Current SCUBA Instruction Techniques

[Nemrod]

I think vintage diving is interesting but not having a wing on my BP really doesn't make my boat float to the same extent that it seems to for you. I use it very little during a dive but with heavy undegarments, larger tanks, etc. it's needed. I'm not interested in diving wet or in rubber suits just to avoid a wing.

I feel pretty unencumbered in a BP/W. You guy's do seem to underestimate the buoyancy control of everyone not in vintage gear. It's not much of a comparison if the standard is newly trained occasional warm water divers.

Again, I do find it interesting, the pictures are interesting, and I'm sure it's enjoyable for you. There are people who enjoy reenacting the Civil War over and over as well. Vintage diving doesn't seem to be quite as popular in the PNW as in some other locations however although I'm sure there are some here as well.

Minimalism does not require vintage gear. The Voit 50 Fathom single stage regulator is just happens to be an extremely reliable unit for shallow solo diving and the light weight and integrated design make transport and set up easy when walking a distance is required for access.

The PNW is not the center of the diving world, some divers travel to various destinations from cold to warm, it is normal and expected to vary the equipment and techniques to suit each diving environment.

N

 

[TSandM]

I don't think anybody would argue that there are no good lessons to take from minimalist diving. Proper weighting and elegant use of breath control are part of graceful diving. But I, for one, like having something in my gear that makes me effortlessly buoyant on the surface, and would allow a rescuer to accomplish that easily as well. The failure modes of an air bladder (especially catastrophic failure modes) are few and rare, especially for the recreational diver, who is not swimming around inside of disintegrating wrecks with sharp edges. A compensation device can be used as a fine instrument, or as a gross crutch -- the difference is not in the equipment, but in the skill of the user.

If wing failures were a common issue, my guess is that cave divers wouldn't use them . . . but in fact, buoyancy compensation came OUT of cave diving, where precise buoyancy control is a survival skill, and overuse of the breath significantly shortens the time one's gas lasts.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Here is a report from a guy I turned on to minimalism.
He's really taken to it well and enjoys the challenge and the freedom.
20090613 Breakwater

Here is another page featuring California style backpack diving:
http://diver.net/backpack_divers/

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

I don't think anybody would argue that there are no good lessons to take from minimalist diving. Proper weighting and elegant use of breath control are part of graceful diving. But I, for one, like having something in my gear that makes me effortlessly buoyant on the surface, and would allow a rescuer to accomplish that easily as well. The failure modes of an air bladder (especially catastrophic failure modes) are few and rare, especially for the recreational diver, who is not swimming around inside of disintegrating wrecks with sharp edges. A compensation device can be used as a fine instrument, or as a gross crutch -- the difference is not in the equipment, but in the skill of the user.

If wing failures were a common issue, my guess is that cave divers wouldn't use them . . . but in fact, buoyancy compensation came OUT of cave diving, where precise buoyancy control is a survival skill, and overuse of the breath significantly shortens the time one's gas lasts.

Effortless buoyancy on the surface is achieved quite easily with backpack diving by exact weighting. If a person attempts a backpack dive off a beach and is overweighted on the surface to the point that they cannot stay on the surface then there is no way to really pull off a dive without literally crawling around on the bottom the whole time. Therefore proper weighting is the very first thing minimalists learn otherwise diving is impossible. The only exception would be if someone didn't have their weighting dialed in and jumped off a boat in deep water, then they would be screwed. The only remedy for this would be to dump the weightbelt. Rocketing to the surface is not as much of a problem with no BC diving because there is no aircell to expand except for your lungs and with that you better know what you're doing with ECSA's. That's why minimalism requires a slow and solid path of learning and is not for people who are impatient and want everything now.

The times I do use a wing it is on only as a convenience for depth compensation on deeper dives with my really thick suit. Even then it's not really needed on the surface because nothing is changed with my weighting. So the whole question then about wether a back inflation wing plants your face foreward on the surface to me is silliness because the way I dive I don't need air in a wing at the surface to stay floating.

With rescueing somebody (minimalist rescueing another minimalist), once on the surface the protocol would be to first dump the belt on the victim and yourself if need be, get them out of their rig if need be and yourself if need be and get them in to shore or the boat. At that point both parties are in just wetsuits and fins and are at the best unencumbered advantage to get to safety. With minimalism the gear is so minimal that stripping a diver of gear is very quick. There are no long hoses, drysuit lines, bungeed octos, etc. to worry about.

Finally, backpack diving is not used for every application. It is not for caves, inside wrecks, deep dives, or other dives where depth compensation is required such as for photography or maybe really shallow dives (intertidal pools or anything under 15 feet).

 

[Slonda828]

But I, for one, like having something in my gear that makes me effortlessly buoyant on the surface, and would allow a rescuer to accomplish that easily as well.

They made something that does this in like 1925. We call it the weight belt with a releasable buckle. If you surface with no BC and you need to get positive, you ditch your belt. Everyone I've ever met is at least 2# positive butt naked with no weight belt or exposure protection in sea water. As a matter of fact, I am 2 lbs positive in the ocean in just my shorts, and I'm a skinny dude.

You already know what I just said though, so why say something like the above quote?

Besides, I took my rescue class in an NTEC bp/w (what you would call a DIR rig). Rescuing someone in that rig is a full blown pain in the butt, no matter how you slice it. 7 foot hose, drysuit hose, necklaced backup, no quick releases...

It sounds something like this:

"Help, diver in distress! Call 911! one thousand...two thousand...three thousand....four thousand.... $%#! harness, this thing is SO hard to get off."

*rescue breathe*

"Help, diver in distress! Call 911! one thousand...two thousand...three thousand....four thousand.... $%#! long hose."

