Scuba
Contributor
This may be a loaded topic, but here it goes anyways.
Technical diving requires a certain amount of experience generally acquired through recreational diving. It requires a more advanced skill set and level than necessary for rec. Along with greater diving knowledge and specialized equipment, in order to perform these dives relatively safely. I think most will agree that Solo diving shares all these qualities with tech. However, widely accepted tech dive disciplines share one thing in common that solo does not - overhead environment. Is this enough to exclude solo from the tech categorization?
In truth, I have not found a definition for tech. It can be anything from the various overhead environment dives (soft and hard), to the use of different gases, to rebreather use. Although the latter two are generally often used in overhead diving, this is not a requisite. Yet, solo diving seems to be getting left out of the tech category by a training agency ( SDI ), and this board. Dont know of others as this appears to be a rather new subject openly discussed on its own merit.
Is the risk level, dive difficulty, knowledge, skill level, necessary specialty gear, of a higher degree for currently accepted tech diving disciplines than solo? Which type of dive presents the greatest risk to an inexperienced new diver? (on a comparable dive) To a well trained diver? In the long term? Can we fairly accurately assess these different type dives? Is the difference significant enough to differentiate them based on these criteria?
Generally, an overhead environment presents additional risks, how does it compare to the additional risk created with the exclusion of a dive buddy in some cases? Through the whole range of skill levels.
Is tech one of those categorizations designed to denote certain qualities, such as degree of difficulty and risk, along with the required attributes needed to practice it? Or are the qualities denoted by it stating other issues in common? Both? If you consider tech overhead diving, does the increasing acceptance of solo diving demand a new, more encompassing, definition of technical diving. Lest it loose one of its most useful aspects, to warn the uninitiated. It could possibly become a dangerous term if it fails to include types of high risk diving, since its meaning to most new divers is: higher risk advanced diving. By neglecting to incorporate solo diving as a tech category some may believe that it has a significantly lower degree of difficulty and risk level. Does it?
Is technical diving much ado about nothing? Our friends in other parts of the world where no such categorization exists will probably agree. After all, those practicing advanced diving such as cave, wreck, solo, etc. can be assumed to have progressed through the beginning and intermediate levels already. And a team cave diver is not necessarily qualified to wreck dive, ice dive, deep dive, solo, etc. And vice versa. All these specialties have some specific inherent qualities, both risks and demands, that are not present in others. The particulars of each type of dive need to be accounted for in order to perform each specific style of dive safely. In addition, a cave diver with one thousand dives will most likely not be better than a comparable diver who dives shallow reef dives in the latters environment, and vice versa. An applicable across the board comparison. Each type of dive stands on its own merits.
My concern is, is the exclusion of Solo diving from our commonly used tech categorization in the U.S. leading new divers to believe that solo is somehow easier and less demanding than tech?
New divers may want to comment here.
Technical diving requires a certain amount of experience generally acquired through recreational diving. It requires a more advanced skill set and level than necessary for rec. Along with greater diving knowledge and specialized equipment, in order to perform these dives relatively safely. I think most will agree that Solo diving shares all these qualities with tech. However, widely accepted tech dive disciplines share one thing in common that solo does not - overhead environment. Is this enough to exclude solo from the tech categorization?
In truth, I have not found a definition for tech. It can be anything from the various overhead environment dives (soft and hard), to the use of different gases, to rebreather use. Although the latter two are generally often used in overhead diving, this is not a requisite. Yet, solo diving seems to be getting left out of the tech category by a training agency ( SDI ), and this board. Dont know of others as this appears to be a rather new subject openly discussed on its own merit.
Is the risk level, dive difficulty, knowledge, skill level, necessary specialty gear, of a higher degree for currently accepted tech diving disciplines than solo? Which type of dive presents the greatest risk to an inexperienced new diver? (on a comparable dive) To a well trained diver? In the long term? Can we fairly accurately assess these different type dives? Is the difference significant enough to differentiate them based on these criteria?
Generally, an overhead environment presents additional risks, how does it compare to the additional risk created with the exclusion of a dive buddy in some cases? Through the whole range of skill levels.
Is tech one of those categorizations designed to denote certain qualities, such as degree of difficulty and risk, along with the required attributes needed to practice it? Or are the qualities denoted by it stating other issues in common? Both? If you consider tech overhead diving, does the increasing acceptance of solo diving demand a new, more encompassing, definition of technical diving. Lest it loose one of its most useful aspects, to warn the uninitiated. It could possibly become a dangerous term if it fails to include types of high risk diving, since its meaning to most new divers is: higher risk advanced diving. By neglecting to incorporate solo diving as a tech category some may believe that it has a significantly lower degree of difficulty and risk level. Does it?
Is technical diving much ado about nothing? Our friends in other parts of the world where no such categorization exists will probably agree. After all, those practicing advanced diving such as cave, wreck, solo, etc. can be assumed to have progressed through the beginning and intermediate levels already. And a team cave diver is not necessarily qualified to wreck dive, ice dive, deep dive, solo, etc. And vice versa. All these specialties have some specific inherent qualities, both risks and demands, that are not present in others. The particulars of each type of dive need to be accounted for in order to perform each specific style of dive safely. In addition, a cave diver with one thousand dives will most likely not be better than a comparable diver who dives shallow reef dives in the latters environment, and vice versa. An applicable across the board comparison. Each type of dive stands on its own merits.
My concern is, is the exclusion of Solo diving from our commonly used tech categorization in the U.S. leading new divers to believe that solo is somehow easier and less demanding than tech?
New divers may want to comment here.