what do you consider an advanced dive?

[Storker]

OW divers correctly applying the full scope of their training can be considered 'advanced'.

However, that doesn't mean that the dive is an advanced dive (which was the topic of the thread). An OW diver "correctly applying the full scope of their training" to a dive in benign conditions, shallower than 18msw/60fsw, with no waves, no current and above-freezing temperatures isn't doing an advanced dive, IMHO.

Introduce factors like waves, current, low viz, depths greater than 18msw/60fsw, darkness, hard or soft overhead, or sub-freezing temperatures, you might very well talk about an "advanced" dive. Because those things require skills you shouldn't expect to find in any OW diver, regardless of where s/he has been certified.

 

[DevonDiver]

Introduce factors like waves, current, low viz, depths greater than 18msw/60fsw, darkness, hard or soft overhead, or sub-freezing temperatures,...

Factors so relative (to the individual diver) that they become irrelevant as a designation.

Because those things require skills you shouldn't expect to find in any OW diver, regardless where s/he has been certified.

Such a thing wouldn't be an 'advanced dive', it'd just be a dive beyond the training and experience (competence) of the diver concerned.

We should avoid painting over-ambitious (at any level) dives as 'advanced'... it's just another factor that encourages people to over-stretch themselves and get into trouble.

 

[Storker]

Such a thing wouldn't be an 'advanced dive', it'd just be a dive beyond the training and experience (competence) of the diver concerned.

No, it wouldn't. It'd just be a dive where the training and experience (competence) required for the diver concerned to dive safely and within his/her limits exceeds what one should expect from any OW certified diver.

We should avoid painting over-ambitious (at any level) dives as 'advanced'... it's just another factor that encourages people to over-stretch themselves and get into trouble.

I'm trying to avoid avoid over-ambitious (at any level) dives. Period. And I don't call over-ambitious dives 'advanced', I call them 'stupid'.

 

[DevonDiver]

No, it wouldn't. It'd just be a dive where the training and experience (competence) required for the diver concerned to dive safely and within his/her limits exceeds what one should expect from any OW certified diver.

I think you're missing the nuance contained with my reference to 'approach'. No offence intended whatsoever, but at your stated experience level, do you really understand the full scope of 'advanced approaches' to diving?

 

[Storker]

I think you're missing the nuance contained with my reference to 'approach'.

I probably am. Care to elaborate? Preferably using small words, as English is my second language.

at your stated experience level, do you really understand the full scope of 'advanced approaches' to diving?

I'm really not with you here. My posts have been written under the assumption that we were discussing what we considered an advanced dive. If the topic was the full scope of 'advanced approaches', I'm off-topic and my posts can be ignored. 'Advanced approaches' is something I don't have a good definition of, so I won't try to discuss it.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

I agree that an advanced dive is any dive that pushes the "experience envelope" for the diver conducting it.

I also agree with TSandM that a person repeating the "same dive" can indeed advance as a diver. The "dive site" in question would have to include factors such as tides, currents, surge, depth, varying vizability and other conditions that impact the difficulty of the dive. It is the opportunity to learn to deal with the various conditions that impact a dive which provide the opportunity to develop and learn.

When I read the OP's question I got to thinking about the sites I would consider to be Advanced Dives if I was taking a non local to one of our sites. The first one that came to mind was Swansea Drift Dive. When people say a dive is Tide Dependent, this is the dive that comes to my mind. You better time it right or the current is ripping, will pull your mask off your face and cause your reg to free flow. You can enter at the boat ramp near the bridge and get swept along about 2Km (1.24mi) to exit at another boat ramp. Not particularly easy to find the exit either. You can catch the outgoing tide and drift from the boat ramp towards the sea. Once again the exit can be hard to locate. If you miss the exit you notice it get dark as you drift under the bridge. If you are lucky at this point you may be able to get to shore before you are swept out to sea.

