A deep systemic problem with diver ed?

[MASS-Diver]

Genesis once bubbled...
it doesn't kill people.

Last weekend I had a friend's son on board my boat specifically so he could do the "final dive of the day" with us - a "weenie" dive by our standards, to about 50' on one of the few local sites that are that shallow.

He had no tables, no logbook, only a dive watch (bottom timer), SPG and depth gauge.

Nor could he tell me what the NDL was for his tank full of air to the planned max depth (there's a hard floor there - no way to exceed the max depth without a shovel!)

I knew, but he didn't.

We did the dive, but after we got back up I explained to him that in the future he would bring his planning tools and plan his dive accordingly before he got in the water or he wasn't going to get wet - at least not so long as he was a friend's minor son, and I was asked to look after him!

I know for a fact that at least one of the local cattle boats doesn't ask for you to have tables (or a computer!) on board. They give you the NDLs for the dives, calculate the RNT for you, and tell 'ya "ok, you need to begin your ascent 20 minutes after you splash on this dive assuming you are diving air." No planning required - its all done fot you.

If ther's something I find to be dumb, that's where the dumb part is. I'd call it the "real dumb" part, personally.... I've dove on that boat and while they're "ok" by the tables, they're JUST "ok" sometimes - I like a bit more conservatism than they seem to.... but its tough when you're on a cattle boat and they're keeping a schedule.

His in-water control was reasonably good though. This was someone who a local shop certified, and he's green - the first "local example" from this shop that I've dove with fairly fresh out of OW class. And he was in a poodle jacket at that.

So the news is not ALL bad....

Like I alluded to earlier, my friend took a PADI class up here in the NE and then his dives in the Turks. The local PADI took him on a bunch of follow the leader dives - several of which exceeded 60'. He then signed up with a random charter boat. They assembled all his gear before him for each dive. On his third day of having his c-card, he went on a night dive, the DM took the group on a swim through (cave) at 90', after which at some point my friend lost the DM and shot up (blowing off his saftey stop). he was not injured.

Again, noboday died, so I guess his training was OK, right? He doesn't understand why it took me years before I dove to 90'. Anyone can run across a highway blindfolded once or twice without getting hit, that doesn't make it safe.

 

[Charlie99]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
Attempting to teach the difference between good and bad judgement is the essence of dive planning. ...We can't force common sense upon a person but certainly we can provide a definition of it as it relates to diving.

"Risk assessment" is another related skill that deserves more attention in dive training, although perhaps not at the beginner level. The mantra of "know and dive within your limits" is the key item that applies to divers of all skill levels.

Have you watched an advanced class lately? Crawling through a vav course shouldn't count according to standards.

I've seen both good and bad AOWs, as I have seen both good and bad OW classes. A lot depends upon the attitude and aptitude of the students. Obviously, a lot depends upon the instructor. The only constructive suggestion I have is that the course standards should be added as an appendix at the back of the student book. As someone (you?) noted elsewhere, one problem is that the students don't always know when they are getting shortchanged on instruction.


Since I do a lot of travel to resort areas, I see a wide variety of divers. A lot of them have low skill levels. A lot of them will never develop their skills since diving is something done a few times every other year of so when they go on vacation. In the typical benign, highly supervised envirionment of a resort dive charter boat, they are diving within their skill level. In most cases, these divers have done an accurate self-assessment of their experience and skill and won't dive without a DM.

While many here may be appalled by this state of affairs, for many people scuba diving is just one of many sports in which they dabble a bit. Failure of an instructor to meet the intent of the relatively low requirements of an entry level OW class is something that upsets me, but the answer isn't to add additional stuff to OW syllabus.

 

[Popeye]

MASS-Diver once bubbled...


Like I alluded to earlier, my friend took a PADI class up here in the NE and then his dives in the Turks. The local PADI took him on a bunch of follow the leader dives - several of which exceeded 60'. He then signed up with a random charter boat. They assembled all his gear before him for each dive. On his third day of having his c-card, he went on a night dive, the DM took the group on a swim through (cave) at 90', after which at some point my friend lost the DM and shot up (blowing off his saftey stop). he was not injured.

