PADI DSAT Tek Course

My buddy and I have decided to get some deep training. Our first thought was to get the PADI DSAT Tek course. This certification trains you to go to 165. Is the course worth it for the additional 35'?

There are some outfits in Bonaire, and probably other places that do some more serious RecTek training, but again, we know little else other than their websites information.

Any info you guys can offer regarding deeper dive training would be appreciated.

Thanks,
mmm

MadMan
The course you are looking into is not really about the extra 35' Its about getting you into the mindset and teaching you the physical skills required to do dives wich require you to be completly self-suficient and self-reliant. You will learn more than just decompression theory. If the class is conducted well you should leave the class with a quest for more knowlage vice depth.(and a lot more gear )
I can teach either the Padi Tec-Rec or the TDI Adv Nitrox and Deco classes. I find I teach the TDI more often and it only certifies to 20 extra'! I make students take a break and get some dives in before we head on to TDI's extended range and or Entry level trimix which get you to 180' and 220' respectively.
Yes I would say take whichever classes work out for you, check the reputation of the instructor if you can, and get the textbooks sent to you so you can read them completly prior to class. You will probably find the class will make you a better diver at any depth.
Cheers Jim

My buddy and I have decided to get some deep training.  Our first thought was to get the PADI DSAT Tek course.  This certification trains you to go to 165.  Is the course worth it for the additional 35'?

There are some outfits in Bonaire, and probably other places that do some more serious RecTek training, but again, we know little else other than their websites information.

Any info you guys can offer regarding deeper dive training would be appreciated.

Thanks,
mmm

first off, just because someone can issue a "certification" to a certain depth, doesn't mean a person is ready to, or has the experiance to go to that depth.

and with a tech course, your not only talking about going "only" 35 feet deeper, but your getting into an overhead environment. even if you don't penetrate a wreck, you will have a deco obligation.

its easy to look at the course requirements and go, "yup, that looks easy"

but you have to be comfortable with the idea that if there is a problem, you can't bail out and head to the surface, you have to stay calm, and manage the problem underwater.

ok, i'm done at the podium, anyone else??

as for the PADI DSAT Tech course thingy, there are some instructors around here who are TDI and AINTD instructors, and they looked over the course, and, while they say they realy hate to admit it, they think its a good course. but with that said, no one around here has taken it yet, so no feedback from any "graduates"

and like many others have said, and will continue to say, "it has more to do with the instructor, and less to do with the agency"

Edited by BradfordNC, 02 January 2005 - 09:24 PM.

Personally, I would not recommend this.

If you are talking training deeper than 135 ft., you really should be thinking about tri-mix. For that normoxic tri-mix through IANTD would train you to 200 ft. with a slightly better training program (because they are teaching tri-mix). GUE is another one, but they don't believe in anything but tri-mix below 100 ft. I don't know the name of TDI's course for this type of thing.

In short, I feel that recreational training is best done by the recreational agencies. The technical training realistically tends to be better accomplished by experienced technical divers and most of them are trained by an agency specifically designed around technical diving.

Just my 2 psi worth. YMMV,

Regards,

Brian

Late edit:

Brad posted after me and made some good points:

It truly is about the instructor in this case. If the PADI instructor is good it may be worth the money. But, if the instructor doesn't stress that any diving below 135 ft. isn't tying you into an overhead in the form of a deco obligation, then they are charging you too much, no matter what they charge you.

It really is hard to judge without "course graduates". I do know that one of our tech instructors up here is PADI Rec-Tech and is very good. I wouldn't have a problem taking a course from him, but I know him personally. My tech instructor is IANTD. Many of the other techies that I dive with are TDI or GUE trained. I haven't had a problem with any of them yet!

Edited by Diverbrian, 02 January 2005 - 09:33 PM.

In short, I feel that recreational training is best done by the recreational agencies. The technical training realistically tends to be better accomplished by experienced technical divers and most of them are trained by an agency specifically designed around technical diving.

Brian,

that was my thought when PADI started this. but i've heard some good things from TDI instructors.

I'm not saying jump on it, but check out all the options.

As a TDI and Padi Tec Rec and Tec Trimix instructor here is my take.
The Padi Courses have much better student materials. In my opinion they also have some drawbacks. formost is 12 dives to complete the inital course. Althought it can be broken down into Apprentice Tech and finished later NO ONE wants to be an apprentice! TDI breaks it into 3 courses each with 4 dives. Or you can combine the first two(which really makes sense 90% of the time) and it is 6 dives. I charge twice as much for the Padi class as the Combined TDI class. I end up covering the same topics and skills in both. However the padi class has more individual requirements and hoops to jump. If someone is doing these classes on a vacation such as you are I think the entire thing is a lot to do in a short time and you will have little time to practice and apply before going home.

