A different take on Master Scuba Diver

[Leatherboot69]

I think that it is fundamentally unhealthy that there is no level of recreational certification that is generally recognized by the community , at least on SB, as worthy of recognition and a significant indicator of skill. The message seems to be unless you are GUE Fundies or AN/DP you are just a peon, and I really don't think that is good for anyone.

There is; just, as you point out, not for the minority of divers on SB, many of whom aren’t representative of the diving hobby at large

 

[Leatherboot69]

And then they’d also be 20% of the way toward MSD!

(Apart from OW, AOW, EFR, RD, 4 specialties and 50 dives…)

 

[drrich2]

In construction trades a Master is rarely conferred on anyone with less than 10 years experience and demonstrable mastery.
They are also normally able to teach, so maybe instructors would better be suited for the title and we call all use baiter or equivalent for novices with a couple of hours underwater.

The problem is they want to reach and inspire newer divers to keep taking courses and expand their experience by offering something prestigious-sounding but realistically achievable in the intermediate term.

One of the problems in my view is that once people get AOW in the PADI system (which seems to be what most American divers come out of), and many want to 'up their game' in diving without going into technical diving (which they may not be ready for anyway), they're not sure what to do. I got the impression many consider or actually pursue Dive Master because they think it'll make them substantially better divers, rather than because they intend to act as dive guides or go on to teach or assist in teaching.

NAUI's Master Scuba Diver course was, IIRC from having it explained to me years ago, intended to impart instructor-level knowledge and capability minus the teaching aspect. That sounds a lot closer to the mark, but NAUI doesn't seem to have near the name recognition of PADI in American divers.

I imagine most divers who aren't on ScubaBoard don't know what GUE is, much less GUE Fundamentals, and GUE's gear requirements would be off-putting (like telling divers that BCD they paid a lot for at their dive shop was a bad choice, ditch that think for a BP/W).

I'm okay with things as they are. If someone wanted to offer a revamped Master Scuba Diver course offering customers what they wanted, with more credibility, I suggest:

1.) Peak Performance Buoyancy as a required course, since this is expected to be honed in an excellent diver. Also include some alternative kicking styles - such as frog kicking.

2.) Underwater Navigator, as one would expect a 'master diver' to have at least some basic skill with it.

3.) Deep Diver - but augmented with a little deco. teaching? Not so much to encourage deco. diving as to accept divers who push the limits may go into deco. accidentally, or choose to to stretch a dive for an objective, and it'd be good to have some idea how to deal with that. Teach alternative air source options and do a dive with one.

4.) Solo Diver - seems like if you're a 'master,' you ought to have the knowledge and capability to conduct benign conditions dive within your experience level without relying on a buddy. I think with current standards this would boost the minimum dive count to 100 going into this part of the course, which may be too far out to appeal to some new divers.

5.) Some variety - not sure how to judge this; perhaps known experience in a variety of environments (e.g.: ocean, cold water (e.g.: California, deep quarry diving), drift diving, wreck penetration or cavern), etc...

I started to recommend wreck or cavern diving for penetration experience, but fear encouraging people to do penetration dives might lead to overconfidence and fatalities later.

What I struggle with is what the customer needs and wants. The NAUI Master Diver course manual has a lot of info. that's interesting if you're into theory, but I wonder how many customer's idea of a master scuba diver is one who has excellent horizontal trim and buoyancy control, can engage in tasks while maintaining those, a good gas consumption rate and navigates well (hardly giving a thought to gas laws)?

---

Alternative: If PADI came out with something along the lines of GUE Fundamentals without specific gear requirements, would that suffice? I've never taken that course and don't know the details on how it'd compare to what I described.

 

[BoltSnap]

NAUI's Master Scuba Diver course was, IIRC from having it explained to me years ago, intended to impart instructor-level knowledge and capability minus the teaching aspect. That sounds a lot closer to the mark,

Exactly! It is also a required course for NAUI's leadership courses.

The minimum number of dives in this course is 8 but the instructor is required to add dives based on the students' background and skill level. Students' knowledge and skill level should be at an instructor level sans the teaching skills.

 

[Leatherboot69]

The problem is they want to reach and inspire newer divers to keep taking courses and expand their experience by offering something prestigious-sounding but realistically achievable in the intermediate term.

One of the problems in my view is that once people get AOW in the PADI system (which seems to be what most American divers come out of), and many want to 'up their game' in diving without going into technical diving (which they may not be ready for anyway), they're not sure what to do. I got the impression many consider or actually pursue Dive Master because they think it'll make them substantially better divers, rather than because they intend to act as dive guides or go on to teach or assist in teaching.

NAUI's Master Scuba Diver course was, IIRC from having it explained to me years ago, intended to impart instructor-level knowledge and capability minus the teaching aspect. That sounds a lot closer to the mark, but NAUI doesn't seem to have near the name recognition of PADI in American divers.

I imagine most divers who aren't on ScubaBoard don't know what GUE is, much less GUE Fundamentals, and GUE's gear requirements would be off-putting (like telling divers that BCD they paid a lot for at their dive shop was a bad choice, ditch that think for a BP/W).

I'm okay with things as they are. If someone wanted to offer a revamped Master Scuba Diver course offering customers what they wanted, with more credibility, I suggest:

1.) Peak Performance Buoyancy as a required course, since this is expected to be honed in an excellent diver. Also include some alternative kicking styles - such as frog kicking.

2.) Underwater Navigator, as one would expect a 'master diver' to have at least some basic skill with it.

