Decompression Course

[rivers]

I'm not really familiar with the training offered on either of those courses, so I won't dispute that. My point was merely the non-existence of a 'grey area' through the application of two analytical factors.

'Tecreational' level courses are now becoming more popular - breaching the gap between the traditional rec-tec divide. Nonetheless, those courses have specific aims and outcomes. It is wise not to over-attribute those outcomes, merely because they exceed prior definitions of 'recreational diving'.

Do either of the IANTD or GUE 'Rec 3' courses actually qualify divers to conduct decompression dives?

Or are they merely an instance of 'beginning with the end in mind'... pre-loading students with advanced knowledge of later training, to enable defter subsequent progression?

Giving someone the tools with which to practice and prepare for decompression diving, is not the same as training/qualifying them as decompression divers. For one thing, the required standards of skill performance and necessary acquired experience are likely to be noticeably lower in a 'preparatory' course, rather than a 'qualification' course.

gue rec 3 qualifies divers to dive to dive to 40m using trimix and a single stage (of 32%) and conduct dives with up to 15 minutes of deco. So it's an advanced recreational course and introduces a bit of stage handling. Not massive bottom times. It also introduces manifold failures and how to fix them, ascent and descent procedures, etc.

 

[DevonDiver]

gue rec 3 qualifies divers to dive to dive to 40m using trimix and a single stage (of 32%) and conduct dives with up to 15 minutes of deco. So it's an advanced recreational course and introduces a bit of stage handling. Not massive bottom times. It also introduces manifold failures and how to fix them, ascent and descent procedures, etc.

Sounds like it covers a lot of the same territory as the PADI Tec40 course then; the variance being on trimix use, deco gas 50% vs 32% and 10min vs 15min deco.

I promote the Tec40 course as an exceptional 'advanced rec' course also; in addition to it being the first baby step towards 'proper' technical diving qualification. It certainly offers a lot more refined 'tools in the toolset' for recreational divers who would otherwise be pushing the limits with 'aggressive' recreational-approach diving. It turns an 'aggressive' recreational dive into a very mild technical dive. That's a good way to do things IMHO.

Back to the issue of 'grey area' - this is really being addressed now through an increasing availability of 'tecreational' or 'advanced recreational' diving courses. It's something the market was missing for a long time... and something that's becoming more and more necessary as the use of dive computers leads to more aggressive diving.... and technical diving itself becomes much more mainstream and accessible to the masses.

 

[DuboisP]

Back to the issue of 'grey area' - this is really being addressed now through an increasing availability of 'tecreational' or 'advanced recreational' diving courses. It's something the market was missing for a long time... and something that's becoming more and more necessary as the use of dive computers leads to more aggressive diving.... and technical diving itself becomes much more mainstream and accessible to the masses.

depending which market

 

[Edward3c]

Fair point, I did say *suspect* though and they do seem to be involved in the appropriate working group.

BTW, do you know why sports diver isn't certified to ISO 24801-2? I notice it specifies a knowledge of decompression limits rather than actual decompression practice and that PADI AOW complies.

BSAC, like most organisations, has more qualifications than there are ISO standards. the BSAC ones are here, but in essence:

* Ocean Diver = EN 14153-2/ISO 24801-2 - 'Autonomous Diver
* Dive Leader = EN 14153-3/ISO 24801-3 - 'Dive Leader'

 

[mike.chuanshi]

Tdi and tec rec are good options. Theoretically I studied both and the only difference I found is the catchy material PADI has to offer. Tdi books are too plain (I'm trivial like that) . In the end Tdi gives you an extra 5 metres allowed on the license. I chose to be certified with padi because all my other licenses are padi

As a professional instructional designer and a diver who has studied both the PADI materials and those from TDI, I can tell you that PADI's materials are quite poor from an educational standpoint. They seem to pride themselves on how their courses are of such high quality ("you may be able to get college credit..."), yet when I look at their courses I immediately notice a ton of red flags popping up all over the place. TDI, on the other hand, may not produce manuals which are as aesthetically pleasing, but they are written with application of the content in mind, and that content is solidified through hands-on experience in the water with (hopefully) an effective instructor.

True learning takes place through experience, not through the mere memorization of content. Assuming the goal of the learning is to become a better diver (not have matching c-cards), the choice is pretty clear. Of course, if the PADI course had a very good instructor and the instructor for the TDI course was not as good, then go with the PADI course - as I already mentioned, it's the experience that matters, and since the instructor is guiding that experience, he/she will make or break the course.

My own instructor does both TDI and PADI TecRec, which is why I have had the opportunity to look at different materials. Because he provides very good experiences in the water and guides effective application of the "academic" concepts learned, I choose to stay with him.

 

[boulderjohn]

As a professional instructional designer and a diver who has studied both the PADI materials and those from TDI, I can tell you that PADI's materials are quite poor from an educational standpoint. They seem to pride themselves on how their courses are of such high quality ("you may be able to get college credit..."), yet when I look at their courses I immediately notice a ton of red flags popping up all over the place.

Really.

I, too, have had a career as a professional instructional designer. In fact, I taught courses in instructional design, and worked as the curriculum director for a national company creating instructional materials. I am an instructor for both PADI and TDI. I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[FinnMom]

I too wanted just one course to allow me the option of trimix for deep dives. I took IANDTs Advanced Rec Trimix and was completely happy with it. BUT I had also already been diving doubles for 2+ yrs by then & the only new practical skills were handling a stage and finally getting the back kick down pat.
I don't think 40m is big problem on air or slitrox (EAN 25 for example), but you need to have doubles and be used to them, preferably fairly capable at doing shutdowns too. I think I would rather be on air than with doubles, stages and trimix having only just learned to use all of it, let alone with a buddy equally as green with the whole package.
Just for the record my certification is for 40 meters on air or appropriate EAN. I'm not diving beyond my certification.