Is the Deep cert really necessary?

[davecampbell]

Who would need something like this for recreational diving? Couldn't they use a steel 100. 117, 120 or 133 rather than going to doubles? Sorry, I don't get it. What kind of rec dive are you going to do? What is your gas consumption?

my wife and I dive doubles (hp100s) recreationally because our local diving is deepish, and quite cold. It's not about gas consumption, it's about free flows, redundancy, etc...

 

[Blackcrusader]

Who would need something like this for recreational diving? Couldn't they use a steel 100. 117, 120 or 133 rather than going to doubles? Sorry, I don't get it. What kind of rec dive are you going to do? What is your gas consumption?

Let along how many operators are going to have twinsets for divers. Are the guides now going to be kitted out with twinsets?
Very few ops offer anything other an an AL80. I know some that have AL100 and AL120 but very few. Also many dive ops have a 1 hour limit on dives. Many let you dive to whatever dive time you can do.

Back too the deep certificate is it necessary. No. Just go diving with more experienced divers and do more dives to a deeper depth.

 

[divezonescuba]

Who would need something like this for recreational diving? Couldn't they use a steel 100. 117, 120 or 133 rather than going to doubles? Sorry, I don't get it. What kind of rec dive are you going to do? What is your gas consumption?

Some people don't like diving with a single large HP steel tank due to balance issues. You can't always get a large HP steel tank at many diving destinations. Some like the convenience of not having to disassemble and reassemble the gear between dives. There is the redundancy issue already mentioned. So many reasons not even addressing the gas consumption issue.

On the consumption issue, if a diver uses x32 then the NDL is greatly extended. For many divers, who use a single tank, the limiting factor is gas volume not NDL with x32. For those divers, the limiting factor then becomes NDL not gas volume with x32.

And then there are just some large or big divers who like their gas. I don't hold it against anyone who just needs or wants more gas.

 

[Alekseolsen]

DAN insurance covers recreational divers to 50m I believe, not to your certification card.

Hmm, My Dan sport silver states "Diving activities covered: All diving including technical diving.

I sure as hell would be beyond furious if the ever suggested 50 meter would be a limit.

 

[Blackcrusader]

Hmm, My Dan sport silver states "Diving activities covered: All diving including technical diving.

I sure as hell would be beyond furious if the ever suggested 50 meter would be a limit.

Yup I erred, 40m for basic coverage no depth limit higher plans. I have the highest plan.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

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.

I, too, don't understand people not taking something like that more. It just makes more sense for people who dive spots where the max depth is approaching rec limits.
We used to dive a lake in WVa that went to 130 ft. And it could be as warm as 83 degrees on the bottom because of the power plant that discharged into the lake. There's not a lot to see, but there's some interesting topography and things left over from when the lake was created.
But at those depths, you were limited to a few minutes. After I got my initial tech training, I did a number of dives there practicing that was in the 110-120 range but spent a half-hour plus on the bottom and some 50-100% O2 deco for the ascent.
When I started teaching AN/DP, I stressed that it was not just for dives beyond 130 ft. For a photographer in someplace like Bonaire or Cayman being able to spend 45 minutes at 90-100 ft safely by being able to use a deco gas? That could be magic.
I personally think that the reason it's not more popular is a failure to communicate that deco is not just for "tech" depths.
Maybe that goes back to the prejudice that, to some extent, may still exist in some older rec instructors'/CDs minds that "sport diving," as the YMCA referred to it, should not take place beyond 130 ft.
My own PADI instructor was dead set against me doing anything tech-related, but he didn't teach it or sell tech-related gear in his shop.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

Who would need something like this for recreational diving? Couldn't they use a steel 100. 117, 120 or 133 rather than going to doubles? Sorry, I don't get it. What kind of rec dive are you going to do? What is your gas consumption?

I didn't want to mess with 119s, 120s, etc. I had two sets of LP72s (baby doubles) that were much more user friendly and easier for me to manage. And since I filled them myself they had a lot more gas than a 119. filled to 2800 PSI was over 160 cu ft of gas. No swapping cylinders for the second dive, redundancy, and if necessary enough gas if deco was on the table.