Again, noboday died, so I guess his training was OK, right? He doesn't understand why it took me years before I dove to 90'. Anyone can run across a highway blindfolded once or twice without getting hit, that doesn't make it safe.

How is this a training issue?

Can you show me in the PADI manual where it teaches exceeding safe depthes, diving beyond your experience, and penetrating overhead environments without the proper training and equipment?

Which chapter is that, exactly?

Here's a flash for ya:

It's your friend's fault, no one else's.

The keypoint here is personal responsibility.

Everybody whines about DM handholding, yet doesn't note that it takes place because the divers allow it to.

Your friend had every bit of information that he needed to do the right think here, whether he read it from his manual, or his instructor presented it to him.

Take some responsibility, for god's sake.

 

[MASS-Diver]

Popeye once bubbled...


How is this a training issue?

Can you show me in the PADI manual where it teaches exceeding safe depthes, diving beyond your experience, and penetrating overhead environments without the proper training and equipment?

Which chapter is that, exactly?

Here's a flash for ya:

It's your friend's fault, no one else's.

The keypoint here is personal responsibility.

Everybody whines about DM handholding, yet doesn't note that it takes place because the divers allow it to.



Your friend had every bit of information that he needed to do the right think here, whether he read it from his manual, or his instructor presented it to him.

Take some responsibility, for god's sake.

Dude, how's it my friend's fault when his PADI OW instructor didn't teach him crap and exceeded 60' during the course. How is it his fault when a PADI DM doesn't have a clue how to guide people on safe dives (that is his job)? This guy got a 95% of class exam and "aced" his OW dives, how come he is such a poor diver? Hmmmmm, maybe the standards are a little low?

The problem is that people coming out of PADI's OW course aren't just poorly trained, they don't realize how poorly trained they are?

Do you really think PADI is doing a job of creating competent divers?

BTW, this was about my friend (not me or my dive buddies), so don't tell me to take responsiblilty. And as for my friend, he's not complaining, he thinks he's a great diver and he's got the card to prove it. Heck, he'll probably get his AOW next time he's down south, he heard that class is "cake" as well.

 

[Diver0001]

Popeye once bubbled...



Keeping in mind that your "whopping" 30% OOAs you refer to is roughly 30 divers, out of millions of divers doing millions of dives, I fail to see what indicates a system wide problem.

It's like saying that since we had -one- plane crash last year, we should re-evaluate the principle of flight.

Millions of divers.

Millions of dives.

You guys just can't see it, can you?

Each one of these fatailitys was senseless and easily avoidable.

What you seem to be suggesting is that diving is a safe sport and you need to keep accident stats in context. I'll go along with that and I'll go along with the suggestion you seem to be making that anything you do to improve the situation will have a marginal affect on the stats.

But a death has meaning beyond the numbers and I'm uncomfortable with the suggestion that it's "good enough". When we get to the point that you can only see really unavoidable stuff in the incident reports then I'll say it's "good enough".

R..

 

[devilfish]

