When is it okay to exceeding training limits?

[Bob DBF]

Scuba police or not, I'd be checking the wording of my insurance policy before exceeding PADI's 60' limit.

May be certification is different up in Canada, but in the States OW certification is good for recreational limits (130') even though PADI recommends a 60' limit for new OW divers, until they get more training or experience.

As for insurance, it is always a good idea to check your policy, as it may not cover other activities as well.


Bob

 

[Iralub]

I've got my OW certification, so I'm certified to dive with a buddy of similar training to a maximum depth of 60 feet. Going deeper than that would be a violation of the standards, with respect to my training. So, when is it okay to go deeper than that?

I'm pretty sure that those rules/standards "are more like guidelines anyway".

Personal opinion - it depends on the nature of exceeding the guideline and whether it exposes you to greater risk.
Eg. if you are diving to say 22m rather than 18m, while with an instructor in otherwise good conditions and are comfortable doing that, there's no real additional risk and no problem.

If you go down to 40m, with no understanding of effects on gas consumption or NDLs or possible narcosis, that is a problem. Not so much because you've breached a guideline, but because there is a significant additional risk.

Likewise, going through a short swim-through may well be ok, although technically it is an overhead environment, but going into a cave or penetrating a wreck without training would be a very stupid thing to do, even if you are not breaking any laws.

Just my opinion

 

[RJP]

Slightly off topic maybe - so it must be more than a manual and card - standards as well must play a role from the agency?

I just meant in terms of deliverables for the particular class.

 

[Colliam7]

So, when is it okay to go deeper than that? . . . when it's okay to exceed limits was not a topic covered in my training. So, what's the official answer?

I realize your OW certification was SDI, not PADI. So, I can't speak with authority as to what is, or is supposed to be, covered in the SDI course. But, at least for PADI, verbatim from the Open Water Manual (p. 235):' you've learned about the limits recommended for you as a newly certified PADI Open Water Diver. . . . You were trained to a maximum depth of 60 feet . . . You were also trained to dive in conditions as good as, or better than, those in which you were trained . . . Ultimately it is your responsibility to set your limits for each dive based on your assessment of your skills, comfort level and the dive conditions.' That is as close to an 'official' answer as you are likely to get from any agency - that it is your responsibility to decide. I would be surprised if SDI would give a very different answer.

In practice, decisions are made by filtering information through experience, to create 'knowledge', and you then act on that knowledge. In your case as a newer diver, you really don't have the experience necessary to make the most knowledgeable decisions, about diving. One rule of thumb might be, when you get to the point (a depth, a temperature, whatever) that it scares you, you have exceeded your limits.

Many, if not most divers, improve their skills and confidence by gradually pushing the limits of their certification. It is expected that they will do so. And, most agencies encourage that gradual expansion. At one time or another, many recreational divers exceed the nominal depth limits of recreational diving – 130 ft. There are wrecks off the NC coast that sit on the bottom at 135 – 145 feet, and I see plenty of ‘recreational’ divers on those wrecks, at times some of them put their computers / depth gauges down in the sand to record a maximum depth. They successfully make the dives and safely ascend, and the world goes on. And, I don’t make a point of chastising them when we are all back on the boat. I am just another diver on the charter, and it is their responsibility to plan and execute their dive safely. And, by the way, I will NOT accept a recreational (non-technical) diver as a buddy IF the dive will take us to depths that exceed the recreational limits, nor will I accept a newer OW diver as a buddy if the planned dive will take us deeper than 60 feet. Others might, I won't.

As for your two scenarios:

But, what if I'm diving with a certified instructor, but I'm not enrolled in a course or formally on a training dive? Is it still okay? . . . What if I'm diving with a certified Dive Master, who is not a certified instructor? Is it okay then?

Both of these would quite possibly be considered 'trust me' dives. I tell my students in OW, it is not 'OK' to do those. Diving in a formal training environment with an Instructor is OK, as long as you are comfortable with the conditions. In that situation, the Instructor is (presumably) adhering to a set of established standards that are considered safe and reasonable. That Instructor is accepting responsibility for you as a student. On the other hand, just because your dive buddy happens to be an Instructor does not mean that s/he is accepting any responsibility. And a DM may or may not be, depending on whether s/he just happens to be in the water with you, or is formally conducting something that s/he is credentialed to conduct (e.g. a formal 'Discover Local Diving' activity).

 

[stuartv]

One rule of thumb might be, when you get to the point (a depth, a temperature, whatever) that it scares you, you have exceeded your limits.

Well THAT might be a problem! LOL Remember, ignorance is bliss!

This does make me think of a semi-related question:

Imagine that you're a newb (say, like me) and you dive to 130'. Because you're a newb and haven't been educated properly on gas consumption, you stupidly run completely out of air while you're at 130'. And, also because you're an inexperienced newb (possibly diving with a newb buddy), when it happens you don't see your buddy anywhere close by. Though you are a newb, you keep calm and cool and make the decision to make a controlled emergency ascent, swimming/floating up at 60'/min up to the 60' level and then 30'/min to the surface, skipping the safety stop since it's optional anyway and you're out of air.

