What Defines a "Tech" Diver

[tursiops]

From 2002: https://tos.org/oceanography/article/comments-on-technology-transfer-in-diving-based-on-a-review-of-the-noaa-div;

"There are five major branches in the world of diving: commercial, public safety, military, scientific and recreational."
"Technical Diving is a (new within the last 10-15 years) branch of recreational diving, constituting the cutting edge of equipment, depths, methodologies, and attitudes within the domain of recreational diving. It includes diving beyond the "no decompression limits," diving in caves, rebreathers and mixed gases (including Nitrox). The term "technical diving" was coined by a diving magazine to encompass those activities. There are now formal certification agencies, like the International Association of Nitrox and Technical Divers (IANTD: see www.iantd.com), Technical Diving International (TDI: www.tdisdi.com/tdi/tdihome.html), and technical diving sections of the traditional agencies, like the "TechRec" part of PADI (www.padi.com/ coures/tecrec/) and the "Tec" part of NAUI (www.nauitec.com/)."

 

[Alastor]

The "tech" word ?

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

How about divers who do relatively deep decompression dives that never took any tech diving courses? Is a solo diver a tech diver?

In my opinion it is a difficult thing to nail down. Let's face it, in the early days, there were divers exceeding NDL's and they didn't have multiple gasses (nor training). They just had air (and their open water courses and a ton of experience). If I'm not mistaken, people were diving the Andria Doria a number of years on just air.

I wish Sam Miller III was around to chime in. He was a walking scuba encyclopedia.

Solo diving, with or without redundancy, doesn't quality as technical diving in my opinion. But, it is important that an agreed upon definition should address that.

Though I doubt we will ever converge on a definition.

Not per-se. But the decompression obligation becomes quite technical and the longer you're down, the more there is. Also a single ali80 won't be enough, start to need redundant gas and alternative gasses, switching as you go and needing NoTox procedures. Technical.

Yes, but that is a different matter. If you bounce dive and don't get close to your NDL, you can still head to the surface. It is pointless to me, but other people do it. I let them be them.

Overheads, virtual or not, are one aspect. Gasses are another aspect. Depth is another, but that isn't a hard rule. One can be in a cave/wreck, on trimix above 130 feet.

I need coffee.

 

[Bazzathemammoth]

I can’t help but think of this

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

I can’t help but think of this

That's a stone. Jesus. I can't believe I have to explain that.

 

[Divin'Papaw]

You know it when you see it, but any attempted definition falls short in one regard or another.

 

[MichaelMc]

It is a fuzzy and wide boundary area.

Slightly crossing the NDL (for your gradient factor) on back gas is a shift. It is different from have a diligent safety stop, but not hugely different in concept or execution. A step into the boundary area.

Planning, equipping and executing accelerated deco with depth-toxic gasses and longer non-accelerated as backup is a big shift. A large step across the boundary zone.

Entering a cavern or ice, hard overhead recreational classes, vs a cave.

 

[Seaweed Doc]

My original "Scuba Diver" certification (1988 - YMCA) included how to plan a decompression dive.... Not that I would have considered attempting one, or a dive in excess of the recreational limits in the early stages of my diving.

Much later I did take classes for the topic of "technical diving" certification.

Accelerated DECO was really the defining line to my "technical diving" knowledge base, but certifications are quite different now vs. then...

Same for my YMCA certification in 1985. As far as max depth, well, at 200' oxygen would kill you back then. He also told us to use lines if doing cave or wreck penetrations, and for goodness' sake don't stir up the sediment! But we didn't do any penetrations. But we carried exactly one second stage on our kits....

Back then, my instructor thought folks breathing things like heliox were crazy weirdos, which seems like one way to define tech.

Ultimately, trying to pin down an international definition on this seems futile. PADI defines it one way (overhead, deco, or >130', maybe). BSAC, etc., another. Be clear in your definition if fine points matter and all is good. Or throw it out there in a generic sense if fine points don't matter.

For the OP: Why does it matter? What are you contemplating and why do you care if it's called tech or not?

 

[BlueTrin]

It is a fuzzy and wide boundary area.

I thought you were talking about the egg/stone pic … and was about to add the ‘Brilliant’ emoji, until I realised you were actually serious

 

[Grantt]

While we are having a great discussion on semantics, I would like to draw attention to OP's actual question.... what defines a "tech diver"? Aside from being trained to execute some form of tech diving, overhead or accelerated deco, is there anything that separates us from recreational divers?