RDRINK25:
Looking to learn more about Deco and Dbl's. Not looking to get deep into Tech but just some simple basics. Is the the right course for me?
It is one possible right course. I won’t say it is ‘the’ right course or the ONLY right course, because I believe there are multiple ways to get to the same goal. But, Tec 40 is definitely one way to pursue an interest in ‘Deco and Dbls’, and by the end of the course you will conduct a decompression dive, you will be using doubles, and you will have learned some
important fundamental procedures. Andy (DevonDiver) has provided quite a bit of good information to consider. But, there are a variety of options. I think Peter Guy gave a very good answer, early on.
peter guy:
a. Find a PADI instructor who is authorized to teach the "TecReational Diver" Distinctive Specialty (I think there are 3 so far!) and then take the course. It won't teach you about doubles (unless you want it) but it will help strengthen your skills to prepare you for the next level
b. Find a GUE instructor and take Fundamentals of Diving
c. Find a UTD instructor and take Essentials of Diving
d. Find a GUE/UTD/Cave trained tech instructor and take Intro to Tech
e. Since you live in Georgia (if I'm reading the info correctly) maybe go to N. Florida and take a Cavern course
All of these would be reasonable options. I would add the subsequently suggested IANTD and TDI courses to the list as well. I admit to a bit of favorable personal bias toward the TecReational Diver course. But, as Peter notes, it is not about doubles, per se, although it is in part about equipment, and it can be about doubles if you want it to be. Nonetheless, all of the suggestions are good, and it is hard to say that any one is clearly ‘the best’. And, putting aside all the nonsense, the chest thumping, the biased criticism of one agency or another, while there are exceptions, generally there are a number of good instructors out there for virtually all of these courses. So
waterpirate:
If I were you I would not fixate on course names or agencies. You should be focused on what you want the outcome to be.
I think this is very good advice. Find an instructor, irrespective of agency, who regularly dives double cylinders (backmount or sidemount), who regularly engages in decompression dives - they actually engage in what they are teaching - who can help you learn to conduct a decompression dive in double cylinders (and who conveniently located for you, and with whom you are personally compatible). That may take a bit of time. But, whether the course is PADI Tec40, or an IANTD course, is not as important as you accomplishing your learning goal.
RDRINK25:
Please help as I am getting overwhelmed and confused
Not surprising, that you are overwhelmed, given some of the posts in the thread. What you understandably see in threads like this are individual biases (I have my own, so I am not trying to suggest that I am somehow the only, supremely objective poster on SB), which necessarily influence the recommendations. In some cases, what is recommended is simply a reflection of the agency through which an individual trained, or teaches. That makes sense, I am very familiar with what one agency (PADI) has to offer, I know what can be accomplished with the available training. Others posting in this thread have experience with IANTD and can do the same in recommending other options. Nothing wrong with that.
In other cases there are legitimate differences of opinion, and individuals have come to conclusions based on thoughtful consideration of information and on their experience. That may contribute to the feeling of being a bit overwhelmed. For example, one difference that has come out here involves the early use of helium / trimix as a back gas, and another has to do with the extent of content in a particular course.
kevrumbo:
I don't like delaying the introduction of Trimix or two deco gas mixes (50% & 100% Oxygen) until PADI Tec50 (50m/166'):
I can see someone holding this view, it is thoughtful and clearly stated. I do not hold this view, myself. I do plenty of enjoyable (and, memorable) dives to 175 feet on air, with one deco mix. That works for ME, but it doesn't mean that a recommendation to do otherwise is wrong, just two views of what is best. Some people will insist that the colors are brighter, the dive more enjoyable, etc., on mix, and I am sure that is true for them. Taking one of kevrumbo’s recommendations to heart, I have even purposefully made repeated dives, to the same sites (e.g. the hangar deck on the O, and various NC coastal wrecks) and depths (to ~160 - 170’
on at least two (usually more) occasions, using air, or using mix on different dives. I cannot say that I have noticed any difference in the clarity of my thinking, or the color of the coral, the size of the marine life, etc. (Maybe I was so narc’ed on both mixes that it made no difference although I doubt that.) Yes, in the PADI course sequence, formal trimix training comes later, after Tec50. For some that is a limitation, for others it is not an issue:
kevrumbo:
it's better sense albeit more expensive to start using Recreational Triox through Trimix early in your tech deco course progression. You would then have a reference experience of expected "clear-headed" performance to compare against
ajduplessis:
IMO deep air training is vital before moving to any form of trimix.
Two reasonable, and differing opinions. Nothing wrong with that, either. Maybe, I am biased because I did deep air first, then added the use of trimix. I would not be unhappy if PADI decided to introduce the trimix training option earlier. But, helium isn’t THE issue for me. I have ready access to helium. I have the training to use it. I blend trimix, not only for my own gases, but for customers as well. I only pay ‘cost’ for helium, so it is probably a bit more affordable for me than for many. Nonetheless, I seldom use it unless I am going below 200 feet. I cannot make a case for the benefits outweighing the cost. That part has nothing to do with when it was introduced to me in my training in the past, it has nothing to do with the agency through which I instruct. It has everything to do with my personal experience, and conclusions drawn from that experience.
Unfortunately, you also see comments where the biases really seem to get in the way. In some cases, they are simply nonsense.
mikko ilari laakkonen:
The tec40 is also supposed to fill this same void. However most of the instructors are bad.
I imagine some are. But, the notion that ‘most are bad’ is silly – simply no basis whatsoever for the statement (including no summary of what is ‘bad’
.
In some cases, conclusions unfortunately seem to become obsessions, and turn into a ‘bone to pick’, and posters appear committed to making sure that their bone become the focus of discussion. For example, the issue of a balanced rig, and what is seen as egregious behavior on PADI’s part for allowing (or endorsing, whatever) unbalanced rigs becomes THE issue. And, even when other posters try to steer the discussion back to the original point of the thread
spc751:
This thread is about padi tec40. This course does not allow dives to 200 feet. Please keep your comments on subject. If you wish to complain about padi please start a different thread.
maniago:
Good god, this is not a thread about PADI bashing! Get off your soapbox.
. . . efforts are nonetheless made to return the discussion to the ‘bone’. Personally, I respect the advocacy of balanced rigs, but I don’t agree that it is THE issue in this thread (or in technical training, or in technical diving for that matter). I don’t have a strong bias against dual bladders, I will dive to 250ft in a wetsuit with double steel cylinders and a couple of AL deco bottles (although, I admit that is a recent change, which came after sweltering in my drysuit on too many occasions in the past), and I do so on the basis of careful consideration of the consequences of the choices, the likelihood of equipment failure, and the options available for recovery if those failures occur. If others hold a different opinion, fine. But, let's not derail the discussion away from what the OP originally asked.
