NAUI DIR tech course content (kinda split from DIR variances)

[dsteding]

FYI- you guys are aware that ratio deco is unsupported by NAUI Tec, right? NAUI has a strong affinity for RGBM, which is one of the packages we go over in my classes.

Yes, I was aware of that.

Heather, one thing, you mention keeping the END (I'm assuming this is the narcotic depth, but I could be mistaken) below 100 fsw, but with 26/17 on a 150 foot dive, that doesn't seem to compute. Does NAUI not include oxygen in the equation? Or do you do shallower tech dives for the class?

 

[Rainer]

Also, Heather, you say you teach 26/17 (per standards), does the NAUI "Tech 1" cert specify this as the only HE mix? Do you actually do the dives for the class on this mix? Thanks.

 

[Adobo]

Max end is 100'. PO is 1.2 or less (for the bottom portiion of the dive), average will be about the same.

I'm curious about your feelings on the valve drill. My feelings: what GUE teaches is almost like a martial art form (kata? I thinkt hey call them)- it familiarizes you with the movements, but the process is much slower than what you want if you are really loosing gas.

I don't use cookies EVER for anything. The only entrance/ exit that means anything to me are 1. the one I have come from. I never trust the markers already present in the system. See... a marker could be telling you that there is an exit 200' ahead of you, but what if there has been a collapse or the line has broken between your present location and that exit? Is that still a valid arrow? Would you want to take that chance in an emergency? This is a major difference I have seen in people who were trained 10 years or more ago, and those trianed more recently. In recent years we have developed "line follower" mentality among divers who expect the "line committee" to keep all the lines in good shape and markings current. When I was trained there were no "cookies"- we used arrows for everything, which I continue to do and to teach.

Warning: Newb alert

Re: Valve drill
Personally, I don't really get the purpose of the valve drill. Maybe to help one practice reaching their valves so they have the ability should the need ever arise? However, there seems to be consistency in that the former GUE instructor and the two current GUE instructors I have taken instruction from teach it the same way in that they go for the right valve first, breath the primary reg down and then isolate if necessary. There is a minor variation from there but it is valve first.

In a real valve/manifold failure scenario, the order in which things are done might vary slightly depending on where the diver suspects the gas is leaking from. In other words, one might go for the left post instead of the right post in a real failure scenario.

Re: Line markers
I'm not sure I understand...
IIRC, I was instructed to use my own cookies when there is a decision. So on a T, I would put a cookie on the exit side of the line.

I was also instructed to use my own line arrows in emergency situations. In other words, if I have to leave the main line to look for my buddy, I would use an arrow to tie off to. The arrow would point to the exit.

I believe the idea was also not to trust the permanent markers. For example, one could run into a permanently installed arrow that points away from the direction one came from. But that arrow could be pointing to an exit that does not have a continuous line to the surface.

What I have described is based on Cave 1. And it might be slightly inaccurate/incomplete.

Re: "I have to "teach" the gasses as prescribed by standards."
I guess this begs the question, which processes, procedures and standards are consistent with what you did in the WKPP days and which are variations based on NAUI tech standards?

 

[vbcoachchris]

NAUI officially does not use O2 as narcotic for dive planning, but you can if you choose too. Hence 17% meets the 100 ft END for dive planning. They also recommend a Maximum PO2 of 1.4, but you may use 1.2 if you choose. If you teach Helitrox as a separate class the standards would have you use the published tables and you would need to dive a 13-17% HE and 26-30% O2 mix. If you take the “tech 1” class, the instructor has more flexibility in mix and deco choices. As for ratio deco NAUI DOES NOT support ratio deco and you are not allowed to use it for NAUI sanctioned courses, but you may use VPM instead of RGBM and you can add conservatism as you set fit. You would be surprised (or maybe you would not) at how similar a modified VPM profile resembles a ratio deco profile. What a coincidence

 

[dsteding]

If you take the “tech 1” class, the instructor has more flexibility in mix and deco choices.

Thanks Scott-

So, the way I read this, the helitrox 17% is mostly tied to NAUI's tables, if you needed to dive a higher percentage helium, the NAUI answer would be to run a profile using RGBM, and compare that to other deco planning approaches as the individual diver saw fit. Does that summarize things a bit?

