What is Technical Diving? [Archive] - BSAC Scuba Diving Forums

Michael Purcell

17-07-2008, 00:04

Sorry I know this has been done to death but rather than hijack the other thread:

<shrug>
My 60m diving on a trimix CCR is recreational.
I do it for fun.

(nothing against you Nigel, I have a lot of respect for you...<this is where Nigel will as self-defecating humour>)

This actually really gets under my skin but I do realize I am in the minority here. I think it does a disservice to everyone when we mix the idea of recreational and technical diving and say it is all just a progression. I feel it causes safety issues with (what I would term a recreational diver) venturing into territory they have no business being in because the definitions are not only blurred but shunned.

I think the BSAC model introduces deco far too early if you think about the quickest route to SD. It isn't only about deco but that is one example. If you look at the PADI model they don't hit deco in the recreational training. Fine, call it a dollar grab...but anyway the "tech diving" thing has been done to death...back to your regularly scheduled thread.

Richard Whitcombe

17-07-2008, 00:17

Im the opposite. I really dislike the definition "technical" vs "recreational". In my view there is no dividing line.

I'll give examples with the "other agency" accepted limits but same applies to bsac in a way:

The (W)RSTC agencies class "recreational" diving as 40m max depth, no stop.

Now would someone on a single 12l tank going to 40m be recreational?
What if that person went to 41m ?

What if someone had a twinset and dived to 30m (no stop) ? What if they went to 41m ?

Is diving to within 1min NDL and riding that line to the surface safe recreational but going 1 min over no stop into a bit of deco suddenly far more dangerous?

I'd argue that there is no dividing line. Its a gradual progression of skills and equipment with no clear line between the types of diving and think therefore its unhelpful to create such distinctions as it can lull people into a false sense of security ("its only recreational...").

Someone carrying a pony on a 20m no stop dive is technical due to tanks but someone carrying 1 tank to 39m is recreational? Someone with pony at 40m is technical, someone without at 39m is recreational?

BSAC in my view have got it right in this case (and i dont say that often) in realising that deeper, longer and deco diving is merely a progression of gear and skills and has the core syllabus set accordingly.

For me the diving im doing for fun, ie for me is "recreational" regardless of whether thats 6m with a student or 45m on a accelerated deco dive. If its for fun its my hobby, my recreational. If someone is paying me to do it its "commercial".

Anyway im sure most disagree:)

ozone1

17-07-2008, 00:32

This actually really gets under my skin but I do realize I am in the minority here. I think it does a disservice to everyone when we mix the idea of recreational and technical diving and say it is all just a progression. I feel it causes safety issues with (what I would term a recreational diver) venturing into territory they have no business being in because the definitions are not only blurred but shunned.
.

I think it is just a play on words.
Recreation diving in my oppinion is what most divers do,
no mater what depth or challenge. Other divers may do
it for money and they are proffesional and that includes
instructors when instucting.

Its like a motorbike rider classing himself as a recreation rider
but he still thraps around at 180mph when given the chance.

I think it the lables that people give to hobbies that make them
elitist. Depth, duration, location, situation and equipment are
what they are. Its only when people try to put them into
catagories that we get extremes and elitism.

ozone

Vic

17-07-2008, 01:29

<this is where Nigel will as self-defecating humour>

You sure that's the right word? I've seen quite a bit of humour from Nigel, but none of it needs a change of trousers...

I think it does a disservice to everyone when we mix the idea of recreational and technical diving and say it is all just a progression.

Why?

Why is the one so very different from the other? Why is one depth "recreational" but 3 inches deeper is "technical"? Why, given the approximate nature of decompression schedules, is it "recreational" to go within seconds of NDL, but half a minute more makes it "technical"?

It truly is a progression. 20mins @ 6m is noddy; 60 mins @ 70m is tricky. In between, there are a spectrum of dives...

I feel it causes safety issues with (what I would term a recreational diver) venturing into territory they have no business being in because the definitions are not only blurred but shunned.

I completely disagree with you.

The issue, to my mind, is that too many people focus on qualification, rather than experience; it says 40m on their shiny new plastic card, so they assume themselves capable of 40m. To approach the dive as being a bit deeper than 35m means that experience is gained gradually. Now there's always someone who will decide that 75m on air on a single[1] is a perfectly fine thing to do - there's not much helping those guys, and using a different terminology won't help. But for most of us, introducing artificial boundaries into dive planning only causes compartmentalisation - and that causes different dives to be grouped together, thus undermining the dive planning process. That's not good.

