76 replies to this topic

[Diverbrian]

"Daylight zone" ? In NJ we don't have daylight on the outside of the deep wrecks! The problem here is our wrecks are getting old and collapsing, some I went inside 30 years ago are now a pile of plates.

LOL! I know the feeling. Call it the Twilight Zone, then!

[Genesis]

That's one of the realities of wrecks, especially in salt water - time 'eats' them.

So do storms. One of the artificial wrecks here that is a favorite spearfishing site of mine had its entire superstructure torn off by Ivan. All that remains of it is the hull and main deck - the rest is simply gone, with the only evidence it was ever there being a small pile of twisted railing off to one side....

[jextract]

Karl, I think you and I are gonna get along juuuuuuuuuust fine!

[Walter]

That's one of the realities of wrecks, especially in salt water - time 'eats' them.

It's also one of the differences between caves and wrecks.

[Genesis]

That's one of the realities of wrecks, especially in salt water - time 'eats' them.

It's also one of the differences between caves and wrecks.

Oh that is not true at all.

Time changes caves. All those "breakdown" areas you see on a cave dive were once attached in the ceiling!

It is true that time tends to move more slowly in a cave than a wreck, but there are places in a few caves I've seen that look rather dangerous to make contact with (one particular formation in Hole in the Wall looks like you could dislodge it; its on the ceiling, and must weigh tons - it would be a very bad day for you if you hit it and it broke off!), and at least one death has been blamed on such an event (the equivalent of an underwater sand avalanche at Wakulla)

It is true, however, that the odds of such a thing happening while you're inside is lower on a cave dive than on a wreck dive. What is not true, however, is that the odds are zero. Further, on a wreck dive such an event may not necessarily kill you (unless whatever comes apart lands ON you) as there are usually multiple possible exit points, and they're reachable on your reserves. This is frequently not true in a cave, and when it is true, in many case your gas supply won't let you get to an alternate exit anyway.....

Edited by Genesis, 26 January 2005 - 07:29 PM.

[maninthesea]

 

    Maybe we should all forgo all educational classes beyond learning to read?  We could find appropriat lititure on whatever we wanted to do in life.  Study that, put it into practice in gradual steps untill we are confident enough to proclaim ourselves experts in the field.

    It must be a real treat to be smarter than the rest of the world.

Cheers Jim

I tend to think that if you pay for something and don't get it, you have no reason to be nice. Most folks would consider that stealing. Since the actual amount paid for the card issue was minimal ($25), its not worth making a federal case out of it. $25 won't break me.

However, I have a personal rule that nobody gets to steal from me twice if I can avoid it.

If you paid $25 then you were not paying TDI for the cert. You were paying someone to submit the cert and they kept some of your $25. Sounds like the inst you paid the $25 to either has a problem with TDI or did not properly submit the paperwork. You could blame TDI for that.... and you could blame S&W for anyone killed with a handgun they produced.
As far as it being a dual cert, it has allways been my understanding from the agencies I have worked with that they do not approve of a "dual cert class" You can chalk that up to being greedy but my take is it would be hard to defend in court. I like lawyers as much as the next guy but we do live in the land of litigation.


This is just my opinion.
Cheers Jim

[maninthesea]

As for your other comment, some history.....

I've been writing commercially-viable (and used) software for more than 20 years, including embedded, real-time firmware. If you watch cable TV, the signal is almost certainly passing through several devices that are controlled by microcode I was responsible for authoring - personally. That's just the most obvious example, but hardly the only one.

I've built several large commercial and one national IP network; the latter was ground-breaking in several ways, being the first full-mesh "Tier 1" provider that didn't require full DS-3s to provide acceptable performance.

I ran a successful (defined: profitable, in a sector where not one in 1,000 was) company for more than 10 years, and a profitable (defined: I lived off it) consulting business in a highly technical space for another 10.

BTW, I hold no college degree. I left college after my sophmore year as I was earning more money from my software work than I was paying in tuition.

Seemed kinda silly to continue at the time, and since I retired at 38 and now only do select consulting gigs that I find particularly interesting, not needing to work, I think its reasonable to call the path I decided to take "acceptable" in its outcome.

So do you advocate this path for everyone or might you be an exception to the norm?

