Tech through PADI or TDI?

[TrimixToo]

Same shop or different shop?
Asking, because if same shop, how does that work instructor changing?
You know in terms of
"Your training is really great, it's not you, but I do want to try the other guy now"
never sounding that good, no matter how put...

First was with a shop, second was independent. When I started it didn't occur to me that I'd want to go past deco procedures. But it developed that I wanted my trimix and eventually advanced trimix certs, which the first instructor could not train me for. It turned out really well, though, because they are both great instructors and the different points of view and different approaches to underwater drills taught me a lot. Also, the second one didn't care much for the course materials at the time (they are a LOT better now) so he gave me lots of additional reading assignments.

 

[Black Cat]

Thanks for the excellent responses guys. @tbone1004 to answer your question, my long term goals/reason to get into tech is to broaden my horizons, keep learning as much about the different facets of diving as possible, and eventually be able to access some different sites around the world that would otherwise be unaccessible without tech training. Some sites that are on my radar right now that are goals of mine are some wreck sites in the Keys and a deep wall dive in the Caymans. @Dan_P I zeroed in on PADI and TDI simply because out of the few different places that I've researched the possibility of getting the training, the vast majority offered only TDI and some offered a choice between both TDI and PADI.

 

[Diver0001]

In reality, how does one change instructors within a shop (#1 do they have several tech instructors for the same program? #2 stepping on toes and egos of the very people you yet may spend time UW with)?
Or one has to be geographically rather flexible...... or?

In actual fact, I initiate this discussion more often than students do. At the shop where I work we have a number of instructors. Some have skills that I don't. For example, there is one who REALLY likes to work with children.... whereas I am not a fan..... If it clicks then I'm fine but if it doesn't then I'm the first one to say that I think my colleague can do this better than I can....

Frankly, I have no ego in this game. My personal focus is on the quality. if I think my colleague can do a better job then I'm happy to hand off students to him. Likewise, it goes both ways. We occasionally have students who have read about training online and want a very demanding instructor. I can play that role better than my colleagues so those students get sent to me.....

...we all understand... it happens...

Believe it, brother. We're all in the same boat

R..

 

[boulderjohn]

If you want to do Deco dives to 150' PADI requires Adv OW, EANX, Deep, Tec 40 and Tec 45 courses. Lots of bite sized steps.....great for a slow progression to tech.

If you want to do Deco dives to 150' with TDI, it requires Advance Adventure Diver or Advanced and then Deco Procedures. So a jump is made from advanced diver right to Deco, what I consider a "large" amount of skills.

PADI does not require deep diver certification if you have at least 10 dives deeper than 100 feet to begin Tec 40. (That requirement increases for each succeeding course.) TDI does require nitrox. TDI also requires Advanced Nitrox. That means that each has the same number of courses required for the training through that range. However, with PADI you can do decompression dives after Tec 40; with TDI you cannot do it until Decompression Procedures is completed.

 

[RayfromTX]

I was pleased with the results of expressing my needs and dissatisfactions with my OW instructor to the owner of the dive shop who then made his recommendation for the best fit with the instructors he had available. He knew after our discussion that luck of the draw wasn't going to work for me. I then took his recommendation and talked about my needs with the instructor. I got good answers and he seemed happy with where I wanted to go with my training. I then spoke with people here on SB that were familiar with him and got great reviews. The results were an AOW experience that exceeded my best hopes and a friend for the future and a direction for my future training. We went beyond AOW standards and skills in preparation for our continuing educational path. It wasn't always comfortable to pursue a path of demanding I get what I would need to be satisfied but it worked out for all involved. On shore, I was right next to my OW instructor when we did our AOW dives and I think he had little doubt that my AOW instructor was a better fit for where I'm headed. I sensed no tension.

 

[boulderjohn]

Please correct any misinformation that I state, but this is my understanding. The PADI tec deep series is 12 dives. Combined TDI AN/DP is 6 dives, and then one can take trimix.

Now I may be overlooking some important subtleties with depth and such, but with the trimix course, 4 dives, down to 200 feet. That seems to be a lot faster than the PADI roadmap.

You can do the TDI AN/DP courses in only 6 dives if you combine them and mix the standards together. If you are looking for the fastest possible way to get down beyond 200 feet using mixed gas, then in pure number of dives, TDI's is indeed fast--at least on paper. (Of course, you are assuming the TDI student has no need for Intro to Tech. The only time I ever had a TDI student skip that was when she came to me already cave certified.)

Then comes reality.

The number of dives is not what matters. What matters is the skills you demonstrate during those dives. If you don't complete the skills satisfactorily, you keep going until you do, and that is the same with both programs. For example, with PADI you have to be able to do a valve shutdown drill within 45 seconds while holding depth and position during a deco stop. For people in backmounted doubles, that is usually quite a challenge, and you don't just go into the water and do that on your first attempt. Or, likely, your second. Or your third. Or your fourth. There is a lot of training and practice involved.

Of course, you might be able to find an instructor who will allow you to go through the course solely on the basis of the number of dives and not worry so much about the quality of performance. Of course, you may find yourself having a free flowing alternate regulator at 200 feet while your buddy is engaged in something and not paying the slightest attention to you (as happened to me last year). At that point you have two choices: 1) Shut down the left post quickly, as you were trained, or 2) try to do it and fail, then try to shut off the isolator and fail, and then think, "You know, right now I wish my instructor had made me do this right before certifying me to do this dive" as your tanks empty into the ocean.