*rescue breathe*

"Help, diver in distress! Call 911! one thousand...two thousand...three thousand....four thousand.... $%#! necklace and drysuit hose."

The guys in regular jacket BCs looked at us like we were window lickers. That is one aspect where a tech rig in neither more elegant, nor more efficient.

 

[Diver0001]

If it were for real I'd cut them out of it.

But you're right. It's a major PITA in a rescue.

R..

 

[Coldwater_Canuck]

Miketsp,
You have pointed out at least two very important reasons why my method can be safer in certain situations.

1. The girl was over weighted. Diving without a BC requires careful selection of weight for any given dive. Diving the old way, she would not have been over weighted in the first place. This just reinforces what I have been saying. The girl was diving overweight and depending on her BC to compensate. When she got into trouble, she panicked simply because she had not been given enough training and did not have the confidence needed to respond properly.

2. The use of a separate weight belt with a quick-release buckle. In the situation you described, had she been wearing an "old-fashioned" weight belt, the DM could have easily removed her weights and stopped the descent pronto.

'Nuff said.

1. It is difficult to not be overweighted to start a dive, the only times I've been perfectly weighted at the start of the dive the dive always ends with me not being able to stay down at the end. Even if you can successfully make a safety stop, it's not a good idea to just jolt up in the last 10 feet. Having complete control of your ascent means being approximately 4-6lbs (full tank buoyancy - empty tank bouyancy, maybe + 1 for the 500PSI left over at the end) overweighted to start the dive. Could the divemaster have kicked fast enough to make up for both being overweighted? Maybe, maybe not.

2. This is far more risky than a divemaster putting some air in their BCD. While a fast ascent would certainly be preferable to descending to 6000 feet, ideally it isn't a choice of one or the other. If the divemaster has a BCD with enough lift they can precisely control the combined buoyancy of the two.



Now, I can see the allure of vintage or minimalist diving, and in no way am I saying it shouldn't be done. But it seems a bit of a stretch to support it on safety merits. That kind of seems like saying "you shouldn't wear a seatbelt because wearing one will make you feel invincible and not train as hard and then drive like a maniac". Same with solo diving, I definitely see why people do it and once I am more experienced may try it myself. I also think that with the right experience, gear, and training it can be relatively safe (like minimalist/vintage diving), however I just have a lot of trouble believing it when solo divers write that they think that on a particular dive, if they had a buddy there and the same conditions, equipment, etc. they would be in more danger. You never hear overhead environment divers saying that "not being in open water makes us more safe". There is a difference between doing something for enjoyment of it, possibly taking some risks along the way, and trying to sell something on the merits of safety when that isn't the case.

So, I think something like diving without a BCD could be pretty cool and a neat challenge, but I'd never say "I am safer without a BCD".

 

[gcbryan]

Minimalism does not require vintage gear. The Voit 50 Fathom single stage regulator is just happens to be an extremely reliable unit for shallow solo diving and the light weight and integrated design make transport and set up easy when walking a distance is required for access.

The PNW is not the center of the diving world, some divers travel to various destinations from cold to warm, it is normal and expected to vary the equipment and techniques to suit each diving environment.

N

I wasn't implying that the PNW was the center of the diving world. It's just where I live and I was just mentioning that vintage diving doesn't seem to be that popular around here for whatever reason.

I don't think any of us are on opposite sides of this issue. I don't like or use integrated weights, AI computers, needless bells and whistles nor am I overweighted. I just have a wing on my back that I cannot see and is not in my way. As far as speed...I try to go as slow as possible underwater rather than fast but I'm not a hunter.

I get the feeling that both "sides" are taking offense where none is intended and each side has a rather incorrect view of the other. No one is arguing for the current state of training or LDS bells and whistles.

 

[Slonda828]

1. It is difficult to not be overweighted to start a dive, the only times I've been perfectly weighted at the start of the dive the dive always ends with me not being able to stay down at the end.

This is something you can learn with more diving. An AL80 is about -1.4 lbs full and about +3.5 lbs @500 PSI. A steel 72 is about -4.0 lbs full and about neutral @500 psi. This is easily within the capacity of virtually all divers' lungs to compensate for within the realm of breath control.

For example:

In the bahamas, I dove a Rubatex beavertail shorty and an AL80. I wore 4 lbs of lead on a belt. This made me about -5.4 pounds at the start of the dive (I was wearing no BC of any kind). Once I got down to depth, I was fine as long as I controlled my breathing. At the end of the dive, on the safety stop, I was about neutral because I had a tank that was +3.5 lbs with 4 lbs of lead. The wetsuit buoyancy was negligable because it was only a 2mm shorty. A picture of that safety stop can be found in my profile after that 120 foot dive.

It's really not that terribly difficult.

 

[Coldwater_Canuck]

This is something you can learn with more diving. An AL80 is about -1.4 lbs full and about +3.5 lbs @500 PSI. A steel 72 is about -4.0 lbs full and about neutral @500 psi. This is easily within the capacity of virtually all divers' lungs to compensate for within the realm of breath control.

Isn't this a poor way to use air though? From what I've heard the best way to use air is to take deep, slow breaths to make sure you are getting oxygen and not just stale air left in your airways.

I assume if you are trying to make up for the differences in bouyancy, you start the dive with full lungs and just let a little bit of air out before breathing more in (never let your lungs empty), and then at the end when you're more bouyant just take small breaths (never let your lungs get full)?

In the bahamas, I dove a Rubatex beavertail shorty and an AL80. I wore 4 lbs of lead on a belt. This made me about -5.4 pounds at the start of the dive

I thought your point was that you didn't need to overweight yourself at all, if you could do it all with breathing why not start just very slightly negative?