Do cave divers need wreck training?

[DevonDiver]

John, this is boring.

Yes, it'd take me literally 2 seconds to pop a primary tie and enter with a spool. In doing so I'd set a good example, I'd mitigate against unforseen risks in a dynamic and unpredictable environment and I'd get just a little more practise in a critical skill.

What's also pleasing is that I'd know I hadn't made a lazy choice, or fallen pray to a temptation to start cutting corners or trying to justify shoddy dive behaviors. I'll also have practiced some self-discipline ... and that's an attribute that too many divers neglect to cultivate.

As I've explained twice... and now for the third time, I've seen equally benign penetrations actually turn sour. Yes, places JUST LIKE IN THE VIDEO... turn nasty and scare the beejezus out of divers.

You haven't seen that... yet.... so you can't imagine it. Fair enough. Let's hope you never get unlucky ever.

I've done twice the amount of significant *penetration* dives than you have listed here as your total cumulative dive experience. I've had more opportunity to see the unpredictable stuff that can happen occasionally. Nothing more, nothing less. That's why our perspectives differ.

 

[boulderjohn]

Here is more information about my extended conversation with PADI about the problems in their wreck diving course. This will include a judgment on my part about why the problems exist--and why it may be intentional.

In the midst of the discussion, I did a recreational dive on a wreck called the Lady Luck. The DM gave the dive briefing, including a description of nice swim-throughs near the top of the wreck, which he said would be good for "anyone who had the proper training and certification." I talked to him later about that. I asked him what the proper training and certification for going through the wheelhouse would be. (Let me be clear that I as not challenging him. I consider him a friend, and as a technical diving instructor, he was well qualified to give an answer.) He laughed because he knew that I knew that there is no such thing.

He and I later talked about it with the dive operation's manager. (It was a great exchange among friends.) As a dive operation, they are in something of a trap. In South Florida, the big diving attraction, the enticement that brings customers into the shop, is wreck diving. These people want to do those swim-throughs. Most of the swim-throughs are as incredibly benign as the one I posted in the earlier video. If they forbid it, they would be out of business in no time. Without the benefit of clear language from an agency, they are left to make the extremely well-crafted CYA dive briefing I heard on that dive. "We didn't say you could enter that area without proper training--we clearly said you needed that training--which does not exist."

So I took that message to PADI. Why don't they issue a clear statement in that regard? I was told it was not necessary. All around the world, dive operations allow people to do simple swim throughs in both wrecks and coral reefs. That shows they know full well that it is an acceptable practice. Therefore, there was no need to put in in writing.

So I went back to the manager and told him that. He said "BS." They do not know it is an acceptable practice. If something happens during a dive, they do not believe they will have anything they can point to as justification from a higher authority, so they will continue to use that vague statement about having proper training and certification. They also believed, and I agreed with them, that PADI is doing the same thing. By not clearly spelling out what is acceptable and what is not, they, too, are looking to avoid liability in the case of an accident.

 

[boulderjohn]

Yes, it'd take me literally 2 seconds to pop a primary tie and enter with a spool.

2 seconds? Wow! I can't come close to that. It will take me literally a lot more than 2 seconds to do that. I would also add to that time the amount of time it takes for me to swim around the wheelhouse to the other side, when other people are instead taking the 5 seconds it takes to swim through.

So you never, ever enter a wreck and leave through a different opening than the one you went through? Wow again! Again, I'm impressed. I have never, ever seen anyone like that in the many hundreds of wreck dives I have done. It must be a great feeling to have this approach--kind of like the pride people must feel when they are the only ones in step in the parade.

 

[DevonDiver]

As a dive operation, they are in something of a trap... These people want to do those swim-throughs.

So I took that message to PADI. Why don't they issue a clear statement in that regard? I was told it was not necessary... there was no need to put in in writing.

In the military we used to call this 'sloping shoulders' behaviour. Brushing off responsibility as a justification for not doing something right.

In this case, both parties... agency and operator... do so from financial motives.

Seems par for course behaviour nowadays.

________________

Dive Operator: "Hey PADI, we want to abandon proper protocols and limits because, you know, we can pander to the demands of clientele who we've shaped to expect instant-gratification diving ... and wow, dropping those ethics certainly boosts the profit margins".