I think the BSAC model introduces deco far too early if you think about the quickest route to SD.

You might be right there - but that's not about "recreational" vs. "technical" diving, that's just a case of a qualification being given to someone who may not currently be up to the responsibilities that involves.

If you look at the PADI model they don't hit deco in the recreational training.

True, but we're not PADI, are we?

Vic.

[1] Yes, I do know someone who did this. And came back.

Michael Purcell

17-07-2008, 01:41

I think it the lables that people give to hobbies that make them
elitist. Depth, duration, location, situation and equipment are
what they are. Its only when people try to put them into
catagories that we get extremes and elitism.

ozone

that's the way I used to think. I was with the majority that think it is a progression..."watching" divers around me has changed my mind.

And Richard, I agree with your argument in so much the way you laid it out. My point is (and confused it a bit by using the PADI example) is there are practices that are (generally) safe(er) to the recreational limits and once you start venturing outside those...all those terms that people like to throw around like elitist shouldn't be a bad thing. They should be a badge of responsibility...

I'm sure if I said define reasonble diving protocols that will generally be safe(er) for the majority of PADI AOW it wouldn't be bouncing to 40m on a single tank in a no deco format.

Anyway, like I said I know I am in the minority on this one...

For me the idea of recreational diver: 30m no deco AIR (is getting upper limit)
I have no objection to Nitrox at recreational (in fact support it)

And I think anyone that wants to go beyond this should be encouraged but it should be under a tech mandate that creates the awareness that the environment deserves...And I think on PAPER...what BSAC does is good (for the most part...but I still think deco is too early). I think, especially in a club environment the controls are just not there.

Richard Whitcombe

17-07-2008, 01:55

what BSAC does is good (for the most part...but I still think deco is too early).

That is something i agree with 100% but i think that's for a totally different topic or debate and not related to the above.

I dont think the SD course if followed per letter of the law provides everything that's needed to start planning and executing deco dives safely. Thats a syllabus issue not a terminology issue.

Michael Purcell

17-07-2008, 01:58

I still think the terminology in of itself is not the important part.
It is using the terminology as a vocabulary and then a training model that separates the "holiday" diver from people who have moved along the progression ladder in an meaningful way and have the progressive experience to back it up.

Like I said, most will disagree..but when you look at the majority profile of divers it just isn't the divers I spend most of my time diving with. And especially in warm water environments it encourages them into dangerous situations. In a lot of ways warm clear water is far more dangerous than cold, murky water for that reason.

Michael Purcell

17-07-2008, 02:00

True to all of that...

tony J

17-07-2008, 08:40

Sorry I know this has been done to death but rather than hijack the other thread:

(nothing against you Nigel, I have a lot of respect for you...<this is where Nigel will as self-defecating humour>)

This actually really gets under my skin but I do realize I am in the minority here. I think it does a disservice to everyone when we mix the idea of recreational and technical diving and say it is all just a progression. I feel it causes safety issues with (what I would term a recreational diver) venturing into territory they have no business being in because the definitions are not only blurred but shunned.
I think I sowed this seed..

My opinion...

I don't like the word tech diving as It is so hard to define and is used by many wannabies to distance them selves from the pool of other divers.

I'd rather be an inverse snob and call myself I rec diver as my primary aim is having a laugh underwater with the minimum of fuss (even if i may happen to have a twin set on that day)

When I started, there was no "technical diving" and doing a twin set deco dive on tables was just adventurous BSAC diving. If the wannabies techies want to label is techy thats fine if it makes them happy. Inexperienced divers buy twin sets, spools, wings, canister torches, cave cut suits, gators, p valves, wear black as they want to be labelled part of the group (Its no different that the smokers group we had at school !)

Tony

(Michael I am not implying you are a wannabie techy !)

Tony

Janos

17-07-2008, 08:50

I hate the term 'technical' diving, but my view is that the cut-off is when a direct return to the surface has too high a chance of a serious problem.

I would quite happily [1] skip five or ten minutes of deco in the UK, and think myself to be pretty unlikely to suffer any lasting damage if I were treated promptly. However the same is not true for a couple of hours deco. I’m not sure where the dividing line is.

Janos

[1] – Ok. Happily is not the right word. But if the situation warranted it.