As far as diving goes, I own my own compressor, mix my own gas as a given dive may require, dive doubles, O2 clean my own cylinders and valves, overhaul my own regs, plan my own dives, dive my own profiles off my own boat and in caves, including decompression and staged dives, operate a DPV, etc. With the exception of buying a cave card as a "key to open a lock" I have given up on the dive industry's "class format" after the joke of a class that is commonly called "Rescue Diver". I hold no certification for the compressor, gas blending, regulator rebuilding, O2 cleaning, DPV piloting and a whole bunch of other things.

Works for me.

I also accept the personal responsibility that comes with this, including the fact that if I screw up I may get seriously hurt or even killed. That's perfectly fine with me; its part and parcel of this activity. Scuba diving is NOT "as risky as bowling", as is often claimed by mainstream agencies! I've yet to see someone die from dropping a bowling ball on their foot!

I don't hold a certification to tune and work on the diesels in my boat either, but I do that too. They haven't blown up or burned my vessel to the waterline yet; I must be doing something right.

Back to the lawyer issue. Very few if any lawyers would take the case of your widow or surviving family to sue the engine or boat mfr if you do something that is obviously stupid and remove yourself from the gene pool. However if you do something stupid underwater and kill yourself there are a lot of lawyers who will take the case, they may even win! Thats what makes a boat captian look for a card, the card will shift some blame to the agency that issued it.

Not everyone needs their hands held, and a model that forces paternalism on a recreational pasttime that is inherently an indivdual-risk, individual-reward activity is inappropriate and insulting for those who do not want it.

I have no quarrel with those who find the "industry" model appropriate for them, so long as they are not deceived and their life is not put in danger without their fully-informed consent.

For myself, I'm willing to live by that paternalistic model as soon as the agencies and instructors stop demanding that I sign away the right for myself and my heirs to sue everyone involved if they screw up. I further believe that the current model of "you're the one who's responsible but we set the rules" is an insult to all who have more than two firing neurons and sounds an awful lot like "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

Would you buy a car where the warranty statement read: "This vehicle may explode when you turn the key, spray gasoline on you and ignite it, fail to stop when you press the brake pedal or accelerate at any time without warning. By signing this purchase agreement you agree that even if we were negligent in designing or building this vehicle and it injures or kills you as a consequence, you waive the right to sue us for said deficiency"?

Of course you wouldn't.

Now read the waiver that ALL agencies shove under your nose before you take a class and see if it reads an awful lot like the above car warranty.

It does.

If the dive industry and instructors in it wish me to trust them, they can start acting in a manner that is accepting of the responsibility and authority they wish me to entrust them with.

Until then, its my butt down there (per their rules - I must waive any right of recovery against them, even if its THEIR negligence that causes my demise) and there's only one person who is going to set the parameters of what is an is not an acceptable level of risk.

(BTW, do not take this as an objection to the waivers. I have no problem with them. My issue arises when the waiver is coupled with the paternalism. Either take responsibility with the authority you demand or leave me alone and disclaim both. Any other position is IMHO fundamentally dishonest - and that's being polite.)

Ask a good lawyer and they will tell you the waivers you sign do not absolve the inst/agency/charter company/dive shop of guilt and negligence. They just discourage the uninformed from fileing a case. Most inst's and dive shops don't realise this until they are in court.
Litigation and waivers are a minor drawback to living in the US. I can deal with it considering the alternitives.
Cheers Jim

[ScubaDadMiami]

There is no law that says you have to have any dive certification card at all. You can mix any kind of gas, drive your own boat to any location (or dive in your own cave), and dive as deep as you like. The certification card is just an indication that you have gone through something that that the person looking at it can understand and be comfortable with enough to allow you to engage in that activity when that person is in a position of authority to either allow you to join in or not.

While you are free to engage in these activities and view them as possibly endangering only yourself, please consider that you may also endanger those around you while engaging in these behaviors. For this reason, before I dive with somebody new (especially in a more advanced dive setting), I want to know a thing or two about that person and his or her diving history. One way for me to have a starting point is to find out what type of dive education and practical experience that person has had before. I certainly am not comforted by a certification card alone. On the other hand, I at least have some starting point by knowing the amount of formal training the person has had (the basic standards of which I know) in addition to that person's rendition of how much experience he or she has had.

Anyone who has been around the block knows that there are a lot of people out there that can talk the talk. I would prefer to have some kind of evidence that the person can dive the dive by something I can at least reference as a starting point. On the other hand, I have no problem at all diving with someone that I know can handle a dive even without the golden card. I will either know this in advance because I have already been diving with this person enough times to know or because someone I trust to make this evaluation has told me that this new diver meets the requirements and then I have asked enough to verify it for myself.