By my calculations, the ascent would take 3:10. That is longer than most people can hold their breath. But, with the partial pressure of O2 in your lungs at 130, even though you're NOT holding your breath, you should be able to "last" a lot longer on your lungful of air than you could by holding your breath on the surface, right? Plus, as you ascend and the ambient pressure drops, some of the air in your "empty" tank will become available, right? So you might get another half or full breath out of your tank on the way up?

Or, to summarize all these questions: If you dive to the Rec limit and you have an almost-worst case scenario, is it reasonable to think that a calm, cool, and collected diver could still get themselves to the surface without getting hurt or drowning?

 

[Basking Ridge Diver]

Not in my opinion at 130 feet - without having tried it at a shallower depth.
Having said that 2 things come to mind - you need to do something so trying it is better than sitting there saying prayers or Pony Bottle ...

BTW - my son and I both dive with Ponies now - he is Jr OW and I am OW (with a tainted Solo Cert) - it may be worth your while to invest in one if you plan on hitting 130 feet on a regular basis.

 

[stuartv]

Not in my opinion at 130 feet - without having tried it at a shallower depth.
Having said that 2 things come to mind - you need to do something so trying it is better than sitting there saying prayers or Pony Bottle ...

BTW - my son and I both dive with Ponies now - he is Jr OW and I am OW (with a tainted Solo Cert) - it may be worth your while to invest in one if you plan on hitting 130 feet on a regular basis.

No, no. I'm not planning on going that deep, at least until I take the Deep Diver course. After that, it would just be an issue of wanting to visit wrecks and whether they are that deep or not.

I was just asking the question for my own educational benefit. Not because I want to be the guy to try it!

Different thing to ponder. At 130, you're at approximately 5 atm, right? So, you have roughly 5 times as much O2 contained in your lungs as you would at the surface (assuming you're breathing air and not Nitrox). So, does that mean that if you stayed at that depth and held your breath, you could hold it 5 times as long as you could at the surface?

 

[Colliam7]

Or, to summarize all these questions: If you dive to the Rec limit and you have an almost-worst case scenario, is it reasonable to think that a calm, cool, and collected diver could still get themselves to the surface without getting hurt or drowning?

Interesting question. I know of a couple of SB posters who, based on what i have seen them post before, might possibly say, 'Yes, of course, if you have the proper training to begin with . . . blah. blah. blah. ' Personally, I do not think it is likely (nothing is impossible) that a diver could surface from 130 ft without getting hurt. But, people have held their breath for longer than 3:10. And, this would be slight exhalation with the ascent to accommodate pressure changes.

I am not aware of this being done, but hopefully, if it has, someone will see the thread and comment. It occurs to me that oxygen availability might become secondary to CO2 accumulation and the possibility of black-out / drowning - whether you were ascending or simply not breathing at deopth. As for me, I will echo BRD's comment - for diving deeper, dive with a redundant air supply, like a pony.

 

[Lorenzoid]

. . .
As for your two scenarios: Both of these would quite possibly be considered 'trust me' dives. I tell my students in OW, it is not 'OK' to do those. Diving in a formal training environment with an Instructor is OK, as long as you are comfortable with the conditions. In that situation, the Instructor is (presumably) adhering to a set of established standards that are considered safe and reasonable. That Instructor is accepting responsibility for you as a student. . . .

I'd take it a step further and propose that ANY dive in which a diver relies even to a small extent on an instructor keeping him safe is a "trust me dive." Trusting the person who is providing instruction--whether that's an agency-certified instructor or a mentor providing less formal training--is a necessary risk if the diver wants to learn to do more than his current level of training permits. In other words, I see it as a continuum, not a line drawn in the sand where on one side the diver is the instructor's student and on the other the diver is just being accompanied by the instructor in a non-professional capacity. One would hope that in each case the student has done whatever amount of pre-enrollment research into the instructor's ability and risks involved are appropriate for the level of course being taught. A non-diver OW student will be doing trust-me dives in OW class and has, one would hope, at least given a tiny bit of thought as to who's going to be teaching him, what the risks might be (however low those risks might be in an OW class), and whether he feels up to the challenges of OW class. A more advanced diver will be doing trust-me dives in advanced training and has, one would hope, looked into who the instructor is, what limits the agency imposes, whether he feels up to the challenges at those limits, etc. The instructor's credentials (agency, etc.) are one factor a prospective student should take into consideration, but the student shouldn't end his inquiry there. You've got to feel confident about the whole thing any time you push yourself beyond your comfort zone, whether it's as a student of an agency-certified instructor, as a dive buddy with someone who happens to be an instructor, with a mentor, or whomever. I don't see agency vs. non-agency as such a distinct line in the sand.

 

[nimoh]

I think anyone capable of being calm when they are out of gas at 130' would never find themself in that situation.