Padi/Dsat gear configuration

[Genesis]

we have technology - why not use it?

"Technology" does include things like He. Its not just a matter of computers, fin designs unheard of, and even today's drysuit materials.

He doesn't introduce "complications" that are unreasonable, IMHO. It in fact reduces risk overall. Look at the balance and trade-offs:

1. He requires better control of ascent rates, since it perfuses differently than Nitrogen - its a molecular mass thing. Come up too quick on He and you're more likely to get nailed. But we already learn a maximum ascent rate of 30 fpm, not the older 60 or 120! If you can't keep your ascent rate under control, you have no business doing dives in that range anyway. I'd argue that if you can't keep your ascent under control you had better not even think about diving in the 100' range, because you can nail yourself and good with a fast ascent from that depth - no He required. So is this a REAL issue?

2. Is He expensive? Well, a bit. So are doubles, manifolds, and the rest of the rig you need to dive with reasonable equipment at that depth, not to mention the training cost. Is the He material in that overall computation? I don't think so, and I'd argue that if it is, you can't afford to be doing that kind of diving.

3. Narcosis can kill you. Easily. Narrowing of perception is a sneaky way to die, much like a CNS Tox event, in that often you don't notice anything wrong before the fatal event cycle begins. Never mind that I'd like to remember and enjoy my dives, not just survive them. The problem is that there is no way to know what your individual succeptability to narcosis looks like, even on a given day, until you're down there and then you may not recognize you're impaired.

4. He may not be available everywhere. So what? Am I buying a generic world-wide course or am I buying one suited to my local conditions and environment? Is PADI/DSAT selling me something to the lowest-common-denominator? I'd prefer not to go that route, thank you very little

There appears to be other paths, including TDIs, that bypass the "deep air" stuff and go from planned deco at "recreational" depths to Trimix. I personally believe its a better mousetrap, and wonder why a "new" course doesn't recognize the things that have been learned.

Not long ago PADI said that diving on air beyond 130' was stupid and unsafe with no qualifications related to training. Now they're teaching it? What gives there? You can't make an unqualified statement and then teach that, can you?

 

[MHK]

MIke, and others,

You guys make some fair points and it's pretty unlikely we'll change any one's opinion based on internet based conversations, but if I may speak to a few points that Mike riased that I think should waarent further consideration if anyone is considering the RecTec class..

MY view of the RecTec approach is that the mindset is off from the get go so what you'll find is that mindset flows through into teh class.. What many recreational diver fail to appreciate is that when you start diving into the technical environment [ and let's just assume that technical is defined as anything requiring mandatory decompression stops] your options are significantly reduced, your risk is significantly increased and as a result much more attention to detail and planning is required. For many this change in mindset and this notion of adopting a complete re-thinking of their approach to diving is the first opportunity to recognize whether or not a diver has made a successful transition from a recreational diver to a technical diver. In recreational diving if something happens, or if you are unsure you can always surface and solve the problem at the surface.. In tech diving you do NOT have that option and you will need to solve anything that comes up at depth.. Accordingly, things like attention to gear configuration, proper gear selection, proper gas selection and so on become all the more relevant..

Those that practice the deep air diving often like to say that * I can handle it* or some such other ideas. I used to dive deep air all the time, in fact I've done dives as deep as 285' on air, but just because I used to do it and got away with it doesn't mean that I plan on ignoring the benefits associated with helium based diving. When I was doing the deep air stuff helium was largely unavailable and the information was significantly restricted to either military or commerical divers. So back then if you wanted to go deep you had little choice but to do it on air.. Like most every other person who engages in an activity that many consider beyond the scope of acceptable limits, I assumed that it could never happen to me.. I was lucky nothing did, but I had way to many close calls to continue the practice, especially given that there is a safer way to do it..

What really troubles me about the PADI RecTec program is for decades PADI was the leader in advancing the position that diver's should go no deeper then 130' on air. Such to the point that there very own Vice President Drew Richardson, in their very own Undersea Journal wrote an editorial entitled *The Dangers of Deep Air* and in the article requested that PADI members speak out against any agency that promotes and teaches deep air diving.. Nothing in the way of technological breakthroughs have occured since that article, in fact the overwhelming evidence and information suggests that there are safer ways to dive to those depths, and the use of helium is significantly more safe.. For PADI to do such a complete reversal of one of their core philosophies simply to capitalize on market share, to me, speaks to a program that hasn't been well thought out, hasn't been researched clear enough and is designed with financial goals at it's core not diver safety..

Just my thoughts on the issue..

Later

 

[MechDiver]

MHK once bubbled...
MIke, and others,

You guys make some fair points and it's pretty unlikely we'll change any one's opinion based on internet based conversations, but if I may speak to a few points that Mike riased that I think should waarent further consideration if anyone is considering the RecTec class..
<<snip very good comments>>
Just my thoughts on the issue..

Later

I actually have to agree with everything you said in this post.

I think I have to die now...

 

[DiverBuoy]

Genesis once bubbled...
we have technology - why not use it?

