PADI TecRec

[MHK]

The quality of the education materials is good.

What, if anything then, did the educational materials discuss to address the points raised?

1) I have a copy of the book so would you please point me to the page that discusses overcoming narcosis while breathing air at 165'??

2) Could you point me to the page that discusses overcoming the increased gas density when using air to 165'??

3) Could you please point me to the page that discusses why anyone who dives to 165' should worry about isobaric counter diffusion??

Once we finish with those we'll go to the next set of questions..

The real issue that PADI has steadfastly refused to discuss is that a few years ago their very own VP of training Drew Richardson wrote an article in their very own journal catagorically stating that deep air diving is too dangerous to dive, and in fact went so far as to encourage all diver from all agencies to speak out against ANY agency that promoted and/or offered deep air training so until they address their hypocrisy why should anyone take this class seriously, especially when we know there are safer and more efficient ways to do the same diving???

Later

 

[roakey]

Mike, it's kinda like learning to car race, once you get good, THEN you get to use a seatbelt...

Wait a minute, that's not how it works, is it?

Roak

 

[Otter]

What, if anything then, did the educational materials discuss to address the points raised?

1) I have a copy of the book so would you please point me to the page that discusses overcoming narcosis while breathing air at 165'??

2) Could you point me to the page that discusses overcoming the increased gas density when using air to 165'??

3) Could you please point me to the page that discusses why anyone who dives to 165' should worry about isobaric counter diffusion??

Once we finish with those we'll go to the next set of questions..

The real issue that PADI has steadfastly refused to discuss is that a few years ago their very own VP of training Drew Richardson wrote an article in their very own journal catagorically stating that deep air diving is too dangerous to dive, and in fact went so far as to encourage all diver from all agencies to speak out against ANY agency that promoted and/or offered deep air training so until they address their hypocrisy why should anyone take this class seriously, especially when we know there are safer and more efficient ways to do the same diving???

Later

I clearly understand you are against deep air. What I don't understand is your vituperative attack on PADI. If the course eliminated deep air, would it be a good course or does it lack any redeeming value at all?

 

[Mako Mark]

Wow, what a hot issue, I feel compelled to contribute but feel a little bit of bit of trepidation, but here are some comments.


Firstly, Mike (MHK) Shut up and go diving dude, I am sensing a lot of hostility and I think you have issues. PADI bashing does not make you look clever, if you can produce a better course I suggest you talk to Karl yourself rather than logging 500 posts on one bb. Put your knowledge to use and contribute rather than criticize

secondly I have recently taught the Tec Deep course for the first time. I took a long time before I felt comfortable with it and as always, the first time you teach a course is a learning curve.

The materials look good, I especially like the teaching slides as these are virtually unheard of in other technical agencies, and even where they do exist few of the instructors use them, believing that their vast knowledge makes them brilliant educators by default.

The knowledge reviews are exhaustive, I found that some of Karl Shreeves mathematics is beyond my ability to fathom. Why anyone would multiply by 1/x rather than devide by x is a mystery, I guess everyone has their own way of doing maths, it must be a cultural difference.

The dives, I found it a little strange that more care was not taken to organize the dives into at least pairs of equivalent dive depths or diving days, I know that the depth ranges generally overlap, but this could have been simplified.

Calculating deep stops, I guess i am a veteran, cause when I started deep air diving the deep stop was an anecdotal referance to "it seems to make you feel better, so if it works, it works". such introduction of "Standardised" proceedures and the standardized rig drew Karl a lot of flak when he launched the program, but in reality makes sense. It doesnt mean that if you are doing something different, with your greater knowlege and experience that you are wrong, it means that for a newbie starting out, this is a great place to start based on the concensus of the dive community.

Drew Richardsons article regarding deep air diving and his opinion that deep air is dangerous, has been covered by the fact that the DSAT limit is 165 ft rather than the 190-220 depth range for the equivalent (TDI IANTD) courses that were available at the time he wrote the article. I personally discussed these issues with both Drew and Karl, and they are not trying to fool anyone, they are just trying to apply an educational system that is tried and tested in one dicipline of diving, and applying it to another.
Drew told me (in early 1998) that PADI would NEVER enter the tec market, they had no reason too, they were far more interested in the slightly larger market of kids programs. Tec was seen as a high profile but VERY small niche market.

