DEPTH LIMITS FOR DIVERS [Archive] - BSAC Scuba Diving Forums

View Full Version : DEPTH LIMITS FOR DIVERS

Bill Bird

08-10-2003, 12:11

Steve Walker

08-10-2003, 12:42

So how does that affect Ocean Divers and Sport Divers in relation to what they are qualified to dive to (20 metres and 35 metres respectively). Are these a recommendation, and what are the possible consequences of someone at Sport Diver level going below the recommendation?

Regards.

Bill

AIUI, diving outside the limits recommended by your qualification invalidates your BSAC cover and, I would very much imagine, any alternative cover purchased elsewhere, life insurance, endowment policies etc as I'm sure insurance companies would jump at the opportunity to dismiss your (or your surviving dependants!) claim on the basis of acting outside recomendations.

Personally, think 35 metres is deep enough for most divers, but then again I've never been prone to "depth fever". And I think 50 metres on air is way more than enough, TBH I'd want to be on trimix at that depth in the UK
Cheers
Steve W

iainmsmith

08-10-2003, 14:53

I would just like to qualifiy something regarding depths to which divers may go to.

I have just read something regarding the accident ofvof Sussex where Jim Watson said that the recommended limit for diving on air is 50 metres and for Trimix 70 metres, but that these are a recommendation rather than a rule.

So how does that affect Ocean Divers and Sport Divers in relation to what they are qualified to dive to (20 metres and 35 metres respectively). Are these a recommendation, and what are the possible consequences of someone at Sport Diver level going below the recommendation?

Unless things have changed in the new course, Ocean Divers are _restricted_ to 20m, Sports Divers are _restricted_ to 35m and Dive Leaders/Advanced Divers have a _recommended_ maximum of 50m.

As a side topic, I do find it interesting that BSAC recommends that:

a) rebreather divers on nitrox limit their depth to 40m
b) RB mixed gas divers limit their END to no greater than 30m
c) that OC trimix divers limit their END to "30-40m"

Yet OC air divers are still allowed to go to 50m...

Iain

DeepDigit

08-10-2003, 15:17

:=So how does that affect Ocean Divers and Sport Divers in relation to what they are qualified to dive to (20 metres and 35 metres respectively). Are these a recommendation, and what are the possible consequences of someone at Sport Diver level going below the recommendation?
:=
:=Regards.
:=
:=
:=Bill

AIUI, diving outside the limits recommended by your qualification invalidates your BSAC cover and, I would very much imagine, any alternative cover purchased elsewhere, life insurance, endowment policies etc as I'm sure insurance companies would jump at the opportunity to dismiss your (or your surviving dependants!) claim on the basis of acting outside recomendations.

Personally, think 35 metres is deep enough for most divers, but then again I've never been prone to "depth fever". And I think 50 metres on air is way more than enough, TBH I'd want to be on trimix at that depth in the UK
Cheers
Steve W
--------------------------------------------------------
Are divers not qualified to the depth at which they qualified and have experience and depth guidelines are purely recommendations.

Experienced divers should be able to pick the depth they want to dive to. As for BSAC insurance, its third party insurance and would have no bearing on what relatives received from insurances. Of course knowing that divers are experienced and do dive deeper than the guidelines for thier qualification, one would assume they provide suitable cover with those details stipulated.

Not everyone wants to be an DL or AD, I know plenty of SD's who dive deep (beyond thier qualification guidelines) regularly and seem quite able and return (surprise surprise!)

The BSAC safe dive practices are a set of guidelines, not a set of rules - dogma rules eh!!!

:-)

Keith Lawrence(BSAC)

08-10-2003, 17:40

AIUI, diving outside the limits recommended by your qualification invalidates your BSAC cover...

I am not sure that you can state that as fact. There are many areas of insurance with no black and white answer, the answer is very often grey. I do not have a definative answer for you, I have sought advice from our insurance expert and will attempt to clarify this, although the clarification answer may well be "it's grey". Please do not take anything that I say on this matter as fact because I am not the expert, I am only expressing my personal opinion and understanding.

Regards

Keith L

andy lewin

08-10-2003, 17:47

I would just like to qualifiy something regarding depths to which divers may go to.

I have just read something regarding the accident ofvof Sussex where Jim Watson said that the recommended limit for diving on air is 50 metres and for Trimix 70 metres, but that these are a recommendation rather than a rule.

So how does that affect Ocean Divers and Sport Divers in relation to what they are qualified to dive to (20 metres and 35 metres respectively). Are these a recommendation, and what are the possible consequences of someone at Sport Diver level going below the recommendation?

Regards.

Bill

Bill,

not being privy to what you have read i can only comment on what you have written i.e.