[bigblueplanet]

Genesis,

Who are you? You speak as an authority. Yet, what you say is plain dangerous and irresponsible. Advocating that training does not need to be obtained to conduct technical diving and worse cave and wreck diving is the worst thing I have seen publicly stated in a very long time.

Again, I love to see the data that you are drawing these conclusions from.

Your problem is not with TDI it is with your instructor. If he or she did not put the paperwork forward, contact them first. I imagine that TDI has no record of the course. So, it is likely that the instructor never put the paperwork forward. If your instructor will not contact you, I suggest you contact Sean at the TDI headquarters and tell him Grant told you to contact him and workout the problem. If your class was so disappointing please give Sean an detailed report of all the things you found to be wrong with it. It is the only way action can be taken.

I guarantee that Sean will be very courteous and take your call seriously. It seems to me that your statements are not true in fact because TDI office is very helpful.

That being said, there are many wreck penetration courses that teach technical wreck penetration. Most of them are good. As with any tech training you need to find an instructor that provides the type and level of instruction you desire. I did not read the post this was taken from, but it seems that you never received training in wreck penetration. That is your choice. To recommended that as a wise choice for all is totally irresponsible! Anyone who wishes to do any technical diving, please for you and your relatives get proper training and build experience in small progressive steps prior to attempting serious dives.

You seem to feel that it was necessary to attain cave diving training before doing that. So, why cave diving and not anything else. Are you actually saying that you would cave dive without training if you were do it over again?

Obtaining cave training if available to you is not a bad idea to do prior to receiving wreck training. It will make you better. But, wrecks are most definately not caves. There are dangers in a wrecks that are not there in cave diving.

We practice a diving philosophy of rigging for wreck, diving cave techniques for all our tech diving. We rig our kits to work in wreck environments which is the most dangerous entanglement environment there is. We dive using techniques for cave diving which tends to be the most sensitive environment to dive in. Wrecks in some sense are big mental caves, but it is not the same. Training should be taken for any new major change in gear or environment or capability. It certainly cannot hurt and the opposite is certainly true.

There are many stories in the early evolution of technical diving of people dying who taught themselves. The first point in acident analysis in cave diving is not being trained. It is the number one reason people die. I find it amazing that someone that feels as expert as yourself would advocate not training to learn how to wreck dive or tech dive.

I see in your profile that you say 200 dives. How does this make you the great expert you claim to be. More like wantabe. You have illustrated that a little knowledge is dangerous. If you are going to spew such falsehoods, I would ask that you backup what you say with references for the documents and data you are gleaning this knowledge base from.

As for cylinders. Your statements are just totally incorrect.

Your 104s, that you regularly overfill are rated at 2640. In spite of what OMS says, they are not rated at 3500 or 4000. It also depends on which Faber cylinder and which 104 you are using. However, your understanding of metal alloys amazes me. Are you an engineer? The 72 you think has a different alloy is chrome moly as well. Wall thickness is very different.

It is common practice in cave country to overfill cylinders. Some 104s are cylinders that in Europe are filled higher that they are here. But, knowing which ones those are is not easy to do. The bottom line is that any facility that does this is violating federal law. I suggest you get one of the E9791 sets. The 130 is a 104 at 2640. They are rated to 3445. They allow the fills you want and are close to the old 104s which are some of the best cylinders ever made in my opinion.

Your statement that steals never explode is simply FALSE. The center you reference as filling in the car had a rupture and it killed the employee filling the cylinder. It was a Faber steal cylinder. Never ever overfill alumimums or 72s. No cylinder should be overfilled. The reality is that it is done in cave country, but you do not know when and if it will go off.

The facility is the one taking the greatest risk. They are violating federal law and if something happens they have nothing to defend themselves.

This is a good topic. I caution anyone from taking the advice to avoid being trained.

As to the quality of instruction. You get what you pay for. If you think this training is going to be cheap or you want to save money because you think you know better, than go for it. But, I do not think I would ask for a second hand parachute and half assed training if I want to learn to jump out of plane.

Recreational wreck diving courses should be training in line use, even if you are not actually conducting penetrations. Line drills are essential. The wreck dive that is part of an advanced class is not supposed to be a penetration dive. That is simply diving around a wreck to check it out and learn about the potential hazards. The only place in a recreational class that penetration is taught is in a wreck specialty and it is optional. Then, the limits are 130 feet linear distance from the surface. But, line drills and basic reel techniques should be covered on land and in the water.