PADI: "Yeah, those damned ethics certainly get in the way of making a fast buck. Hey, we know everyone makes a mockery of what we write in the manual, but that's just a token to cover our ass. Our QA doesn't care what you do.... so just go aheady and do that shady stuff already. But... this is important... don't forget to flog 'em a Deep course "for safety... wink, wink, nudge".

Dive Operator: "Sweet...thanks for obliging. Can we have that in writing? Because the liability of our shady practices scares the heck out of us. We have asses to cover also, when someone dies..".

PADI: "GTFO. You think we're stupid? Our legal team ain't ever gonna allow us to put in writing what we ACTUALLY advocate."

Dive Operator: "Grrrr... so unfair. Thanks anyway but gotta dash off now... we've got a boatload of new Open Water divers to take inside a wreck".

PADI: "Do yourself a favor. Call it a swimthrough. Jargon dude... use it. That's how this game works. I didn't tell you that. We didnt even have this conversation alright?"

Dive Operator: "What conversation? Ha ha ha".

PADI: "Don't forget to flog those deep courses. It's all about the 'safety', right?".

___________________

It doesn't happen in cave/cavern where there is regulation. No regulation in wrecks.... and the predictable outcome is $ influenced decisions.

Wreck diving is a money-maker for big agencies. The training has been made as threadbare as feasible. Instructors can self-certify with zero penetration experience. Divers are taken beyond their limits because operators are too desperate to say no. Instructors, of minimal experience, get complacent from ignorance of risk and Normalisation of deviance.

Hundreds die in wrecks.

Thousands experience unreported near-misses and close-calls.

But there's money to be made, so all that matters to those concerned is that they can deflect liability.

 

[DevonDiver]

2 seconds? Wow! I can't come close to that. It will take me literally a lot more than 2 seconds to do that.

I dive and teach wreck daily, for 11 years. Not just on occasional weekends, or annual vacations.

Wreck, technical and sidemount is all I do. Daily. For over a decade.

I dove wrecks for 15 years before that. The English Channel, Scapa Flow, Cyprus, working on a tech liveaboard in Thailand doing wreck exploration and expeditions. Thats a lot of dedicated practice John.

This week I taught Advanced Wreck class, on Sunday was hypoxic trimix wreck. Tomorrow is a day off, my chore is to replace fresh line on six of my spools and reels. After that I'll be back in the water again, laying line. I have a meeting this week regarding the design of an agencies' technical wreck syllabus. Today I took bookings for 2 more advanced wreck courses and a technical wreck course. A third of my students are professional divers.. DMs and instructors. I frequently run wreck clinics for motivated wreck instructors.

It's all relative John.

Unsurprisingly, I can do a lot more now, with many thousands of hours inside wrecks, than what i could do when I only had a few hundreds of wreck penetration dives.

I'm lucky to be in an environment, and full-time job, that gives me hours and hours of wreck penetration experience and practice per week.

A newly qualified instructor started work here last year. He'll have done something like 300 wreck penetration dives since... over 900 dives total in 12 months, I believe, ..and he's he's the 'baby' instructor here ... the only one without thousands of hours inside wrecks.

We only have wreck dives here in Subic Bay... over 25 of them... just the recreational ones.. within 30 minutes of the dive centres.

Perspectives...

So yes, i can plant a tie off as i swim past.

That's why I advise getting the practice where and when you can.... rather than making justifications to avoid doing it.

 

[boulderjohn]

I dive and teach wreck daily, for 11 years. Not just on occasional weekends, or annual vacations.

Wreck, technical and sidemount is all I do. Daily. For over a decade.

I dove wrecks for 15 years before that. The English Channel, Scapa Flow, Cyprus, working on a tech liveaboard in Thailand doing wreck exploration and expeditions. Thats a lot of dedicated practice John.

This week I taught Advanced Wreck class, on Sunday was hypoxic trimix wreck. Tomorrow is a day off, my chore is to replace fresh line on six of my spools and reels. After that I'll be back in the water again, laying line. I have a meeting this week regarding the design of an agencies' technical wreck syllabus. Today I took bookings for 2 more advanced wreck courses and a technical wreck course. A third of my students are professional divers.. DMs and instructors. I frequently run wreck clinics for motivated wreck instructors.

It's all relative John.