"the recommended limit for diving on air is 50 metres and for Trimix 70 metres"

I think this might refer to the PPO2 in relation to depth,(1.26 bar), the depth limit in relation to diver grade is not mentioned.

The depth limit stated by BSAC for each diver grade is a limit not a recommendation. This has probably been included in the insurance policy taken out by BSAC and accepted by the underwriters.

If an incident was to occur when a diver has exceeded the depth limit for his/her grade I would guess a good reason for non payment will have been presented to the insurance underwriters.

Maybe you could shed a little light on the point of this thread, in what context was jim watsons remarks made?.

best wishes

Andy

John Williams

09-10-2003, 23:32

Not everyone wants to be an DL or AD, I know plenty of SD's who dive deep (beyond thier qualification guidelines) regularly and seem quite able and return (surprise surprise!)

The BSAC safe dive practices are a set of guidelines, not a set of rules - dogma rules eh!!!

Yes - but why were those guidelines set?

Far too many SDs were diving beyond their limits and NOT coming back (at least not without a frightening incident). So the BSAC tried to protect it's members from foolhardiness by offering qualified advice.

The guidelines are not there to spoil your enjoyment. They are there to ensure that you have been properly trained to manage the extra risks associated with extra depth BEFORE you expose yourself to them.

If you want to go deeper than your qualification "allows" then PLEASE get the relevant training to do it. This is more than just building experience - it involves the understanding and the peripheral skills learned too.

All that the recommendations are designed to do is to keep you safe. If you want to push the limits and take risks that the accumulated experience of all the BSAC and its advisers tells us is unacceptable then there is nothing that the BSAC can do to stop you.

This lack of enforceability means that the BSAC can only make recommendations - because rules require policing and enforcing.

If I recommended that (experience has shown) jumping onto a concrete floor from more than 3m height was likely to break your legs would you deliberately jump from 4m to prove me wrong?

So why would you want to dive deeper than your qualification has prepared you to go safely?

How high will you jump from? How deep will you go?

How will you know when you have pushed it too far?
broken legs? missing diver?

John

Keith Lawrence(BSAC)

10-10-2003, 00:19

AIUI, diving outside the limits recommended by your qualification invalidates your BSAC cover?

I have sought advice from one of our specialists in this area at HQ, somebody who actually been involved in the legal process surrounding liability claims against the BSAC and its members. As expected the answer is ?it?s grey?. It depends upon the circumstances, it depends upon the court.

I do not have a clear cut answer for you, nobody does, it depends on legal precedent and the exact circumstances. A more correct statement regarding diving outside of the recommendations of the SDP would be ?diving outside of the limits recommended by your qualification may affect the BSAC cover?. I have changed the word ?invalidates? to ?may affect?.

It is also worth noting the second word change that I have put in there, I have changed the word ?your? to ?the?. The BSAC third party liability insurance not only covers for third party claims against you, it covers your BSAC buddy, your club diving officers, the regional teams and the club itself. It?s not there just for you, it is there for the benefit of the club overall.

This third party liability cover is particularly pertinent to our branch officers and the experienced club members who marshal our dives, in the modern blame culture society it is them who may well end up in the firing line of any legal action for negligence ? ?it?s your fault because you let it happen?. As a BSAC member they would be covered by our third party liability insurance, the BSAC will defend you, it will pay for expert witnesses, it will settle any valid third party claims against you. Provided that diving is being carried out within the recommendations of the SDP.

Outside of those recommendations and you get into the grey area of ?diving outside of the limits recommended by your qualification may affect the BSAC cover?. The BSAC would probably not turn it?s back on you, we would probably do everything that we could to assist you, but as it was very succinctly put to me ? ?the BSAC third party liability cover cannot go to jail for you?. In extreme cases of liability claims arising from diving outside of the SDP recommendations and/or gross negligence it could actually come to that.

You asked for clarification, as expected I cannot give you a straight black or white answer, the only answer that I can give you is the correct one of ?it?s grey?. You will also note that I have chosen my words carefully and used words like ?may? and ?probably?, that is deliberate ? it is not up to the BSAC or our insurers to decide exactly what would happen in all circumstances, it is up to a court of law and every case is different.

Kind regards

Keith L

DeepDigit

10-10-2003, 00:49

:=Not everyone wants to be an DL or AD, I know plenty of SD's who dive deep (beyond thier qualification guidelines) regularly and seem quite able and return (surprise surprise!)
:=
:=The BSAC safe dive practices are a set of guidelines, not a set of rules - dogma rules eh!!!

Yes - but why were those guidelines set?
>>>> Becuase it was in BSAC's interest as they are the governing body in the UK.

Far too many SDs were diving beyond their limits and NOT coming back (at least not without a frightening incident). So the BSAC tried to protect it's members from foolhardiness by offering qualified advice.
>>>> I dont recall suggesting anyone dives beyond thier limits.

