Great thread RJP! Though I'm not sure what you've expected, inasmuch as in your profession, nothing has changed in 50 years. :biggrin:
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
I'd like to (respectfully) differ on just that point. In Scandinavia, at least, that's the MO of CMAS as well.The YMCA favored working through local clubs, a design that is still working for BSAC but really nowhere else.
Great thread RJP! Though I'm not sure what you've expected, inasmuch as in your profession, nothing has changed in 50 years. :biggrin:
What percent of ALL recreational divers are using rebreathers these days, do you suppose? I would guess you'd need some significant rounding to get it up to even 1%. Sure, that's up 1000% from .01% five years ago. But I wouldn't consider that "lighting it up" just yet. I'm thinking a product with a $5000 price tag targeted to a customer base that buys a $3 bottle of defog from an online seller in order to save the sales tax still has a little way to go on the adoption spectrum.
Again, you're looking at what something IS. I will agree that the technology is innovative (though it's been around for decades, so...) and of anything currently out there rebreathers have the greatest shot but they haven't come close to innovating the sport yet
Well, helium doubled the amount of dive depth open to recreational divers in the late 70's. Before helium folks were limited to about 130 feet, now I run charters regularly to 300 feet.
Liveaboards opened up places that were not accessible to the regular person before. Not the milquetoast T&C boats, but true explorers like the Sea Fever and the Nimrod and the Nautilus Explorer.
I know that none of these were gear innovations, but then, the gear is pretty good. These were adventure innovations, taking reliable gear and visiting places that would have taken an expedition (in the true sense of the word) 20 years earlier.
It all depends on your definition of 'recreational'. Rec vs tec - I agree. OTOH, 'recreational' can also mean 'not-for-pay'. The tec divers I know are all diving without being paid and for the sheer fun of it, while a DM, guide or instructor is doing it for money while still staying within rec (i.e. non-tec) limitsI don't think I'd consider 300ft dives to be recreational diving.
It all depends on your definition of 'recreational'. Rec vs tec - I agree. OTOH, 'recreational' can also mean 'not-for-pay'. The tec divers I know are all diving without being paid and for the sheer fun of it, while a DM, guide or instructor is doing it for money while still staying within rec (i.e. non-tec) limits
rec-re-a-tion-al [rek-ree-ey-shuh-nl]
adjective
1. of or pertaining to recreation