Hacker News Reader

Am certain if you ask 100 beginner divers, 99 will have their own brush with death adventures!

Mine came in the form of a six foot barracuda getting a bit too close for comfort. I am sure if I hadn't played it cool. Had somehow attacked or acted aggressively to shush it away (when I was a guest in it's deep sea domain). It would have enjoyed a nice lunch of fresh human flesh.

The second was going below the hard deck at 300 feet whilst diving the continental shelf in the Caribbean. It's stunning. Floating weightlessly over the void that drops suddenly over a mile in depth. Feeling the rush of frigid current rise from the abyss. And seeing mysterious shapes as light filters down into darkness. But I too ran low on air. And had to come up fast.

I haven't been diving in decades. And would require re-certification. But I've always heard legendary tales of the Red Sea and Australia's Coral Reef. Definite bucket list items ;)

https://oceana.org/

I've done a few hundred dives (so, intermediate? with some additional certifications for deep/nitrox/rescue/divemaster) and the biggest problems I've had were 1) dropping a steel cylinder on my toe on a boat 2) getting sunburned on my scalp before I started wearing a hood even in warm water, due to an extended surface interval 3) dodgy food on a liveaboard.

I don't think most recreational divers push things close to the line at all.

Most definitely misremembering the depths! 300' begins to collapse lung & heart cavities ;)

Scuba diving is done at ambient pressure. Lung and heart cavities don't collapse.

(Lungs do compress during breath hold freediving.)

The issue with depth is 1) you can't do a direct ascent to the surface past...18m or so?...with a high level of safety, for a large number of users, and from 30m or so (the recreational limit for most programs) it's even harder, plus that's the upper bound where nitrogen narcosis starts to set in. I've done down to 40m on air which is the next limit and the point where a lot of people have more serious nitrogen narcosis. Beyond that you really should be doing decompression diving and start to be looking at different gas mixes which makes it all a lot more complex. At depths beyond >50m oxygen toxicity on air would be bad too. The current normal limit is ~56m on air, previously people have done 60-65m pretty consistently on air, and the record is probably 155m (but that is insane and almost certainly caused harm, plus had high risk).

Ascent from depth without having cavities open to equalize pressure will be a really bad deal even from 18m (and really from comparatively shallow depths like 3-6m), but that really just means breathing out at slow rate during ascent. For that it'd be explode vs. implode though :)

I'm no marine biologist but you can be certain that humans are not a regular diet of barracudas.

Once, a 5-meter tiger shark came to me out of the blue and got too close, but as humans aren't a regular diet of tiger sharks either, it swam away.

I've met literally dozens of people who talk about their close brush with a barracuda while diving.

They are a minimal threat but they look kind of scary so people always always think that they had a close call with one when the barracuda is just doing what they do which is checking out a human who might hand them a fish.

It always makes me chuckle because I hear people tell their barracudas stories and they always sound the exact same. At no point were they in any danger but they really think they were.

Just like masses being overscared with sharks because of Jaws, its probably because another but much less popular movie “The Depth [1977]” with Nick Noltie where in a final scene Noltie wins underwater battle because he knows where huge Murena lives and put a villain head in there. Then we see that Murena litterally sicking him into her hole with a force that break his mask and break him in half. Definitely one of the most memorable scenes of the movie and definitely what made me start my doving adventure (now cerified with CMAS and PAID up to deep dive / rescue diver). Definitiely movie worth rewatching.

Barracudas can freak you out because they seem to be curious. They just hang out and watch you. The only time I've heard of someone getting bitten was on a YouTube sailing channel where the group was making fun of one of the crew for being the only known human to actually be bit by a barracuda. IIRC he was messing with it.

Jelly fish, OTOH, suck.

Barracudas really aren't dangerous to divers. There are a few recorded cases of bites but I don't think anyone has been killed.

I've read they sometimes bite because of flashing jewelry which they mistake for shiny small fish.

When on a snorkel trip in the Florida Keys I was told not to point at the barracuda, because tourist often fed them hotdogs to get a close up look, and so they were trained to eat anything hotdog shaped... no idea if it was true.

You can see the coral reef in Eilat (Israel) without really diving since it is in shallow water, not sure if it is as good as in Egypt but at least there is a decent hospital near by if something goes wrong.

If the Great Barrier Reef is on your bucket list then you really want to get on that asap. It's getting more and more bleached.

Yep. Sadly, I'd say that even now you might want to spend your travel dollars elsewhere.

I'm very curious what gas blend were you using at 300 ft - I'm fairly sure that would be fatal on air or even nitrox.

I'm also shocked that you could come up from that depth with any sort of urgency and not be seriously injured / killed by some form of DCS.

Maybe I misunderstood and you were not a beginner, because otherwise that tour operator has no business running a dive op.