If you plan on taking a course, ask if dryland and in water line drills are part of the course. If not, move on to another instructor who knows what they are doing.

Recreational wreck courses are not and never have been designed to teach penetration. Especially long and difficult ones. That is why there are technical wreck courses. Someone coming in with cave training is going to be able to have a shorter course. Because they understand and have many of the necessary skill sets for the course. But, with me it is still a five day course. There are no trust me dives ever. I do believe, however, in your NACD course you did do a trust me dive for one dive. The idea is to get you to never want to do one again.

I train with several agencies. My course is the same regardless of agency you want a card from. For someone that comes into technical wreck class without cave training their course is at least twice as long. They need to come up to the level of someone entering with cave training. It is always my recommendation for people to get cave training first. It will make you better. However, there are those that want nothing to do with cave diving. So, their path is longer.

Genesis, I applaud your obvious joy and enthusiasm for the sport and your dives. I do ask that you keep your statements based in fact or provide the sources for your statements. Or make it clear that your opinions are that. Much of what you have presented is simply irresponsible and incorrect.

Again, do not attempt to technical dive or any form of diving beyond your training without first obtaining proper training to do so. Do not overfill cylinders. One aluminum 80 has the explosive power of three stick of dynamite. Imagine what double 104s are capable of.

Grant

Again, my two cents. Let the flaming begin.

[Genesis]

Genesis,

Who are you? You speak as an authority. Yet, what you say is plain dangerous and irresponsible. Advocating that training does not need to be obtained to conduct technical diving and worse cave and wreck diving is the worst thing I have seen publicly stated in a very long time.

Again, I love to see the data that you are drawing these conclusions from.

Your problem is not with TDI it is with your instructor. If he or she did not put the paperwork forward, contact them first. I imagine that TDI has no record of the course. So, it is likely that the instructor never put the paperwork forward. If your instructor will not contact you, I suggest you contact Sean at the TDI headquarters and tell him Grant told you to contact him and workout the problem. If your class was so disappointing please give Sean an detailed report of all the things you found to be wrong with it. It is the only way action can be taken.

I guarantee that Sean will be very courteous and take your call seriously. It seems to me that your statements are not true in fact because TDI office is very helpful.

That being said, there are many wreck penetration courses that teach technical wreck penetration. Most of them are good. As with any tech training you need to find an instructor that provides the type and level of instruction you desire. I did not read the post this was taken from, but it seems that you never received training in wreck penetration. That is your choice. To recommended that as a wise choice for all is totally irresponsible! Anyone who wishes to do any technical diving, please for you and your relatives get proper training and build experience in small progressive steps prior to attempting serious dives.

You seem to feel that it was necessary to attain cave diving training before doing that. So, why cave diving and not anything else. Are you actually saying that you would cave dive without training if you were do it over again?

Obtaining cave training if available to you is not a bad idea to do prior to receiving wreck training. It will make you better. But, wrecks are most definately not caves. There are dangers in a wrecks that are not there in cave diving.

We practice a diving philosophy of rigging for wreck, diving cave techniques for all our tech diving. We rig our kits to work in wreck environments which is the most dangerous entanglement environment there is. We dive using techniques for cave diving which tends to be the most sensitive environment to dive in. Wrecks in some sense are big mental caves, but it is not the same. Training should be taken for any new major change in gear or environment or capability. It certainly cannot hurt and the opposite is certainly true.

There are many stories in the early evolution of technical diving of people dying who taught themselves. The first point in acident analysis in cave diving is not being trained. It is the number one reason people die. I find it amazing that someone that feels as expert as yourself would advocate not training to learn how to wreck dive or tech dive.

I see in your profile that you say 200 dives. How does this make you the great expert you claim to be. More like wantabe. You have illustrated that a little knowledge is dangerous. If you are going to spew such falsehoods, I would ask that you backup what you say with references for the documents and data you are gleaning this knowledge base from.

As for cylinders. Your statements are just totally incorrect.

Your 104s, that you regularly overfill are rated at 2640. In spite of what OMS says, they are not rated at 3500 or 4000. It also depends on which Faber cylinder and which 104 you are using. However, your understanding of metal alloys amazes me. Are you an engineer? The 72 you think has a different alloy is chrome moly as well. Wall thickness is very different.