Nigel Hewitt

17-07-2008, 09:09

I'm sorry.
It touched a nerve.

I hate this arbitrary distinction between recreational and technical. Diving is a continuum with increasing complexity but it is all a technical hobby. Some people use 'technical' as an undefined boundary either in the form of a 'coming of age rite' or as a pure elitist ego trip.

I see diving as a set of progressions in different directions of which depth and complication are only one. I am interested in wrecks because I came into diving from my fascination with archaeology. That has forced me into deeper water as shallow wrecks get trashed so fast. That has consequentially forced me further up the complexity scale of diving. Does this make me a 'better' diver? Of course it doesn't. My ignorance of fish and my dumb looks when somebody says 'nudibrach' are almost embarrassing.

If there was some depth or event that made a huge change to our diving beyond that point then maybe there would be a justification for a special name but I don't see one. A depth limit? But do we use feet or meters to get our memorable number? Deco? What's a few minutes of stops between friends? A safety stop blurs into a short deco stop. How many minutes is 'significant' deco?

I see very few people using the word 'technical' is a useful sense but I see the whole internet full of bad uses. The opposite of recreational is commercial and I am not a commercial diver. Poke a technical/recreational divide at me and I snap at you like and aggrieved puppy.

JimW

17-07-2008, 10:20

I think I sowed this seed..

My opinion...

When I started, there was no "technical diving" and doing a twin set deco dive on tables was just adventurous BSAC diving.

Tony
it was actually the allusion to Nigel's trouser activity that had me reaching for the dictionary but "Technical" according to the OED

1 of or relating to a particular subject, art, or craft, or its techniques.
could apply equally to 'diving' as a whole as you can't do it without?:rolleyes:

2 requiring specialized knowledge in order to be understood.
could apply equally to 'diving' as a whole as you can't do it without?:rolleyes:

3 of or concerned with applied and industrial sciences.
could apply equally to 'diving' as a whole as you can't do it without the wonders of custard and Gagnan (and Dave Thompson, Kevin et al)?:rolleyes:

4 according to a strict application or interpretation of the law or rules.
Now that would be tables, depth limits, gas toxicity...:rolleyes:
5 showing technique: technical brilliance
:eek:
maybe that is it?

Jim;)
Me? I don't feel the 'need' for labels

Vic

17-07-2008, 11:11

I still think the terminology in of itself is not the important part.
It is using the terminology as a vocabulary and then a training model that separates the "holiday" diver from people who have moved along the progression ladder in an meaningful way and have the progressive experience to back it up.

So - don't do that. Don't bother with terminology, just deal with dives.

Forget about trying to discriminate between "technical" and "recreational", and the whole problem goes away :-)

Vic.

Vic

17-07-2008, 11:13

I'd rather be an inverse snob and call myself I rec diver

I use the term "untechnical", because I use technology to move the difficulty of the dive out of the water and into the pre-dive planning (in the pub, natch).

And because it winds up the wannabees :-)

Vic.

JimW

17-07-2008, 11:28

Forget about trying to discriminate between "technical" and "recreational", and the whole problem goes away :-)

Vic.

Wot he said:D

Jim

paul_c

17-07-2008, 11:28

now isnt technical based around the diffuclty level of the planning etc as an air deco dive is failrly simple to plan yet a multi stage trimix dive with varing gasses is going to take alot more technical planning and controlls and treaining than a deco spash around.

diving will always be a technical hobby due to its reliance of people understanding pressure, technology and the effects upon the human body. yet those within its fraternity who then decide to add an extra layer of hassel onto themselves and do deeper/longer things then require an addition level of knolage to prepere themselves and equipment to undertake such dives. as such that becomes a technical aspect to diving beyond the normal level of understanding.

with more people doing " techy" things at a less demanding level to enhance dive times and safety the line will become blurred with anyone with a slung tank or pony being "techy" and single tank divers recreational when in reality we are all diving for recreational purpouses first and formost :D

and dont some countries define anythig past X depth as technical? please correct me upon this if i am wrong.

Turtle Dude

17-07-2008, 11:32

In coming back to BSAC club diving, after quite a few years absence, a number of things struck me on how things had moved on; one of them being how much more "technical" (from my old perspective) things had got and were now almost the norm.

