Can a certified cave diver escort a non cave diver

[lermontov]

Tangential, but since it's ScubaBoard specifically and the internet generally, here we go:

What do folks who ARE experts think about old guys (like me) who had a sort of cave training or deco training 40 years ago when certified? Maybe they got a lot of experience before the modern system of cave and tech certifications existed, or maybe not.

For example, my YMCA Open Water course taught us to take our backpacks off and pass them through restrictions ahead of us, then put them back on. And have a line to get out with, and a few other minor niceties. I may be mis-remembering badly, but it seems like a possible final exam question involved what to do if the cabin on the wreck you're diving gets silted out. (Find your line and crawl out as I recall was the advice back then. Maybe use bubbles to orient. I'm vaguely recalling some lighting advice as well.)

We were also given US Navy deco tables and taught to use them. The expectation was that we might do single-tank, no redundancy deco dives. Of course, we were told "you'll die at 200' from ox tox," but that was the only ultimate depth at that point. Obviously, there's a lot wrong with this. But we were trained and may have gone out deco diving for years.

I was going to write out what kind of diving I've done (and am comfortable doing today) that would not be "approved" under today's standards (due to lack of new certifications) but was acceptable at the time I was trained. But my case isn't really the issue, it's more the general question of "what if you were trained to standards of the day?"

Several specific questions:

1. What if you were trained to (e.g.) to deco or wreck penetrations way back when, and did a lot of it. Maybe picked up some tricks as techniques and equipment improved. Assuming it doesn't put you at risk of liability, would you be comfortable with diving with this person?

2. What if the old codger has self-limits that seem pretty well-informed? (E.g., only penetrating sanitized wrecks with multiple obvious and large exits at any location, or only doing "light deco on air" dives? And having redundancy.) Humor me here, and assume that these self-limits are not dangerous if evaluated with modern knowledge, but the diver is not appropriately certified. And let's wave the magic wand and get rid of liability issues.

I'd take it as a given that if you were taught 40 year old deco techniques and never did deco dives for 40 years, you probably shouldn't dive the Andrea Doria tomorrow.

I suppose I'm asking the "experience vs. certification" question, but with the tweak that the diver in question may have had appropriate certifications at the time but would not be sufficient today. (Cue "When I had to swim uphill in the snow to SCUBA school" stories.)

I'd note I'm just musing here. I don't have a strong opinion, but there are enough of us out there in this category I wonder how this is regarded. Not looking for approval, and don't care about condemnation. Fire away!

some information has been better researched and theres more up to date knolwedge
equipment has got better and probably more customisable
Dive computers play a significant role now
theres probably more awareness of hazards and things that can go wrong in the training and general diving community

measuring those that i know that have been diving a long time and have not adjusted they tend to be more blase' about things like reserve gas, doing dives at depth on air, going it alone 9to name a few)

Im sure if you spent a couple of days on a refresher you'd be ok

 

[boulderjohn]

(E.g., only penetrating sanitized wrecks with multiple obvious and large exits at any location,

Anyone can do that now, at least as far as PADI is concerned. What you are describing is a swim-through, which PADI does not consider a "penetration." It is essentially considered to be open water. Before anyone argues, I went through this in detail with PADI a few years ago. They asked me to suggest better language, and they liked what I suggested. They published a version of it in their professional journal, giving me credit for it. It will supposedly work its way into courses as they are rewritten.

The language I described features using your judgment to determine if your level of training, your equipment, and you experience are suitable to the current situation. As in the case of the paragraph above, pretty much everyone can do that. In the case of a cave, you had better have appropriate cave certification, experience and equipment.

So let's look at everything you wrote. In some cases, you have a vague memory of perhaps getting some training at some point. You aren't really sure. You can't even be sure whether you were getting official training or whether some rogue instructor was violating agency standards. I would say that in those cases, you should consider yourself untrained. Other cases, like the swim-throughs, are more reasonably certain and are barely beyond basic OW training.

So will someone dive with you? I would say it depends upon the judgment of the diver making that decision. Just as that diver has to use good judgment to determine if he or she has the appropriate certification, experience, and equipment for the planned dive, he or she will have to use good judgment for the buddy's certification, experience, and equipment.

 

[Seaweed Doc]

Thanks boulderjohn and lemontov for the responses. I should have added a "given" that the type of diving a given person (me or another) was trained to 40 years ago is something they have since been doing at least occasionally and definitely recently. It's not like 40 years have elapsed without diving at all. E.g., the person has been doing deeper dives on air than GUE likes, or penetrations/deco dives that PADI wouldn't approve today for an open water trained diver.

But your point is well taken: Sounds like if the buddy is agreeable, and the diver in question "looks like a modern tech diver, talks like a modern tech diver, walks like a modern tech diver, and dives like a modern tech diver" it's not a big deal.

I really should turn the question back on myself: What if I had a prospective buddy who also learned via YMCA 40 years ago, was only open water certified, but had done 100's of dives to well deeper than 60' (let's say up to 130')? And I generally knew them to be a safe diver that followed modern procedures? I'd dive with them. But I wouldn't dive with them if they were using nitrox, because I know they have zero nitrox training of any kind.

 

[lermontov]

I really should turn the question back on myself: What if I had a prospective buddy who also learned via YMCA 40 years ago, was only open water certified, but had done 100's of dives to well deeper than 60' (let's say up to 130')? And I generally knew them to be a safe diver that followed modern procedures? I'd dive with them. But I wouldn't dive with them if they were using nitrox, because I know they have zero nitrox training of any kind.