The guidelines are not there to spoil your enjoyment. They are there to ensure that you have been properly trained to manage the extra risks associated with extra depth BEFORE you expose yourself to them.
>>>> So getting a badge makes you okay then?

If you want to go deeper than your qualification "allows" then PLEASE get the relevant training to do it. This is more than just building experience - it involves the understanding and the peripheral skills learned too.
>>>> Can't I get on the job training? your assuming people learn nothing or take their diving in stages unless they have a badge - thats very odd.

All that the recommendations are designed to do is to keep you safe. If you want to push the limits and take risks that the accumulated experience of all the BSAC and its advisers tells us is unacceptable then there is nothing that the BSAC can do to stop you.
>>>> so as an SD I can't drown at 20M but I can at 36M, I stated these are experienced divers some with several hundred dives and training from other agencies.

This lack of enforceability means that the BSAC can only make recommendations - because rules require policing and enforcing.
>>>> So are you saying we should be policed to ensure we stick to the rules?

If I recommended that (experience has shown) jumping onto a concrete floor from more than 3m height was likely to break your legs would you deliberately jump from 4m to prove me wrong?
>>>> I dont recall calling you wrong, but I'm sure there are those who can jump from 4M without breaking thier legs.

So why would you want to dive deeper than your qualification has prepared you to go safely?
>>>> Why not? how would one build experience otherwise?

How high will you jump from? How deep will you go?
>>>> Personally, up to and including a depth which has ppo2 of 1.4 maybe 1.5 bar depending on conditions.

How will you know when you have pushed it too far?
broken legs? missing diver?
>>>> Depends really. Can't say I'd adhere to your way of thinking, it seems very closed.

John

Dive Safe :-)

Chris Cherrington

10-10-2003, 10:05

So how does that affect Ocean Divers and Sport Divers in relation to what they are qualified to dive to (20 metres and 35 metres respectively). Are these a recommendation, and what are the possible consequences of someone at Sport Diver level going below the recommendation?

Regards.

Bill

We seem to be having a debate about SDP and insurance again guys...

As a PADI trained diver I am limited to 35m as a Sports cross over. I am looking at DL to get round this, or just do deeper dives out of branch (or leave altogether). I think the DL course is very worthwhile, its ages since I practiced rescue skills (12 years if you must know) and my last O2 Admin was 5 years ago. These are things that I would like to do, but please tell me how that makes me "qualified" to 50m? 35m makes sense as its about the narc depth for most of us, beyond that Trimix is a good idea - but then we are back to that old thread about PO2s....

I seem to remember there was debate about the SD limits when they were introduced, but that was years ago. I generally agree with 35m it makes sense. What was the thinking behind DL at 50 rather than say Sports+ERD for 50m and (for example) 40m for DL/AD anyone remember??

Chris

iainmsmith

10-10-2003, 10:27

As a PADI trained diver I am limited to 35m as a Sports cross over. I am looking at DL to get round this, or just do deeper dives out of branch (or leave altogether). I think the DL course is very worthwhile, its ages since I practiced rescue skills (12 years if you must know) and my last O2 Admin was 5 years ago. These are things that I would like to do, but please tell me how that makes me "qualified" to 50m? 35m makes sense as its about the narc depth for most of us, beyond that Trimix is a good idea - but then we are back to that old thread about PO2s....

I seem to remember there was debate about the SD limits when they were introduced, but that was years ago. I generally agree with 35m it makes sense. What was the thinking behind DL at 50 rather than say Sports+ERD for 50m and (for example) 40m for DL/AD anyone remember??

I imagine it's because there would be outrage from Bertie "I've been diving for twenty years and I don't get narked at 50m" BSAC at having his maximum depth reduced to 40m, especially if some jumped-up "done all the courses, but no experience" neophyte was being allowed to dive to 50m.

As I understand it, ERD is not supposed to be a Deep Air course, but an introduction to advanced diving and decompression techniques. How applicable they are to dives within the 40m range, I'm not sure.

In terms of DL training preparing you better for deeper diving, IMO, the only additional preparation is the additional diving between SD and DL. This is somewhat tenuous as it was possible to get to DL without ever diving below 20m (I think this has now changed) and one could do DL with only 20 more dives than SD (Sorry - can't remember the new experience requirements)) but in reality, most people do take some time to progress from SD to DL and thus do gain more in-water confidence and competence.

Iain

andycarroll

10-10-2003, 12:53

Hi

Its not all about insurance as you can get alternatives on your own, but if you want to exceed the SDP's on a BRANCH dive then you may be invalidating your DO's, your buddies, or even your club insurance and subjecting them to unneccesary risk.

