How old were you when you became a "Tec" diver

[raybo]

AquaTec once bubbled...
other than the liability issues it should not be about age at all but more about the number and type of dives you have been doing....

back to the topic......there are a lot of divers out there now who are jumping into tech diving with as few as a 100 dives under their belt. are they ready.

I was just on an expedition where a very experienced recreation diver who just jumped into tech and flew threw the courses rapidly, died....you need to wonder that if he took the tech diving in smaller steps would he still be alive

To me, "Tec" has as much to do with a comprhensive understandng of the ramifications of the endeavor rather than just how deep, or where you go, etc.

Having a respect gleaned form a thorough understsanding of the physiological consequences of your actions as a diver.

Although I left the sport for several years, I was originally trained with a very thorough & comprehensive understanding of the physiology of diving (to the extent it was known back then, i.e., O2 PP of 2.0 was considered OK!), and I have a very healthy respect for the fact that it can kill me at about any time. Hence, I pay attention to what I'm doing.

Now, in my mid 40's, I'm financially at a point I'd like to advance to deco, and maybe trimix,and wreck & cave.

I've personally progressed to the point that I want to exceed the "agency" limits. Will I ever dive the Andre Doria? Doubt it. But I'll go over that line from recreational to "Tec" at my own pace, and with my own personal limits.

Because I have a reasonable understanding of what's going on!

20 years ago, if I'd have lived on a coast, I wonder if I'd have been a statistic or now a ancient "tec" diver. I think the latter, becuase I was trained to be adventurous, but realisticly conservative.

There are a lot of members on this board that have posted to the difference of being trained 20-25 years ago & today. Back then, the course would be about to the GUE Tech 1, or IANTD &/or TDI Nitrox & Deco course. They weren't easy!

My perception is that's a bit of of an ongoing point of debate. Back then, by today's standard, it would have all been "Tec" diving.

Just my humble opinion!

 

[caverkevin]

Well first you have really define what tech diving really is. I know that some of the deep, mixed gas, overhead envir. diving I do are less taxing then some of my 65 foot single tank dives. For me tech has been a natural progression. Two day after my 13th birthday I was doing my check out dives in low vis and 50 degree water. My 6th after open water was to a depth of 111 feet. That was less than 40 degree water temp and zero vis. I was solo diving at age 14. I was wreck diving at 13 years of age. After age 19 I learn to dive nitrox, rebreather, caves, and mixed gas.

These days I am 27 years old. I have been diving for more than half my life. I have lived out of vans that are worth less than the scooters that I could not afford.

When it comes right down to it. Age is not much of a factor. Having the smarts and strength to cope and perform is what counts. Even if that person is under the age of 18.

Kevin

 

[DA Aquamaster]

I have to agree that a lot of older divers who took an OW or AOW course 20-25 yrs ago were trained to a higher standard than they are now. There was a lot more theory involved and the courses were more demanding. Two of my Open Water checkout dives were done in a 5 kt current, something that would not happen today due to a lower standard of physical conditioning perceived to be needed to dive. There were numerous dives invovled in my AOW course, and one of my AOW check dives was a deco dive to 130 ft. in cold water and 10 ft visibility.

I'd also have to say that the attitude conveyed was that an AOW cert. was a license to learn and that this was a double edged sword. It encouraged people to build their skills through progressive experience but also cautioned them to be very aware of ther own limitations and know when to hold back. But I think it was common for a good number of divers to move on to overhead types of diving without more formal training. Additional skills and techniques were picked up from more experienced divers and a sort of natural progression developed. The dumb ones or imature ones who pushed this process to fast often got hurt. Sort of "live and learn, if you lived".

I feel that there is merit in having experience with progressively more challenging dives and to that extent I agree that a 100 rec dives with no challenge or progession means very little in terms o qualifying a person for more demanding technical diving.

However, in my opinion having what amounts to all training and no real world experience is not any better. Good judgement comes from experieince. And much like pilot in command flight experience, there is a lot to be said for having a hundred hours or so of just being there and doing it without the oversight and saftey net of an instructor.

In a similar vein, and perhaps on a cautionary note, I did REALLY stupid things with an airplane after I learned to fly at 16 and was lucky to live long enough to learn what I was doing was really stupid. An ounce less talent, ability, or bold faced luck and I would have probably died in a rolled up flaming ball of steel tube and fabric. I remember some of the things I did then in a plane and my knees still get weak. I would not under any circumstances train a 16 to 18 yr old kid who, like I did (and like they all do), thinks he was invincible to become a tec diver. It isn't just good training or sufficient experience that makes a tec diver safe, it is the proper attitude, and often that only comes with a little age and maturity. Sometimes it never comes at all.

