GUE recreational classes - early details

[rhlee]

Save the 21/35 for when you can efficiently deco it.

I think I agree with this. Bottom line is, who here (with T1+ training) can honestly say they would do this dive with somebody? "21/35 to 130', deco out on 32%?" uh... no thanks.

What I'd like to understand is, what were the problems with the "old system" of rec triox being the part 1 of T1, with the upgrade option. Clearly this was sub-optimal as they chose to re-work things; I wonder what some of the problems were.

Lastly, from a more superficial point, I do find it a little amusing to see a "recreational" class that requires doubles + deco bottle.

 

[amascuba]

Here is what was posted on the Quest list via JJ.

Yes, of course; I am happy to oblige. First one must recognize this
is a RECREATIONAL diving course without prolonged decompression or
elevated PO2. In other words this course is not designed for
technical diving. I believe our existing courses cover those needs
effectively. This program was designed to fill the gaps in existing
recreational diving ie near and beyond 100'/30m and up to the
relevant "sport diving limit" of 130'/40m. This course is not
designed for prolonged stage decompression diving and would not
benefit from high PO2 gases (please see more detail below).

create at least a bit of background in order to outline the
motivation for our choices. From my perspective there are three
primary areas in which tech and rec diving differ. First, in tech
diving we dive deeper for longer periods, requiring stage
decompression. Secondly, in order to decompress efficiently we accept
the increased risk of elevated PO2 (as high as 1.6). Finally these
factors increase the amount of equipment (task loading) as well as
the opportunity for things to go wrong; this reality increases the
penalty of poor decisions as we have incurred a decompression
obligation and do not have the luxury of an efficient ascent. These
latter issues thus require improved skills in terms of problem
resolution.

However, the aforementioned issues are not significant in
recreational diving and we can reduce the required performance in
areas such as buoyancy and trim as well as reduce the need for
enhanced problem resolution (stress drills etc). A range of other
performance requirements are also relevant though this hits the high
points. Therefore, recreational divers do not require the refined
skills required in GUE technical diving courses and are not, in our
opinion, qualified to use high PO2 where very refined buoyancy is
required. For example, oxygen has an extremely small window and can
be dangerous for those without precise buoyancy skills. Likewise,
other gases used at or near 1.6 PO2 present similar risk. The
original choice of a deco gas for this program was 35% (our standard
120'/36m gas) but the draft standards currently allow either 32% or
35%). The 35% was chosen as it remains below our target of 1.2 at
70'/21m (our switch depth for 50% in tech 1). Therefore, a Rec 3
diver has a large safety window (with respect to PO2) while
benefiting from an increased gas supply for ascent and also gaining
valuable experience should they be interested in later tech diving
programs. It remains unknown what percentage of people will pursue R3
as an end point and how many will use this program as a weigh point
toward more advanced training. In either case I feel the program
represents a strong value for both groups. Please let me know if you
have any other questions. BTW, you are free to forward this note to
other interested parties.

Lastly, regarding our Submerged Manual it will be released later this
year along with the Recreational Level 1 program. During our
conference in Florida we plan to release the program as well as these
materials.

Best,

Jarrod Jablonski

 

[Thalassamania]

Thanks James. So now it appears to be not much, an entry level class with a few extra dives and some NITROX material tossed into the mix. I hope that's not the case, but,

"reduce the required performance in areas such as buoyancy and trim as well as reduce the need for enhanced problem resolution (stress drills etc). A range of other performance requirements are also relevant though this hits the high points. Therefore, recreational divers do not require the refined skills ..."

causes me grave concern ... only time will tell. I'll wait and hope for the best.

 

[MaxBottomtime]

"reduce the required performance in areas such as buoyancy and trim as well as reduce the need for enhanced problem resolution (stress drills etc). A range of other performance requirements are also relevant though this hits the high points. Therefore, recreational divers do not require the refined skills ..."

causes me grave concern ... only time will tell. I'll wait and hope for the best.

I guess they're going for Doing It (almost) Right.

 

[deco_martini]

I guess they're going for Doing It (almost) Right.

Doing It (R)ecreationally

 

[robzr]

In true GUE fashion they are thinking outside the box. Putting a lot of time, pride, thought and and effort into engineering what will hopefully be a unique and quality product, with no real competition. Reminds me of Apple, ahead of their time...

Rob

 

[rainman_02]

Now, the waters get even muddier:

"We were thinking 35% because it is the 120' deco gas...but settled on 32% because it is close...but the course standards allow deco on either 35% or 32%..."

Um, last time I checked, the 120' deco gas was 35/25.



The biggest problem I have with this class is the bastardized deco gas. I understand "training" for deco...i.e. what happens now with a T1 provisional where you get to practice without loading the gun (32% switch at 70')...to come back and pass T1. I do not understand making up a new deco gas to teach people to "recreationally" enter deco...when all your other teachings are based on standardized gas etc.

 

[TSandM]

Thal, you have to understand that, when GUE says "lower the standards" for buoyancy and trim, they're talking about not requiring people to do the skills in midwater in a 3' window, and not maintaining 20 degrees of trim ALL THE TIME. I'm quite sure GUE isn't going to graduate anybody who is diving at a 45 degree angle, or yo-yoing significantly.

From my experience with GUE classes, 4 days of OW diving is probably 12 to 16 dives. You can get a lot done in that much diving.

 

[MonkSeal]

It's amazing how long discussion has developed around something that hasn't been published yet (and it won't be published before GUE conference I guess). And IMHO it has very low impact on people included in this discussion.

 

[Thalassamania]

Thal, you have to understand that, when GUE says "lower the standards" for buoyancy and trim, they're talking about not requiring people to do the skills in midwater in a 3' window, and not maintaining 20 degrees of trim ALL THE TIME. I'm quite sure GUE isn't going to graduate anybody who is diving at a 45 degree angle, or yo-yoing significantly.

From my experience with GUE classes, 4 days of OW diving is probably 12 to 16 dives. You can get a lot done in that much diving.

If it's 12 to 16 dives it could be a good program. Still a little short on academics though. But that's the easiest thing to backfill.