To add to the challenge of the site it is a shipping channel! By this I mean you absolutely can not surface except at the edges of the channel along the rubble. The bridge is an opening bridge that allows boats to enter the channel heading in from the ocean. The last thing you want to do is surface among the boats traffic trying to get through before the bridge closes again!

There are also a lot of sand bars so you need to be bale to manage your buoyancy without relying on the bottom. Vis through here can get difficult. Maintaining buddy contact is also difficult. I have been told not to take that dive on unless you are comfortable with buddy separation and are willing to complete the dive on your own if separated. I have done this dive a number of times and we have always managed to maintain buddy teams. It is certainly a dive I would consider advanced and one I would not take a diver on unless they were indeed an "Advanced Diver". Being an Advanced Diver in my mind has more to do with skill, experience and attitude as certification!

 

[DevonDiver]

I'm really not with you here. My posts have been written under the assumption that we were discussing what we considered an advanced dive. If the topic was the full scope of 'advanced approaches', I'm off-topic and my posts can be ignored. 'Advanced approaches' is something I don't have a good definition of, so I won't try to discuss it.

I simply believe that it is better to catagorize the diver, and most relevantly, their approach to a given dive; rather than try to create some 'catch all' definition of a dive.

Attributing 'advanced' factors to a dive site is quite implausible. You dive in Northern Europe... what is 'basic' for you would be incredibly 'advanced' for a comparably experienced diver who dove the tropics. What you consider 'complex' might seem extremely undemanding and simple for a diver of higher level. So on, and so forth...

So...a dive site, or location, may demand an 'advanced approach'. That'd include specialist skills, protocols or equipment for sure... but relative to what? Also, shouldn't we also consider the application of specialist skills, protocols and equipment on seemingly 'basic' dives? Just because a site is benign, doesn't mean that safety cannot be improved by the diver's approach to the dive.

It'd be fair to designate a site as 'basic' - but that still has to be attributed towards a specific level of training/diving. For instance, a 'basic' open-water site... or a 'basic decompression dive'... or a 'basic' wreck penetration. That leaves us with an understanding that an 'advanced' site/dive requires something beyond the bare qualification-level essentials... some accumulation of further generic or specific experience, some specialist competencies etc etc

That's an 'approach-orientated' perspective to defining the demands of a dive.

 

[xyrandomyx]

I'll go back to the OP's original question, asking for examples of 'advanced' dives. One of our local dives that's generally considered advanced is the SS Lusitania: Diving the Cape Peninsula and False Bay/SS Lusitania ? Travel guides at Wikivoyage. I've never dived it myself -- I consider it well beyond my skill levels -- and, although it can be planned as a recreational, no-stop dive, the very short no-stop times make it sound pointless to me (especially given all the additional complications and relatively long boat ride).

It's deep, between 35 and 40 metres on the wreck, just within recreational limits. It often has a relatively strong current. That current can you pull you onto the exposed rock, where it's not safe to surface and where a boat cannot safely pick you up. If the visibility is not good, which it often isn't near the surface, not landing up on the rock requires compass navigation.

The link I posted has a few more details. A couple of the other local divers on this forum can probably elaborate or correct me on some of the details (I'm pretty sure at least one of them's actually dived it).

 

[DCBC]

An "Advanced Dive" to me must first be seen in the context of the training and experience of the person doing it. Clearly what is normal for one diver is suicide for another.

The same goes for the dive site. What is an easy dive one day can be advanced (or even impossible) to achieve when the conditions change. There are however dives that are challenging regardless of perfect conditions and others that are likely to be hazardous without sufficient training and experience.

To me an advanced dive is any dive that would fall into the upper end of a diver's safety envelope. One in-which the diver can safely perform by applying all of their training and experience.

 

[TMHeimer]

The last 4 posts says it all. It depends on the diver. For me, I would probably call advanced anything below 60' (just to keep PADI standards), or something challenging like strong current (that you plan to deal with or keep out of), very low viz like 3 feet or less, lot's of boat traffic, nasty surf & or surge, etc. I try to not make most of my dives "advanced".