Brian
I think you will find most Padi TecRec instructors took classes from TDI or IANTD instructors anyway. I have taught many instructors and two course directors so they could go back to Padi and teach. I would hope that I gave them good enough example that they do the right thing.

Bottom line in choosing a tech instructor Look for a guy that tech diver that also teaches. Not an instrutor that also instructs tech! Dont be afraid to ask to see there logbook. If they are a tech instructor that only tech dives when they teach it will be reflected in their log. If they are tech divers that also teach they probably will tell you they only log the dives that are class dives.

Cheers

The PADI CD I did my IDC with years ago contacted me when TecRec first came out and said how good the course was and that I should try it. I was already an IANTD & TDI advanced trimix diver so I declined, and interestingly I don't know anyone who's ever done it. Certainly the presentation of the written material is very slick and some way ahead of IANTD & TDI, but I have the impression that it doesn't have the content of (in particular) the IANTD manuals. When PADI came out with TecRec I'm afraid I thought rather uncharitably that it was a "me too" exercise, and I haven't been able to shake off that impression yet. I'm now an instructor for IANTD and TDI (& PADI, but not TecRec), and I still think IANTD's courses set the standard that all others strive for - given the right instructor.

Funny how certain words can crystallize a concept for me. Brad's & Brian's use of the term "overhead environment" really brings home the fact that there is always deco when diving to the depths that are being discussed- not that I wasn't aware before- I'm not that :marvel: but, putting it in those terms provided me (& perhaps others) with a terrific visual that can really bring home the necessity of the deco obligation.

Wow, what a wealth of worthy information. Thanks to all for responding.

Perhaps my initial question was too flippant. I am not haphazardly considering this step, I was just wondering what the limitation was. Specifically, that if you are learing, among other things, the intricacies if deeper diving and deco, what is the 165' demarcation? I am assuming that whatever you are learning only applies to a depth of 165' and that if you take a more advanced course later on, you are learning a bunch of new stuff. I would think it more worthwile and practical to teach the concepts and facts needed to dive deep in general, and hopefully teach you the ability to apply them to whatever depth you choose to explore.

Of course, the preceeding is an oversimplification. I would certainly hope to apply these concepts in small increments, increasing my depth gradually as my experience and comfort grow, but just wondered why the PADI Tek course was specifically limited to the 165'?

Thanks again for all the great info.

mmm

PS - If travel were not a concern, and certifying agency not a concern, and money was, of course, to be a factor, what agencies and courses would you guys recommend for tek training? I have had a few recommendations to consider the cavern/cave training, which seemingly would benefit all divers. (Thanks again!)

Brad's & Brian's use of the term "overhead environment" really brings home the fact that there is always deco when diving to the depths that are being discussed

Actually, you can dive to 190 feet without a staged decompression obligation.

And I tend to agree with Marvel, though in a slightly different manner. I am intrigued with Deco. I am already making my 'PADI recommended deco stops' at the recommended depths, but am excited about doing diving deep/long enough to REQUIRE them.

Perhaps this is just another part of wanting to experience more of what the sport offers. And Deco is a portion of the sport experienced by a small percentage of the group of divers, that is already a small group of the general population.

I mean if 10 minutes at 130' is fun, 20 must be more fun.

Anyway, what a great find this board is, even if this thread has little to do with being single.

mmm

Actually, you can dive to 190 feet without a staged decompression obligation

Actually, you can go 155 mph on my Triumph Daytona, but ability and desire don't necessarily wind down the same path.

(And isn't the limit on air 198'?)

mmm

Apples and oranges. I was merely explaining there there isn't always a deco obligation at the depths being discussed. In fact, the depths being discussed are shallower than the 190 the Navy tables allow without staged decompression. I'm not recommending anyone dive to 190, especially not on air.

And isn't the limit on air 198'?

Depends on who you ask and what reason you want to use for giving the limit. Some recommend a limit of 100 ft, others 130. The first is based on narcosis, the second is based on the Navy limit, why they came up with it is often debated.

If you want to keep your PO2 at 1.4 atm, your limit is 187 ft, if you're limiting yourself to 1.6 atm, your max depth is 218. When I learned to dive, I was taught to keep my PO2 at 2 atm or below so 300 feet was the absolute limit. I didn't know it at the time, but 2.0 atm is actually reached at 281 feet on air. I've never heard of a 198 ft limit.

I personally teach a limit of 100 feet.

Brad's & Brian's use of the term "overhead environment" really brings home the fact that there is always deco when diving to the depths that are being discussed

Actually, you can dive to 190 feet without a staged decompression obligation.

OK, the "bounce dive," right? But, how much bottom time can you get diving to those depths? I mean, is it just to say "I did it," or what? Walter- you really need to post with a little more info than is in one-liners.....

Marvel,

I'm not teaching the course, merely pointing out it can be done. 130 and 140 feet have 10 minute limits. Deeper than 140 to 190 feet have 5 minute limits.