Frankly, TDI has internally tried to nix it more than once and a very small group of vocal instructors have thrown a “we can’t get helium and deep air is fine” fit.not only condone it, but actively market it as a class.
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
Frankly, TDI has internally tried to nix it more than once and a very small group of vocal instructors have thrown a “we can’t get helium and deep air is fine” fit.not only condone it, but actively market it as a class.
Some of the earliest responses asked the critical question--who is doing the requiring? A dive operator running a dive? A dive insurance company?The wording is a bit inclear, would that include/cover a dive without helium below 45m? Or would such a dive necessarily require the extended range certification because there's no helium?
So you are saying that the training agency and its QA, Scientific Board, and BOD has allowed a course they deem inappropriate in the current era to remain because a “small” group of instructors insists it’s safe? That’s a pretty damning statement for the training agency.Frankly, TDI has internally tried to nix it more than once and a very small group of vocal instructors have thrown a “we can’t get helium and deep air is fine” fit.
But the purpose of the course is to allow you dive without supervision. Does that justify the course?So you are saying that the training agency and its QA, Scientific Board, and BOD has allowed a course they deem inappropriate in the current era to remain because a “small” group of instructors insists it’s safe? That’s a pretty damning statement for the training agency.
The more likely reason it remains in my mind is that folks are diving deep air anyway, and they won’t stop anytime soon with the current helium prices…so maybe a course where they can be exposed to that level of narcosis under supervision is the right thing to do.
Well aren't ALL courses conducted with that goal in mind?But the purpose of the course is to allow you dive without supervision. Does that justify the course?
That the purpose of all courses. Expose students to new things, then certify them when they have demonstrated competency in those thing iaw X agencies standards.But the purpose of the course is to allow you dive without supervision. Does that justify the course?
My point was not clear, obviously. You said maybe the ER course was OK because you were narced under supervision. I don't see that justifies the course, since the point of the training is for you to dive without that supervision.That the purpose of all courses. Expose students to new things, then certify them when they have demonstrated competency in those thing iaw X agencies standards.
Maybe I was unclear. What I meant to imply is that if people are going to dive deep air anyway, why not have a course that not only exposes them to it under supervision of someone that already has that tshirt, and teach them to manage narcosis? It’s a good opportunity to mentor divers and let them see for themselves that narcosis is highly variable with different conditions, while providing them the insight as to why it may not be the best way to go about things.You said maybe the ER course was OK because you were narced under supervision.
How does that work? Is that not just a hopeful myth, like getting acclimated to high PPO2?teach them to manage narcosis
Not really a myth, it’s more about being able to recognize when you are impaired, and adjusting your depth/dive plan before you are high as a kite and unable to make sound decisions.How does that work? Is that not just a hopeful myth, like getting acclimated to high PPO2?