Do training dives (at depth) count as your dive count for Tech cert?

[rjack321]

The GUE valve manual comments that a tech 2 or cave 2 diver is expected to be able to perform a valve drill in about a minute. My instructor mentioned there comes a time when you can do it too slow, but it's not something to worry about at fundies or 1 level classes.

a minute is not rushed to me. 45 seconds as a drop dead requirement is not useful. Using two hands to shut down multiple valves at one time (no light discipline, not signally buddy, no reliable line contact/awareness) - also not useful.

90+% of students either: 1) can reach their valves and rush a bit possibly missing steps, or 2) can't reach their valves and are flopping all over the place already.

You don't need to encourage the former to rush, they are "fast enough" already. If anything slowing down and being more methodical in training is going to ingrain the proper sequence more reliably. Trying to fix the latter's problem by imposing a time limit isn't what they need. They need to either improve flexibility or improve technique or both.

 

[OMANDIVER]

If it was me, i would spend the money on getting recreational ocean diving experience. Whats the point in learning tec to do it it a gravel pit.

 

[DevonDiver]

a minute is not rushed to me. 45 seconds as a drop dead requirement is not useful. Using two hands to shut down multiple valves at one time (no light discipline, not signally buddy, no reliable line contact/awareness) - also not useful.

90+% of students either: 1) can reach their valves and rush a bit possibly missing steps, or 2) can't reach their valves and are flopping all over the place already.

You don't need to encourage the former to rush, they are "fast enough" already. If anything slowing down and being more methodical in training is going to ingrain the proper sequence more reliably. Trying to fix the latter's problem by imposing a time limit isn't what they need. They need to either improve flexibility or improve technique or both.

You seem to not understand progression in training. You start with slow, methodical and broken-down (skill phases), then move to a complete procedure. It's done slowly, at first, to ensure it's done right. Then it's repeated sufficiently to develop speed.

Speed IS important. Gas is time - time is life.

I don't understand the presumption that speed causes degradation in other functional skills/competencies. Such an occurrence would merely indicate a too-fast training progression to speed; without developing the fundamental protocol properly in the first instance. It would also indicate that underlying functional skills/competencies were not ingrained and subject to failing when other task loading was introduced.

From what is said... it looks like GUE only teach the initial stages of protocol development, but abandon the progression towards timeliness. It also looks like GUE (self-nominated representatives on Scubaboard) seem to assume that no other agency or instructor, outside of GUE, is competent to teach effective skills with a proper training progression for skill development.

What I suspect is that a relatively novice level understanding of GUE has been misinterpreted - and there is a dogmatic justification for what's been taught...and why... without understanding the long term development that will occur as subsequent levels of training are undertaken.

The logic of being leisurely in a gas emergency is hugely flawed.... and not off-set by any considerations of team support. I suspect this is a simple, novice, misinterpretation of a basic-level training methodology for an emergency protocol approach. Focus on skill perfection is the luxury of the training environment....and rightly slow. It is not a strategy applied in real emergencies, where lives are on the line... and time is critical....and team support cannot be guaranteed (it never can....).

LMAO at drowning, but being proud of your 'flawless' slow gas shut-down....

 

[rjack321]

You seem to not understand progression in training. You start with slow, methodical and broken-down (skill phases), then move to a complete procedure. It's done slowly, at first, to ensure it's done right. Then it's repeated sufficiently to develop speed.

Speed IS important. Gas is time - time is life.

I don't understand the presumption that speed causes degradation in other functional skills/competencies. Such an occurrence would merely indicate a too-fast training progression to speed; without developing the fundamental protocol properly in the first instance. It would also indicate that underlying functional skills/competencies were not ingrained and subject to failing when other task loading was introduced.

From what is said... it looks like GUE only teach the initial stages of protocol development, but abandon the progression towards timeliness. It also looks like GUE (self-nominated representatives on Scubaboard) seem to assume that no other agency or instructor, outside of GUE, is competent to teach effective skills with a proper training progression for skill development.

What I suspect is that a relatively novice level understanding of GUE has been misinterpreted - and there is a dogmatic justification for what's been taught...and why... without understanding the long term development that will occur as subsequent levels of training are undertaken.

The logic of being leisurely in a gas emergency is hugely flawed.... and not off-set by any considerations of team support. I suspect this is a simple, novice, misinterpretation of a basic-level training methodology for an emergency protocol approach. Focus on skill perfection is the luxury of the training environment....and rightly slow. It is not a strategy applied in real emergencies, where lives are on the line... and time is critical....and team support cannot be guaranteed (it never can....).

LMAO at drowning, but being proud of your 'flawless' slow gas shut-down....

Not going to argue with you anymore, but nobody is dying from failing to do 2 handed valve drills. So apparently the slow and methodical approach is adequate. Buddy separations, lost lines, and silt outs have caused fatalities recently. So teaching someone to be a spaz is not necessary and acting to escalate a problem.

 

[DevonDiver]

So teaching someone to be a spaz is not necessary and acting to escalate a problem.

At what point is conducting protocols in a timely manner, to preserve gas, a "spaz"?

That's quite an offensive word to use... aren't you supposed to say "stroke"? That's the correct parlance for a GUE wannabie novice.... I believe.

There seems to be a theme that anyone not doing it as you were taught (doing it right?) is doing it wrong... escalating problems.

You can't comprehend that replicating a timely, controlled emergency procedure to preserve gas (the whole point of a shut down, in the first place) avoids an escalation of the problem (insufficient personal gas supply).

Sounds like regurgitating the cool-aid without sufficient personal knowledge to understand the fundamental principles behind the training.

