Is the Deep cert really necessary?
- Thread starter theminidiver
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Just for clarification, the PADI Tec 40 class does not allow the diver to go beyond recreational limits for depth; it instead allows the diver to stay at that depth beyond recreational limits and accelerate decompression using EANx 50 as a decompression gas. For the life of me, I don't understand why a certification like that isn't more popular. Where I spend the winter in Florida, there are a number of wrecks that are not visited by dive operators because although they are within recreational depth limits, they are deep enough that most divers don't think the short NDLs make the dive worth it. A lot of people would love to have more time diving between the 100-130 foot range.
That program was recently revised, just after I retired. Scuba journalist Michael Menduno, who invented the phrase "technical diving," reviewed it here.
Momma said nothing good happens after midnight. You could add that nothing good happens below 100'. Is the cert itself necessary? Not for at least 99% of the recreational dives that are done. Is it useful to do a few supervised training dives in the 100-130 feet range? Sure, especially if you are interested in some of the deeper wreck dives in the Keys and elsewhere.
I can only speak to my personal experience taking the PADI Deep course. If I have gotten anything out of the discussions here about people's individual experiences with their courses it is that people have reported surprisingly (to me) different experiences with what is supposed to be the same course.
What I felt my PADI Deep course left me with was something like: "Diving below about 100 feet is fraught with peril and you should think carefully before doing it, but if you do decide to do it then here are some things to consider." I felt I was essentially being discouraged from diving "deep." I did not feel the course armed me with the tools and skills I would need to confidently plan and execute dives in the 100-130 ft range with a margin of safety (and perhaps that is not the goal of the course). As I recall it, when the instructor mentioned something that at first I thought might be the introduction to a practical tool or skill, it was followed by a mention of some countervailing factor that left me feeling discouraged or less than confident about employing it to mitigate the risk. I believe courses that actually arm a diver with the tools and skills needed to safely and confidently plan and execute dives in the 100-130 ft range do exist, and they are generally labeled tech diving courses.
I try to avoid diving below 100 feet or so, and my decision is mostly based on knowledge and impressions I have gathered over the years following that PADI Deep course. Too much potential for narcosis (especially with the effects of increased gas density), and not enough bottom time within recreational dive planning limits to make it worth the risk.
What I felt my PADI Deep course left me with was something like: "Diving below about 100 feet is fraught with peril and you should think carefully before doing it, but if you do decide to do it then here are some things to consider." I felt I was essentially being discouraged from diving "deep." I did not feel the course armed me with the tools and skills I would need to confidently plan and execute dives in the 100-130 ft range with a margin of safety (and perhaps that is not the goal of the course). As I recall it, when the instructor mentioned something that at first I thought might be the introduction to a practical tool or skill, it was followed by a mention of some countervailing factor that left me feeling discouraged or less than confident about employing it to mitigate the risk. I believe courses that actually arm a diver with the tools and skills needed to safely and confidently plan and execute dives in the 100-130 ft range do exist, and they are generally labeled tech diving courses.
I try to avoid diving below 100 feet or so, and my decision is mostly based on knowledge and impressions I have gathered over the years following that PADI Deep course. Too much potential for narcosis (especially with the effects of increased gas density), and not enough bottom time within recreational dive planning limits to make it worth the risk.
Blackcrusader
Contributor
Well even more fun is to tell them that BSAC Dive Leader in 1986 was deco on air to 50m lol Then I tell them of a dive in South Lombok you dive in whirly knarly currents to 50m to see hammerheads at a cleaning station, and do some light back gas deco on a single AL80.
You end up a far far away in 3m swells where the boat captain will come pick you up. But even on the shallow dives strong down currents can rip you into reef walls.
Blackcrusader
Contributor
Blackcrusader
Contributor
heftysmurf
Contributor
If there's one thing I've seen repeated on SB in my short tenure, it's the "a course is only as good as its instructor" and I'm grateful for mine!
My SDI deep certification was great in my opinion and was exactly this: How to safely plan and execute the dive. We did a double dip on the Spiegel Grove and I was taught the importance of gas selection for the dive, the MOD for each dive, the NDL time at each, etc. I thought it was fantastic but then again, I dig the instructor. We tickled 135' the first dive for only a couple of minutes to try to experience narcosis (which I did) and the rest was in the 100' range.
As good of a class as it was, I share your thoughts in that I keep my dives 100' or shallower for the most part.
Similar threads