Forget re-breathers; it is not long ago that diving with Nitrox was consider "technical" - the concept of playing with oxygen percentages was for mad cave divers and commercial lunatics. As for Heliox... well that was NASA stuff and for even odder folk, never heard of again, on oil-rigs. And now, I find a load of people in my new BSAC club happily using it and club students being taught about it.

Not that I am against it, just that things move on (except how ugly, cynical and warped club divers can be! :D ).

Stating the obvious, what really matters is what is taught and executed safely.

I guess some people, through vanity, want to distinguish themselves from the recreational norm by using the phrase "technical". But anything taught (safely) through any recreational club, IMO, is now mainstream.

Personally, I don't like the term "technical" as my experience is it tends to be used as a vanity term. I far more recognize when people say "cave diving", "deep diving", "commercial diving" or "pearl diving".

But hey, if some want to use the phrase and call themselves "technical divers" - fine, its a (relatively) free world. I will just never fall for it as a chat-up line...

GaryC

17-07-2008, 11:47

This actually really gets under my skin but I do realize I am in the minority here. I think it does a disservice to everyone when we mix the idea of recreational and technical diving and say it is all just a progression. I feel it causes safety issues with (what I would term a recreational diver) venturing into territory they have no business being in because the definitions are not only blurred but shunned.

.

I thought "Technical Diving" was a line created by the likes of TDI and GUE to seperate their training schemes and the entry level and prerequesite training that they require. TDI uses SDI and such like.

It doesnt really apply to BSAC as there is less of a demarcation.

THe point is it is not a specificastion but a general term.

PeteM

17-07-2008, 11:49

now isnt technical based around the diffuclty level of the planning etc as an air deco dive is failrly simple to plan yet a multi stage trimix dive with varing gasses is going to take alot more technical planning and controlls and treaining than a deco spash around.

Don't think that really comes into it. A few years ago when diving on 15+3 most of my dives were in the 30-35m range on air. From experience I knew a dive where I left the bottom with 10 minutes ascent time on my computer or 80 bar would get me safely to the surface.

Now I dive with twin 12's and one or two side slung 7's using various mixes of gas between 40-60m I can do exactly the same. OK the ascent time is now an hour and I have had a look at my bailout slates to check my max bottom time as a precaution but the only extra planning is getting the gases mixed in advance (shut up all those with rebreathers:D ) but I had to do that with single mix nitrox.

The only time most people do detailed planning is when they move from one set of circumstances to another so they are out side their known parameters, and that can be longer/shorter, deeper/shallower, etc.

JimW

17-07-2008, 12:04

now isnt technical based around the diffuclty level of the planning etc as an air deco dive is failrly simple to plan yet a multi stage trimix dive with varing gasses is going to take alot more technical planning and controlls and treaining than a deco spash around.
It's just 'more' of the same?
the underlying principles remain the same (deco theory, equipment operation, human physiology)
<cynic mode on:rolleyes: >
making the training 'more' complicated simply helps 'sell' the concept the the gullible (and if you believe I actually mean that you don't know me very well;) )
<cynic mode off>

diving will always be a technical hobby due to its reliance of people understanding pressure, technology and the effects upon the human body. yet those within its fraternity who then decide to add an extra layer of hassel onto themselves and do deeper/longer things then require an addition level of knolage to prepere themselves and equipment to undertake such dives. as such that becomes a technical aspect to diving beyond the normal level of understanding.
It's called one step at a time:rolleyes:
(damn I thought I had switched that off)
<cynic mode off>
<cynic mode off>
or maybe even Progressive instruction?
:eek:
<cynic mode off>
<cynic mode off>
<cynic mode off>

and dont some countries define anythig past X depth as technical? please correct me upon this if i am wrong.
so what?:D

JimW

17-07-2008, 12:07

so what?:D

sorry, that was uncalled for:o

Edward

17-07-2008, 13:10

Turtle Dude

17-07-2008, 13:22

To the man-in-the-street a 6m poodle is ‘technical’.

...sorry for being the pedant, but it is "pootle", not "poodle".

A 6m "poodle" is one big hairy French dog....

A 6m "pootle" is minimalist deco technical dive

;)

JimW

17-07-2008, 14:00

There are, for me. only two types of diver:

Commercial:- dives to earn a living.
Recreation:- dives for fun.

so you can't have 'fun' whilst working?:(

Tristan Green

17-07-2008, 14:25

...sorry for being the pedant, but it is "pootle", not "poodle".

