Recreational Limits, confusing or is it just me?

[NAM001]

Yes BOB it would be easy. My IANTD card does put a depth on it. I was digging on the web to find out ore on this topic. I assume we are both coming from the same thread. I did find a place hat said PADI says OW recommended max depth of 60' and then in thier course descriptions there is a PADI deep course that covers 60-100 ft or to 130 depending on the agincy. I found another spot in PADI sites that describes OW training as training for diving with in the recreational limits. Both 60 or 130 ' is that. I would guess that we all agree that rec limits are 130' but there is an agency that calls it 150 or 160'. the depth appears to be drivin by the gas being dived and that recreational diving uses air. Another area i saw related to PADI (Ithink) deep training which taught skills to deal with narcosis related depths. Generally .100' but padi considered >60 a deep dive. One could make the case that Ow ias good for 60 ft and deep training is needed to go beyond but that could be a stretch towards getting a desired end.

Keith

Out in the weeds of another thread I found a discussion of the limits of various certifications and thought it would be interesting to start at that point and see where it goes.

It is my understanding that OW certification allows you to dive within recreational limits (130'), however PADI and others recommend your limit to 60', also it sounded like there was a recommended depth limit for training classes as well. In addition, recreational training agencies “recommend diving within your experience and training” which would mean to me that if you are trained in 30’ of water, then that should be your recommended limit rather than 60’.

Some Dive operations will enforce the recommended limits and others will let you plan your own dive within recreational limits under "my boat my rules" policies. So sorting this all out should be interesting.

What are the differences between recreational limits, recommended depth and recommended depth for training of OW, AOW, and Deep? Toss in a why if you like.

Wouldn't it be quite easy to stamp the depth limit on the card to stop any confusion?




Bob
--------------------------------------
“I am always ready to learn although I do not always like being taught.”
― Winston Churchill

Trained when J-valves solved the OOA problem.

 

[chillyinCanada]

I'm not confused and i never hsve been . . Until now. Now I'm confused as to why anyone is confused.

 

[Rhone Man]

I hanker for the old days when people used their intelligence to make informed decisions about whether it is safe to do a dive (of which depth was but a single component) rather than looking for a set of rigid rules to tell them the answer.

I was in Cayman in February and went out with the hotel dive op several times. One particular day there were just five people on the boat: the two DMs, me, my 12 year old son and a 15 year old girl. The DM had been diving with me most of the week and knew I was an experienced diver, but the two kids clearly were not. The DM leading the first dive says: it is a beautiful day, perfect conditions - would you like to try a deep dive off the wall? I say nothing. Predictably my son wants to do it. The girl seems very comfortable with it. So we all agree yes. We go out to the wall, go down to 108' on my computer, go along working our way shallower. And the dive was enjoyable and passed incident free. All the adults were very conscious of the kids and the need to keep an eye on them. But ultimately it was a low risk dive that was executed perfectly despite being close to double the depth limit for the kids.

 

[Redshift]

Recreational limits are 130, but there are several levels within recreational certifications. Why does the first cert already give the maximum limit? Should it? Does it make sense?
And where there may not be scuba police, there is in fact a restriction for divers (at least in most places I've been), which is enforced by the dive centers. They'll have dive spots for OW, AOW, etc or those with Deep Specialty. Why then?

And no, it's not an extra feet which is going to kill anyone, as boulderjohn was trying to use as his example. It's the less than 60 feet to 130 feet difference which appears to be ok.
In my view it's not ok straight of the course. Such as it's not ok in some situations to even be completely autonomous. They haven't learned navigation, to send an SMB, any rescue skills (and although there are procedures to use in OW dives, doing them from 130 feet will be a lot different), etc. In many sites those are necessary skills where an OW diver without further training and experience should not do with another diver of the same level.

So isn't there a sentence of the type "This certifies a diver to conduct dives in open water, with air, to a depth of x feet"?
Most tec certs state particular limits. In recreation diving it's getting worse and worse. The information is very hidden, standards, what is taught, what divers are certified for...

 

[FinnMom]

Actually, those limits that some people say are only recommendations and can be forgotten after the courses (although in practice dive centres usually enforce such limits, and of course people are free to do what they want, so that can't be used as an argument) are law in Europe.