It is common practice in cave country to overfill cylinders. Some 104s are cylinders that in Europe are filled higher that they are here. But, knowing which ones those are is not easy to do. The bottom line is that any facility that does this is violating federal law. I suggest you get one of the E9791 sets. The 130 is a 104 at 2640. They are rated to 3445. They allow the fills you want and are close to the old 104s which are some of the best cylinders ever made in my opinion.

Your statement that steals never explode is simply FALSE. The center you reference as filling in the car had a rupture and it killed the employee filling the cylinder. It was a Faber steal cylinder. Never ever overfill alumimums or 72s. No cylinder should be overfilled. The reality is that it is done in cave country, but you do not know when and if it will go off.

The facility is the one taking the greatest risk. They are violating federal law and if something happens they have nothing to defend themselves.

This is a good topic. I caution anyone from taking the advice to avoid being trained.

As to the quality of instruction. You get what you pay for. If you think this training is going to be cheap or you want to save money because you think you know better, than go for it. But, I do not think I would ask for a second hand parachute and half assed training if I want to learn to jump out of plane.

Recreational wreck diving courses should be training in line use, even if you are not actually conducting penetrations. Line drills are essential. The wreck dive that is part of an advanced class is not supposed to be a penetration dive. That is simply diving around a wreck to check it out and learn about the potential hazards. The only place in a recreational class that penetration is taught is in a wreck specialty and it is optional. Then, the limits are 130 feet linear distance from the surface. But, line drills and basic reel techniques should be covered on land and in the water.

If you plan on taking a course, ask if dryland and in water line drills are part of the course. If not, move on to another instructor who knows what they are doing.

Recreational wreck courses are not and never have been designed to teach penetration. Especially long and difficult ones. That is why there are technical wreck courses. Someone coming in with cave training is going to be able to have a shorter course. Because they understand and have many of the necessary skill sets for the course. But, with me it is still a five day course. There are no trust me dives ever. I do believe, however, in your NACD course you did do a trust me dive for one dive. The idea is to get you to never want to do one again.

I train with several agencies. My course is the same regardless of agency you want a card from. For someone that comes into technical wreck class without cave training their course is at least twice as long. They need to come up to the level of someone entering with cave training. It is always my recommendation for people to get cave training first. It will make you better. However, there are those that want nothing to do with cave diving. So, their path is longer.

Genesis, I applaud your obvious joy and enthusiasm for the sport and your dives. I do ask that you keep your statements based in fact or provide the sources for your statements. Or make it clear that your opinions are that. Much of what you have presented is simply irresponsible and incorrect.

Again, do not attempt to technical dive or any form of diving beyond your training without first obtaining proper training to do so. Do not overfill cylinders. One aluminum 80 has the explosive power of three stick of dynamite. Imagine what double 104s are capable of.

Grant

Again, my two cents. Let the flaming begin.

You obviously haven't read for content.

When you have, then we will have the basis for debate.

Until then we do not, because you are flaming me for something I have not said.

The only other conclusion I could draw from your rant is that you are intentionally abusing my words and twisting them into something that was simply never said.

ANY shop, instructor or business who holds themselves forth as an agent of some "certiifying agency" in any manner whatsoever is (properly) using that banner as their "imprimateur" of legitimacy. That agency has both a right and duty to insist that they conform in all respects to their rules. I have made my attempt at chasing the issue with TDI; if they wish me to consider them as anything other than a rogue the ball is in their court. If they have no record of me at this point, it is through willful destruction or ignorance of records, as I have contacted them.

I advocate that no diver, at any time, make a "trust me" dive - under any circumstances whatsoever, including but not limited to during instruction.

You claim this is an unsafe recommendation?

HOW, PRECISELY?

You've also called me a liar in public. You can retract that, of course, or you can get your all-knowing friends at TDI (with which you claim to have a personal association) to contact ME. I've spent my money chasing them with zero response - both by email and telephone. What do I need to send to them - a summons? It ain't worth a summons for the small amount of money involved, but I don't go back for seconds once abused, thank you very little. I'm not exactly hard to find.

You think I took a cave class before conducting any cave dives? You'd be wrong. I took a cave class to get a key to certain sites on private land where one had to be shown, because I respect private property rights. You can call me foolish if you'd like, but at least I made my dives in doubles, using proper gas management techniques and with proper equipment that I knew how to use, unlike the hundreds of people I've witnessed who make them every summer or weekend day at a local dive park - with neither.