Nitrox is 100% fatal at depths beyond prescribed limit. The whole point of Nitrox is to increases the oxygen content in the gas to minimize nitrogen absorption. A side effect of this is that you will get to hyperoxic poisoning thresholds earlier on a deeper dive profile. This is why Nitrox requires additional certifications, to help understand these limitations and learn how to calculate your max operating depth. (when using nitrox wihtin these thresholds I find I have more energy at the end of my dive).

To go deeper you need to blend in inert gasses and decrease o2 and n2 to keep partial pressures below fatal doses. This means most commonly mixing in Helium to cut down on over o2 and n2 in your gas mix. Human tissue I guess doesn't absorb helium the same way it does n2.

Source: Open Water Scuba Instructor with multiple agencies... I havent taught in about 5 years though so some of this information may have changed, especially in light that global helium shortages (or US stock piles?) may have driven the price of He up to high to be used for mixed gas diving.

We still use helium for mixed gas diving but it is more expensive now. Human tissue does absorb helium in much the same way as nitrogen (or any other inert gas). The rate of diffusion is a little different which can impact the decompression profile.

Yeah, I'm a beginner diver (< 15 dives) too and I've been a bit horrified just how easy and loose some of the diving centers play with safety and capability checks. Just like you said, most of them don't even check if you passed the shipwreck advanced diving cert.

You're experience matches mine so I'm now extra careful to vet all the diving centers - especially looking for complaints of divemasters being too "hardass" on people and demanding good equipment / qualifications. A lot of other divers are still surprised that my inital diving instructor actually checked if I could do the required 200m swim by demanding that I do it in the pool before starting training.

I've also bought my own equipment because of that - who knows just how well the regulators, dive computers and BCDs are maintained in those places. It's scary enough that you need to trust them with air and tank quality.

I took the basic (open water?) license in Australia, and the group were sent into a pool to tread water for 20 minutes or something. Now, I can barely swim. Really poor buoyancy and bad technique I guess, so have never really learned.

If the instructor had looked away from the TV for a second he would've seen and flunked me, which would probably have been a good thing. I'm stupid. Went through with it and out on a couple of dives which I enjoyed greatly, but now ten years later still haven't dived again and won't until I can swim. Having kids does stuff to your sense of self-preservation.

top tip: most humans can float as long as their lungs are full

Being super lean and carrying mass in large muscles will ruin this, fwiw.

In my late 20s I was militantly fit and also very into rock climbing. I supplemented this with some lifting to balance things out; people who ONLY climb end up looking a little weird as the lats develop out of proportion with the rest of you.

Anyway, even with a lungful of air, my neutral buoyancy point was like 8-12" below the surface.

Alas, I am now 51.

Same here when I was younger (i.e., less fat). With a full breath of air in me, I'd float, but exhale a bit and I could sink to the bottom of a 12 ft pool without any effort on my part.

Only if they're not panicking and thrashing about.

true. it’s definitely easier said than done, but it’s a useful fact to have in your head

I'm an avid diver and I completely agree. My Open Water took place in a hot spring with extremely low visibility. The goal was the cert it wasn't skill mastery. My next dive was the Great Barrier reef where boats just drop you off and you can get a guide or dive yourself. We irresponsibly dove by ourselves, exhausted all our air, and came up (skipping a safety stop) realizing we were a considerable distance from the boat. It's obviously our fault for not being safe but we definitely didn't have the necessary fear in us for our skill level.

I think PADI should be emphasizing that your first 20 dives or so should be with a guide never exceeding 60ft. IIRC, a lot of the course material for Open Water is about shore diving with a buddy by yourselves.

It's obviously our fault for not being safe but we definitely didn't have the necessary fear in us for our skill level.

I think fear is what has kept me safe this long. I've got at least 100 dives under my belt but I was quite careful to slowly ramp up the difficulty, and even now, I'm very cautious of really strong currents.

I must have done over 20 easy shore dives just getting navigation experience (and I'm still not super confident with it) before jumping on a boat to go deeper. And even then there were a couple of potentially close calls. I must have had over 40 dives before I even went on a dive holiday, and many of the scenic places are not super difficult to dive.

> I was quite careful to slowly ramp up the difficulty, and even now, I'm very cautious of really strong currents.

This is most definitely how it should go.

It seems like an inevitability you will eventually have something go wrong (maybe you lose your group, your mask is a problem, you burn through air too quickly, etc). In this scenario the most important skill is to not panic and control your breathing but I think that mostly comes with experience.

While you develop experience, diving conservatively hedges against some of the worst case scenarios. Something as simple as a mask coming off can lead to panic which leads to hyperventilating. Someone hyperventilating will feel like they just can't get enough air and the immediate reaction will be to exit as quickly as possible.

Guides, as OP points out, should be far more sensitive to the experience a person has.