A 6m "poodle" is one big hairy French dog....

A 6m "pootle" is minimalist deco technical dive

;)
What if it's a 6m puddle? :D

That's what I read first time.

Cheers,
Tristan

Hickdive

17-07-2008, 21:49

'Technical' diving is just an expression dreamed up by mainly US-base training agencies to permit dives with planned decompression stops which they had been telling everyone for years was an absolute no-no outside of commercial or military diving.

If you're not being paid to be there, it's recreational.

ozone1

18-07-2008, 00:17

Pointless and insulting troll comments removed : KL

Tristan Green

18-07-2008, 02:04

.
Removed : KL
.
Ozone,

Please bear in mind that you are a guest of these forums and that some might take offence to your comment above.

I have only met three people who have dived deeper than 100 metres so far, and regretably one of those died on a dive. I don't believe that any of them would refer to the 99.9% of divers who dive to shallower depths in such derogatory terms.

I suspect that you are in a minority of one in your opinion.

Cheers,
Tristan

Janos

18-07-2008, 08:32

Nigel Hewitt

18-07-2008, 09:01

Well I've dived to 100m but this weekend we're off to Swanage and I'm on a single tank and we'll be diving from the club rib. I'm really looking forward to it and it will be ace.

Although the weather is a bit dodgy at the moment, so it might be the pier instead. But I've had some great dives under the pier too.
It is my Saturday to dive plan so in collaboration with the Sunday marshal and the Club BBQ organisers we were taking the two RIBs over to Newhaven for the weekend.
My plan was for a WW2 sub on the lunch time high and a shallow wreck for ODs on the early evening low and I was taking a rebreather full of trimix for the sub and so I'd be doing the second dive on trimix too. It's trimix so it must be a techie dive. :rolleyes:

Enjoy the pier. I suspect I'm taking my Mum to Asda to do her shopping as we're forecast a 5-7.

ozone1

18-07-2008, 16:36

Ozone,

Please bear in mind that you are a guest of these forums and that some might take offence to your comment above.

I have only met three people who have dived deeper than 100 metres so far, and regretably one of those died on a dive. I don't believe that any of them would refer to the 99.9% of divers who dive to shallower depths in such derogatory terms.

I suspect that you are in a minority of one in your opinion.

Cheers,
Tristan

Hello Tristan.

I thought I was a member of the BSAC diving forum. Are you saying
that my membership is anything less than yours or other members?
Do I have to serve an apprentiship before I can use my sense of
humour at will.

I posted a jokey, flippent statement about depth. I have not mentioned
anything about death or injury. I personally have lost 2 friends to the sport
one who was in less than 15mtrs of water. Am I not allowed to make flippent
comments because someone may choose to take offence.

I was not insulting and if you could not see the humour in my comments then
well I'm sorry but you might have to get used to me or ban me.

ozone

.

John Bantin

18-07-2008, 16:49

I believe any diving other than breath-hold diving is technical, only some diving is more technical than other diving. That's why you have to train right from the start. You are endangered if you just have a go,

PeteM

18-07-2008, 16:58

Adrian Kelland

18-07-2008, 17:52

Michael Purcell

18-07-2008, 18:20

You are not listed as a BSAC member, therefore you are a guest on the BSAC forums.

Your comment could easily be construed as homophobic and therefore is likely to be interpreted as offensive by some. Therefore it breaks the Acceptable use policy

Interesting, does that mean BSAC members have more latitude in what is acceptable vocabulary? I would have thought time on the forum as a contributor might tie into this but I wouldn't have thought member vs non-member would...(I thought that tied into access) *learned something new*

As for deleting his post I was happy to see it deleted on grounds he is an idiot (or at least his statements were idiotic) but I think the link to being homophobic was a stretch.

Of course it's likely more difficult to delete a post because the writer is an idiot (common usage definition), otherwise I suspect a lot more of my posts would go missing.

Michael Purcell

18-07-2008, 18:22

Even breath holding can get technical :)

um...shouldn't you say is technical otherwise you are treading dangerously close to making my point for me by drawing a distinction between types... :)

Adrian Kelland

18-07-2008, 18:30

um...shouldn't you say is technical otherwise you are treading dangerously close to making my point for me by drawing a distinction between types... :)
Aye fair enough.

I was thinking along the lines that there is a 'hold' as part of the cycle, even if a small one. It takes 'technique' to hold for longer.