I also made them with full knowledge of what I was doing, the risks I was taking, and that it was solely my decision to do so. Just like it is every time I have gotten in the water before or since.

My last "trust me" dive was made when I did my AOW, when I was quite the "noob" complete with 'the best scubapro diving gear money can buy!' (or so the shop claimed.) What I have seen since from various agencies and instructors has made it clear to me that I cannot trust either.

I can and do advocate that nobody trust either - ever. IMHO, you'll live longer that way.

Have I advocated the path I have chosen in my dive progression for others?

No, and I challenge you to find words where I have, or retract your allegation.

I have read back through this entire thread trying to find where I may have misspoke. What you claim I said simply is not there.

Of course there are dangers in wrecks that are not in caves. This is so blatently obvious that to need to state it requires one to ask "at what level of IQ is one calibrating this debate?"

Can we all agree that we're speaking to adults with triple-digit figures in that category, and not talk down to people like they are two?

"The center I reference that had an explosion that killed an employee" refers to an incident that I am very much aware of. I also knew Fran personally and your claim that this was somehow related to a steel tank or overpressurization is false, libelous to the shop involved, and an insult to her memory and family. The cylinder that exploded was a Luxfer aluminum tank, contained 100% O2, was attached to the whip but the valve was closed, as filling had not yet commenced. It fell on the valve from a distance of several feet and the cylinder ruptured. The metallurgical report has not yet been published, but the appearance of the cylinder post-incident (photos have been published) suggests that the root cause was a failure of the tank at the neck, as the fracture location and propagation is consistent with a SLC-induced fault. It is also consistent with an overload caused by impact with the ground. There are published reports on other aluminum tank failures due to both SLC and acute overload available for the looking, including gross (non-magnified) and magnified photographs, along with in some cases SEM micrography. Luxfer has claimed (without the evidence being in) that the root cause was an oxygen fire due to an "unclean" cylinder, but they have failed to explain the ignition source. That sort of "corporate response" is no surprise - if indeed the failure is an SLC-related one, their butts are very much in the frying pan, especially given that there was a fatality involved. My "best guess" from the available evidence is that the O2 flash fire (there was one; that much is agreed) was a consequence of the bursting and not the cause, but until the metallurgical report comes back there is no proof either way. Go read up on the subject, then compare with the pictures of the tank from the explosion. The information is out in the public domain if you care to actually learn about this incident and how to prevent ones like it in the future. Propagating false information does a disservice to safety and slanders the dead.

Aluminum tanks are extremely dangerous when overfilled. In that you are correct; aluminum does not have the metallurgical elasticity of steel. More to the point, overfilling aluminum cylinders can cause neck cracks, which can lead to a later explosive failure without warning.

I again challenge you to find a steel scuba tank rupture that was not traced to serious corrosion or radical (e.g. 5k psi!) overpressure. You can't. The last steel dive cylinder that I can find on record as having blown up was in a guy's car (he wasn't in it fortunately!) and upon examination line corrosion was found most of the way up the cylinder to such an extreme degree that if it had been actually inspected it would have been caught years before it blew up and the tank condemned. This explosion was not in the US, and standards in other parts of the world are not as stringent as here..... Steel 72s are not "modern" tanks (they're not made any more and haven't been for years), yet they were and are routinely "+" rated - that rated pressure with the "+" is 2475, which is what I fill them to on my own compressor. 'Nuff said on the 72s.

Tens if not hundreds of thousands of modern steel tanks are filled by shops in cave country and Fill Express every year to "european" standards without a single recorded incident.

My compressor is only used to fill tanks that I have personally seen the inside of. I am well-aware of the dangers of both neck crack issues with aluminum tanks and corrosion problems with steels. I also do not believe the nonsense about 6061-T6 tanks being 'immune' to SLC failures - nobody knew about the 6351 problems until the tanks got to be more than 10 years old (go look it up - they all blew up at more than 10 years of age!) and the 6061-T6 alloy is relatively new. Catalina has always used it, but until recently they made so few tanks that statistically its unlikely they'd have been involved in an explosion. With millions of aluminum tanks out there, only about a dozen have explosively failed - the actual odds, even with 6351 tanks, is quite low. Nonetheless, if you happen to be 'the one', you're going to have a real bad day.

My personal policy is to retire all aluminum tanks at 10 years of age. Steels I will fill and use as long as they pass both hydro and vis (including that done with my eyeballs).