I was sixteen when I first started diving. It was only after I first (briefly) lost track of the dive group, at night, that I realized I had absolutely no plan for what to do if I was disconnected from the guide. (At night.) This possibility hadn’t been discussed, at all.

> As a PADI Open Water Diver, you'll be trained to a maximum depth of 18 metres/60 feet, and are qualified to dive in conditions as good as, or better than, those in which you trained

ref: https://www.padi.com/courses/open-water-diver

PADI does emphasize that with an open water cert you must absolutely always remain above 60ft.

That’s what’s shocking to me the most about the article and some of the conversation here—many folks are talking about diving to crazy depths as if that’s normal.

I don’t know why that is, but I will agree with your general point as a result. Folks need to understand this is a dangerous sport and one that can easily kill you (though not by barracuda).

I'm just learning that I don't actually know PADI Open Water guidelines despite > 100 dives. I guess that syncs with my experience that Open Water cert doesn't necessarily actually train you.

I'm like genuinely confused at this point. I've had so many guides, even in places like Hawaii, not follow their own guidelines. It would be trivial for PADI to see Open Water divers are diving the thresher sharks at Malapascua, for example, and that would necessitate they go past 60ft.

The thing is, it's actually extremely easy to get an Advanced Open Water cert. I did it in a few days in Dahab, on the Sinai. We actually dove the Blue Hole as our last dive.

Yeah, that's crazy too. Maybe I have rose colored lenses because I did my advanced open water through my university and we did tons of dives to the same spot with I guess more academically focused exams and whatnot.

Still, that was circa 1997 so, um, I forgot pretty much all the detail :).

I remember my padi instructor (British, in Malaysia) as being completely paranoid, which was a good thing.

He essentially told us that any missteps would have very nasty consequences, and spent most of his time badgering us with safety precautions. He also encouraged us to dive with a guide, do refresher dives, etc.

The only downside is that I don't dive anymore now that I have kids, since I believe it's dangerous, and I'm worried I will make a mistake...

Interesting, I also got my open water in Malaysia. My South African instructor spent a lot of time drilling safe decent / safe ascent practices into us, making us practice individual and buddy drills etc. I will always be grateful to him for instilling good practices from the get-go.

The two biggest things with alpine hiking are probably weather and not turning around when you should. (I could probably add just being grossly ill-prepared like lacking map and compass and perhaps depending too much on electronic gizmos.)

Over the holidays I was reading a book about a winter fatality on Mount Washington a few years back. The person was actually very well-prepared and fit. And even had some big mountain experience--but always with guides. And simply went out on a day she should never have been out on.

Landslides & avalanches would be the other big worry and not just from them coming down on you from above. It's not unusual for trails some places to cross a couple hundred feet up scree slopes that are right at the angle of repose. A bad slide can start just from standing still too long. I've been in groups that had to run across them and afterward we questioned whether we'd been stupid to even try.

Trails in the Alps in Germany or Austria can be tricky precisely because they are fairly well marked and signposted. A red route can be a 'walk in the park', nicely trodden path with a steep gradient in places, or include bits that are quite exposed with a danger of falling. As a complete amateur, it is easy to end up on a riskier route than you expected, as it would not even look remotely risky until you are half-way through. And then you encounter some dodgy bit, it can be hard to decide - do you turn back, or do you attempt it? Will it get worse or better after this?

One should be vigilant not to get lulled into a false sense of security and prepare well for any hike. I have been irresponsible in the past at times but now I know better - I wish I did back then too.

Yep, this literally just happened to me here in Switzerland. An "easy" route at around 2300m which was great - a nice wide, cleaned road around snowy areas. And then suddenly a steep descent with 30+ cm of frozen iced snow. Without proper equipment, that would be extremely dangerous and even with equipment is was far outside the comfort zone.

Ice can be particularly tricky. One of the nice things about modern traction gear is that it's easy and light to toss in a pack "just in case." That said, with harder ice and steeper terrain, it's not a replacement for more specialized gear.

I tried to do one hike this winter that wasn't even particularly hard but it was really icy and cold and the steep parts were steep enough. I ended up turning around given that I wasn't wearing my full crampons.

I turned around at Bright Angel in the Grand Canyon this Winter. Despite being real bummed about it, I headed down Hermit's Rest which gets more sun and was no longer icy.

"Oh well, I'll settle today" I thought. Midway down Hermit's Rest I cross a much more experienced hiker -- she had lived in and around the Grand Canyon full-time for a year. She was only coming back to the Rim to move her car due to the incoming on-season (yeah, just a "casual" river to rim and back, lol). She told me she had just been around Bright Angel the day prior and had seen a girl be air-lifted away with a broken leg. Even though she had microspikes and months of winter experience in that park specifically, she bailed.