 

[blackice]

scubadude_eric once bubbled...
I think that the 18 year old age limit set by lots of agencies to young for most 18 year olds. I think 20-21 would be the reight age. What do you guys think.

I tend to agree that for extended range and tech diving - maturity is a very important factor when it comes to diving that is beyond recreational diving.

=-)

 

[jroy017]

I dont think its a quaestion of age. I think the mindframe you are in is more the question. I a divemaster and am finishing my instructor course. We've certified over many rec divers that are adults even mature adults if you wish, who allthough they know their standards and safety rules just plain disregard them by choice.
An example is last week-end in a quarry (Quebec) the instrucor from another club decided to solo-dive 100+ft after all his students had left the site without the proper equipment(no backup) and while we were hearing thunder. This guy was crazy...

I'm 23 have alot of experience diving(rec) and am starting to look at tech diving . So I dont think age is relevant but seriousness, comitment and training, however you can have all the training in the world but the only question is what do you choose to do with your training.

 

[-boltfish]

You can become a tek diver aged 15 with PADI: I plan to do my Enriched Air Diver Course this year.

 

[djkeeler98]

bridgenet once bubbled...
I'm one of those diver's jumping into technical diving which many would call "too soon". So question is when is right? From my perspective I've maxed out all the Padi courses to where I crave more training, hence technical, and problem with being an Engineer. Is there magic in 100 dives? There is a big difference between someone who has done 100 dives at 40 feet and another, like myself (< 100), who has done challenging dives, wreck, cave, currents, deep... As I convinced my instructor, what good does it do for someone to just "do" recreational dives to make a magic number.


I really agree with the above post - I've been diving just under a year and have logged around 80 dives - all in Guam and Palau. I just finished TDI advanced Nitrox and Deco procedures. I was "forced" to use TDI because of the dive limits. Where is the magic in the 100 dives DSAT and NAUI use for their tec courses? I took the TDI courses because there was nothing more to do with PADI and wanted to learn more. (However, I found the DSAT book much more useful than the TDI workbooks)

I also agree that the PADI rec courses have been "dumbed down" for mass consumption. I learned more in the TDI courses than I did in all the PADI courses through Master Diver. I used the same instructior for almost all the courses and he could finally "get down to business" in the TDI class.

I think its really up to the instructor - if he knows you and has dived with for awhile he should be able to judge your maturity/skill. Although 18 is probably a good minimum for liability purposes.

 

[divermasterB]

djkeeler98 once bubbled...
I used the same instructior for almost all the courses and he could finally "get down to business" in the TDI class.

I think its really up to the instructor - if he knows you and has dived with for awhile he should be able to judge your maturity/skill. Although 18 is probably a good minimum for liability purposes. [/B]

That is the problem with PADI. PADI is very strict about a curriculum and doesn't allow the instructor to deviate any from their course outlines. Note, I am not referring to their standards, there should never be deviation from the minimum standards.

I am a YMCA instructor. YMCA standards are one of the most comprehensive in the Industry (right up there with NAUI). The important distinction is that the YMCA allows me the freedom to add to my course. For instance I can put more emphasis and time on buddy skills, or talking about physiology etc. By doing this I can take a group of good divers and really challenge them. They don't get bored and they ultimately wind up being better divers.

I believe that PADI is so strict on their curriculum because of the sales of training materials. As a Y instructor I am free to choose the best materials for my class. In fact we are using the NAUI training packet for our program. The program we teach now covers all Y, NAUI and PADI (tough stretch) standards.

 

[BradfordNC]

did anyone else have to walk 20 miles uphill (both ways) in a snowstorm to get to school?

 

[etype]

As a semi-retired commercial diver, i was interested in doing a charter/ diveshop... and looked into Padi dive instructor certification. PADI graciously grandfathered me into divemaster, i went EANX and trimix diver/blender for IANTD technical certification. This was just for the purpose of acting as a sport level divemaster, later a instructor, i already had ADC/DCBC gas cards for scuba and supplied, so i was going to finish up some requirements, learn the class spiels, and write the tests .

So my local IANTD shops asked me if i would master some instruction dive charters for eanx diver courses. I enjoy diving so i said sure. What an eye opener....almost every other dive we had someone narcing out...one dive was spectacular. We had a diver who was earlier trained in the US naval reserves (and apparently lost their edge ) narc out and do a spectacular backflip (about 50 meters sw) off a radar deck of a sunken artificial reef and almost dissapear forever, but it was a beautiful sight, we found them before they dropped the reg. This person already had eanx and was doing advanced. The person mentioned was learjetted at 2000 ft to the nearest hyperbaric chamber, it was a very,very close call.
The requirements of AOW and whatever no. of dives is not enough imho. Breathing eanx is supposed to alleviate susceptability to narcosis. But i saw it again, and again, one misstep and potential casualities or deaths.