The "federal law" issue is not so clear as you'd believe. DOT regulations apply only to transport of cylinders in commerce (go look it up.) A cylinder in your personal vehicle for your personal use is not "in commerce" as defined by the law. Now it is true that OSHA will ream you if there's an accident, you've violated "standards", and that is the proximate cause of the mishap. That is to be expected.

Do you know that its illegal to carry more than 1,000 lbs of compressed gas cylinders (even if empty, unless the valves are removed!) in a vehicle "in commerce" unless you hold a hazmat-endorsed CDL? Do 'ya work for a dive shop? Ever drive a truck with a bunch of tanks in the back? That's commerce - you're on the clock and/or its their truck. By the way, that's a REAL federal law with REAL teeth. You do have that CDL, right?

Finally, I disagree with your last statement and will go further to state that in my opinion this agency-spoon-fed pablum is dangerous. You said:

"Again, do not attempt to technical dive or any form of diving beyond your training without first obtaining proper training to do so."

I have said, and will continue to say:

"Do not attempt any form of diving beyond your ability. Ever. Even in the presence of an instructor."

Those are two very different statements. Yours is the definition of "trust me", and therefore you cannot both make that statement and yet say "don't do trust-me dives."

Mine is the antithesis of "trust me" and is consistent with my underlying position. I respectfully suggest that you examine, with a cool head, the conflict between the position you've staked out and the basic underlying tenet of technical diving, which is to never make "trust me" dives. I believe you will be driven to modify your statement to be much more closely aligned with what I've been saying.

As a final note as to why I believe your position is dangerous, Mr. Murley had training, and a perfectly-valid TDI "certification" (and instructor along for the ride too!) He's dead, and by the way, his waivers were upheld when his family tried to sue - even though it was proven that the operator and instructor knew that he had falsified material information he represented to them. This too is available in the public domain (the court decision) if you care to look it up. Finally, dive waivers are 100% enforceable in Florida. Do not ever let anyone believe that you, or your loved ones, can sue and get anything if you sign one.

That is a settled matter of law in this state; those documents are NOT a "mere formality", or "just for insurance company purposes."

PS: The question on the profile page is about how many dives have you LOGGED, not how many have you MADE. You also missed (intentionally?) the "+" at the end.

[TraceMalin]

