What Defines a "Tech" Diver

[SysGreg]

Let’s go back to the roots and how the ”technical diving” term was created by Michael Menduno back in 1991. An interesting article helps to refresh the memory.
Interview: Michael Menduno - DIVER magazine

 

[boriss]

Let’s go back to the roots and how the ”technical diving” term was created by Michael Menduno back in 1991. An interesting article helps to refresh the memory.
Interview: Michael Menduno - DIVER magazine

For the lazy, below is a direct quote and there you have it. What defines technical diving? The two D-words. Depth and Decompression.

It was also clear that we needed to distinguish it as separate and distinct from recreational diving. The recreational diving industry was not happy that deep and decompression diving—the “D-Words”—were out of the closet and they didn’t want to have anything to do with what was emerging.

 

[NW Dive Dawg]

I have done many tech dives but do not at all consider or define or identify myself as a tech diver. I'm just an old diver now and even though some of my dives might still be considered as "technical" .......I'm really now just a recreational diver and happy that I can still do it.

 

[Angelo Farina]

For the lazy, below is a direct quote and there you have it. What defines technical diving? The two D-words. Depth and Decompression.

It is important to point out the presence of a "logical and" between Depth and Decompression.
So a "deep" dive, say down to 50m, without deco, is still not tech.
Or a dive to shallower depth, say 35 meters, with some deco stops, is also fully recreational.
Only when a dive profile is both very deep and with deco, then it becomes technical.
Unfortunately the boundary for recreational diving has been significantly reduced after that original correct definition.
So now for many people anything beyond 30m is tech and should be made in trimix...

 

[tursiops]

What defines technical diving? The two D-words. Depth and Decompression.

It is important to point out the presence of a "logical and" between Depth and Decompression.

Actually, as used by Michael Menduno in his original writing, it was NOT a "logical and." If either depth (>40m) or decompression were involved, then it was technical diving by that early definition.

 

[Angelo Farina]

Actually, as used by Michael Menduno in his original writing, it was NOT a "logical and." If either depth (>40m) or decompression were involved, then it was technical diving by that early definition.

Ok, I see.
But then how all normal recreational divers certified by organizations such as Cmas or Bsac should be classified?
Our certifications are for max depth of 50m in air with deco also in air...

 

[happy-diver]

So just curious as to what folks think either defines or qualifies someone as a "Tech" diver.

They don't talk about it unless they're planning a dive which they always are and aren't on here or have left

 

[SysGreg]

I believe that back in 1991, anything out of usual recreational diving needed a new definition. This definition deluted later, as cavern, wreck, RB went into the sidestream of recreational diving. So the border between tech and recro has been drawn basically to Deep and Deco, handling the gasses and the very basic, “solve your your problems underwater”.

Back in 1978 PADI OW manual already described deco procedures and published tables for so called Emergency Decompression. The students needed to know how to use them, even if it was not recommended. Since then PADI has been more conservative supporting only recro with NDl and some Tech 40,45,50 arrived well later. Probably only to have a piece of “tech market“.

However all the discussion has one handicap. From the 1991 Menduno perspective, do will still need to define tech and recreational in 2023? After all it’s another advanced type of diving, but very profitable from marketing point of view. So let’s be divers, performing simple, advanced and more advanced dives.

 

[NothingClever]

From the 1991 Menduno perspective, do will still need to define tech and recreational in 2023? After all it’s another advanced type of diving,

Yes.

Believe me, I’m sympathetic to the CMAS and SNSI rubric but I think softening or erasing the demarcation recreational line would cause more problems than it solves.

Those divers that have a more disciplined approach will naturally seek academic and skill training to extend their range.

However, if SB is any representation of the greater community, erasing the demarcation line would induce an increase of unfocused divers casually surpassing recreational limits, injuring or killing themselves and inviting unhelpful attention to our activity.

 

[NothingClever]

So let’s be divers, performing simple, advanced and more advanced dives.

Concur 100%. This population of thinkers will naturally seek more advanced training and be willing to uphold corresponding principles, standards and techniques.

Unfortunately, not everybody who dives thinks this way and a big part of our legacy SCUBA culture has softened over the decades.

Go to south Florida and witness the number of people on a boat who are oblivious to fundamental principles and skills in their Basic OW course. It’s miraculous some people survive their dives.