65 replies to this topic

[freedivers]

After a lot of thought, I went all Poseidon for my regs, BC, masks, Fins. I still dive a once piece semi dry suit with hood and recently got my Northern Diver Drysuit.

Diving in the Northwest, as many who dive this part of the region know, requires gear that can handle all sorts of nastiness.

When I went to get my DiveCon Cert in Northern Calif, my instructor was curious as to why I went that route - I let him try it out for himself - he was so impressed, he is looking to carry the line in his shop. In this case, the student influenced the teacher and in the process, we both learned something from each other.

I have heard over and over about all the other lines, but after going the route I did, I just can't complain about my decision, it works and that is what matters most.

[BubbleJunkie]

Gotta disagree (respectfully) with you Walter.

First, if a diver is OOA, I wanna give him/her a known working regulator, and that's the one in my mouth. I don't wanna fumble hunting for an octopus.

Second, a 5 foot hose is is only 20 inches longer than the typical octopus hose. 20 inches isn't a lot. I can still easily manage a panicked diver on a 5 foot hose, and if I need to, I can easily grapple them. I don't put new divers on a seven foot hose like I would use in an overhead. The 5 footer is easy to manage.

It also is a much more streamlined configuration than the typical recreational rig, and the skills they learn with the 5' hose translate directly without them having to relearn anything as their diving progresses.

I should have made it clear, however, that I don't teach the "once a year" kind of divers... I teach divers that expect to be actively diving year round. For the more typical recreational divers, I just refer them to another instructor. Since I teach for fun, rather than for a living, it makes everyone's lives more pleasant that way.

I agree that one doesn't HAVE to ascend horizontally, but it makes life easier for everyone. In the conventional "grapple", both divers go vertical, at least partially if not completely. That process changes the buoyancy of both divers, making both positively buoyant (assuming they were neutral to start). Then both divers wind up coping with the OOA, the grapple, positive buoyancy, and the vertical position in the water which decreases hydrodynamic resistance to vertical movement in the water column.

It's my opinion that the long hose is a better configuration than the typical reg configuration (just my opinion, which I understand may be different than yours). But since I believe that, it's also what I teach.

-david

I should have made it clear, however, that I don't teach the "once a year" kind of divers...  I teach divers that expect to be actively diving year round.  For the more typical recreational divers, I just refer them to another instructor.

That is a luxury that many of us only dream about. I teach for "fun" also, but I teach almost anyone that shows up. Just because they are going to be once a year divers doesn't mean that I will/could pass on their desire to dive. I have had some students that have never gotten back in the water after their certification.

I agree that one doesn't HAVE to ascend horizontally, but it makes life easier for everyone.  In the conventional "grapple", both divers go vertical, at least partially if not completely.  That process changes the buoyancy of both divers, making both positively buoyant (assuming they were neutral to start).  Then both divers wind up coping with the OOA, the grapple, positive buoyancy, and the vertical position in the water which decreases hydrodynamic resistance to vertical movement in the water column.

I respectfully disagree David. Ascending horizontally may be easier for you and someone you teach but I prefer swimming up vertically. I know, a lot of arguments on both sides but I have always liked the idea of doing a slow swim up. I can see what's above me, slow down or speed up at will or hold onto a buddy as tight as I need to. If I have luxury of being able to choose my students then I might look at it differently but to me, vertical is simpler. Just my opinion.

[PerroneFord]

Most newly certified divers will NEVER dive inside a wreck, cave, or below 130 feet. To be honest, most OW students will make less that twenty dives in thier lifetime. Most will rent gear a few times that will be the typical recreational package. Why would we not want them training in the gear they will be diving? To do anything different, in my opinion, is somewhat skewed.

I wanted to dredge this back up to make a point.

I was one of those OW divers who really didn't get back in the water much after my cert. Not for lack of interest though. But to be perfectly frank, I sure as hell wish someone would have introduced me to the backplate, and such back then. All I knew was I had a jacket and I thought it was awful.