I have been reading this post with interest since it reflects my opinions and concerns which I had for many years watching dive training and education slide down on a exponetial curve starting about 10 or 12 years ago.
I feel there are no bad divers, only bad Instructors who took their money and didn't teach them anything. That individual not knowing what is good and what is bad paid a professional to train and prepare them to participate in the soprt, safely.
On the same note there are no bad Instructors. They paid their agency to prepare them to be dive trainers. Not knowing any better they think that it's the way it should be done. Not too long ago I was watching from sideline and underwater an IDC being evaluated. I wanted to throw up what they allowed to pass. God forbid they fialed somebody, the agency would be short on registration fees.
The problem is perpetual, bad feeds on bad, and soon it becomes a standard.
Actually, other than the sanctioned quicky courses to generate a quick buck, the standards are not that bad. If only they were followed the way they should be and training was conducted to a level of quality. Take the simple skill of mask clearing how it is typically conducted during training. It's like a death defying skill. The Instructor is holding on to the student with a death grip, the student planted on the bottom with a ton of lead rips the mask off, slams it back on the face while holding their breath all in couple seconds, and then attempts to blast the water out chocking and biting, all while the Instructor is holding on to them. "Great job, they get a hand shake and they passed.
I hope that diver does not need to clear a mask while diving on a wall, because the only way they can do it is going down to the bottom 8000 ft.
Now, what does the standard of mask clearing skill mean?
1. Flood the mask.
2. Take the mask off
3. BREATH COMFORTABLY FOR SEVERAL SECONDS BEFORE PLACING THE MASK BACK ON.
4. Put the mask back on.
5. Looking down begin to exhale through the nose.
6. While lifting the head looking up, continue to exhale through the nose while pressing on the top of the frame.
7. If all the water is not cleared, put the head down and repeat.

Although most low volume masks are easy to clear. What does it take and how many repeats does it take to establish that comfort? Yes, seveal, but the stores and the resorts do not allow enough time for that. Same goes with all the rest of the skills. Majority of people can't learn on one trial.
Learning is a change of behavior. Teaching is a race agains time. But it does take time. Unfortunately most dont take the time. Besides, many Instructors don't know any better becasue they didn't see it any better from whomever was training them. Like I said, it's perpetual. That's my 2 cents.

 

[cornfed]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...

Going too far too fast is considered by many to be a problem in cave and tech diving.

I'm not sure I see how enforcing standards will help with this.

Cornfed

 

[MikeFerrara]

cornfed once bubbled...

MikeFerrara once bubbled...

Going too far too fast is considered by many to be a problem in cave and tech diving.

I'm not sure I see how enforcing standards will help with this.

Cornfed

If I remember I made that statement in reference to the cave divers who did a scooter dive without knowing how to plan their gas for a scooter diver. Scootering isn't tought in most full cave classes.

As far as recreational diving...If a diver moves on to new things before mastering old things they can run into trouble. At best they're just wasting their time and messing up the dive site. Standards require instructors to preasses the skills of a diver before introducing new skills/classes. Specifically if you don't have your bc under down pat from your OW class you'll learn little doing a deep dive for an AOW class. It may also put you at additional risk because of not having the requisit skill set to do the dive in the first place.

The OW standards require the student to demonstrate good buoyancy control on every dive. They often don't. It is a violation of standards to do OW dive 2 if their buoyancy control was bad on dive 1. These skills are meant to be learned in confined water. The purpose of OW is to gain experience in a real diving environment. Now pass that diver on fromOW dive 4, put him through an AOW and turn him loose at Gilboa where he now has the credentials to get into the deep side and he thinks he's good enough. What do you get? Red lights and sirens.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Popeye once bubbled...


How is this a training issue?

Can you show me in the PADI manual where it teaches exceeding safe depthes, diving beyond your experience, and penetrating overhead environments without the proper training and equipment?

Which chapter is that, exactly?

Here's a flash for ya:

It's your friend's fault, no one else's.

I think he was saying that he was taken below 60 ft on his OW checkout dives. That is a blatant violation of training standards. Do you really want the page? I'll get it for you monday if you do.

Also while not part of training standards (because it isn't part of a class) instructors are expected to exibit role model behavior and encourage divers to use good judgment. Taking a new diver into an overhead wouldn't qualify. The instructor may by some be viewed as an authority (maybe not the right word) but we have two conflicting rules here...ie listen to the instructor and don't go into overheads or an deep dives without the training/experience.


Such poor judgment on the part of the instructor could be the basis of action by the agency if they cared.

 

[Genesis]

But a death has meaning beyond the numbers and I'm uncomfortable with the suggestion that it's "good enough". When we get to the point that you can only see really unavoidable stuff in the incident reports then I'll say it's "good enough".

I'm not.

Then again, I am one of those funny civil libertarian guys who thinks that you have the right to cap yourself - intentionally or otherwise.