 

[tursiops]

I, too, don't understand people not taking something like that more. It just makes more sense for people who dive spots where the max depth is approaching rec limits.
We used to dive a lake in WVa that went to 130 ft. And it could be as warm as 83 degrees on the bottom because of the power plant that discharged into the lake. There's not a lot to see, but there's some interesting topography and things left over from when the lake was created.
But at those depths, you were limited to a few minutes. After I got my initial tech training, I did a number of dives there practicing that was in the 110-120 range but spent a half-hour plus on the bottom and some 50-100% O2 deco for the ascent.
When I started teaching AN/DP, I stressed that it was not just for dives beyond 130 ft. For a photographer in someplace like Bonaire or Cayman being able to spend 45 minutes at 90-100 ft safely by being able to use a deco gas? That could be magic.
I personally think that the reason it's not more popular is a failure to communicate that deco is not just for "tech" depths.
Maybe that goes back to the prejudice that, to some extent, may still exist in some older rec instructors'/CDs minds that "sport diving," as the YMCA referred to it, should not take place beyond 130 ft.
My own PADI instructor was dead set against me doing anything tech-related, but he didn't teach it or sell tech-related gear in his shop.

I used to dive Mt Storm a lot too. Neat place. Miss it. Damn boaters.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

I used to dive Mt Storm a lot too. Neat place. Miss it. Damn boaters.

It wasn't actually the boaters that got it shut down. It was the local swimmers and DNR. There were confrontations between locals and boaters because the swimmers ignored the no swimming from the docks signs.
Those confrontations drew in DNR. There was a DNR officer who had a hard-on for divers anyway. Why? Never got a good reason. Rather than making a swimming area, which could have been done easily over in that cove next to the dam, DNR came in and said no in-water access except by boat.
We got around that for a while by launching a boat and tying it up to the shore at the old scuba access stairs but not enough people were doing that.
Fishermen were also spending more time in the diving area because there were no divers and all the lines and features got fouled with hooks.
They also reduced output from the plant which resulted in less movement and vis went to hell quick.
It was a chain of events that had it been properly managed could have resulted in a very nice recreation area.
Instead, kneejerk decisions and a lack of interest in supporting the local population killed over 50% of the recreational opportunities. The economy in that area is depressed. Locals are generally not able to just put in a pool in the backyard. The community doesn't have the resources.
A bulldozer and a few truckloads of river gravel and sand could have made a nice beach on a sheltered cove for the locals. The scuba area could have stayed where it was. Boats would have had their docks.
Plenty of parking.
Instead, it was a$$holes making moves that only benefitted one group: mostly out-of-area boaters and fishermen on boats.

 

[BabyLitigator]

I, too, don't understand people not taking something like that more. It just makes more sense for people who dive spots where the max depth is approaching rec limits.
We used to dive a lake in WVa that went to 130 ft. And it could be as warm as 83 degrees on the bottom because of the power plant that discharged into the lake. There's not a lot to see, but there's some interesting topography and things left over from when the lake was created.
But at those depths, you were limited to a few minutes. After I got my initial tech training, I did a number of dives there practicing that was in the 110-120 range but spent a half-hour plus on the bottom and some 50-100% O2 deco for the ascent.
When I started teaching AN/DP, I stressed that it was not just for dives beyond 130 ft. For a photographer in someplace like Bonaire or Cayman being able to spend 45 minutes at 90-100 ft safely by being able to use a deco gas? That could be magic.
I personally think that the reason it's not more popular is a failure to communicate that deco is not just for "tech" depths.
Maybe that goes back to the prejudice that, to some extent, may still exist in some older rec instructors'/CDs minds that "sport diving," as the YMCA referred to it, should not take place beyond 130 ft.
My own PADI instructor was dead set against me doing anything tech-related, but he didn't teach it or sell tech-related gear in his shop.

There is the cost issue. I did Deep and am in the process of doing Tec40/45/50 + trimix with my LDS. The cost of Deep was the cost of the training and the boat ticket to Catalina (had my own recreational gear). The cost of Tec was a lot of $$$ gear (plus the training, which was a lot more $$$ than Deep).

Tec40 was technically offered as a standalone, but our team of 4 is doing all 3 plus trimix, and I understand there is another team that will do the same with the LDS this winter. The other Tec shops in LA are (I understand) GUE. Get the sense my local LDS is part of PADI's new push into Tec, but they certainly aren't pushing "just do Tec40 so you can be more chill about the NDL" (think a good chunk of my team is planning on going for Cave next year, and one of my teammates has used crazy words like "Andrea Dorea").

But god the tec class is fun (if hard).