Its not that they wouldnt be capable of doing the dive its just that there are more and more gaps appearing in their knowledge and training which increases the chance of it going pear shaped and the balance shifts from you diving with a buddy to you becoming a dive guide and its not so much fun anymore as your constantly managing them

I had 2 recent examples of exactly that scenario:
1) we were on a cave expedition and reached 40m so the guys who had no deep training turned back, next day my freind and I made up some trimix to go to 60m thinking it probably wouldnt go much deeper, to our surprise it kept going beyond 60m so we too turned back and that night discussed mixing some gas to go to 80m. The first guy who turns at 40 m asked us to make up some gas for him so he could have a go. In his mind he couldn't see the problem, it's just another gas right ? Im in no doubt he could have done it -but his understanding of using hypoxic gas was zero

2) I had a buddy who wanted to do a deep wreck dive and WAS qualified to do it but had lost self confidence. So we did a straight forward wreck dive to 60m on what I would describe as a guided dive (me making the dive plan mixing gas, on his shoulder the whole time etc ) . After the dive I asked him how he felt about doing the deep dive and he replied he now felt a lot more confidant, so did i do him a favour by 'guiding' him or did I give him false confidence?

Its not a situation I like myself being in

 

[boulderjohn]

2) I had a buddy who wanted to do a deep dive and WAS qualified to do it but had lost self confidence. So we did a straight forward wreck dive to 60m on what I would describe as a guided dive (me making the dive plan mixing gas, on his shoulder the whole time etc ) . After the dive I asked him how he felt about doing the deep dive and he replied he now felt a lot more confidant, so did i do him a favour by 'guiding' him or did I give him false confidence?

Its not a situation I like myself being in

It's a really good question.

I was told long ago that if I put myself in a position where someone else does a dive with me with an understanding that he or she could depend upon me for guidance and support, as you would with a professional DM or instructor, then you are acting as a professional, even if you are not getting paid. That means you could be liable for a lawsuit in case something goes wrong.

 

[Seaweed Doc]

Its not that they wouldnt be capable of doing the dive its just that there are more and more gaps appearing in their knowledge and training which increases the chance of it going pear shaped and the balance shifts from you diving with a buddy to you becoming a dive guide and its not so much fun anymore as your constantly managing them

I had 2 recent examples of exactly that scenario:
1) we were on a cave expedition and reached 40m so the guys who had no deep training turned back, next day my freind and I made up some trimix to go to 60m thinking it probably wouldnt go much deeper, to our surprise it kept going beyond 60m so we too turned back and that night discussed mixing some gas to go to 80m. The first guy who turns at 40 m asked us to make up some gas for him so he could have a go. In his mind he couldn't see the problem, it's just another gas right ? Im in no doubt he could have done it -but his understanding of using hypoxic gas was zero

2) I had a buddy who wanted to do a deep wreck dive and WAS qualified to do it but had lost self confidence. So we did a straight forward wreck dive to 60m on what I would describe as a guided dive (me making the dive plan mixing gas, on his shoulder the whole time etc ) . After the dive I asked him how he felt about doing the deep dive and he replied he now felt a lot more confidant, so did i do him a favour by 'guiding' him or did I give him false confidence?

Its not a situation I like myself being in

Seems like your judgment in both cases is spot on. In the first, there's no relevant training or experience. In the second it sounds like a qualified diver who needed reassurance of skills and knowledge they already had.

One of the subjects we discuss with students learning to dive is not diving beyond your training. We note two reasons for this:

1. There may be things that should worry you that won't.

2. You'll worry about your lack of knowledge, and that distraction is itself dangerous.

It sounds like your second buddy was in the latter state. They needed the mental boost. I'm not sure how else they would have gotten their confidence back beyond doing the dive. Retrain? I suppose, and there's probably a continuum between "I just need to dive with a buddy and get myself sorted" and "I really need to go through it all again to feel comfortable."

 

[halocline]

Thanks for the replies they have been helpful and entertaining. I used the wrong term, I shouldn't said legal, ........acceptable would have been more suitable. At any rate I will come back and post how my dives went for that day. Until then, I'm off to rec dive!!!

I’m not going to read this whole thread, but what you are suggesting, i.e going into a cave zone with a cave instructor after completing the cavern class, is not unusual. Usually it’s done as part of the intro to cave class. I think being guided into the cave zone as a cavern diver sends a little bit of a mixed message; on one hand you’re very likely in good hands with the instructor, but on the other you are entering an environment that is beyond your training, which is breaking one of the cardinal rules. The way some people might skirt around this is by saying ‘it’s the same as if you were taking intro to cave’ but it’s not really. The class would have prefaced the dive with classroom and land/OW skills. And your role is different, you are a student, not just a guided client. So while the standards of the cave training agencies might allow it, to me it’s just a little on the iffy side in terms of intent.

There is a easy solution; tell your instructor you’d like to start an intro class and ask him/her to consider the dive as a training dive.

 

[BoundForElsewhere]

i think it all really depends on the cave / cavern you are in. the cenotes i have dived are pretty tame with no current and no real obstructions into the cave zone. only really, really dark and empty blackness.

if it was one of those cave situations with the crazy currents shooting through tiny little openings and switching directions, no. not a chance.

there are always factors going into any diving situation that have to be weighed and measured before finning into it. i would like to think i follow the cardinal rule, "will my decision kill me, will it kill someone else, will someone else have to put their personal safety in jeopardy to rescue / retrieve me?" if the answer is yes to any of those, I turn around and enjoy where i'm at.