Tech diving, equipment, awareness and too much too soon

[oya]

I need to preface with the statement that I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever in your abilities as an instructor and venture to say I would dive anywhere with any student of your to the level at which you certified them. I base this on the points you have raised on the messageboard and on a handful of videos I've seen which you've posted to Youtube.

That said:

It's a teaching method, not a 'skill' for assessment. ... truncated... No harm, no foul... the lawyers can rest easy...

I don't know that lawyer rest easy on any point ever. Certainly in the US any dumb-goddamn case over anything can and probably will be raised. And when it comes to an accident any lawyer worth their salt will say, "Why wasn't the injured party wearing their mask at the time? It doesn't say anything about mask removal in the training agency's standards."

My main point in this is that I don't believe you should have to do a semantic backflip to train students properly. It makes me uncomfortable having to read the standards in such a way that you're pushing them to a breaking point or ever having to explain to anyone, "Now this isn't on the slate like this, but this is how we're going to do it and fit it into the standards like this..."

dive on the TecRec syllabus includes the performance standard "other simulated emergencies as directed by the instructor"... huge scope, all things considered.

I admit, I didn't know this line existed and applaud it's being written in. I counterbalance that, however, with the number of TecRec instructors (and Course Directors) I've known over the years who have insisted on sticking strictly to the slates and not pressing the standards a bit harder in the interests of creating better trained divers. This, too, is more an instructor issue than an agency issue, perhaps.

 

[stuartv]

I'm fascinated. Why??

Why should a student seeking an instructor pay attention to the agency as well?

Here is one example:

A student wants to get to full cave. They want to spend 2 years at an intermediate level before they progress on. They should make sure the instructor can issue them a cert from an agency that won't expire in the meantime. If the instructor can only issue a cert that will expire before the student's timeline allows them to proceed on to the next level, the student should find a different instructor.

Here is another:

A student wants to eventually be a Dive Master, certified to lead Adv Trimix dives. But, they are currently only an experience OW diver. If their goal is to be a TDI Adv Trimix DM, and they are looking for a recreational DM instructor to get started, they MIGHT legitimately choose to not use an instructor that cannot specifically issue an SDI DM cert - since TDI DM requires SDI DM as a prereq and does not accept crossovers.

I am confident there are more. I can think of more, but I think these two examples are sufficient.

 

[Jack Hammer]

Advanced Trimix Dive Master?!?

?!?!?!???

SMH

If your gonna do advanced dives you really need to know how to plan and execute advanced dives and not look for a babysitter, uh I mean DM, to lead you.

 

[DevonDiver]

I counterbalance that, however, with the number of TecRec instructors (and Course Directors) I've known over the years who have insisted on sticking strictly to the slates and not pressing the standards a bit harder in the interests of creating better trained divers. This, too, is more an instructor issue than an agency issue, perhaps.

On that we agree... instructor, not agency.

I think that it must be tempting for inexperienced instructors/instructor-trainers to hide behind standards. It's a solution for when your slight experience doesn't give you the answer to teaching conundrums... and/or because you didn't do enough technical diving to understand the actual competencies students need.

The influence of an agency is upon the lowest common denominator of instructor.... the minimum standards brigade. That can be justification to avoid an agency if you aren't confident in sorting the wheat from the chaff with instructor selection.

However, if you are confident that you've identified a good quality instructor, avoiding that instructor for reasons of their agency affiliation must be based on perceived limitations induced by the agency. That's what seems to make no sense to me. But I'm interested in what those perceptions might be....

Personally, I've always been content teaching TecRec. I genuinely like the course-flow and progression throughout the syllabus. I feel it's more beneficial than AN-DP as isolated courses. Tec40 gets divers into gear, using proper protocols... but doesn't take them into any'meaningful' deco until they are ready to progress. PADI have just added an option for normoxic trimix as an add-on to Tec45 and Tec50... that's awesome.