Suddenly, I didn't feel like I settled anymore... turning back can save lives and limbs. The majority of the time, nature (and the trail) will still be there when you return. It will certainly outlast you, if anything.

> And even had some big mountain experience

One problem is that that experience lull you into a false sense of security. I'm not talking arrogance or so. Merely that you can do something everyday that's unsafe and get away with it, training you on bad data to think it's safe.

Like avalanches. Certain conditions are met. You go out. Everything is fine. Same the other times. You learn that it's safe. Suddenly an avalanche happen with those exact conditions. It was just arbitrary it didn't happen the other times.

Avalanches are probably one of those things that you can reduce the danger of in various ways but probably can't avoid entirely other than avoiding mountains that can potentially have an avalanche entirely.

For all the mitigation work they do on a regular basis, there are periodic avalanches at ski areas in the Alps and in the US West. Many of these are out of bounds, but not all. [1]

[1] https://www.powder.com/stories/skier-killed-in-avalanche-at-...

Yeah. Like when in a group having to traverse something almost horizontally on skis, we go with a long distance between each other. So that the risk of triggering something is smaller, and if something is triggered as few as possible is involved and others can do the rescue. I also have beacon, back pack with airbag etc. So minimized the risk as much as I can.

But sometimes I think. If I have to do aaall those things to mitigate the risk, is it really safe and worth it? So far, the answer is yes. Maybe it changes if I ever see an accident.

As a native of a very well known mountainous state I can say it's more than that. If you're summitting on a mountain you need to be prepared to bivouac at least one if not two nights and survive adverse weather. Even experienced hikers can find themselves trapped far from the trailhead by either weather or fire. That's not even talking about the usual bears, mountain lions (don't hike alone), or ticks (Lyme Disease is real).

For those who don't know, there are signs around the "presidential" peaks in the White Mountains that say:

> The area ahead has the worst weather in America. Many have died of exposure even in the summer. Turn back _now_ if the weather is bad.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ScarySigns/comments/ekx3rw/found_wh...

They are NOT kidding. Things can go from beautiful to ugly very quickly. 5,000 feet might seem like a joke to somebody from out west, but it's not all smooth trails (practically the same as pavement) with plenty of switchbacks like you're used to. When you're on steep nasty almost-technical terrain and its wet and hella windy, safety can suddenly be a long way away.

I know those mountains very well, I'm a strong hiker even by local standards, and I still make sure to exercise plenty of caution every time. Those rocks are not to be trifled with.

Based on the comment about the electronics, GP is likely referring to Kate Matrosova, who perished in positively appalling conditions, even by the very low standards of winter in the Whites.

She died just off the Star Lake Trail, having ascended to the ridge via the Valley Way, which hits the ridge line at Madison Hut (4800', or much lower than the summit of Washington at 6288'). My partner and I have bailed off pretty much exactly her route in the summer when the winds were too high for our experience and fitness levels when we popped up out of the lee side of the ridge line on Adams.

Anybody who wants a really well researched case study should read Ty Gagne's book on her trip and the subsequent rescue attempt.

Incidentally, my partner and I climbed Washington on a guided trip the weekend after she died. The weather was so good the guides had their cameras out to take pictures. The extremes in the Presidentials are no joke, as stated, but can also result in some beautiful days.

Yeah, that's the case and the book I was talking about.

The actual accident, while obviously very tragic, wasn't especially interesting. Basically don't try to do a Presidential Traverse during the worst weather in about 20 years. It was actually a different situation from the more common cascading failures mode of accidents.

She made a grave error by deciding to drive up to NH that weekend and a fatal one by continuing above treeline. Even Rick Wilcox (owns local climbing gear/guide store and has summitted Everest) basically says in the book that she was well enough prepared but shouldn't have been out that day.

That said there were definitely lessons around just because you have a lot of experience, don't assume you understand the local situation when you have little to no experience there.

But the search and rescue account was morbidly fascinating. Also demonstrates that locator beacons won't always save you. (She admittedly didn't use it properly but I doubt it would have made a difference given the weather.)

BTW, when I said "you" before I didn't mean you @ghaff. I know you know these things; that was for the majority of HN folks whose experience is likely to be with taller but still less dangerous peaks. I apologize for the lack of clarity.

I think the big takeaways for my partner and I were a little more nuanced. With all respect to Kate Matrosova and acknowledging that we don't have any knowledge of her thoughts that day:

0) Her mileage to the top of Madison was off by about a mile on her written plan. Not a good place to start for an ambitious day.

1) Most of her prior experience was guided where somebody else was responsible for making the decisions. I am fully prepared to believe that she had the physical experience, but would suspect that she lacked the decision-making experience that would have saved her.

2) She died heartbreakingly close to Madison Hut. If she'd turned around 30 to 60 minutes earlier, she might have made it to the relative shelter of the hut with enough energy left to warm up and get back below treeline on the Valley Way, which is quite close to the hut. Speculation, I know, but I can't help but wonder.