We all know at the end of the day you can do what you want, but its prudent and ethical to find out first if what you are proposing affects others negatively and then seeking a solution if you do so.

Andy

Bill Bird

10-10-2003, 13:41

My original question wasn't really about starting a debate about insurance and diving, but it probably has some bearing. I'm more interested in what happens on private dives in relation to the limits. I know there will be those that say but that's a private dive, but if they are diving under their agencies ticket (whether that be BSAC, PADI, NAUI, SAA et al, if they then go beyond their recommended (and this is the point - recommendation vs limitation) depth for their grade and there is an incident, what's the approach? I'm concious of today's emergent litigation society, and am concerned that individuals organising such dives may be exposing themselves if they fail to follow the recommendations of their agency, even if they are arranging this as a private dive.

We all accept that our sport is a sport with dangers, which we accept, but would the loved ones that we left behind (or the insurance companies shelling out life insurance) be quite so understanding?

It's a issue that's been brought into focus by one of our branch divers being on a private dive with over 30 minutes of missed stops with an uncontrolled ascent, no immediate affects but suspected DCI a couple of days later. The dive was at 42 metres and the grade Sport Diver. Who would be liable if the individual had died and his family sued? I can't see the branch being liable, but if the organiser/buddy/skipper was felt to have contributed, there's a need to issue some guidelines to those organising private dives to ensure that they are aware of any risks that they may be incurring by avoiding following such principles.

Bill

Its not all about insurance as you can get alternatives on your own, but if you want to exceed the SDP's on a BRANCH dive then you may be invalidating your DO's, your buddies, or even your club insurance and subjecting them to unneccesary risk.

We all know at the end of the day you can do what you want, but its prudent and ethical to find out first if what you are proposing affects others negatively and then seeking a solution if you do so.

Andy

DeepDigit

10-10-2003, 14:14

My original question wasn't really about starting a debate about insurance and diving, but it probably has some bearing. I'm more interested in what happens on private dives in relation to the limits. I know there will be those that say but that's a private dive, but if they are diving under their agencies ticket (whether that be BSAC, PADI, NAUI, SAA et al, if they then go beyond their recommended (and this is the point - recommendation vs limitation) depth for their grade and there is an incident, what's the approach? I'm concious of today's emergent litigation society, and am concerned that individuals organising such dives may be exposing themselves if they fail to follow the recommendations of their agency, even if they are arranging this as a private dive.

We all accept that our sport is a sport with dangers, which we accept, but would the loved ones that we left behind (or the insurance companies shelling out life insurance) be quite so understanding?

It's a issue that's been brought into focus by one of our branch divers being on a private dive with over 30 minutes of missed stops with an uncontrolled ascent, no immediate affects but suspected DCI a couple of days later. The dive was at 42 metres and the grade Sport Diver. Who would be liable if the individual had died and his family sued? I can't see the branch being liable, but if the organiser/buddy/skipper was felt to have contributed, there's a need to issue some guidelines to those organising private dives to ensure that they are aware of any risks that they may be incurring by avoiding following such principles.

Bill
:=
:=Its not all about insurance as you can get alternatives on your own, but if you want to exceed the SDP's on a BRANCH dive then you may be invalidating your DO's, your buddies, or even your club insurance and subjecting them to unneccesary risk.
:=
:=We all know at the end of the day you can do what you want, but its prudent and ethical to find out first if what you are proposing affects others negatively and then seeking a solution if you do so.
:=
:=Andy
------------------------------------------------------------
Of the poor individual who had the accident at 42M would you not ask.

1) Was the dive planned to that depth - agreed objective.
2) Were both divers happy with that plan - accepted the risks.
3) Had the diver dived to that depth before i.e. he was experienced.
4) Was he equiped for the dive to that depth.
5) What were the circumstances of the accident. did it follow the dive plan?

Personally I thing the SDP's are largely irrelivent in this case, dont forget the coroner would have to judge mis-conduct by the buddy for any court action to be taken by the relatives or authorities.

Dive Safe ;-)

chris cherrington

10-10-2003, 14:18

My original question wasn't really about starting a debate about insurance and diving, but it probably has some bearing. I'm more interested in what happens on private dives in

It's a issue that's been brought into focus by one of our branch divers being on a private dive with over 30 minutes of missed stops with an uncontrolled ascent, no immediate affects but suspected DCI a couple of days later. The dive was at 42 metres and the grade Sport Diver. Who would be liable if the individual had died and his family sued? I can't see the branch

This IS an insurance question right??

The agency, and its guidlines, whether PADI, BSAC or TDI refer to the training you have undergone with that agency. This is the central (and recurring) theme of all these postings - PO2 limits etc.

Do an IANTD course and read the disclaimer "no liability - even for death - even if through negligence" Sign it then copy it out again in your own handwriting. Scary or what..