Humans seem to have an obsession with state changes, rather than gradual change...

Adrian

ozone1

18-07-2008, 18:36

You are not listed as a BSAC member, therefore you are a guest on the BSAC forums.

Your comment could easily be construed as homophobic and therefore is likely to be interpreted as offensive by some. Therefore it breaks the Acceptable use policy

Under my name in the title it states that I'm a forum
member. What do I have to do to list BSAC membership please?

I take on board your comments about homophobia, I may not choose to
agree with you or your Politicaly Correct stance but it is your view.

To argue that point would take this debate to a place that makes grown
men shudder. Or should I rephrase that to "a place that makes grown adults
shudder"? :p

ozone

.

Michael Purcell

18-07-2008, 18:38

Now see this post on the other hand I would suggest the link to homophobia is much easier to make.

ozone1

18-07-2008, 18:47

Interesting, does that mean BSAC members have more latitude in what is acceptable vocabulary? I would have thought time on the forum as a contributor might tie into this but I wouldn't have thought member vs non-member would...(I thought that tied into access) *learned something new*

As for deleting his post I was happy to see it deleted on grounds he is an idiot (or at least his statements were idiotic) but I think the link to being homophobic was a stretch.

Of course it's likely more difficult to delete a post because the writer is an idiot (common usage definition), otherwise I suspect a lot more of my posts would go missing.

Right finally a reply that I can relate to.

You make your point well :p

I have been known to come out with idiotic statements and for that I will
accept full responsibility:cool:

BUT I do think that idiotic statements can be funny somtimes.
If people are so affraid to let there feelings run free because they feel that
we have to be protected from our selves for some Politically Correct reason
its a sorry, sorry world we live in.

ozone

.

Adrian Kelland

18-07-2008, 18:53

What do I have to do to list BSAC membership please?
Click on 'User Cp' in the top menu, then 'edit profile' on the left hand side. There are 3 compulsory fields, BSAC membership no, Branch no, and renewal month. These are automatically checked against the membership database for currency - we don't see the database. After a while you may see more forums listed too, depend on the results of the check.

Adrian

ozone1

18-07-2008, 19:02

Now see this post on the other hand I would suggest the link to homophobia is much easier to make.

I do not want to highjack your thread.

I could take offence by your last post.
How can you construde that there is a link to homaphobia with my last
post?

This is your thread and your call!!! I will not post again on this subject in this
thread:)

ozone

.

Michael Purcell

18-07-2008, 19:23

I do not want to highjack your thread.

I could take offence by your last post.
How can you construde that there is a link to homaphobia with my last
post?

This is your thread and your call!!! I will not post again on this subject in this
thread:)

ozone

.

It's a thread that I knew starting out I would likely be a minority of one, so I can't help to chuckle at the idea that the thread gets hijacked by minority rights :)

I don't live in the West so PC is not something on the top of my radar these days but I am quite sure when you are talking about the subject of homosexuality and someone says

"To argue that point would take this debate to a place that makes grown men shudder"

has got to be less PC than using words that may or may not relate to folks of that orientation. Regardless this is a diving forum not a social justice class so we should put this to bed. I only followed up on it because if it doesn't play out now, over the coming weeks you and the admin folks here are just going to keep "politely" banging heads until it comes to a head.

Vic

18-07-2008, 19:40

Interesting, does that mean BSAC members have more latitude in what is acceptable vocabulary?

It's more that sanctions are less likely against a member...

A BSAC member is essentially a part-owner of these fora; thus any removal has to be in the context of a community decision to take action against one of its own - just like any shared resource in any members' club.

A guest has no such position, and can be removed without such worry :-)

Vic.

NJT

18-07-2008, 20:49

Yes it is all technical without the technology we would be free diving !

I get the P!$$ taken out of me for being "Technical" by my club.
But most of them are diving < 30m on a single.
Were as I have pushed my limits with the kit, training and experience to go much deeper with others who have helped and encouraged me to do so.
But I have always tried to sort appropriate configuration for the diving being undertaken.

So for my 10p worth. I would agree with that All Scuba diving is technical but some dives need to be more technical that others.

This is usually driven by using the technology (gases, computers, techniques etc) to minimise the risks, as we have all heard the stories of deep air diving.