I bought a Zeagle and thought it was the cat's meow. Then, I sold it under duress when I needed money. I figured one day, I'd get back to that "sweet BC". Then, I learned about divers doing the stuff I wanted to do. Wrecks. And they weren't wearing gear anything like I had seen. I took the time to piece some things together on my own, and finally found some divers I could talk to about their setups. That eventually led me to talking to cave folks, then WKPP, and so forth.

Long story short, I think had I been exposed to what was available out there beyond the jacket BC with a dozen color options, the whiz-bang computers, and the bright colored fins, I might have had more interest.

After learning what was left OUT of my OW class, I felt cheated. I took PADI OW over 11 years ago. My friend took SSI OW 2 months ago. Neither my instructor nor his spent even a moment discussing proper trim. One of the most basic and fundamental elements to diving. So when I hear these guys talking about instructing students in BP/W, and introducing them to doubles, and other things that are out there, I say more power to them. And I wish I had had an instructor like that when I learned.

[PerroneFord]

After reading through this thread, I do have one question that has burning my mind for the LONGEST time.

Why is a BP/W considered "Tech"?

I don't want to bring up any of the DIR demons here, but I have to admit, when I looked at the Zeagle Ranger compared to the first DR and H, backplate setups I saw, I was like WOW, that's so simple.

The supposed "Tech" rig inevitibly has HALF the junk on it the average recreational BC does. Nothing on it looks like it will break. Nothing on it requires instructions beyond what you get in OW class. It's dirt simple.

Contrast that with the high-end recreational BCs today with retractors, 10 D rings (all plastic), integrated weights with pouches, velcro, etc. Fast release buckles all over the place, 4 pockets, velour cummerbunds, and for the ladies, a built in sports bra???

If we are calling things "tech" because they are supposedly complicated, then I think the naming convention is dead wrong. The BP/W has it ALL over the recreational BC. If we are calling them tech because technical divers tend to use them, then maybe we ought to re-think the task loading we are saddling the new or novice diver with.

Just my thoughts.

[David Evans]

Why is a BP/W considered "Tech"?

....

The supposed "Tech" rig inevitibly has HALF the junk on it the average recreational BC does. Nothing on it looks like it will break. Nothing on it requires instructions beyond what you get in OW class. It's dirt simple.

Good thoughts... I agree (as you might expect I would, of course).

There's nothing difficult about a BP/W. It has a power inflator and a couple of dumps. It works precisely, exactly the same way that 99% of the BC's on the market work.

I have no idea why it's considered "technical", except that the vast majority of technical divers (both DIR and non DIR) use them. Of course, I think it's instructive that this is the case....

-d

[PerroneFord]

If I ever get out to seattle, I'd love to take a class from you. Or at least dive with you. Provided it's in the summer, because I don't have a drysuit or training for one.

-P

[Walter]

I'll go one step further, I don't know why anyone uses the term "tech" it's an artificial separation that is useless.

[David Evans]

If I ever get out to seattle, I'd love to take a class from you. Or at least dive with you. Provided it's in the summer, because I don't have a drysuit or training for one.

Perrone, would love to have you come dive up here!

Diving in winter is actually better than diving in the summer here, FWIW... and since the water temps only vary a couple of degrees between winter and summer, you can dive up here in the winter in a wetsuit.

We actually have remarkably mild winters. The only challenge with a wetsuit is the surface intervals on repetitive dives... being underwater in a wetsuit is comfortable enough (IMO) but getting back into a cold wet wetsuit after a surface interval in the winter SUCKS.

Still, I prefer diving in the winter over the summer here... viz is better, tidal exchanges are (generally) better, and there aren't as many people out and about.

-d

[David Evans]

I'll go one step further, I don't know why anyone uses the term "tech" it's an artificial separation that is useless.

Where gear is concerned, I agree completely.

The only exception I can think of is doubles. I think diving doubles warrants some additional training. Of course, the primary reason for diving doubles is for technical diving, so it's probably a moot point.