Perhaps BSAC could come up with one so the DO doesn't stop us using PO2 >1.4 ???

Chris

Keith Lawrence(BSAC)

10-10-2003, 14:25

Do an IANTD course and read the disclaimer "no liability - even for death - even if through negligence" Sign it then copy it out again in your own handwriting. Scary or what..

Such disclaimers are laughable under English law, I always have a good chuckle when I see one. Under English law you cannot just sign away your rights like that, they are not worth the paper that they are written on.

Perhaps BSAC could come up with one so the DO doesn't stop us using PO2 >1.4 ???

See above.

Keith L

john kendall

10-10-2003, 14:26

:=My original question wasn't really about starting a debate about insurance and diving, but it probably has some bearing. I'm more interested in what happens on private dives in

:=It's a issue that's been brought into focus by one of our branch divers being on a private dive with over 30 minutes of missed stops with an uncontrolled ascent, no immediate affects but suspected DCI a couple of days later. The dive was at 42 metres and the grade Sport Diver. Who would be liable if the individual had died and his family sued? I can't see the branch

This IS an insurance question right??

The agency, and its guidlines, whether PADI, BSAC or TDI refer to the training you have undergone with that agency. This is the central (and recurring) theme of all these postings - PO2 limits etc.

Do an IANTD course and read the disclaimer "no liability - even for death - even if through negligence" Sign it then copy it out again in your own handwriting. Scary or what..

Perhaps BSAC could come up with one so the DO doesn't stop us using PO2 >1.4 ???

Unfortunately those disclaimers are not worth very much when it comes down to it. No one can sign away their rights like that. If injury is caused through negligence, having a bit of paper won't help.

John

terryh

10-10-2003, 14:53

Such disclaimers are laughable under English law, I always have a good chuckle when I see one. Under English law you cannot just sign away your rights like that, they are not worth the paper that they are written on.

I'd say 95% true. While you are absolutely right that such
disclaimers are almost worthless, they do show that the diver
was informed and was at least aware of some of the potential
risks.

Dificult to plead ignorance if the school/Instructor has your
scrawl on a piece of paper.

TerryH

Bill Bird

10-10-2003, 15:29

Keith L

10-10-2003, 16:23

My question was more aimed at possible liabilities and trying to help members avoid being in a situation where they could be liable because they had organised a dive (privately) which was technically outside of the guidelines. How would a court deal with? Who knows?

You ask some difficult but very valid questions Bill and I?m going to have to give the standard answer of ?it?s grey?. The answer to your first question about how to avoid any potential liability is the easiest ? sell your gear, give up diving, get well away from divers and any dive club. I am afraid that?s what it takes, modern blame culture litigation tends to use a scatter gun approach - sue everybody in sight (and often those out of sight as well, just for good measure) because somebody, somewhere has got to be ?to blame? haven?t they. That is why our members TPL is so important, cover against such litigation is provided even for private dives.

Things start to get grey outside of guidelines and recommendations. Here the first question to ask is did the transgression of the guidelines have a material affect on the incident, if they didn?t then the insurance should not be affected. E.g. You are sued for dropping your stage of 100% on your buddies foot. The fact that it was 100% and not 80% is totally irrelevant to the incident and should not affect the insurance cover in any way. That is why it is wrong to say that diving outside of the guidelines invalidates the insurance, it doesn?t necessarily ? saying that all of the insurance is invalid for a minor transgression of the guidelines is like saying that your car insurance is invalid if you park on a double-yellow line. It isn?t true.

Things start getting REALLY grey when it could be argued that the transgression contributed to the incident, but even here there are grey areas and levels of. E.g. taking your newly qualified OD?s on a deco dive to 40m would probably be deemed gross negligence and there would be very little that anybody could do for you. But an incident a 20.5m (you misjudged it a bit) with an OD with previous and recent experience up to the 20m mark is defendable and would probably be defended vigorously on your behalf. There are of course a multitude of shades of grey between those two extremes.

Then throw into the equation the courts, here all types of things come into play. What is reasonable? What would the man-on-the-street do? Were the actions those that a reasonable person would take? The answer to those questions? nobody knows, you would have to go and find out for real.

I know that it?s of no help to you at all Bill but the only clear (as mud) answer that anybody can give you is ?it depends??. That is the reality of the situation, that is the reality of insurance, that is the reality of the law.

I know it wont ? but HTH

Keith L

Disclaimer : The above is my personal understanding of the situation. I am not a lawyer, I am not an insurance expert. This advice is worth exactly what you paid for it, but it is informed advice to the best of my knowledge on the subject.

rob mclean

10-10-2003, 19:19

John Williams

10-10-2003, 22:01

:=:=Not everyone wants to be an DL or AD, I know plenty of SD's who dive deep (beyond thier qualification guidelines) regularly and seem quite able and return (surprise surprise!)