I decided i could live without this. Depth diving is too rigorous for the majority of people...and how do you tell who untill you get them at depth and they fade out?

I can just imagine PADI method trained instructors teaching technical diving in the near future...PADI releasing these bland statistics to explain away the rising number of deaths.... “it’s not more dangerous than a drive around the block (wearing jordans in downtown detroit after midnight is not mentioned) join and you can be diving deep wrecks next week.”

I think,to start, divers who wish to advance to technical certification should be required to take the commercial level divers physical exam...which is more expensive than most of the courses put together. But i think this is a must, it’s ridiculous something like this is not mandatory. I feel strongly about it...what i saw was crazy...i wouldn’t teach the courses with the requirements as they are today. Also imho a technical diver is by definition an athlete...a technical diver must be in the absolute best possible shape and endurance level...far above rec divers.

It’s not possible, but it would be ideal if students spent time in a hyperbaric chamber and were tested thorougly for their physio and psychological endurance at extreme pressure durations and under low temperature conditions, and tested for their mental level and ability to work out problems under bariometric pressure. If thats not possible, they should be taken to 50 meters and given various tasks and tests...a few times over the period of a course. The tests i saw were bullsh*t.

In commercial or military diving, they are required to have a chamber on site...and it’s used constantly (not just for sat). Sport diving doesn’t. Once you start doing advanced technical diving...you are really taking your life in your hands...it’s no cakewalk. I don’t care that much about age...it’s the level of skill and experience.....I think the requirements as they stand today are a joke. I don’t trust the discretion of paid instructors on something as complex as diver physiology.

If you take 10 healthy people of the street and test them, it would be my guess that 5 to 7 of them, with training would not be suitable ‘physically’ to undergo deep technical dives. In commercial diving, there’s a level of realism that allows the other 5 or so to figure this out on their own. Paid sport diving instructors i donot think convey that realism.

Personally i don’t really enjoy technical diving. On my own time i’m a recreational diver. I’ve have enough challenges. I have some very fixed observations on the levels of personal danger involved that do not accord with any statistics released by sport diving organizations. I find the commercial and military statistics and outlook on technical diving to be far more realistic. People who want to face those challenges should be able to do that. This is my opinion, but i would find it hard to believe there are enough teen aged divers with the necessary skills and experience to fill out many diving classes for advanced technical diving. Maybe there is...but first of all i think the industry is foolish to not institute divers physicals on the same level as the commercial/military level...and possibly requiring the military level of general physical fitness, endurance and training.

For those of you who have actually done advanced technical...i would be surprised if you disagreed with me and would like to hear why. My experience tells me this is one of the most dangerous things a trained but under conditioned person could do...far more dangerous than flying a plane...no comparison, and i think the sport training courses as i have seen them are in no way complete enough to garauntee safety. They leave it up to the diver. To begin with, the physiological aspect...i’ve regularly seen commercial and military divers who have been off physical training for a few months not be able to tie a simple granny knot at 40 metres. Even if you are absolutely confident in your ability... have you not seen what i just mentioned above? On the boat, a trained diver is ready, arrogant, macho...but at 70 metres, it doesn’t count for squat.
I would suggest to anyone about to do technical certification...hit the gym and the track and see your doctor for a most thorough examination you can get, if you value your life. You want to be in absolute top physical condition. Frankly, there is a certain point and position where your buddy and your b/up tanks and your computer are not going to help you....when your fading out and your not even conscious of it. When your in the middle of a penetration dive at depth...your mind, is system one, that goes, your dead. And there is nothing you can do underwater about it. It slips away just like *that*. Various rescue techniques with your buddies and backup systems help...but in actual practice they are surprisingly ineffective at bringing back functional humans.
So, my two bits is , anyone attempting technical penetration or deep diving, who is not planning to be a complete and thorough athlete, meaning working out and being in absolute top physical and aerobic condition, and does not have their body completely gone over for any potential weaknesses, who doesn’t thoroughly, over many dives at depth, check their conciousness and ability to think under bariometric pressure...is playing russian roulette. You might as well just get a pistol and stay on the boat and have a few beers.
Just my humble opinion. But i don’t think there are many teenagers with the experience to do advanced technical dives. If they have the experience, sure. But i don’t think the sports diving organization is realistic about what it takes to be a technical diver. I hope this doesn’t sound negative. I just want to share with you some of my observations.