Unfortunately, I think that "classifying" divers as "tech" or "rec" creates divisiveness that is unwarranted and unneeded.

-d

[Walter]

Where gear is concerned, I agree completely.

As far as anything is concerned. It's a useless designation.

[Diverbrian]

Where gear is concerned, I agree completely.

As far as anything is concerned. It's a useless designation.

I guess that I see both sides of this.

There really isn't a huge difference in the divers except the level of training and the breathing of different gases other than a bottom mix on the way up to accelerate decompression.

The designation makes sense in that it tells you what kind of diving is being catered to by the shop/ charter.

A few of the boats up here schedule trips both ways. A "tech" charter is quite a bit more expensive as the operator can only make one trip out that day (to accomodate the additional surface interval and length of time that divers will be decompressing). The cost winds up being somewhere between paying for two trips out and a half-day charter (less fuel due to the one trip, but still only half the income that day). In order to accomodate the gear requirements (mainly the extra stage bottles that everyone will be carrying) the boat can take fewer divers. It is a little bit easier to envision when he says up front that the boat can take 12 "recreational divers" and 8 "technical divers".

Instructionwise, most anyone who takes an Advanced Nitrox course up here finds themselves buying a lot of new gear. Unless they are like me where the shop wants the assistants/ instructors using gear that is "very similar" as the gear they are providing the students, they typically wind up selling off or retiring their "recreational" gear.

Insurance and agency-wise, SSI's certs will not go into the realm of "tech" diving This is a difference between them and a couple of other major training agencies (NAUI and PADI to be precise.) They prefer (for insurance reasons) if a diver wants to do staged decompression or any other kind of diving in an overhead environment that they do it completely outside of SSI's purview. They state right in their dive pro manuals that other agencies do a better job of this training and that they are not after this market. They are strictly after the "safer" diving above 130 ft. without any form of overheads.

I agree with Walter and David about the devisiveness that this appears to cause, but it is a quick way to sort out what market the operators/ shops are selling to. And the different markets do have slightly different desires. If I see a shop name like "Northern Tech", I can guess that I won't be seeing too many 22 inch primary hoses, split fins, gadgets, or traditional BC's in the shop . If I want that, I may as well check out another dive shop down the road.

Besides a BP/W is great for the unspoken message of "don't set-up my gear for me" as I see happened in another thread, LOL.

Edited by Diverbrian, 12 September 2005 - 10:58 AM.

[ScubaHawk]

I agree that one doesn't HAVE to ascend horizontally, but it makes life easier for everyone. In the conventional "grapple", both divers go vertical, at least partially if not completely. That process changes the buoyancy of both divers, making both positively buoyant (assuming they were neutral to start). Then both divers wind up coping with the OOA, the grapple, positive buoyancy, and the vertical position in the water which decreases hydrodynamic resistance to vertical movement in the water column.

Great thread, it's given me a lot to think about, and I think everything has been well hashed over. I just have to ask about the position in the water having anything to do with buoyancy. You still have the same volume, displacing the same mass - how would they become more buoyant? I have a feeling I'm missing something. Need help here . . .




P.S. David, I like how you described the hose as being "Only 20 inches" longer - that sounds better in a discussion than saying "over a foot and a half" longer

[David Evans]

As far as anything is concerned. It's a useless designation.

Perhaps.

The same could be said for the word "advanced".

Or "no-deco".

When I read the word "tech" in a diving context, it immediately says "overhead" to me... meaning that there's a hard ceiling involved, whether it be deco or the roof of a wreck or a cave.

There are times that I can see this being a useful designation, although I would concede that this word causes more problems than it solves.

-david (a Tech diver, since I graduated from Texas Tech)

[ScubaHawk]

-david (a Tech diver, since I graduated from Texas Tech)

I don't care who you are, now that's funny!

[skybird]

As a just certified OW diver, I can't imagine why someone would log less than 20 dives and quit. I am already worrying aboaut how I am going to survive the winter. Diving is life.

Skybird