One thing that few people know is that PADI and TDI had a gentlemans agreement for a long time. PADI would not enter the tec market and TDI would not enter the recreational market. This agreement was broken when Brett GILLIAN Started SDI. then I guess all bets were off.

Politics aside, most people on this board seem to agree that it is the instructor not the agency or the color of you c-card that matters. I agree.

If someone wants to teach encyclopeadic knowledge of diving theory, you will certainally have divers that can quote the page numbers of various theories from various manuals. Personally I believe that diving is learned in the water and only supported by the knowledge.

The DSAT programs have higher pre-requisites than most all the other agencies, they have more required dives than most other programs, and this extends right up to the new trimix course. The information is up to date and open to instructor elaboration and adaptation to local practices

This does not mean that I am not looking forward to the first rewrite of the DSAT tec deep course, I think there will be many changes, but the greatest comment I have regarding this whole thread is that it is so easy to criticize.

My greates problem with the DSAT course, is that I now have a sore back, I guess Ill leave all those deco tanks at home and go cave diving instead, I think DSAT is working on that course right now.

may your bubbles always be silent

and never take a laxative and a sleeping pill at the same time

 

[salty]

Firstly, Mike (MHK) Shut up and go diving dude, I am sensing a lot of hostility and I think you have issues. PADI bashing does not make you look clever, if you can produce a better course I suggest you talk to Karl yourself rather than logging 500 posts on one bb. Put your knowledge to use and contribute rather than criticize

Dude get a clue...That first passage deserves a coke warning.

Basicly what I got from your post is that PADI has a great new tech program every one should try it out but its not quit perfected so it might get changed and fixed.

Yea tech diving is the area where you want to interduce something that isent perfected yet,how many people will get hurt or die befor PADI figures out all the errors in the program??

 

[Boogie711]

Wow, what a hot issue, I feel compelled to contribute but feel a little bit of bit of trepidation, but here are some comments.


Firstly, Mike (MHK) Shut up and go diving dude, I am sensing a lot of hostility and I think you have issues. PADI bashing does not make you look clever, if you can produce a better course I suggest you talk to Karl yourself rather than logging 500 posts on one bb. Put your knowledge to use and contribute rather than criticize

OK - you have NO clue who you're talking to there, do you? Because if you did, you would realize just how COMPLETELY out of line what you wrote really is.

Not only does Mike Kane have over 4,000 dives, (when he stopped keeping track, according to what he told me) but he HAS developed a better course, and is currently involved in teaching and promoting it.

New guy - you're not starting off on the right foot around here. That may be one of the most inappropriate posts I've seen around here in a while - not because of your horrible attitude, but because you so BLATANTLY don't know who or what you're talking about.

 

[Mako Mark]

have you guys actually seen the program, the first thing it says is "this program is not for everyone".

and nothing is perfect or perfected, diving is a skill that is under constant evolution, just as teaching it is. Particularly tec diving, accident analysis is the fundimental reason that we develop new techniques and proceedures. Some one gets hurt or killed, and we try not to copy what they did. That is the nature of the beast.

Dont get me wrong, I believe the instructor is more important than which text book you use, but as tec diving becomes more mainstream, there will be more people that want to extend their range, without having to become astronauts to do so. There will be "mainstream" tec divers, and the cutting edge or groundbreakers, just like the first recreational divers of the 50´s and 60´s were seen as being a little out there or fringe. now, even kids can participate in mainstream recreational diving with appropriate limitations.

Remember diving is what we do for fun generally, I think that the DSAT program is too long and involved and should be broken down into more managable steps. When other agencies put out equipment rigging videos, then I will have something to compare the DSAT one with, untill then good on the guys from DSAT. Good job on the teaching slates too they are better than all the other agencies combined as to my knowledge no one else has bothered to make any. I am not saying it is perfect no, the slates are too big to fit easily in a standard dive rite pouch, but they are better than believing I can remember everything.

The blender course is better than any other I have seen too. It comes with a graphical trimix blending calculator, I guess we could do long involved calculations by hand, but that introduces the error chain. It would be arrogant of me to believe that I could do a better more reliable job of simple arithmatic than a pc or laptop can. if that was the case, everyone would still be using slide rules and abacus.