Regards
Nick

Michael Purcell

18-07-2008, 21:52

...
So for my 10p worth. I would agree with that All Scuba diving is technical but some dives need to be more technical that others.

This is usually driven by using the technology (gases, computers, techniques etc) to minimise the risks, as we have all heard the stories of deep air diving.

Regards
Nick

If you look at what happens with a lot of "holiday divers" (I feel though wouldn't know where to get the data to prove it) they complete the POW (Or OD course if you like) and then every year go on a diving holiday or 2 or 3. Perhaps they have been doing this for 20 years and while their bouyancy is pretty good they have little theoretical knowledge and in a lot of cases DO have a lot of anecdotal information they have picked up over beers on the liveaboard. (much of which is well, bol*ks)

The BSAC club environment is not the standard for diving and when the two collide chaos ensues. The same can be said of BSAC divers and divers who have gone down what even now BSAC refers to as "the technical route".

A cross agency approach that had a clear differentiation based on valid risk assessment I believe would save lives.

dunny

18-07-2008, 22:31

I always considered "technical" diving as ERD and above?? Basically when accelerated deco starts and then trimix and then CCR and then...

Gareth

18-07-2008, 22:56

If you look at what happens with a lot of "holiday divers" (I feel though wouldn't know where to get the data to prove it) they complete the POW (Or OD course if you like) and then every year go on a diving holiday or 2 or 3. Perhaps they have been doing this for 20 years and while their bouyancy is pretty good they have little theoretical knowledge and in a lot of cases DO have a lot of anecdotal information they have picked up over beers on the liveaboard. (much of which is well, bol*ks)

The BSAC club environment is not the standard for diving and when the two collide chaos ensues. The same can be said of BSAC divers and divers who have gone down what even now BSAC refers to as "the technical route".

A cross agency approach that had a clear differentiation based on valid risk assessment I believe would save lives.

Michael

You raise two different issues.

1. Relating to holiday or infrequent divers.
2. The make up of branches members.

For the sake of this discussion, we will ignore point 1, which I don't really think relates to the general discussion, in so far as the sub sector of divers that make up forums such as this one.

The problem with point 2. is that branches very hugely.

Within my branch we have instrutors who teach from OD to Trimix. We have a membership that covers all the grades from trainee to First Class, Open Circuit Trimix & Closed Circuit Trimix.

There is & will continue to be a bluring of the concepts of technical & recreational diving. In truth, I believe the BSAC has been producing 'technical' divers for years, in so much as it has been training & qualifying divers capable of decompression diving to depths in excess of 20m in quite extreame conditions. The only thing is that what is considered technical has changed from year to year (in fact the term didn't used to exist).

When I joined my branch in the early 90's(as a PADI OW), I invested in a pony cylinder within the first year, within 3 years I was diving a twinset, I was Nitrox quailifed in 96, & Trimix qualified in 99. I am not unique witihin my branch. My path was effected by those i dived with within the branch & my interests. There are those within the branch who's interests are in a different direction, seamanship, marine life, photography, etc.

Having a branch of members with diverse interests makes the branch stronger, the training that we can provide better for our members, & probably contributes to safer trips. I would suggest that the understanding of 'technical' diving within branches, generally improves safety. Deeper dives are planned properly, rather than just done. Contingency planning is more apparent. A better understanding of the adverse effects of gas etc is more apparent. Rather than adversly effecting safety I would suggest that it significantly improves safety.

There are of course branches that are far more conservative than mine, & far more adventurous.
The fact that the BSAC now has a comprehensive set of technical diving courses is a great improvement for BSAC members. The courses integrate into the existing training scheme ensure elements are not missed & that they are compatable with branch diving or at least consider technical diving within the branch enviroment.
This I think is an improvement over the path I took in that we had to adpat what we where taught to the branch enviroment.

What does concernme is that there is a trend for longer deeper diving from those that either don't have the training & or the support of those with the experience. When I started diving, the majority considered those diving to 30m + unusual, & those planning dives with more than 5 minutes of deco very unusual. To read the diving press & the forums, it would appear that this is 'easy' diving, done by every one.

Gareth

MattS

19-07-2008, 00:38

I have been known to come out with idiotic statements and for that I will accept full responsibilitySo why argue? Why not get back to the topic of conversation and let the moderators get back to deleting the spam.

The acceptable use policy is linked at the bottom of the page.