We talked a lot about the decision-making because we could both see ourselves having a go in the same circumstances owing to our inexperience (we independently thru-hiked the AT, but we aren't mountaineers). Reading it was a really useful case study for us and helped think through identifying when we're about to cross the line from adventure to peril.

If you didn't know, he's got a second book out, btw. Gonna crack it open next :-)

I know he has another book out which wasn’t available when I bought this one. I’m actually involved with a winter hiking program which is how I found out about this one because I’m usually involved with leading winter trips in New England.

To your point, I agree and think I touch on most of them upthread. Weather is definitely an an important consideration. She hadn't mostly been involved in making tough calls.

And, yeah, she had opportunities to bail after driving up from NY. But clearly she wasn't going to do that prior to seriously going for Adams at which point it was too late given the weather.

Not a diver myself but my best friend is (he is also an instructor as well as cave/shipwreck diver and he has also worked for a dive center with a lot of tourists). I remember him telling me that diving in shipwrecks(or caves) requires additional certification, so I assume that those who have only the first/second star were not allowed to join (especially in a trip by an all-inclusive resort).

What you describe sounds like a terrible and irresponsible trip to me.

> What you describe sounds like a terrible and irresponsible trip to me.

That is typical of tours and resorts. These are not in the US where the law might investigate. Just some divers who will show anyone around. Many will teach you to dive, a two hour course is enough for a simple dive (ie.something you could snorkel to), then they take you on a first dive that needs far more training.

In the US there typically won't be a legal investigation unless someone suffers a serious injury or death. And even then it will typically be handled as just a civil issue (wrongful death lawsuit and insurance claim).

Probably, I'm not into diving so I can just report what I've observed from my friends who are. Though insurance in the US tends to be stricter about what they allow.

Both caves and shipwrecks are allowed with Open Water as long as you are within a certain distance from an opening and natural light.

Any place with Hard Ceiling (something between you and the surface except water) necessitates specialty training in most dive certification organizations.

The issue that many take with PADI is that their values are mostly aligned with making profits.

my dad always called it Put Another Dollar In

It's commonly known as Pay And Dive In here in the UK.

I’m from the UK too. Clearly a common theme

Absolutely not:

> You need to be PADI Advanced Open Water Diver who is at least 18 years old to enroll in the Cavern Diver course.

https://www.padi.com/courses/cavern-diver

Edit: I was wrong with the above statement.

After doing some research around this. Cenotes are an exception to the rule and even though Open Water Divers often do enter inner rooms in wreck dives and caverns what matters is maintaining a direct line of ascent.

---- Original ----

Open Water can do caverns. Dos Ojos is incredibly popular and has hard ceiling.

Edit: Also Cavern Diver is just a specialty cert and doesn't confer any extra penetration. Those certs are mostly designed for skill mastery. IANTD's Cavern cert is required to get Full Cave, but I don't know if PADI's would count towards it.

https://blog.padi.com/2019/04/29/must-dive-cenotes-for-open-...

Did you read your own link?

> certified Open Water Divers can take a cavern tour guided by professionals qualified by some of the cave diver training organizations to lead such tours. This is a highly controlled, limited tour along a line into the cavern zone, which is defined as within the natural light zone and within 130 to 200 ft (39-60m) (some minor variations here) of the surface.

Yes, I read my own link. OP was talking about a guided tour.

The case in point is what you said: "Both caves and shipwrecks are allowed with Open Water".

As a rule, they absolutely aren't.

In this specific place, PADI allows some of them to make a supervised dive at a certain site following a specially installed line. This doesn't change the rule, which is "Open Water Diver certification does not qualify you to dive on shipwrecks, nor caves".

At some other place, there may be an option for a person with Open Water certificate to drive a semi-trailer truck, while under supervision from a trained professional, and over a course specifically crafted to minimize any possible collision. This doesn't change the rule, which is "Open Water Diver certification does not qualify you to drive semi-trailer trucks."

After looking into this, I'm wrong and I'm going to edit my original comment. My apologies.

Where I'm confused is the difference between a direct line of ascent (even when there is an overhead directly above) versus penetrating beyond that. This is a differentiator that makes swim-throughs OK but most caverns not OK.

Edit: Turns out I can't edit a comment that old.

If the dive is appropriate for your cert, responsibility falls down to yourself and your buddy if he has a higher cert. If the dive is not within your cert. level, responsibility goes to the instructor (if he went with you) or the sailor that drove you. When in doubt, check local law. That's for negligence. Then it's up to your insurance to fight / cover for damages.

Always dive within your limits, and if interested find a local club. To me, dive turism is something that can only be truly enjoyed after reaching a certain dive level. It's no fun to see turtles or sharks if your whole focus is still on being neutral buoyant or checking your air supply.