>>>> I dont recall suggesting anyone dives beyond thier limits.

Funny how the two statements above don't seem to agree then isn't it?

:=The guidelines are not there to spoil your enjoyment. They are there to ensure that you have been properly trained to manage the extra risks associated with extra depth BEFORE you expose yourself to them.
>>>> So getting a badge makes you okay then?

No - absolutely not!
However the structured training that should be involved in gaining the badge and the qualified instructional support that provides that training and the progressive exposure to greater (but properly managed) risk doe go some way to making it "okay"

:=
:=If you want to go deeper than your qualification "allows" then PLEASE get the relevant training to do it. This is more than just building experience - it involves the understanding and the peripheral skills learned too.
>>>> Can't I get on the job training? your assuming people learn nothing or take their diving in stages unless they have a badge - thats very odd.

Not at all!
What I am suggesting is that the "on the job training" that is most appropriate and delivered by properly qualified instructors/mentors will lead to the award of the badge.

Following any other syllabus, or following someone not qualified to provide the training severely increases your risks. You should be aware of that and seek to minimise those risks by using a qualified instructor teaching a course that will lead to a badge.
The badge is totally irrelevant - the training AD experience involved in getting it is what is important.

>>>> so as an SD I can't drown at 20M but I can at 36M, I stated these are experienced divers some with several hundred dives and training from other agencies.

Who said that?
What I said was that the facts of incidents, when analysed showed that the number of SDs having accidents below 35m was disproportionately high when it was not the same for DLs. The difference was the training that led to the badge and the recommendation was therefore to get the training before diving to depths where it was PROVEN that the risks to SDs were elevated.

:=This lack of enforceability means that the BSAC can only make recommendations - because rules require policing and enforcing.
>>>> So are you saying we should be policed to ensure we stick to the rules?

Nope!
I'm saying that you should not ignore facts. You should recognise that the accumulated experience of the BSAC is worth heeding and follow their guidelines without the need to be watched.

:=If I recommended that (experience has shown) jumping onto a concrete floor from more than 3m height was likely to break your legs would you deliberately jump from 4m to prove me wrong?
>>>> I dont recall calling you wrong, but I'm sure there are those who can jump from 4M without breaking thier legs.

I'd fully agree with you.
People have jumped out of aeroplanes without a parachute and survived ... but a high proportion do not!
All that the recommendations are based upon is the fact that the risk of something going wrong has been shown to be unnacceptably high for divers going beyond the depths they have been trained to deal with.
High risk of something occuring does not guarantee it...but it does mean that those who repeatedly put themselves at such high risk are FAR more likely to see it occur.

:=So why would you want to dive deeper than your qualification has prepared you to go safely?
>>>> Why not? how would one build experience otherwise?

By getting trained to deal with it and then going there with someone trained to take you there safely.
I never said you should not go.

:=How will you know when you have pushed it too far?
:=broken legs? missing diver?
>>>> Depends really. Can't say I'd adhere to your way of thinking, it seems very closed.

What? Getting trained to do something safely before you do it!
Seems closed to you does it?
Seems fairly sensible to me!

You sign off with "Dive Safe"

The safest way to dive is to get trained to do the dive BEFORE you do it. That is all I've advocated here.

John

John Williams

10-10-2003, 22:13

Experienced divers should be able to pick the depth they want to dive to.

Great idea!
I'm a very experienced driver - I reckon that I've driven well over half-a-million miles in the last 20 years. Much of it was at high speed and, although I've had lots of speeding tickets, I've NEVER had an accident at speed.

So I think I should be able to pick my own maximum speed.
Say
100mph on motorways (120 at night when it's quiet)
80 in other derestricted areas
70 in areas marked as 50
60 in areas marked as 40
50 through towns
40 past schools etc

Obviously I'd not do that if there were coppers/cameras about ... because then I'd get busted. But hey - if I don't get caught, and continue not to have accidents then who's to know?

Was that your arguement then?
Or did I miss the finer points?

John

DeepDigit

11-10-2003, 00:01

:=Experienced divers should be able to pick the depth they want to dive to.

Great idea!
I'm a very experienced driver - I reckon that I've driven well over half-a-million miles in the last 20 years. Much of it was at high speed and, although I've had lots of speeding tickets, I've NEVER had an accident at speed.

So I think I should be able to pick my own maximum speed.
Say
100mph on motorways (120 at night when it's quiet)
80 in other derestricted areas
70 in areas marked as 50
60 in areas marked as 40
50 through towns
40 past schools etc

Obviously I'd not do that if there were coppers/cameras about ... because then I'd get busted. But hey - if I don't get caught, and continue not to have accidents then who's to know?

