Looking for a good tech instructor

[lostsheep]

Who was this and what year? You can name names yanno?

Prepare to be high roaded about not naming and shaming

Well okay **** it, Beto Nava and it was about a year ago, might be a bit longer .You want me to go back and search thru messages and emails so I can screen shot it for you too?

I do think it’s low road to name and shame but I’ll humor you and you can take the blame.

 

[suricatasuricata]

I do think it’s low road to name and shame but I’ll humor you and you can take the blame.

With the caveat that people can of course have different value systems, I don't quite see it this way. I think knowing both good sides and bad sides to individuals is valuable in getting a complete picture of who they are.

I have taken multiple classes, some instructors I will never take classes from, some I would have the pleasure to call a friend. I think I am fairly consistent in real life conversations (if not on pseudonymous Scubaboard) in praising what I liked and being candid about what I disliked.

It is a fairly expensive sport, which without hyperbole has some non trivial risk to death. It is helpful for all of us to name and shame or name and praise. And different people have different preferences. What is not my cup of tea might totally fine for you and vice versa.

 

[Nick_Radov]

Update 2:

I have successfully connected with Jason Cook for GUE fundamentals June 6-9.

So we shall see.

Good luck with your course.

- I would like to eventually become a tech diver

- The immediate term goal is to become a proficient air diver with excellent habits

With that in mind, is attempting to enter the course with doubles and trying for a tech pass realistic and or advisable?

(I have never dove doubles, but do have the opportunity to try them on realistically 2-3 dives with local dive team prior to this course)

Thank you for your thoughts.

Felix

GUE recommends that anyone who lacks experience with doubles and intends to take Fundamentals for a tech pass should take the Doubles Primer course first. But if you don't have time to do that before your Fundamentals class starts then the easier option would be to take Fundamentals with a single tank and earn a recreational pass. Then go back and do a Tech Endorsement workshop later. There's no need to rush.

Explore GUE Courses | GUE

www.gue.com

But this is really a question that you should ask your instructor.

 

[Willdiveforhugs]

Thank you, I will absolutely follow my instructor in terms of that.

 

[Lorenzoid]

With that in mind, is attempting to enter the course with doubles and trying for a tech pass realistic and or advisable?

(I have never dove doubles, but do have the opportunity to try them on realistically 2-3 dives with local dive team prior to this course)

In addition to talking with your instructor, take a look through old threads in the DIR/GUE forum here, because this is not an uncommon question.

 

[rjack321]

Update 2:

I have successfully connected with Jason Cook for GUE fundamentals June 6-9.

So we shall see.

- I would like to eventually become a tech diver

- The immediate term goal is to become a proficient air diver with excellent habits

With that in mind, is attempting to enter the course with doubles and trying for a tech pass realistic and or advisable?

(I have never dove doubles, but do have the opportunity to try them on realistically 2-3 dives with local dive team prior to this course)

Thank you for your thoughts.

Felix

Just go to learn. I wouldn't expect to go from single tank diving to "Tech1 ready" in 3 try dives with doubles ahead of time and 8-10 GUE-F class dives.

 

[JohnN]

Sure, here are some references.

https://apps.dan.org/publication-library/

Aquanaut Mailing List Archive Service

Aquanaut's mailing list archives.

aquanaut.com

Accidents, Incidents, & Near Misses

This forum is for the discussion of incidents that are near, on, or under the water that divers can learn from. The main objective is to make us all safer. See the Special Rules. Please post your surprise, indignation, or memorials in the Passings forum. Old name: Old merged forum name(s)...

scubaboard.com

If you're looking for a formal quantitative risk analysis then you're not going to find it. There are too many variables and the source data is limited. But if you spend enough time reading through the archives then the risks associated with deep air become pretty obvious. It's usually not the sole cause of a tech diving incident but often a contributing factor.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that EAD calculation? Nitrox and air are pretty similar in terms of gas density and narcotic effect.

The WOB and hypercapnia concern is more a matter of respiratory physiology than regulator quality. As the gas density increases airway resistance goes up, and then if you really have to exert yourself (like to handle an emergency) you can exceed your ventilatory capacity. Any decent regulator can deliver enough air to keep you alive way deeper than 100 ft. But the ones that are designed to deliver exceptionally high volumes of gas also tend to be more finicky and likely to free flow. Those should be avoided for back gas; save them for stages where free flows are less of a concern.

Great references. So we've gone from decades of incident reports about the dangers of going below 100 ft sans He, to what exactly? I personally don't recall any thing in the SB accidents and incidemts list that would qualify. Perhaps you can enlighten me with something more specific

 

[grantmac]

I dive with Jason regularly and he's excellent.
If you wish to do Tech 1 he can also do that at a later date.

I should say that very few people pass fundies within the scheduled dates, even a Rec pass.

 

[Nick_Radov]

Great references. So we've gone from decades of incident reports about the dangers of going below 100 ft sans He, to what exactly? I personally don't recall any thing in the SB accidents and incidemts list that would qualify. Perhaps you can enlighten me with something more specific

It's not my job to spoon feed you on the basics. The information is out there in the references I provided (plus other more academic sources) if you want to spend the time.

The OP asked about entry-level technical training and has received good guidance. It looks like he's on a positive course now which is great. The bottom line is that there is no valid reason for students to significantly exceed about 100ft equivalent narcotic depth in a training course and any training agency which tolerates deep air on the basis of helium cost or whatever has a poor safety culture. Outside of training if you want to dive deep air yourself then go ahead; no one cares and I'm sure you can find some kind of excuse to rationalize it. Best of luck.

 

[JohnN]

It's not my job to spoon feed you on the basics. The information is out there in the references I provided (plus other more academic sources) if you want to spend the time.

The OP asked about entry-level technical training and has received good guidance. It looks like he's on a positive course now which is great. The bottom line is that there is no valid reason for students to significantly exceed about 100ft equivalent narcotic depth in a training course and any training agency which tolerates deep air on the basis of helium cost or whatever has a poor safety culture. Outside of training if you want to dive deep air yourself then go ahead; no one cares and I'm sure you can find some kind of excuse to rationalize it. Best of luck.

OK. Can you identify a SINGLE skill in Fundies that needs to be performed anywhere near 100 ft (your original rational$

And while you're at it, where did JJ come up with the 100 ft He "rule". Some.dark recesses of his posterior?