As you say, diving is like hiking. I love hiking, but I know my limits and will not attempt a K7 or travel with a specific hike in mind. I like walking a trail, seeing birds and views and nature. Same applies underwater! The red sea is amazing, but so can be your nearest dive site.

If truly afraid / curious about things that go awry, "Diver down" is a nice intro

Yes we do. I have some 30-40 dives done with Advanced open water diving license, but since I only dive in exotic places 1-2 we visit times a year, I always need a full refresh as first dive on every vacation. Not having any scuba equipment at home, the things life all safety and equipment checks, even though easy, just fade from my memory.

I recall, when doing my first real dive (not training in 4m), in Croatia, the instructor took us to 33m. I was showing him this on depth meter, he just signaled OK with fingers. The feeling of being so deep that we didn't see surface anymore, on a first dive was a bit unnerving.

I also have similar experience to yours with shipwreck, although with some 30 dives it wasn't so scary. But we were swimming through narrow passages of very old shipwreck from WWII on Bali, and I felt how tubes are touching the walls. It wasn't a big wreck, but I wouldn't go to this kind of inspection on my own, just followed instructor.

One thing I noticed - a minority of folks are so arrogant they barely follow instructor and do what they want, ie not following the group, swimming lower than instructor etc. Can't comprehend this, I mean you are literally reminded by all senses how you are in very unfamiliar environment, yet some can't show any respect for it, even though they don't have much experience themselves.

Anyway, a very cool sport, although its one way to realize how messed up our environment is, when you see more and more corals dying literally just over few years.

I had a similar experience at a tourist destination island in Australia. We went on a dive with just a couple of meters of visibility, with a big group holding on to a anchor chain. I couldn't see the dive instructor and I couldn't equalise my ears. Everyone kept going and I basically just stopped at about 10 meters down. It just wasn't worth it, especially given the ear pain I had for weeks afterwards.

As a counterpoint, I did another "introductory" dive at another Australian island a few years later, and it was beyond amazing. Prettier than any wildlife documentary I had ever seen. Incredibly attentive, patient, and professional staff, etc...

Would you care to share where the good and bad experiences in AU were?

Bad was Great Keppel Island. Basically it was a bunch of drunk 20-something-year-olds doing "activities" like diving, getting plastered with overpriced drinks, and unsuccessfully hitting on each other. The coral was half dead from bleaching, and the other half was torn up by boat anchors.

Good was Lord Howe Island, which is the last true paradise on Earth. It's on the southernmost tip of the Great Barrier Reef, so it has coral, but none has bleached. The waters are pristine and protected. It's a place more civilised than Japan. You can leave a camera bag with $10K of gear in it on the beach and go on a hike, because it will be there when you get back. There's a beach with a shack next to it where you can stuff a $20 bill into a jar to rent snorkelling equipment. The jar had about $500 in it. Nobody is going to take that either. This place is what most places should be like, but aren't.

The dive at Lord Howe Island was just... unspeakably beautiful. To set the scene: the missus had done a dive before (supposedly), and this was an introductory dive anyway to a depth no greater than about 12m, but she had a panic attack. While the instructor was patiently helping her relax, I snorkelled around the boat. Above were thousands of wheeling seabirds coming in to roost to a cliff about 100m high. That view alone was spectacular. Below were layers of coral and shoals of fish like underwater highways of colour. Had I paid the fee just to see this I would have considered it money well spent.

Then the younger instructor leading the team of kids doing their PADI certification offered to take me on a one-on-one dive since a boy in his group used his air too quick and we had spare time now. I got to see shellfish bigger than I had ever seen, a huge octopus squirt ink in the instructor's face, then we dove through a tunnel under coral, there were fish bigger than me, and generally it was just awesome.

I highly, highly recommend this place to everyone who's willing to listen and has the budget. My tip is: skimp on the accommodation, splurge on the restaurants. Go there to turn your phone off and relax.

Thanks for the in-depth response, much appreciated! Turns out Lord Howe Island was actually on my partner's bucket list. I definitely bumped it up a bit more now.

For any beginning divers reading this, dive your limits.

I am an instructor and it always makes me sad to hear about people questioning the hobby because of shady dive centers.

Do not let a guide or instructor talk you into exceeding your certification limits.

Also, if anyone encounters a situation like what is described above please report it to PADI asap. PADI takes cases like this very seriously and will initiate an investigation immediately.

You might save someones life.

> Dive shops tend to be fairly relaxed with checking if someone is properly qualified to go on a particular dive. They barely check your papers or equipment, if at all.

I find this is very destination dependent.

I did some Cenotes dives in Mexico that I was seriously underqualified for, and some deeper wreck dives in the Carribean too.