Was that your arguement then?
Or did I miss the finer points?
------------------------------------------------------------
Erm yes you did miss it the point, and

Driving is regulated by the law of the land and can involve people and objects/animals who have no idea or understanding of road sense whatsoever, generally the laws are there to protect the inocent, not the likes of you.

Recreational diving isn't regulated by any laws and involves only my buddy and I, if I got a bend its hardly likely to endanger a mother pushing her baby across the road in a pram is it. Hardly a sensible comparison.

Your very adversarial, any particular reason or it just because I don't agree with your point of view maybe or question your un-swerving by the book attitude?

Dive Safe :-)

John

terryh

11-10-2003, 00:27

What I am suggesting is that the "on the job training" that is most appropriate and delivered by properly qualified instructors/mentors will lead to the award of the badge.

Err apparently not.
According to ......
<a href="http://www.bsacforum.co.uk/forums/instforum/posts/2350.html" >http://www.bsacforum.co.uk/forums/instforum/posts/2350.html</a>

You dont even need to be qualified!

TerryH

DeepDigit

11-10-2003, 00:43

:=:=:=Not everyone wants to be an DL or AD, I know plenty of SD's who dive deep (beyond thier qualification guidelines) regularly and seem quite able and return (surprise surprise!)

:=>>>> I dont recall suggesting anyone dives beyond thier limits.

Funny how the two statements above don't seem to agree then isn't it?
>>>> Thier limits are thier personal limits not your imposed ones, the statements seems quite consistant to me.

:=:=The guidelines are not there to spoil your enjoyment. They are there to ensure that you have been properly trained to manage the extra risks associated with extra depth BEFORE you expose yourself to them.
:=>>>> So getting a badge makes you okay then?

No - absolutely not!
However the structured training that should be involved in gaining the badge and the qualified instructional support that provides that training and the progressive exposure to greater (but properly managed) risk doe go some way to making it "okay"

>>>> How deep did you have to dive to get your DL badge - I had to do 20 Open Water dives since qualifying as SD. I never had to go deeper than 30M for my DL in my structured training, I never had to use a twinset or even a pony cylinder, I didn't have to do staged decompression stops or worry about ppO2. I was provided with a 20 minute lecture on Adventurous Diving and taught how to plan a deco dive at altitude. All this structured training provided me with a badge which allows me to dive to 50M.
>>>>> Which bit of my structured training equiped me for deeper diving, I seem to have forgotten?

:=:=
:=:=If you want to go deeper than your qualification "allows" then PLEASE get the relevant training to do it. This is more than just building experience - it involves the understanding and the peripheral skills learned too.
:=>>>> Can't I get on the job training? your assuming people learn nothing or take their diving in stages unless they have a badge - thats very odd.

Not at all!
What I am suggesting is that the "on the job training" that is most appropriate and delivered by properly qualified instructors/mentors will lead to the award of the badge.

Following any other syllabus, or following someone not qualified to provide the training severely increases your risks. You should be aware of that and seek to minimise those risks by using a qualified instructor teaching a course that will lead to a badge.
The badge is totally irrelevant - the training AD experience involved in getting it is what is important.

>>>> Which bit of my AD training equiped me to dive deep? none of it, the only stipulation was that I had carried out dives at a variety of depths some over 40M during the intervening period between DL and AD. none of these dives were during structured training. The deepest dive I did on my AD was my rescue assesments... The best bit of AD training was Advanced Diving Techniques, most of which was done in 20 M of water at Portland Harbour.

>>>> Oh yes instructors. As an Open Water Instructor, I can't remember which bits equiped me to train others to dive deep.. Ummm none of it actually. But according to you I'm in good hands with Instructors who may have never dived deeper than 30M and have never been taugh anything to do with deep diving, apart from a 20 lecture on Adventurous Diving.

>>>> Mentoring, Here we may agree, I was mentored, excellent it was to, slowly increasing depth, rig configs, twinset diving - pony bottles, Nitrox/Trimix, stage decompression, DSMB blah blah. As I now mentor others in some of the peripheral skills required to perform deeper dives - But alas it didn't lead to a badge, does that make me any less able a diver than you with your badges?

:=>>>> so as an SD I can't drown at 20M but I can at 36M, I stated these are experienced divers some with several hundred dives and training from other agencies.

Who said that?
>>>> You implied it.
What I said was that the facts of incidents, when analysed showed that the number of SDs having accidents below 35m was disproportionately high when it was not the same for DLs. The difference was the training that led to the badge and the recommendation was therefore to get the training before diving to depths where it was PROVEN that the risks to SDs were elevated.

:=:=This lack of enforceability means that the BSAC can only make recommendations - because rules require policing and enforcing.
:=>>>> So are you saying we should be policed to ensure we stick to the rules?

