finally surfaced from out NDL dive on nitrox, they had been able to see their computers go into deco and how to follow what they said. Did it with three different groups. Worked pretty well.

 

[passeparici]

If you are interested in scuba diving and want to understand things a bit better, then I think you should do the tech 40. It's not a question of how often you are going to use it as actually you are going to use more than what you think. You will understand how to plan a dive, how to be safer, when you can go deeper and when you should not to. And also go a bit further than this no deco limit mind that most of the recreational divers have... The PADI deep is ok but way less instructive.

 

[chrisch]

If you are interested in scuba diving and want to understand things a bit better, then I think you should do the tech 40. It's not a question of how often you are going to use it as actually you are going to use more than what you think. You will understand how to plan a dive, how to be safer, when you can go deeper and when you should not to. And also go a bit further than this no deco limit mind that most of the recreational divers have... The PADI deep is ok but way less instructive.

I also think it is a better course and gives more understanding. However if you look at the PADI website it (Tec40) requires the student to have already done PADI Deep.

Tec 40 – Who, What, Where, When, Why?

Are you interested in becoming a TecRec diver? Here's everything you need to know about the PADI Tec 40 course!

blog.padi.com

Really therefore the OP needs to evaluate the PADI (Deep) course against other agencies that might have a better (Deep) course; as in more thorough. The problem with this is clearly laid out int he posts above which show the PADI Deep can be a really good option or just a money spinner for the school.

This will not be the first, or last, time that the discussion about dive training becomes whether or not it is "worth the money". Sadly, to that question I do not have a good answer.

 

[Lorenzoid]

I also think it is a better course and gives more understanding. However if you look at the PADI website it (Tec40) requires the student to have already done PADI Deep.

Tec 40 – Who, What, Where, When, Why?

Are you interested in becoming a TecRec diver? Here's everything you need to know about the PADI Tec 40 course!

blog.padi.com

Really therefore the OP needs to evaluate the PADI (Deep) course against other agencies that might have a better (Deep) course; as in more thorough. The problem with this is clearly laid out int he posts above which show the PADI Deep can be a really good option or just a money spinner for the school.

This will not be the first, or last, time that the discussion about dive training becomes whether or not it is "worth the money". Sadly, to that question I do not have a good answer.

There was a thread recently about the benefits of the PADI Deep course, and I commented there that my experience with that course was poor because I felt it did not really prepare me to safely plan and execute "deep" dives. My impression was that the Deep course emphasized the risks way more than it explained in a practical, hands-on way, how to mitigate them. It did not seem balanced to me. I felt as though the instructor would have been perfectly happy had the course outcome been to turn me off to doing these kinds of dives. What I want to add here is that, having read up a bit on PADI Tec 40, it sounds exactly like what I would have liked my Deep course to be like. It's possible that I simply received a poorly taught Deep course, as some said in that other thread, but it seems to me that Deep really is just a stepping stone to actually being taught how to confidently and safely plan and execute deep dives.

 

[NothingClever]

My impression was that the Deep course emphasized the risks way more than it explained in a practical, hands-on way, how to mitigate them. It did not seem balanced to me.

This x100.

I come from a professional background of high risk tasks, activities and operations where risk assessment is a daily reality and professional responsibility (as in prison time if you're negligent). I recognize that perhaps made me an atypical dive student. Nonetheless, when I took my PADI OW courses, I felt like PADI was intent on teaching me to be anxious and afraid rather than teaching me to be a thinking, problem-solving diver. That didn’t sit well with me. I’ve grown to be at peace with PADI’s place in the world but I can't deny that when I looked over at the TDI, CMAS and BSAC divers, I understood there was something better out there for me. I really wish I could assist at the corporate level with evolving PADI's culture but these days I'm a couple of Red Bull's shy of the energy level that would require of me.

 

[chrisch]

...Nonetheless, when I took my PADI OW courses, I felt like PADI was intent on teaching me to be anxious and afraid rather than teaching me to be a thinking, problem-solving diver. That didn’t sit well with me. I’ve grown to be at peace with PADI’s place in the world but I can't deny that when I looked over at the TDI, CMAS and BSAC divers, I understood there was something better out there for me. ..

PADI is aimed at recreational divers and perhaps it is good that they are not over confident. Technical training from TDI and others is aimed at people that want to explore the bigger possibilities. The OP is doing 20 dives a year on holiday and therefore in my view is exactly what PADI is aimed at. That said he is pushing the 30m recommended limit and wants to understand the risks of doing so as well as certification for insurance reasons.

You do not know that which you don't know. The risk of deeper diving is covered in much better detail in a technical course. The deeper you go the faster things go wrong and the harder it is to put it right. Under stress your gas goes very quickly at 35m+ The OP really needs to do the rescue course as well.

If nothing goes wrong 35m in clear warm water is no big deal. If nothing goes wrong.

 

[Wibble]

Chatting to an instructor in my local dive shop regarding their take on the deep diver speciality... She went through some of the skills and standards they teach, these include:

• Actually going to 39m/130ft, doing a questionnaire on the bottom (proof of narcosis), looking at colours, etc.
• Rigorous gas checking before the dive, checking during the deep phase, and after the dive (proving usage)
• Ascents with safety stops
• Etc.

I thought that would be standard practice, but I know what my Deep Speciality was like -- 25m/80ft in benign waters. Basically paid for some dives.

 

[Lorenzoid]

PADI is aimed at recreational divers and perhaps it is good that they are not over confident....

Maybe the emphasis on the risks in the Deep course is like the period at the end of the sentence that spans recreational depths. Training agencies in the US have long had a model of instilling in us that 130ft (40m) is the edge of a chasm between what they have long taught and what lies beyond (which is nowadays known as technical diving). It's my understanding that in some European instruction models students are led to understand earlier on that it's really more of a continuum, or at least an inflection point, than a chasm. With PADI offering their Tec courses, they neatly maintain and straddle the gap--from Deep over to Tec 40. Perhaps the Deep course, by emphasizing the risks over how to truly do this kind of diving, helps sell Tec.