3.) Deep Diver - but augmented with a little deco. teaching? Not so much to encourage deco. diving as to accept divers who push the limits may go into deco. accidentally, or choose to to stretch a dive for an objective, and it'd be good to have some idea how to deal with that. Teach alternative air source options and do a dive with one.

4.) Solo Diver - seems like if you're a 'master,' you ought to have the knowledge and capability to conduct benign conditions dive within your experience level without relying on a buddy. I think with current standards this would boost the minimum dive count to 100 going into this part of the course, which may be too far out to appeal to some new divers.

5.) Some variety - not sure how to judge this; perhaps known experience in a variety of environments (e.g.: ocean, cold water (e.g.: California, deep quarry diving), drift diving, wreck penetration or cavern), etc...

I started to recommend wreck or cavern diving for penetration experience, but fear encouraging people to do penetration dives might lead to overconfidence and fatalities later.

What I struggle with is what the customer needs and wants. The NAUI Master Diver course manual has a lot of info. that's interesting if you're into theory, but I wonder how many customer's idea of a master scuba diver is one who has excellent horizontal trim and buoyancy control, can engage in tasks while maintaining those, a good gas consumption rate and navigates well (hardly giving a thought to gas laws)?

---

Alternative: If PADI came out with something along the lines of GUE Fundamentals without specific gear requirements, would that suffice? I've never taken that course and don't know the details on how it'd compare to what I described.

I think the vast majority of rec divers aren’t just not ready for tec diving but are actually not interested/don't care about it/don’t want to do it. Of the dive club attached to my LDS I’ve only met a few newish divers who want to get into tec, and lots more who want to use their OW training to do fun dives. I’m having to really persuade my girlfriend/dive buddy to do AOW - she doesn’t really want to because of time and expense but is reluctantly signing up as there are some AOW-only dive sites she’d like to visit. Speaking for myself, I will never do tec diving because the cost significantly outweighs the benefits. The next step for me would probably be DM, to get more training in something I enjoy, work more closely with my LDS and develop some dive leadership skills, even though I will never work professionally as one.

(Also, PADI Deep spec has simulated emergency deco)

 

[TMHeimer]

Exactly! It is also a required course for NAUI's leadership courses.

The minimum number of dives in this course is 8 but the instructor is required to add dives based on the students' background and skill level. Students' knowledge and skill level should be at an instructor level sans the teaching skills.

Well, the old PADI vs. NAUI MSD things is ancient. The NAUI one has a bunch if theory that is in the PADI DM course (some is now in the Instructor Course I gather)-- but not the teaching aspect. This is all well and good, but I found as a diver and as an assistant on OW courses that a large % of this info (like with a college degree) is not stuff you will ever use. You don't have to know about half lives of compartments or M Values to know how deep to dive and how long to stay down. It won't make your trim and kicking better.

Just sayin'-- Being a NAUI MSD or PADI MSD or PADI DM or even instructor doesn't necessarily mean you are a Master of Diving. If some like to say that being a NAUI MSD makes one a Master of scuba diving that's OK. To me, it's just another title.

 

[Wibble]

(E) Experienced Diver …. When we humbly realize that despite the courses there remains a lot to be learned .

Post of the week AFAIAC

The more I dive, the more I learn.
The more I learn, the more I realise there is so much more to learn and refine
The more I refine the more I realise I don't know and can improve.

 

[Leatherboot69]

Well done!
I don't know what the current PADI Dive Theory course looks like (I did it many years ago), and I've not seen the NAUI version, but I'm unimpressed with the SSI version. I'm guessing NAUI is pretty good, and that PADI has very good materials but perhaps with less depth.

So, my thoughts on the PADI Dive Theory course. It’s basically the E-learning course for the Dive Theory paper of the instructor/DM exams, marketed separately and as an option, I assume, to open it up to amateur divers who want to know more Dive Theory without doing a professional course, and to bring down the price of DM/instructor courses.

The E-learning itself isn’t bad - it offers the DM/instructor theory syllabus and the assessments count in lieu of the Dive Theory paper itself (75% pass mark for DMs, 80% for instructors, 83% for course directors). Its main value is as one of a few different ways to learn this (I’ve seen other courses advertised, as well as in person classes). However, for amateur divers at all levels I’d say it’s not worth the money (£122)-I bought the PADI encyclopaedia on eBay last year for £10 and read it and it is far more comprehensive (and intentionally so) - PADI Dive Theory covers the same topics but in much less depth whilst the PADI encyclopaedia is the authoritative reference. I was able to pass all the instructor assessments before doing the E-learning having read the PADI encyclopaedia. And anybody who has done (and can remember) high school physics and biology will already know most of three of the five modules (dive physics, physiology and environment). I’d also say that not very much of the knowledge I’ve gained either from the PADI encyclopaedia or PADI Dive Theory is necessary for an amateur rec diver

 

[shark_za]

Do that and an advanced Nitrox course and you will know more about diving than most.
Well done.

 

[RGDiver]

As a Padi MSD my feeling on any of the recreational certs is that they all are basically a handout….regardless of agency. Is there some work involved and knowledge….yes…but it’s nothing too significant or difficult imho. I got my MSD because I had accumulated enough courses to get it. I think it’s a good thing as it shows I have experience…but at the end of the day having dived for 35+ years consistently my real experience did not come from any class but rather just being in the water in different environments a ton. I would rather dive with an AOW guy with hundreds of dives than with a newly minted MSD with 50 dives. Its all about “time“ in the water. Personally I think the threshold for MSD should be 100 open water dives as that is about where real experience seems to start. I don’t think any of the certs mean much until you get into tech diving….and that’s another animal all together. For whatever reason the diving community has a lot of egos, but the best divers tend to be those who just keep to themselves and observe quietly.