Not long ago PADI said that diving on air beyond 130' was stupid and unsafe with no qualifications related to training. Now they're teaching it? What gives there? You can't make an unqualified statement and then teach that, can you?

It's called progress. And in the other areas you mentioned where there is still room for change ... in time that will change too. I've changed my mind and been persuaded by technology and progress just like you. Apparently PADI is not above change either

 

[MHK]

DiverBuoy once bubbled...


It's called progress. And in the other areas you mentioned where there is still room for change ... in time that will change too. I've changed my mind and been persuaded by technology and progress just like you. Apparently PADI is not above change either

I'm not sure I follow your point here.. Are you suggesting that the RecTec class is progress???

Thanks

 

[DiverBuoy]

Though in your case you criticise them for making all the wrong changes for all the wrong reasons. I think they adapt to the times. Yes some of those changes are motivated by money - but often the money follows the whims and interests of the diving community so it can be a healthy barometer of what's worth focusing on.

 

[xoomboy]

While I'm a huge proponent of change, it's important to keep in mind that not all progress can be considered good progress.

Change for change's sake is not the right way to do things, especially in an arena where loss of human life is the consequence of improper action. Proper change can only come from education, experimentation, and enlightenment, not from merely deciding one day that things should be different and making it so.

Unfortunately, no one has come into the mix to defend the PADI/DSAT side of things, so it makes for a biased debate -- albeit one of the most informative ones I've followed so far on this board. Mike and others have done a great job of referencing the materials and sources available to us, but there are also a lot of questions that we have which need to be answered by someone involved in the process.

I agree with all of the arguments made by everyone so far. However, I need more information to make my own opinion!

Matt

 

[MikeFerrara]

You guys don't have to convince me honest. I have a bigger gas bill than anyone I know. But honest...when divers see you cut tables on your palm and diving trimix when they are using air and Nitek 3's you get razed. The idea that deep air is bad is almost a universaly accepted idea. The idea that deep air starts at 100 or 130 is not.

We that use helium starting at 100 or 130 (never mind shallower ) are way way in the minority. I only attempted to speculate as to some of the reasons for that. We do some diving in Lake Superior around whitefish point. Almost all the wrecks we dive are well below "recreational depths" My wife and I are about the only ones I see using trimix.

A short and typical story...My wife and I were diving off a private boat in Lake Superior. When we arrived we were introduced to a third diver. Our hosts were not diving that day but intended to stay clean for a dive they had planned the next day. My wife and I were diving trimix and hadn't planned on a third diver. On the boat ride out I asked the third diver what his plans were. I didn't know if he intended to dive with us or what. He told me his plans which were that he was diving air and simply scooted around the wreck until his computer showed about 45 minutes of deco then he headed up. His plans didn't seem compatable with ours so he dived alone. He seemed ok with things. I have many such stories and I'm sure MHK has even more.

Speedster,
Honest the prerequisits I listed for teaching the TecRec class in an earlier post are right out of the standards so I don't know what that stuff on the web site is about.

 

[MechDiver]

DiverBuoy once bubbled...
I think they adapt to the times.

I think they adapt to where the money is. One of the reasons I no longer DM is PADI's insistence on putting pressure on students to spend more. Although I am a firm believer in continued dive education, PADI does not push it to improve diver ability, but to make money.

I don't know off hand how many PADI cards I have, 10 maybe, but I shudder whenever I hear PADI and "tech" in the same sentence.

Phil

 

[MHK]

DiverBuoy once bubbled...
Though in your case you criticise them for making all the wrong changes for all the wrong reasons. I think they adapt to the times. Yes some of those changes are motivated by money - but often the money follows the whims and interests of the diving community so it can be a healthy barometer of what's worth focusing on.

Perhaps then they deserve the criricism.. I'm not sure I agree with the premise that following the interests of the community is what anyone should expect from a leader.. I admired their principled stand against deep air and I was extremely disappointed in their reversal of a core philosophy simply for the sake of market share. I guess for me it boils down to how can you follow a agency that one minute speaks to a core belief, ie no deep air, and then when the opportunity to make money arrives they simply abandon their core principles.. Take for example, at this point PADI advocates the buddy system and has done so for many years. I agree with that proncipled stand because it has diving safety at it's core. SDI has now offered a solo diving class, if PADI were now to, again, reverse a core position and offer solo diving classes wouldn't you then have to question what, if anything, does the agency actually stand for????

A leader isn't suppose to follow a survey poll and say, OK the diving public wants so and so, so we'll sell it to them irrespective of the fact that it goes against everything we stand for.. In Drew Richardson's very own editorial he encourages diver's to speak out against any agency that teaches deep air because of the dangers associated with deep air, so why should PADI be excluded from criticism when their very own Vive President is the one demanding that diver's speak out against it???

Most agencies, even IANTD are moving away from deep air so I think for PADI to be jumpng into the game at this point is a day late and a dollar short..

But I appreciate that you may share a different viewpoint, but I would still like for anyone in favor of the deep air program to explain to me why diving to 165' is better done on air versus trimix..

Later