OTOH in Australia everything was very much by the book. The new book, even (when I qualified for PADI Open Water in the early 90s we did deep-diving as part of the training, and were qualified up to 30m, but sometime in the 00s AFAICT things changed and O/W people are these days confined to 18m or less.)

Which reminds me, I must get my 'advanced' at some point soon. I did a deep-dive specialty a while back so that I could do some more interesting reef dives at the great barrier reef, and an enriched air qualification as well, but not the advanced O/W.

One day, after many years, I may even have the qualifications to do those dives I did many years ago... Thankfully I was young and stupid enough to just go with it and enjoy it at the time.

I'm on a similar level of experience as you. I've dived a bit below the depth I'm officially cleared for, and through short tunnels. Both felt fine and responsible. But going into a rusty wreck with insufficient air and strong current is insane. I hope you wrote a review to warn others.

I dived the Blue Hole in Belize and was shocked by the slack attitude of most of the other divers on the boat. I'd just completed my Advanced Open Water (with a deep dive) so was very conscious of the regular air checks, however despite a detailed dive briefing with emphasis on the pressure cut offs at each depth, about half the party ended up having to be given supplemental air at the final safety stop. Although I'm sure that there are many irresponsible dive operators out there, there are clearly also divers (many of whom were at least experienced enough to bring their own equipment) who don't take responsibility for their own safety. I don't know if that's a training issue, or just a human stupidity issue.

I am risk averse, first time I dived it was exactly because how nonchalant way it was advertised. It was an intro to diving course, so it didn’t require any class work. We went straight in the boat, instructor gave basic instructions as we were boating to dive site. Because how it was presented I also didn’t realize how dangerous it is. Only thing they emphasized was to not fly for next 24 hours. Had I knew the real dangers when diving, I probably would have skipped it.

Not saying that it is the right way but dive shops would have a lot fewer customers if they really emphasized the dangers.

Also diving is one of the best the best experiences of my life. It really feels like being in another world. It is extremely peaceful and meditative. You should try at least once.

>Diving seems like one of the recreational activities where it is easy to end up doing something much riskier than you intended (another I'd say is alpine hiking)

You are absolutely correct, in mountaineering risk-management you have two risks an objective an subjective.

If you do hiking, the objective risk is low (hey i am just wandering), but the subjective is often much higher then one thinks (falling rocks, rapid weather change, out of water, break you angle, no way to call emergency, aggressive mother-cows etc.).

If you plan to climb a Wall the objective risk is obvious (you can fall down, rocks break out and hit you etc), and because of that you are already aware of those risks, the chance that you calculated the subjective risks in too, is much bigger.

> These experiences - combined with the general experience of wasting the whole day on a rocky boat breathing diesel fumes for an hour or so of diving - make me reluctant to dive again, unless the sight is particularly picturesque.

In my other comment, I recommended that everyone try Scuba diving at least once, cannot edit it now but there is another option, free diving. Most of the reefs and fishes are around 30-40 feet depth. With free diving, you can experience beauty of seas without carrying heavy equipment, worrying about equipment failure, ascending too fast, etc.

I have also because of similar reasons, moved my focus on free diving. There is less overall risk in my opinion, as long as you are not pushing your limits.

"Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face." - Mike Tyson

Not meant as pedantry, because I think it makes the quote more urgent, but it's "punched in the mouth."

Going to the red sea I had a similar experience with the guide ending up going inside a wreck with a group where many just had the continuation course after open water, through no out-of-gas situation.

It is a common discussion topic I hear among divers, and almost everyone who been diving for a while has had a similar experience. Dive guides get basically all of their income from tip, and it creates a strong incentive for them to bring guests into areas which the guest might not be qualified to be in. Same for instructors at popular resorts.

To me the whole experience was a major incentive to get better training and gear so that next time I won't be under qualified to do the dive, and the more training and equipment I get the more I realize how dangerous diving can be and how little redundancy recreational diving have. The basic premise for open water dive is that you should be able to rocket to the surface at any point, and that there is a second diver next to you at all time. Being the last person inside a wreck is neither of that.

But I will end this comment by saying that one should not let guides ruin ones enjoyment of diving. There is a lot of great diving to be done within the limits of recreational diving.

At least at my local NAUI dive shop, PADI is generally considered to play too fast and loose with the rules. Especially with new and untrained divers. The joke is PADI stands for “Put Another Dollar In”

Not that I’ll never go with a PADI dive, especially if it’s the only game in town where I’m visiting. But I generally bias towards NAUI, and would highly suggest anyone new go with a NAUI cert.

In Europe it's a very similar story, CMAS vs PADI.

Edit: I think I wasn't clear. I wasn't try to claim alpine hiking is totally safe. Just that there is less of an issue with guides taking inexperienced people beyond their competency. Clearly alpine hiking isn't totally safe as many people sadly perish doing it.