Nearly 10 years teaching the 'new' system of TecRec (since it changed from DSAT), and I've gotten my classes sculpted nicely. Courses first build skills, then they develop experience.

For example... on Tec40 and Tec45... I hit skills hard on dives #1 and #2.... shallow skills, fundamentals, big repetition to ingrain, specific drills to overcome specific issues. As you know, there's various issues that arise for different individuals... situational awareness flaws, fundamental skill breakdowns when task loaded, stress management, inability to cope with gas depletion, flawed task prioritization. Everything is done in neutral buoyancy and proper trim. Everything is done 'head up, eyes open'...

In each session, 60 minutes in the shallows is followed by ascent protocol practice; proper ascent speeds, following strict run-times, not over-shooting stops, time-keeping, forward planning, gas switches, team positioning and mutual support, accurate stop buoyancy, dealing with delays to run-time and/or deco plan, shooting DSMBs on ascent.... That's around 180 minutes in-water on day #1. It's repeated unless both the student/s and I are confident the skills covered are reliable. Most students find it relentless, intense and exhausting.

Then dive #3 is a full dress rehearsal for a deco dive... that's also repeated if errors occur. I let the student makes mistakes and only intervene if real-time safety is compromised. Mistakes and short-cuts always have a karma, often escalating and causing task/stress overload...and this is the phase where the students learn from their mistakes. Dive #4 IS a real deco dive... and has to be performed flawlessly by the student, with me only as an observer. If I have to intervene in any way...it's a re-take.

I like my students to complete the manual study pre-course where possible. We run through the knowledge reviews on day #1. Thereafter, the study goes well beyond the manual. My students will know the difference between dissolved gas versus dual phase models... understand how to 'test and adjust' GF settings for their needs.. choose gas and set algorithms to suit the nature of a given dive... understand different perspectives and philosophies from across the tech community... all stuff that is critical and current for the modern technical diver.

All of that can be achieved through the TecRec syllabus without breaking any standards whatsoever. There's honestly nothing I feel restricted from accomplishing with my students. To add more mandatory skills to that syllabus might have a positive effect on increasing training quality for those 'minimum standards' instructors.... but, to be honest, if an instructor is seeking to do the least, they will always find a way... a justification.. to do that. If an instructor is willing to 'tick-list' the bare minimum skills and interpret a very slack definition of mastery, then they'll do just that.

 

[DevonDiver]

If your gonna do advanced dives you really need to know how to plan and execute advanced dives and not look for a babysitter, uh I mean DM, to lead you.

Yes... and no.

At any diving level, there's some sense in enlisting a very well experienced diver to supervise and support dives that are at the limits of your comfort. Mostly, in technical diving, we would have some mentor for that.... but sometimes we don't.... and a 'tech DM' can fill that role. Same for diving in new areas, on new sites... there's advantages to having someone with local/specific experience on the dive.

A babysitter? No.... but an individual who can contribute to improving dive safety, increasing dive satisfaction and/or aiding mission success... is an asset.

I don't think that any qualification should bring along the notion of infallibility. This goes well beyond "planning and executing" dives... it's about not being so complacent to think that X, Y or Z ticket makes you an automatic expert in every aspect of diving at that level.

Refer to: The Biggest Risk in Technical Diving (and how to avoid it)

In addition, there's plenty more to being a DM (at any level) than just "babysitting". The DM can handle dive operations management, logistics, coordination etc. Tying off on the wreck? Setting the deco trapeze? Accident management? Co-ordinating separate dive teams? Running support divers? That's all DM territory... and stuff you don't learn specifically on a tech diver level course.

 

[kensuf]

Exactly. There ARE cases. At least, ones where I think my people would agree, anyway

Anybody who signs up for a class that has a tuition of $1000 or more, before you even factor the ancillary costs, and pays no attention whatsoever to what agency they will be getting a certification from, is not being a very smart shopper.