Nope!
I'm saying that you should not ignore facts. You should recognise that the accumulated experience of the BSAC is worth heeding and follow their guidelines without the need to be watched.

:=:=If I recommended that (experience has shown) jumping onto a concrete floor from more than 3m height was likely to break your legs would you deliberately jump from 4m to prove me wrong?
:=>>>> I dont recall calling you wrong, but I'm sure there are those who can jump from 4M without breaking thier legs.

I'd fully agree with you.
People have jumped out of aeroplanes without a parachute and survived ... but a high proportion do not!
All that the recommendations are based upon is the fact that the risk of something going wrong has been shown to be unnacceptably high for divers going beyond the depths they have been trained to deal with.
High risk of something occuring does not guarantee it...but it does mean that those who repeatedly put themselves at such high risk are FAR more likely to see it occur.

:=:=So why would you want to dive deeper than your qualification has prepared you to go safely?
:=>>>> Why not? how would one build experience otherwise?

By getting trained to deal with it and then going there with someone trained to take you there safely.
I never said you should not go.
>>>> Well I've already established the training counts for very little and as for the experience of the instructors, that could be very hit and miss. I've come across instructors that have no experience of and that teach nowhere else other than quarries - these are the people you say I should trust to teach how to dive safely at depth??????

:=:=How will you know when you have pushed it too far?
:=:=broken legs? missing diver?
:=>>>> Depends really. Can't say I'd adhere to your way of thinking, it seems very closed.

What? Getting trained to do something safely before you do it!
Seems closed to you does it?
Seems fairly sensible to me!
>>>> The training in this instance isnt an issue, although I think mostly worthless its the choice or lack of it as far as your concerned that I saying demonstrates a closed mind, a mind unable to think 'outside the box'

You sign off with "Dive Safe"

The safest way to dive is to get trained to do the dive BEFORE you do it. That is all I've advocated here.
>>>> I dont think you are, your demanding no one does anything which may step outside of your little world - incase its a risk, smell the coffee John - lifes a risk every day.

John

I'll dive safe - you collect another badge. ;-)

DeepDigit

11-10-2003, 00:48

:=What I am suggesting is that the "on the job training" that is most appropriate and delivered by properly qualified instructors/mentors will lead to the award of the badge.
:=

Err apparently not.
According to ......
http://www.bsacforum.co.uk/forums/instforum/posts/2350.html

You dont even need to be qualified!

TerryH
---------------------------------------------------
Excellent - Thanks

Theres a change of tune John (inconsistant aswell) ;-)

Dive Safe ;-)

edward haynes

11-10-2003, 11:42

>>>> How deep did you have to dive to get your DL badge - I had to do 20 Open Water dives since qualifying as SD. I never had to go deeper than 30M for my DL in my structured training, I never had to use a twinset or even a pony cylinder, I didn't have to do staged decompression stops or worry about ppO2. I was provided with a 20 minute lecture on Adventurous Diving and taught how to plan a deco dive at altitude. All this structured training provided me with a badge which allows me to dive to 50M.

Not quite. To dive to 50M after getting your DL signed off requires instruction by an NQI (because it's new) on 3 more dives, one at 40m, one at 45m and the final to 50m dives. Only then are you deemed qualified to dive to that depth.

Edward

edward haynes

11-10-2003, 11:51

Its quite rare that john williams and i agree but in this case i do,please read page 87 of the new branch officers handbook

It's going to be Web Page based (and possibly called the BSAC Branch Management guide) so page numbers will mean nothing, the Section will be - Section 4.3 Depth Limits: Looking at the end of this month for issue :-) :-)

Edward

John Williams

13-10-2003, 22:56

Once again you got it wrong boys.

There is NO inconsistency in my answers.

The best "On the job training" is provided by qualified instructors.

Assistant Instructors - who may not be formally qualified but, in the opinion of a suitably qualified BSAC instructor, have a lot to offer the course may assist the BSAC NQI to deliver recognised training programmes that lead to safer divers more capable of dealing with the situations they wish to encounter.

... and a badge!

John

Steve Walker

15-10-2003, 11:26

Just thought I'd share this on here as we're talking about depth limits, though the info came from elsewhere: overseas trainee (don't know which agency) asking about what size tank he needs as he's concerned about his air consumption, his question started with "It was my third dive, we went to thirty metres..."
FFS!

Steve Walker

15-10-2003, 14:54

Its quite rare that john williams and i agree but in this case i do,please read page 87 of the new branch officers handbook

Err.... it's rarer than you think Rob, you were actually quoting my post not John's. Unfortunately I don't have access to a BOH at the moment so you'll have to quote the relevant info on these boards for me, sil vous plait
Cheers
Steve W