Going Deep

[redacted]

If I could see it all with just a snorkel, it would be perfect. Depth is just one of the disadvantages of some of the great dive site.

 

[scottfiji]

Most of my dives have been deep dives with a few otherwise. I like deep dives and everything not deep has been less appealing. Is this common? I guess I like the thrill/challenge of going deep. Who knows but I need to work it out because I prejudge a dive by the depth. Crazy huh? Do others feel this way also?

I felt this way initially. Then, I started to appreciate the fact that there is more marine life, red color, safety, and bottom time in the shallower depths. (And warmth, in southern california!).

I'll go deeper sometimes to see specific things now, but it won't be a goal per se. However, for some divers, the longer they dive, the deeper they want to go. I think its just personality and personal preference.

As long as you are enjoying what you are doing, that is what's important.

btw, you didn't say where you usually dive, and what you like to see, I'd be curious to find out.

Scott

 

[Scubaguy62]

I'm the same way. Used to love being down at the 100 - 120 range, but now, I'm happy doing a beach dive and hitting bottom at 18 fsw. Somehow diving shallow is not only better for gas consumption and bottom time, but for keeping tabs on buoyancy and trim control.

 

[Hank49]

There are a few things you'll never see in 30ft of water , like a whale shark for one . .

I don't know about that statement. I've seen about 6 whale sharks and all were in less than 20 feet of water.

 

[coreypenrose]

I felt this way initially. Then, I started to appreciate the fact that there is more marine life, red color, safety, and bottom time in the shallower depths. (And warmth, in southern california!).

I'll go deeper sometimes to see specific things now, but it won't be a goal per se. However, for some divers, the longer they dive, the deeper they want to go. I think its just personality and personal preference.

As long as you are enjoying what you are doing, that is what's important.

btw, you didn't say where you usually dive, and what you like to see, I'd be curious to find out.

Scott

This makes no sense, but, for whatever reason, I don't like to have by bottom time dictated by my air consumption - I'd rather come up because I'd hit the yellow zone on my computer. For that reason, more so then anything, I like deep diving.

Yes, I know that makes no sense...

 

[mempilot]

I do about 2/3 of my dives beyond the recreational limits, both time and depth. I like shipwrecks, and down here, the bigger ones are found deeper. I like the experience gained by logging mostly deep dives. I'm still planning on diving the Doria before it's just a heap. The deeper dives really challenge your planning and preparedness. I've found that since pushing for a steady log of deep dives, my skills have increased significantly. This makes for some very enjoyable shallow dives as well. Call it squared away.

Most of my dives have been deep dives with a few otherwise. I like deep dives and everything not deep has been less appealing. Is this common? I guess I like the thrill/challenge of going deep. Who knows but I need to work it out because I prejudge a dive by the depth. Crazy huh? Do others feel this way also?

 

[MikeFerrara]

This makes no sense, but, for whatever reason, I don't like to have by bottom time dictated by my air consumption - I'd rather come up because I'd hit the yellow zone on my computer. For that reason, more so then anything, I like deep diving.

Yes, I know that makes no sense...

Is yellow bad?

 

[Northeastwrecks]

With a few rare exceptions , shallow dives are generaly better dives .

I respectfully disagree. The objective, not the depth, is what makes the dive interesting. Depth is nothing more than a factor to be taken into account while planning. In particular, you must determine what you will need in order to reach your objective and whether you can do it safely.

Longer NDLs.

So you get training and experience in decompression diving, buy the gear and eliminate those pesky NDL's.

Tanks last longer.

Again, training, conditioning and proper equipment will solve this issue. For example, I dive double steels. For shallower decompression dives, I'll add an AL40. For deeper dives, I add an AL80.

That configuration gives me more than enough gas to execute any dive I'm qualified and/or comfortable performing. While I'm always sorry when the time comes to leave the bottom, I don't find myself particularly limited.

And one of the reasons allot of us got into diving in the first place ... color

An HID light solves that problem. I can light up the world in full color.

At 100ft you've got a max bottom time of 20 min and all those pretty fish are all the same color .

That's simply not correct. At 100 fsw, with jacked 104's and an AL80, I'd have something like 60 minutes of bottom time, followed by 30 minutes of deco, for a total run time of 90 minutes.

And the fish are not all the same color.

At 30ft , you can easily make a 90 min dive with all the vibrant colors of the reef and it's inhabitants . There are a few things you'll never see in 30ft of water , like a whale shark for one . But , you could spend your whole life in deep water and never see one either . I've found the best diving is generaly in < 50ft . There are a few rare exceptions . If there's something in particular at that location , like a wreck or unique formation , then deeper dives can be fun too .

It depends on why you got into diving and what you enjoy. Personally, I find reefs pretty, but boring. I enjoy wrecks.

There are many benefits to diving deeper wrecks. First, since they are more difficult to reach, you are doing something that fewer people have done. Second, they are less likely to have been demolished as hazards to navigation, destroyed by incompetant divers or picked over. Third, many of the larger, more interesting wrecks are in deeper water.

I've also seen some very cool marine life below 100 fsw. Last year, I saw some type of electric ray at about 105. I saw three eagle rays in formation, followed by a shark, at 120 (I was at 110). Eventually, I want to dive the sponge belt.

In reading the original post, I thought back to when I first started diving and thought that an 80 foot dive was a pretty big deal. A year later, I was wishing that I'd blended my Nitrox a bit light so that I could look at a formation at 130 fsw. Today, I wish that I had the experience to hit some of the really cool wrecks in the 180 fsw range. Not because they are deeper, but because I've never seen them before.

At the same time, I laugh when I speak with people from TDS who consider a 200 foot dive to be simple, since they are comparing it to their typical 290 foot profiles.

The point is that your perception changes as you become more experienced.

 

[mempilot]

All good points. Depth is merely a variable depending on what you want to look at. There are incredible reefs deep also. I like wrecks, but I would love to go dive a wall at 200'. Go deeper down the wall, and there's a whole new set of creatures to ogle.

 

[Northeastwrecks]

All good points. Depth is merely a variable depending on what you want to look at. There are incredible reefs deep also. I like wrecks, but I would love to go dive a wall at 200'. Go deeper down the wall, and there's a whole new set of creatures to ogle.

I agree.

I forgot to add something to my earlier post that I meant to suggest to the original poster. Remember that, for the most part, the wrecks and other stuff will be there for some time and that there is nothing down there worth dying over, at any depth.