I could have learned to dive a CCR from three instructors for no cost. They are all CCR instructors with the same agency. I paid a fourth instructor from that same agency $1500 for my CCR class.

With the exception that @oya pointed out, I really fail to see how the agency should be a deciding factor.

Advanced Trimix Dive Master?!?

?!?!?!???

SMH

If your gonna do advanced dives you really need to know how to plan and execute advanced dives and not look for a babysitter, uh I mean DM, to lead you.

So.. I actually see his point there with the DM component. I've guided people at deep sites that require hypoxic trimix, and I know an operator on a certain Caribbean island that has DM's to take people on wall dives in the 200-330' range.

But the thing is, and I'm speaking as a hypoxic trimix instructor for the two most popular tech agencies, it doesn't really matter what agency you have your hypoxic trimix certification with to become a "Hypoxic Trimix DM" with either agency, and here's why. Any instructor that can make you a "Hypoxic Trimix DM" (for whatever agency you choose) would be able to cross your "user level" certification over to that agency in the process, and anyone seeking out a "Hypoxic Trimix DM" would probably not be too picky if you're a TDI, IANTD, ANDI, NAUI, DSAT, etc DM as long as you can guide them on the dive safely.

Let's be honest for a just a minute, any person your theoretical hypoxic trimix DM may potentially guide that is more worried about what agency that DM is with, is worried about the wrong thing and probably should not be engaged in deep trimix dives.

 

[stuartv]

I am certainly no DM myself, but I feel like the people who are suggesting that a DM does nothing but play dive guide under water have a much more limited expectation of a DM than I do.

Let's be honest for a just a minute, any person your theoretical hypoxic trimix DM may potentially guide that is more worried about what agency that DM is with, is worried about the wrong thing and probably should not be engaged in deep trimix dives.

Did I say something that prompted this response? What?

What I said was that if a person wants to get a TDI DM certfiication, they first have to get an SDI DM cert. TDI does not allow crossovers on that particular prereq. So, if I pursue a TDI DM cert, I will start by specifically looking for an instructor that can issue me an SDI DM cert. That says nothing about people caring what agency I am certified by later.

 

[Jack Hammer]

Perhaps it's semantics on my part. Guides can be awesome at a technical level, especially if you're unfamiliar with the site. I don't equate a guide to a DM though and at a technical level divers still need to accept full responsibility for their dives and be able to plan those dives.

 

[ScubaInChicago]

Perhaps it's semantics on my part. Guides can be awesome at a technical level, especially if you're unfamiliar with the site. I don't equate a guide to a DM though and at a technical level divers still need to accept full responsibility for their dives and be able to plan those dives.

Next you're going to tell us not to do 300' trust me dives!

 

[DevonDiver]

... it doesn't really matter what agency you have your hypoxic trimix certification with to become a "Hypoxic Trimix DM" with either agency, and here's why. Any instructor that can make you a "Hypoxic Trimix DM" (for whatever agency you choose) would be able to cross your "user level" certification over to that agency in the process,...

Here's the stipulations for Certified Assistant (DM) for PADI TecRec Trimix:

Certified Assistant Requirements
To qualify as a certified assistant for any dives of the TecRec Tec Trimix Diver course,
an individual must:
1. Be a renewed PADI Divemaster or higher level PADI Member.
2. Be a PADI Enriched Air Diver.
3. Be a TecRec Tec Trimix Diver or have a qualifying full
trimix certification from another training organization.
(Contact your PADI Office for information about
qualifying certifications.)
4. Have made at least 250 dives, with at least 40 technical
decompression dives deeper than 40 metres/
130 feet of which at least 20 are trimix decompression
dives, beyond those required for certification.
The individual must also have experience diving
with trimix to the actual depth of each training dive.
5. Be 18 years old.
​

As per point 3... the trimix element of the requirement can come from any agency. Only the DM aspect needs to be agency specific.