I thought this sort of "you're doing it wrong ....and you're a stroke spaz..." mentality had faded away nowadays. God save us from unlearned neophytes....

 

[DevonDiver]

There's definitely a relationship. Are you kidding? Real life isn't some textbook situation. With a serious leak, there will almost for sure be silting. And it won't necessarily be a result of your flippers kicking the dirt.

My apologies.... I will clarify.... a skills link.

If you're diving in situations like that then you're a grownup diver and not a brand new fundies student who's *learning* to work a manifold.

I don't disagree. But at what point we're we only talking about a "brand new fundies student". That was my point exactly.... I felt we are being lectured on right/wrong protocols by someone exhibiting the mindset and training ceiling of a "brand new fundies student" - who hasn't yet been introduced to the bigger picture.

Yuh, and fundamentals class isn't the spot for that. Its to learn the (you guessed it!) FUNDAMENTALS!

Correct. But that.... as I said.... does not mean the focus of Fundies skill acquisition is the 'correct' focus for technical diving. Exactly the point I was trying to make.

Again.... at no point was it defined that "this is how to learn a valve drill in fundies"..... the attitude of the posts was/is "you're doing it wrong.... you're a stroke (...or "spaz" i.e. a very demeaning term for 'spastic'...a disability with uncontrolled motor movements).... and that was addressing technical diving in general.

Divers at a FUNDAMENTALS level should understand that they haven't really breached the surface of technical diving....and what they learned is a foundation.... no the be-all and end-all of knowledge or approach.

Sense of urgency is taught in level 1 and level 2 classes.

As I would absolutely expect it to be..

Its not about complacency, its about distributing priority over multiple facets (buddy, line, environment) instead if a singular "OMG I GOTTA SHUT DOWN MY GAS RIGHT NOW BOTH HANDS SCREW EVERYTHING!! GRAAAHHHHHH HALP IM GUNNA DROWN UNLESS I DO IT SUPERFAST" approach.

We don't disagree. Any instructor, representing any agency, who taught a panicked or irrational approach to emergency protocols is preparing their students badly.

As you said...."a sense of urgency" is introduced later in the GUE curriculum. This merely means that fundies level divers are not yet privy to the full context of the procedure. As such, they should refrain from speaking authoritatively in public on the principles of such procedures.

The only issue I've tried to highlight is that there seems, by some, to have been an assumption that non-GUE techical divers are not taught fundamental skill mechanics before progression onto full and complete protocols with a 'sense of urgency'.

As the famous saying goes.... "Practice does not make perfect; only perfect practice makes perfect".

I am sure we can agree that any emergency protocol must be taught to be; Accurate, controlled, precise and timely.That such protocols should degrade other critical functions (buoyancy, trim, navigation, visibility, team coordination etc), nor diminish situational awareness or create further secondary hazards for the diver or their team.

That's "good technical diving"..... not just "GUE diving"....

 

[IDS_Bill]

Regarding the training dives in a lake/quarry. These can be good, controlled environments to hone skills but you definitely need to (time and money allowing of course) get into the ocean environments. The variables that can be presented to you by true ocean environments, even in a recreational setting, will help you deal with events that are unforeseen and will help you problem solve.

Regarding practicing skills before the class. Practice is always great, if it is relevant to the skills you will be learning. What I mean is, if you are doing shut-downs, blowing bags and doing other skills differently than they will be taught in the class, you are reinforcing "different" habits and solidifying them in procedural memory (some call that muscle memory) and this will take more effort to break bad or just plain different habits.

 

[Bigeclipse]

Regarding the training dives in a lake/quarry. These can be good, controlled environments to hone skills but you definitely need to (time and money allowing of course) get into the ocean environments. The variables that can be presented to you by true ocean environments, even in a recreational setting, will help you deal with events that are unforeseen and will help you problem solve.

Regarding practicing skills before the class. Practice is always great, if it is relevant to the skills you will be learning. What I mean is, if you are doing shut-downs, blowing bags and doing other skills differently than they will be taught in the class, you are reinforcing "different" habits and solidifying them in procedural memory (some call that muscle memory) and this will take more effort to break bad or just plain different habits.

well said

 

[rjack321]

At what point is conducting protocols in a timely manner, to preserve gas, a "spaz"?

That's quite an offensive word to use... aren't you supposed to say "stroke"? That's the correct parlance for a GUE wannabie novice.... I believe.

There seems to be a theme that anyone not doing it as you were taught (doing it right?) is doing it wrong... escalating problems.

You can't comprehend that replicating a timely, controlled emergency procedure to preserve gas (the whole point of a shut down, in the first place) avoids an escalation of the problem (insufficient personal gas supply).

Sounds like regurgitating the cool-aid without sufficient personal knowledge to understand the fundamental principles behind the training.

I thought this sort of "you're doing it wrong ....and you're a stroke spaz..." mentality had faded away nowadays. God save us from unlearned neophytes....

I recognize there are several ways to do valve drill and that some agencies have time limits in an effort to establish some sort of objective standard. I'm not real keen on time limits since they don't get to the root of the matter which is being taught proper technique (how to set up the doubles and move your actual arm to reach them efficiently).

Still, a 2 handed disco ball approach is unique to Boulder John. I have not heard of any recognized agency promoting that.

You sure have strongly held opinions about a valve drill for someone who seems to rarely even teach backmount (anymore?).

 

[DevonDiver]

I'm not real keen on time limits since they don't get to the root of the matter which is being taught proper technique

Would that also apply to a skill like, for instance horizontal hover? Why impose a time duration, when all that matters is proper technique? Why ask for 15 minutes, when proper technique can be displayed in 15 seconds? LOL