I'm not sure I agree about alpine hiking. Most of the failure states I've seen can be avoided by having at least one competent person (out too late, lost, continue in bad weather, etc.) There is still the issue of approving people who aren't fit enough, but you've got a much slower start than diving and you'll probably notice that sort of thing before you're too far in to turn back.

Edit: Possibly you meant more mountaineering-y sorts of trips instead. If you're talking about the sort of thing where you might use protection then I agree with you.

I was debating disagreeing with the equivalence with alpine hiking. As I said in another comment, it's mostly about judgment when it comes to alpine hiking. Although perhaps that’s the case with diving as well. Of course, get more into mountaineering and there are a ton of factors like avalanches you can't fully protect against. (And there's of course some overlap with winter hiking in the mountains.)

ADDED: re: fitness. I've definitely had to take people down when I've been leading a trip and even had to turn a group around. But so long as you don't push on past where it's safe, it mostly just means people don't get up the mountain. (Of course, it can be a problem with canyons.)

One of my (very experienced) alpine hiking instructors died after a long day summiting Rainer. His team made a rookie mistake, but it’s surprisingly easy to do when you’re exhausted and you feel as if you’re nearly done with the worst of it.

I was told, most of the climbing accidents happens in easy terrain. When also experienced people get careless.

My experience matches that.

Another point is you get much more injuries when the wall is not steep (you slide along, instead of falling in free-air), another are stones if the wall is not steep they roll along the wall. That's a perfect example off misjudge objective and subjective dangers. An overhanging wall is much less dangerous then anything else, but your brain tells something else.

I'd generally trade more little injuries sliding down a shallow wall for one big injury from a free fall.

For that you have a rope, that's the objective part...you would not climb (i hope) an overhanging wall.

>little injuries sliding down a shallow wall

Those are often not "little" the rocks rip you apart, and when you stop you look not human anymore (a bag of flesh)...happens often at glaciers too.

Oh, but in the alps there are ways with a metal ladder, where you indeed "walk" a overhanging way, without rope.

Not for everyone obviously.

You have steelropes or hooks there too and a via ferrata set with a shock-absorber and a helmet:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Via_ferrata

And if without securing...even a bigger objective danger for you to decide if you can do it, that's the point.

Not sure if you are still focusing on alpine hiking or climbing.

While climbing most deadly accidents (30+% of them [1]) happen because people rappel through the end of the rope (or ropes if using half/twin ropes). Stopper knots are a 10s precaution that is often overlooked.

However, it is true that on easier climbing routes it is easier to hurt yourself because you might hit a ledge on your way down. If that happens it's most likely the belayer's fault because he/she should keep "a tight leash" on the sections just above said ledges. If you let an unexperienced person belay you I assume you evaluated the risk and are ok with that.

[1] https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/skills/8_common_climbing...

I'm sorry to hear that. I wasn't try to claim alpine hiking is totally safe. Just that there is less of an issue with guides taking inexperienced people beyond their competency.

"Most of the failure states I've seen can be avoided by having at least one competent person"

Thats why "guides" exist. And if course it is very safe with a competent guide.

But alpine hiking can be indeed very dangerous, without.

Because Alpine hiking has climbing elements in it.

Add to that a storm and wind and fog - and you have tourists with sandals on slippery rock about to fall very deep. Happens allmost every year.

I just got anxiety reading your story. Then diving it's a no for me for the rest of my life :D

Sorry if it put you off! For balance, diving can also be a very magical and surprisingly calm/zen-like experience. The best diving experiences I have had were in fairly shallow warm water (10-12m?) with great visibility. It is amazing seeing see-turtles, schools of fish, corals. It is like visiting a completely different world!

Basically, as long as you dive in much better conditions than what you trained/qualified for, you will have a great time. Well worth doing.

I just wish more dive shops were on the more conservative side. And that they had better boats with less fumes and less waiting around!

I totally believe you, that diving in shallow water must be amazing and not that dangerous, but now I am scared that some teacher may start there and then "obligate" you to go deeper! "Just a few more meters, everything will be fine" :)

Thanks anyway for worrying about me, ha!

Every dive is briefed on the boat. These days they will also have a website explaining the dives, the required certifications and maximum depth reached.

"A few meters more" is not dangerous per se unless you go below 24 meters (80 ft), but I agree it would be very bad to do that without the divemaster telling you before and also without him/her being a certified instructor.

I've found diving to be the least demanding "action sport" activities that I've tried, and I've done a fair bit of climbing, diving and flying gliders. Careful and well trained open water diving leaves you with plenty of safety margins in all directions. There's (well, almost) no single thing you can really screw up that would be deadly.

But of course, if the whole idea of something going wrong will leave you lying awake the night before, it's probably not worth it :)