Personally--and especially around here--I don't think I'd ever want to be at 150 fsw with only 17% helium in my mix.

 

[chickdiver]

.....

 

[chickdiver]

.....

 

[Adobo]

Valve drill_ so... if you teach this whole sequence of shutting down and breathing down, etc. In a real gas loss scenario you are using valuable gas... not to mention your reaction has been "trained" to follow this pattern- rather than going for the most logical solution of shutting the isolator first to preserve the most gas. What kind of sense does that make?

Line markers: you just made my point. Why use a "cookie" what information does it give you? None. A cookie provides a tie off place for your line, nothing more. An arrow, on the other hand provides a tie off and critical piece of information. Which would you prefer?

I'm not making an argument for or against a particular way of doing either valve drills or marking lines. Just expressing what I think I was taught.

The WKPP is not a training agency, it's an exploration group. It's policies and procedures are not those of a training agency, and should not be confused as such. Neither the standard gasses of GUE nor the policies of NAUI Tec equate to anything done in the WKPP.

My understanding is that procedures used in the WKPP were codified. This is what I thought people used to characterize as "DIR". I guess I might have filled in the blanks here but what I thought these meant were things like:
- standardized gear
- standard procedures (marking lines, valve failure resolution)
- standard gasses

And much more.. Did my imagination get the better or me? Was there really less standardization in the WKPP than what GUE presents?

Note to mod: This might be a deviation from the original topic/intent of this thread. If appropriate, please move this to it's own thread and into the proper forum.

 

[rjack321]

I'm curious about your feelings on the valve drill. My feelings: what GUE teaches is almost like a martial art form (kata? I thinkt hey call them)- it familiarizes you with the movements, but the process is much slower than what you want if you are really loosing gas.

As others have eluded to, the drill is just a drill to:
1) familiarize yourself with which reg goes with which hand
2) gain comfort in manipulation
3) serve as a diagnostic approach of last resort

As has been debated ad naseum before, going for the right post when you're totally clueless has the benefit of possibly getting the reg 'most likely' to fail and providing some feedback on source. Going for the isolator preserves a finite amount of gas but provides no feedback on source.

I have always been very comfortable in both valve drills (breathing down or purging the left post). And I seem to be pretty damned fast at them too. But that doesn't mean I'm "on autopilot". The printing of valve shutdown time limits and such in the GUE standards has created a frantic-ness which is counterproductive to really getting value out of the drill (#s 1 and 2 above).

I know some folks who have literally done hundreds and hundreds of valve drills to prepare for more advanced classes. So yes, at some point the familiarization gets taken to the point of rote muscle memory and it starts to be counterproductive. Since at that point the brain is disconnected from the arm.

I don't use cookies EVER for anything. The only entrance/ exit that means anything to me are 1. the one I have come from. I never trust the markers already present in the system. See... a marker could be telling you that there is an exit 200' ahead of you, but what if there has been a collapse or the line has broken between your present location and that exit? Is that still a valid arrow? Would you want to take that chance in an emergency? This is a major difference I have seen in people who were trained 10 years or more ago, and those trianed more recently. In recent years we have developed "line follower" mentality among divers who expect the "line committee" to keep all the lines in good shape and markings current. When I was trained there were no "cookies"- we used arrows for everything, which I continue to do and to teach.

This seems to be a significant difference. With the continued popularity of cave diving if we all put our own arrows in, they start to get confusing. It becomes more difficult to reference the cave because arrow directions may shift. Yes its possible to mark your arrows so there are unique. But if as a community we decide that arrows are of two types: established or emergency. Then there there's not multiple sets of arrows some with unique identifiers and some without floating around pointing every which way.

The analogy the Danny Riodian gives is an intersection. If you're on a deserted road you can mark an intersection any way you wish to find your way home. But at a busy intersection we must either reference the street signs provided, or establish our own markings not incompatible with the street signs.

Cookies are the approach used. You might consider them.

 

[rjack321]

Line markers: you just made my point. Why use a "cookie" what information does it give you? None. A cookie provides a tie off place for your line, nothing more. An arrow, on the other hand provides a tie off and critical piece of information. Which would you prefer?.

Incorrect, cookies provide direction when used like this

jump (thank you Jason B for turning me on to this excellent pictoral description)