There is a lot of sarcasm and criticism on this thread, the thread was started with what do people know about the new DSAT program tec deep, not who is afraid of the industry leader, If you cant say anything nice, or cant be constructive dont say anything at all.

I taught the course, and I posted my thoughts on it, lets keep ego out of it.

 

[JeffG]

<snip>
I taught the course, and I posted my thoughts on it, lets keep ego out of it.

Then you can answer the 3 questions MHK asked then.

1) I have a copy of the book so would you please point me to the page that discusses overcoming narcosis while breathing air at 165'??

2) Could you point me to the page that discusses overcoming the increased gas density when using air to 165'??

3) Could you please point me to the page that discusses why anyone who dives to 165' should worry about isobaric counter diffusion??

 

[Boogie711]

I'm still laughing at the thought of anyone telling MHK to not only spend more time diving, but to develop a better course. TOOOO funny.

Cancun Mark - maybe you can correct me - is this the PADI course that advocates hooking a liftline around something so you don't have to worry about something like, ok - bouyancy when you shoot a bag???

Hey, if there's money in it, it's good to know PADI will promote it. Unfortunately, it's not like PADI cares about something like actual dive skills.

 

[MHK]

Wow, what a hot issue, I feel compelled to contribute but feel a little bit of bit of trepidation, but here are some comments.


Firstly, Mike (MHK) Shut up and go diving dude, I am sensing a lot of hostility and I think you have issues. PADI bashing does not make you look clever, if you can produce a better course I suggest you talk to Karl yourself rather than logging 500 posts on one bb. Put your knowledge to use and contribute rather than criticize

secondly I have recently taught the Tec Deep course for the first time. I took a long time before I felt comfortable with it and as always, the first time you teach a course is a learning curve.

Drew Richardsons article regarding deep air diving and his opinion that deep air is dangerous, has been covered by the fact that the DSAT limit is 165 ft rather than the 190-220 depth range for the equivalent (TDI IANTD) courses that were available at the time he wrote the article. I personally discussed these issues with both Drew and Karl, and they are not trying to fool anyone, they are just trying to apply an educational system that is tried and tested in one dicipline of diving, and applying it to another.
Drew told me (in early 1998) that PADI would NEVER enter the tec market, they had no reason too, they were far more interested in the slightly larger market of kids programs. Tec was seen as a high profile but VERY small niche market.

One thing that few people know is that PADI and TDI had a gentlemans agreement for a long time. PADI would not enter the tec market and TDI would not enter the recreational market. This agreement was broken when Brett GILLIAN Started SDI. then I guess all bets were off.

may your bubbles always be silent

and never take a laxative and a sleeping pill at the same time

Let me respond to some of your comments, and I'll resist the temptation to "SHUT UP".. ;-)

My comments are not PADI bashing, which seems to be the excuse that any time anyone questions the program that we must somehow be bashing. Nonetheless, the questions I raised STILL are not being answered despite the best efforts at misdirection.

Secondly, I did speak to Karl about my concerns, in fact, Karl and I dove together when he was beta testing the program and I had the opportuntiy to review the program even before it was ever released and I did raise these issues to which I still haven't received a response.

You can dress a bad concept up in any pretty materials all you want, but at the end of the day it's still a bad program. Diving deep on air 5' shallower then your competition [ IANTD] doesn't make your program any safer because it's still a dangerous mix, and there are better ways to do that dive.

Drew Richardson was spot on in his analysis, and parsing the language to include deep air dives to 165' is disengenuous at best. Furthermore, teaching technical divers by putting students on their knees speaks to a ideaological philosophy that they just don't get it. Check the archives wherein previously posted was direct comments from PADI training e-mails that detail why the crawl before you can walk method is defended. That idea doesn't work in recreational diving, and certainly has no place in technical diving.

Rather then side track the issue, why not answer how a diver can adapt to narcosis?? Why not answer how a diver can overcome C02 retention using air at 165'?? Why not discuss the merits of using 80% as a deco gas?? And all the other points I've rasied.

I don't want to have a low level debate that appears to slam PADI, I'm simply saying that I have in fact seen the program, and my analysis is that the program is deficient in the areas that I've highlighted so I'm trying to get someone from PADI to answer a question, not accuse me of bashing PADI..

Later