That not a law, that's a quote from some certification agencies standards. There may be some such laws in France (according to other threads I've read) but I have no idea how or if they are enforced. Here in Finland the Divers' Federation has guidelines, but these too are just guidelines and not legally binding. We generally follow them to the letter (and fill out all the proper forms too) only when conducting an official activity of the Divers' Federation, such as a class or class-related OW dive.

Generally speaking there are no scuba police in Europe either. Frequently (obvously not always) we are diving as groups of friends on privately or jointly owned boats, not commercial dive boats so we also do not have any business or boat owners mandating rules either. We dive according to guidelines/recommendations and our own good judgement. If I were to dive from a commercial dive boat in Finland and exceed to agreed max depths I don't believe I could be charged for any criminal offense. As elsewhere, it would mostly just be asine and inconsiderate behavior.

If agency rules were law the PADI agency with which I once dove would have needed to issue us all snorkels before we could get in the water

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I'm not confused and i never hsve been . . Until now. Now I'm confused as to why anyone is confused.

Some folks have a need for rules to define what they can and can't do. Others just seem to have trouble understanding what the word "recommended" means. And some, it seems, don't understand that PADI is just one of several private companies that sell training, and not an enforcement agency ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[FinnMom]

It also seems that some uncertified folks use max depths as an indication of what training package this agency or shop is offering. One shop says they will train me to to go to 16m and the other shop says 18m, therefore the second shop must be offering me more for my money.

 

[Nasser]

In my experience (mostly in the Red Sea), it has been the dive operator that tends to set and enforce the depth limits. This can differ depending on the nature of the operation: Day trip vs. live aboard... tech vs. single tank NDL... and most importantly the dive site and conditions, which can have a considerable influence on what the dive guides/operators feel is prudent.

Example: A recent live aboard I was on the operator required a minimum of 150 dives as the sites where a little deeper with trickier currents... considered more "adventurous diving". This was set as a baseline and then the guides further assessed the divers and created two groups where the divers who were a little less experienced or more comfortable diving conservatively would dive in one group, and the more "adventurous" and experienced would dive in another group - this was generally a choice made by the divers, except in one case where a diver - having the minimum dives required for the trip, still did not have the necessary skill or sound judgment (gas management, buoyancy control etc..) to do the more challenging profiles and was asked to dive more conservatively with the other group.

Keeping in mind that the above was on a trip to very remote areas with no access to a re-compression chamber close by... and we had to sign a waiver acknowledging this specific fact and accepting the risks involved. This was for recreational single tank sport diving. Most of the divers on board were very experienced and were treated as such.

With respect to C-cards... I tent to just take my highest certification level card regardless of what kind of diving it is - which in my case is a technical cert and the card has the qualifications and depth limit (recommendations) printed on it. This is usually sufficient along with a logbook to give the operators an idea of where you're coming from.. but regardless, they will generally set the limits they feel are prudent to follow... based on the various factors I mentioned above.

 

[boulderjohn]

I hanker for the old days when people used their intelligence to make informed decisions about whether it is safe to do a dive (of which depth was but a single component) rather than looking for a set of rigid rules to tell them the answer.

I was in Cayman in February and went out with the hotel dive op several times. One particular day there were just five people on the boat: the two DMs, me, my 12 year old son and a 15 year old girl. The DM had been diving with me most of the week and knew I was an experienced diver, but the two kids clearly were not. The DM leading the first dive says: it is a beautiful day, perfect conditions - would you like to try a deep dive off the wall? I say nothing. Predictably my son wants to do it. The girl seems very comfortable with it. So we all agree yes. We go out to the wall, go down to 108' on my computer, go along working our way shallower. And the dive was enjoyable and passed incident free. All the adults were very conscious of the kids and the need to keep an eye on them. But ultimately it was a low risk dive that was executed perfectly despite being close to double the depth limit for the kids.

So in this case one of the divers (the 12 year old) did indeed have a card with a depth limit on it, and it was ignored.

BTW, one concern with sending young divers deep has nothing to do with the safety of the dive but the concern (admittedly unproven) on the effects of pressure on growing bodies, bones in particular.

 

[drbill]

My "OW" certification from Los Angeles County back in the 1960s allowed me to dive to 130 fsw. However, that OW course was an intensive one and included most of what is in today's AOW and Rescue, including a deep dive. Given training today, I think the recommended initial depth limit of 60 fsw makes a lot of sense. However, who the heck is going to police this? Darwin?