The Council of BSAC are responsible for deciding the moderation policy, not the moderators. The BSAC have legal and ethical obligations which are stated in the AUP.
The moderators are responsible for implementing the moderation policy. They are allowed to use their discretion - it's a forum not a court room.
Participants in the forum are responsible for ensuring they abide by the policy.
BSAC members are invited to comment on the moderation policy. An appeal process against moderation decisions is provided for them - after all BSAC members finance the hardware and provide the manpower.
Non-BSAC members are guests.
The BSAC welcomes and invites every diver to become a member of the forum community and to express diving related views within the spirit of the forum. Comments that compromise the stated intentions of the BSAC are not invited or tolerated whether they are expressed by BSAC members or non-members.

This is all explained within the Acceptable Use Policy, from page 6 onwards. The AUP is a pretty dry document by necessity. I hope you find the explanation provided above a straightforward summary of the AUP content.

BUT I do think that idiotic statements can be funny somtimes.
If people are so affraid to let there feelings run free because they feel that
we have to be protected from our selves for some Politically Correct reason
its a sorry, sorry world we live in.Our moderation policy has nothing to do with Political Correctness, it has everything to do with basic good manners. If I have to explain it, I will agree it really is a sorry World we live in.

Please read the AUP. Personally I am not particularly interested in dicussing your right to use coarse language. This is a diving forum, not a human rights forum.

Tristan Green

19-07-2008, 02:55

Hello Tristan.

I thought I was a member of the BSAC diving forum. Are you saying
that my membership is anything less than yours or other members?
Do I have to serve an apprentiship before I can use my sense of
humour at will.

I posted a jokey, flippent statement about depth. I have not mentioned
anything about death or injury. I personally have lost 2 friends to the sport
one who was in less than 15mtrs of water. Am I not allowed to make flippent
comments because someone may choose to take offence.

I was not insulting and if you could not see the humour in my comments then
well I'm sorry but you might have to get used to me or ban me.

ozone

.
ozone,

This forum is provided by the BSAC as a service to BSAC members but is also made available to non-BSAC members who would like to participate in diving and related discussions.

Yes, you are a member of the BSAC diving forum, but you don't appear to us to be a member of BSAC. As such you will be treated as a guest on the forum by the moderators until such time as you register your membership details in the User CP (see button at the top menu). I hope that this explains my comment.

As far as humour goes it is very subjective. I don't doubt that you found your comments funny when you wrote them, but when I read them I didn't find them funny. In fact I found them crude and insulting. Maybe it was just me on a bad day :mad: or perhaps it was the lack of any emoticons :rolleyes: in your post to suggest that you were less than sincere in your comments.

Cheers,
Tristan

ozone1

19-07-2008, 14:34

ozone,

This forum is provided by the BSAC as a service to BSAC members but is also made available to non-BSAC members who would like to participate in diving and related discussions.

Yes, you are a member of the BSAC diving forum, but you don't appear to us to be a member of BSAC. As such you will be treated as a guest on the forum by the moderators until such time as you register your membership details in the User CP (see button at the top menu). I hope that this explains my comment.

As far as humour goes it is very subjective. I don't doubt that you found your comments funny when you wrote them, but when I read them I didn't find them funny. In fact I found them crude and insulting. Maybe it was just me on a bad day :mad: or perhaps it was the lack of any emoticons :rolleyes: in your post to suggest that you were less than sincere in your comments.

Cheers,
Tristan

I did say I would not post on this subject again, so appoligies to Michael for
again continuing this subject.

Tristan I will comment on your points if I may.

I have not regestered my BSAC memebership for two reasons,
the first I did not know it was required untill this kicked off and
second I don't feel the need to prove myself like that.

As far as humour goes it is very subjective.. I agree and the use of emoticons
does genrally prove intent, but my comments were either meant in a very nasty
way aimed at stirring up hatered and disharmony between members
or it was a throwaway comment that was made in jest. I'll let you decide.

One thing I will say though is when you start policeing coments you have to crack
down on all Non Politically Correct statements.
This morning alone I have seen references to words that may be derogatory to other
sexual tendancies. Now when I read it, I have read a light hearted
comment, you may read somthing very insulting and will insist it is removed,
again your choice.

In respect to Michael I will not comment on this subject in this thread again and if it
helps I'll throw a few :p :p and :D :D just to let you know there is
no malice in my comments.

I just see things different from you somtimes.

All the best

ozone

.