Karl,

I don't understand your inability to procure your certification card from TDI if your course was valid. If your instructor held teaching status with TDI at the time of the course by carrying proper liability insurance and having paid his or her instructor renewal fee then there shouldn't be a problem. If TDI failed to receive the paperwork to process your card or if they lost your paperwork then your instructor should easily be able to straighten it out by resubmitting the necessary forms. As we all know the world isn't perfect and we've all had to spend time on the phone or on the computer straightening out paperwork SNAFU's with banks, credit card companies, insurance companies, utility companies, etc. Training agencies are not immune from the same mistakes because they hire people and people are fallible. Using my agency as an example, most of my students are surprised how quickly they receive their C-cards from PDIC headquarters after they complete their course and either I or my student sends in his/her paperwork. I'm often surprised myself how quickly they receive their cards. But, every so often someone will experience a problem and I'll have to sort it out. Sometimes it's my fault or my student's fault for writing illegibly and sometimes it is the headquarters staff's fault for printing incorrect information, misspelling names or losing a PIC envelope. Other times the fault is probably with the US Postal Service. But, we've never had a situation that couldn't be solved.
Regarding dive training, you've probably heard the phrase, "Good instructors are always learning." 2005 will mark my 24th year as a scuba diver and my 16th year as an instructor. I grew up snorkeling, started scuba diving at 13, became a lifeguard as a teen and an instructor while in college. I've worked around the United States and overseas as a dive pro and pro lifeguard since graduating from college with degrees in English, Philosophy and Religious Studies. I'm a freediving instructor trainer, technical diver and novice cave diver. In addition, being a surfer and a US Masters swimmer adds to my over all skill as a diver. If there is one lesson I've learned about diving in all of these years it is: I STILL HAVE A LOT TO LEARN!
A good diver is the result of the combination of natural abilities, excellent and continuing training, constant practice of skills and teamwork, progression of experience, self-study including experimentation, contemplation, imagination, visualization, improvization, adaptation and creativity. Diving is a lifelong process of learning and refining. I have great respect for those instructors I've had who were exceptional divers and teachers. If you think a course is a joke then you've obviously had a poor instructor or one who didn't meet your level of expectation. If you are seeking great training then you have to find a great instructor. For example, rescue courses are offered by most local dive centers. The idea behind the class is to teach divers very basic rescue techniques so they know what to do at the very first level of care in an emergency. The rescue course will not make you a Coast Guard rescue swimmer by any means. If you're the type of individual who wants a more demanding program, then you need to be a more discriminating shopper. My TDI deco procedures and advanced nitrox instructor is a firefighter in Philadelphia and a captain. Before becoming a firefighter he was a police officer. He began diving in 1973 and has been involved in dive rescue/recovery as both a cop and a firefighter. So, if you took his rescue class you'd be learning from someone who is a professional and could offer more information and training than an instructor who teaches rescue but who never has done any rescue diving. If you took my rescue course, you'd find that as a lifeguard instructor, I'll put any student who wants to go beyond the standards of recreational diving and has the fitness ability through my freediving rescue and lifeguard courses as well. If you asked around, it would be very easy to find a rescue instructor who is some sort of rescue professional. If you truly wanted to be well-trained at dive rescue, then you could start by taking a rescue class from someone like a firefighter, pro lifeguard or military rescue diver. Then, you could take an EMT course which would give you paramedic skills and attend DAN training and seminars. Finally, you could seek out training from companies such as Lifeguard Systems which teaches all levels of water diving rescue. Most people would be happy just knowing how to tow a buddy to the boat or shore and administrating oxygen, performing rescue breathing and CPR if necessary, controlling bleeding, etc. The more intrepid want to know how to rescue someone underwater who is unconscious or toxing and use AED's and suction devices and the like. Some want to go beyond this level of training.
There are true gurus of every diving specialty. When you find them (very easy through the internet), you can learn so much. I plan to be both a student and teacher of diving all my life as long as my health allows me to participate in the sport. If I'm still diving in my 80's, I'm sure techniques and technology will change to the point that no matter how much I've learned I'll always be someone's student. We have the luxury of having had so many others pave the way through the pioneer days of recreational and technical diving. There is little sense in not seeking proper training for diving activities that others have refined into art. The pioneer spirit is best left for depths and technologies that will be the future of the sport rather than a monastic self-exile from existing programs in a crusade against the diving industry. None of us is 100% happy with the diving industry. That industry is really just a collection of individuals operating various businesses relating to diving. Most dive educators want to do a good job. But, just like any other teachers, some are amazing and others are poor. In public school systems we have to deal with the teachers we are given. But, as diving students, we have the freedom to seek out the best ones for us. In doing so, you just need to interview your instructors before deciding which one is right for you.
In college, my favorite professor was Dr. John Barrett who taught history and was the chairperson of the department. He was an awe inspiring lecturer and gave the most difficult yet well-constructed exams I've ever taken. He reminded me of Jonathan Houseman's character of the tough law professor in the movie "The Paper Chase." My favorite scuba instructors were my GUE instructors because they were tough. I didn't agree with everything that Dr. Barrett said and we would have debates on issues in class and outside of class. Nor did I agree with everything my GUE instructors taught. Sure, I can read about history on my own, watch the History Channel, etc. But, I learned so much from Dr. Barrett as well and it was the human interaction that made learning about history more memorable. The same with diving. I've learned a lot on my own and through my own experiences over the years, but some of the best lessons I've learned came through the tutilage of others. Thanks to my NACD instructor, I learned that easy swim throughs are not when you don't have a mask and you have to negotiate a twisting restriction. It was an experience I was able to have while being safely lifeguarded by an instructor.
I think you just need the right instructors to make you realize how invaluable they are to learning and becoming a better diver.

Trace

[Marvel]

There is little sense in not seeking proper training for diving activities that others have refined into art. The pioneer spirit is best left for depths and technologies that will be the future of the sport rather than a monastic self-exile from existing programs in a crusade against the diving industry.

Well said- sums it all up quite nicely.

[Terri]

Nice post Trace! (And nice to see you back!)

[Diverbrian]

Great comparisons, Trace! I should pick your brain. I just started reading JJ's book. Like you, I don't agree with everything that the man has to say (and definitely disagreed with his attitude. IANTD books seem to be far more open-minded), but there were some good ideas to steal . Now if I could find some water (instead of my job) to try out said adjuments to my harness.

[BradfordNC]

I just started reading JJ's book. Like you, I don't agree with everything that the man has to say (and definitely disagreed with his attitude.

most likely because much of what JJ states as fact is simply his opinion