Unsurprisingly, I can do a lot more now, with many thousands of hours inside wrecks, than what i could do when I only had a few hundreds of wreck penetration dives.

I'm lucky to be in an environment, and full-time job, that gives me hours and hours of wreck penetration experience and practice per week.

A newly qualified instructor started work here last year. He'll have done something like 300 wreck penetration dives since... over 900 dives total in 12 months, I believe, ..and he's he's the 'baby' instructor here ... the only one without thousands of hours inside wrecks.

We only have wreck dives here in Subic Bay... over 25 of them... just the recreational ones.. within 30 minutes of the dive centres.

Perspectives...

So yes, i can plant a tie off as i swim past.

That's why I advise getting the practice where and when you can.... rather than making justifications to avoid doing it.

Wow! No wonder your skills are so Godlike! Of course, we would never know that if you didn't keep telling us. Thanks for keeping us informed.

I just want to make sure I have gotten the gist of your last posts. Combining the issues of swimming through a shallow wheelhouse and an earlier comment about the limits of the rules about penetration, do the following comments reflect your beliefs accurately? A simple yes or no would be appreciated.

1. There is never a time that anyone should enter a wreck through one opening and exit through another without laying line and somehow retrieving it later. Divers should always lay line, enter a distance, and then return to the original opening.
2. These penetrations must always be in the light zone. No one should ever enter a wreck where there is not sufficient natural light to enable navigation without a flashlight.

 

[boulderjohn]

Upon reflection, I think there is a problem in this comparison because we are not comparing two like things. The term "cave diving" is far more restrictive in meaning than the term ""wreck diving." Perhaps what we need to do is compare wreck diving to a broader term, like "natural overheads."

Under the term "natural overheads," we can find a broad range of environments.

1. Simple swim throughs, like coral arches and other environments where the diver is barely in an overhead for the length of the body.
2. More complex swim throughs, with greater distances to the second opening.
3. Caverns, where the diver is always within the light zone and will usually need to turn and come back to the original opening.
4. Caves, where the diver is completely out of the light zone, and the diver will usually need to return to the original opening.

Wreck diving has a similar broad range of environments. Most of the wrecks most people encounter and most of the ones most of us have been talking about are comparable to the first categories on the list above. Most people who dive wrecks will rarely if ever encounter anything comparable to a cave. Some of the bigger wrecks at Truk Lagoon certainly qualify. Some of the areas in the Spiegel Grove certainly qualify--but not all of them. The popular Boca Raton wreck the Hydro Atlantic has mostly wide open areas comparable to the first three categories, but it also has places that are certainly comparable to a cave.

 

[tursiops]

Wow! No wonder your skills are so Godlike! Of course, we would never know that if you didn't keep telling us. Thanks for keeping us informed.

I just want to make sure I have gotten the gist of your last posts. Combining the issues of swimming through a shallow wheelhouse and an earlier comment about the limits of the rules about penetration, do the following comments reflect your beliefs accurately? A simple yes or no would be appreciated.

1. There is never a time that anyone should enter a wreck through one opening and exit through another without laying line and somehow retrieving it later. Divers should always lay line, enter a distance, and then return to the original opening.
2. These penetrations must always be in the light zone. No one should ever enter a wreck where there is not sufficient natural light to enable navigation without a flashlight.

?? I've been following this discussion.....and I'm not sure where the second part of #1 comes from, nor any of #2.

 

[boulderjohn]

?? I've been following this discussion.....and I'm not sure where the second part of #1 comes from, nor any of #2.

1. If you must always lay line, then you must always return to starting point to retrieve your line. Of course, I guess you could go in one place, lay line, go out the other, re-enter the second opening, and retrace your steps. I guess I could include that.
2. I mentioned earlier that the PADI course says all penetrations MUST be within the light zone, and he spoke of the necessity to follow all those rules. He posted photocopies of them.

 

[tursiops]

1. If you must always lay line, then you must always return to starting point to retrieve your line. Of course, I guess you could go in one place, lay line, go out the other, re-enter the second opening, and retrace your steps. I guess I could include that.
2. I mentioned earlier that the PADI course says all penetrations MUST be within the light zone, and he spoke of the necessity to follow all those rules. He posted photocopies of them.

1. In caves we call it a traverse.
2. But he is not teaching the PADI course.