 

[Dan_P]

A question: So, as tech dive nobody (not a tech diver, just dibbled a little not having the time yet to get serious), it seems that e.g. an agency like GUE is in a way making exactly that point (maybe not directly, but it seems that way, implicitly) that their instructors are in fact better because their standards are so much more rigerous.
But then they belong to those agencies that I would have a harder time finding a choice of instructors near home
... and they belong to those agencies that people here on SB even this thread write things like "won't even get into ..."

So, as much as this maybe opening an however old and however often opened can of worms, what gives? What is one to think of that? Why are they here seemingly excluded from the mix of recommendations?
If one found e.g. a great PADI instructor and a great TDI instructor and a great GUE instructor (and say neither has a great local backup), each selling their own path of how they train so well that it all sounds good, what could be other criteria to consider for making the call? Because it does still seem that one makes sens in deciding for one path (agency) or another even if changing instructors midway for some reason ... or? I mean cutting over to another program with differemtly sized stepping stones would not always be "lossless" or?

Can of worms hits it on it's head
First, I must fairly disclaim that I have an interest here as I am an instructor with UTD.

I think the "dir"-organizations generally have a very high standard, whether GUE, UTD or ISE. There are nuances in approaches between them, and they have different solution models to different areas, but overall, I think it's fair enough to say that they all produce a generally high capacity in their divers. But, even between them, they cover a very minute share of the market - i.e. there will be many more instructors with other organizations, and therefore greater accessability, generally speaking. And, they don't do things the "normal" way (obviously, if they make up like 1% of divers out there).
Further, I think - note, I think, because this was while I was busy playing with lego - DIR as a concept got a pretty bad rep with a lot of people back in it's hayday in the "dir wars". Maybe it's a part of the explanation, maybe not. I think it's water under the bridge, though.

@Diver0001 Definitely agree that this is an issue in diving.
I'd like to propose a notion anchored in my driver's licence experience - it's quite a funny analogy, I think:
When I went to take my driver's licence, I could get online and see what the specific requirements were. I could read that there would be an external examinator who'd test my capacity measured on which metrics, and I could browse through the various driving instructors in town, check their prices and their rate of completion towards the independent tests.
It's only a thought I sometimes play around with, but what if it was the same in diving?
All the agencies could offer the training, but a separate entity would be responsible for examination. It would certainly not be without downsides, but I like to play with the idea.

I get what you're saying about leeway in the standards in some cases (and other cases where I believe there are quite specific guidelines probably less vague), but I think that's a big part of the problem - if there isn't a consistent guideline, that makes sense, there will inherently be variations/deviations.

As a side note, I do think that my personal experiences as an instructor at this time, differ.

@Black Cat Fair game.

 

[decompression]

John, why do you love to disagree with me at every opportunity?

From TDI standards;
Course prerequisites:

• Minimum age 18
• Minimum certification of SDI Advanced Adventure Diver, Advanced Diver, or equivalent
• Proof of 25 logged open water dives

The student is allowed to use Nitrox mixes up to their current level, so if they have nitrox great. Of course this is why we find it advantageous to combine either TDI Nitrox or AN with DP......but it is not required....now.......does that happen.....not often in my experience.

https://www.tdisdi.com/wp-content/uploads/files/sandp/currentYear/TDI/part 2/pdf/individual/TDI Diver Standards_08_Decompression_Procedures_Diver.pdf


Now if you'd like to debate why I think the PADI program is better in certain points than the DP program.......let's do it.

To the Op, through this thread I hope you can see the difference between the two programs. In the big picture, the PADI program "requires" more steps and this can be more beneficial in creating a solid base before moving on to the next level.
The TDI program, while offering similar steps, they are not required and you can jump right into pretty advanced skill sets......not always the best option. Beyond this level for both is Trimix/extended range and they deserve their own thread for discussion.

 

[Diver0001]

Can of worms hits it on it's head
First, I must fairly disclaim that I have an interest here as I am an instructor with UTD.

I think the "dir"-organizations generally have a very high standard, whether GUE, UTD or ISE.

No... have you actually READ the standard?

The GUE standard differs little from the PADI standard. The TDI standard is in measurable ways less stringent than the PADI standard....

As I said above the standard is not the problem. The standard for DIR is about equivalent in real terms to a PADI OW diver with a PPB specialty.

The issue is not standards..... it is expectations! the DIR organisations do not have high standards. In fact their standards are very low, even compared to PADI..... but they have high expectations. And there is the rub.....

 

[decompression]

No... have you actually READ the standard?

The GUE standard differs little from the PADI standard. The TDI standard is in measurable ways less stringent than the PADI standard....

As I said above the standard is not the problem. The standard for DIR is about equivalent in real terms to a PADI OW diver with a PPB specialty.

The issue is not standards..... it is expectations! the DIR organisations do not have high standards. In fact their standards are very low, even compared to PADI..... but they have high expectations. And there is the rub.....

I'd say my "expectation" is for the student to meet the standard, which I definitely consider higher for 3 letter agencies than 4 letter agencies.