What is tec diving?

[highflowdiver]

Why, exactly, is a rebreather diver a pilot?

Is it because a rebreather has wings, jet engines, or looks like a submarine?

Two nights ago I was talking to several RB divers,'pilots'. I
also listened to Mr. Melton's lecture on the subject. I strained
to stay in with the incredible complexities of what was
being 'explained'. By the end of the convention I began
to understand,,'feel' if you will, what an incredible difficult
subject this is. An RB pilot was just recently lost. The lecture
touched on how to breathe and other complexities that now
I begin to understand why some call themselves pilots. As
Mr. Melton said, it is like going from a VFR pilot to an IFR
pilot. I am a pilot and have done both types of flying. Believe
me, flying IFR is an intensive flight without winglevers. I am
not so sure I want to go RB after this convention. I have
a whole new outlook on RB.
Kal

 

[highflowdiver]

Question, when we hit a few minutes of deco during class this weekend at JB, we switched to o2, that made it a tech dive? However, had someone stolen my o2 in the cavern, and I deco'ed out on back gas, that would be a recreational dive?

Peacock springs we didn't hit ANY deco, but we had 30 minutes before we could get to the surface at times, where as in JB we could be at the surface in 15 minutes or less including deco due to the flow.

I just don't see how you can (or care to) classify diving as recreational or technical. I'll cave dive for recreation, so I consider any cave dive that I do, a recreational dive. It might fit into the technical category too, but I couldn't care less, the dangers present and the precautions you take to work around them are the same no matter what you label them.

Sure, did you plan to deco? Were you prepared to deco?

Look, you planned for and expected to switch to O2 even though
it was beyond your powers and you had to finish on backgas. It's
still a tech dive. The spirit of the definition is there.

The label is there, why not make it useful?
Kal

 

[highflowdiver]

Changing ppO2 != regulator switch.

You freely admit that rebreather diving is tech but your definition also excludes it. You contradict yourself.

The definition assumes everyone knows RB is tech.
We're talking OC here.
Kal

 

[ucfdiver]

Sure, did you plan to deco? Were you prepared to deco?

Look, you planned for and expected to switch to O2 even though
it was beyond your powers and you had to finish on backgas. It's
still a tech dive. The spirit of the definition is there.

The label is there, why not make it useful?
Kal

I don't see how it's useful. My team planned for the same dive, no matter what classification it may fall under. Perhaps I'm missing what you mean by useful? Our last dive yesterday was the olsen loop, which had no deco, yet required a setup dive (and one to do the actual loop), each with a bottom time greater than 70 minutes, compared to the JB dive that was shorter and didn't require a setup.

 

[Blackwood]

Sure, did you plan to deco? Were you prepared to deco?

Look, you planned for and expected to switch to O2 even though
it was beyond your powers and you had to finish on backgas. It's
still a tech dive. The spirit of the definition is there.

The label is there, why not make it useful?
Kal

Last weekend we made two dives on a wreck off Redondo Beach. Both dives were planned for the same depth/time profile, and with the surface interval both yielded the same deco obligation. But we chose to deco out on Oxygen for one dive and backgas (trimix) for the other.

Same profile. Same obligation. Was one technical and the other not?

 

[4sak3n]

But if you aren't using this definition to classify RB diving as tech, which one are you using?

You can't rely on a definition for one style of diving to define 'tech' and then not use any definition at all for another simply because 'everyone knows that it is tech.' The definition is there to provide a clear-cut, definitive answer and saying 'everyone knows' does not!

You say that 'everyone knows that RB diving is tech'.

Fine then ... others have said that 'everyone knows cave diving, even if it involves no gas switches or deco, is tech' and yet you say they are wrong!

Now you aren't contradicting yourself but you are applying double standards.

 

[highflowdiver]

I don't see how it's useful. My team planned for the same dive, no matter what classification it may fall under. Perhaps I'm missing what you mean by useful? Our last dive yesterday was the olsen loop, which had no deco, yet required a setup dive (and one to do the actual loop), each with a bottom time greater than 70 minutes, compared to the JB dive that was shorter and didn't require a setup.

The word is used all the time. Wouldn't it be nice if we
knew what the definition of the word is? Just to say,
well it is a generic word that means whatever you
want it to is kind of,,,useless. Except for the marketers.
But most of us are divers. Sure, you plan your dive and
it doesn't matter if we called it tomato soup,, but the
word 'tech' is what is out there all the time. Let's define
it so it makes sense. Let there be a specific line that must be
crossed to become technical.
Kal

 

[highflowdiver]

Last weekend we made two dives on a wreck off Redondo Beach. Both dives were planned for the same depth/time profile, and with the surface interval both yielded the same deco obligation. But we chose to deco out on Oxygen for one dive and backgas (trimix) for the other.

Same profile. Same obligation. Was one technical and the other not?

On one dive you chose to have deco bottles and
used em, answer , yes.
Next dive you chose to just take your backgas
and only run that, not technical. However, I bet
you had deco bottles with you just in case, and
your ready and prepared and planned on using them
if neccessary, wouldn't that be tech and retain the
spirit of the definition,after all , you were in deco. If you didn't, and only had
your back gas , planned it that way then no it
is not technical. Fellas,,, this is not that
difficult.
Kal

 

[highflowdiver]

But if you aren't using this definition to classify RB diving as tech, which one are you using?

You can't rely on a definition for one style of diving to define 'tech' and then not use any definition at all for another simply because 'everyone knows that it is tech.' The definition is there to provide a clear-cut, definitive answer and saying 'everyone knows' does not!

You say that 'everyone knows that RB diving is tech'.

Fine then ... others have said that 'everyone knows cave diving, even if it involves no gas switches or deco, is tech' and yet you say they are wrong!

Now you aren't contradicting yourself but you are applying double standards.

If you don't think there is such a thing a recreational cave diving then I
would respectfully disagree. I think there is such a thing as recreational
cave diving.
Kal

 

[JeffG]

Let's define
it so it makes sense.

Sure sounds great. First thing we do is throw out your definition.

Next...define it as any diving that has an overhead. The overhead can be physical (such as a cave or a wreck) or the overhead can be a "soft" overhead (such as a decompression ceiling.)

That's the definition I use.