confused about advanced open water (PADI)

[Lubbock Louie]

We all have vastly different learning curves. Some of us are like a fish in water....others not so much. It is all a challenge at some level. ALL of us are learning. I am excited about continuing my education. And glad to be here among folks of similar interest.

Thanks for the stimulating opinions.

LL/Cary

 

[Walter]

It's my opinion that they are attempting to follow industry standards to keep their customer's happy and to ameliorate exposure to litigation.

I don't see how such a policy would keep custoners happy, please explain. They are certainly following agency recommendations, not standards, in an attempt to limit their liability. Not being a lawyer, I'm not sure how successful they would be with such a policy. Not letting OW divers exceed 60 would certainly limit the number of accidents they have from OW divers diving deep. On the other hand, what about that AOW with no or very limited deep experience who walks into the shop asking what dives are available? The employee asks about certifications and is told the diver has AOW. The diver is told about several interesting wrecks in the 100 ft range. The diver knows he has little experience with such depths and expresses doubts about his ability to make such a dive. The employee reassures him that with AOW he's ready to make the dive. The diver thinks, "they're experts, they should know," and signs up for the dive. It seems to me the operator has just opened themselves up to liability. Even if they haven't, they have just put this diver in jeopardy.

Many divers lie.

Many people do lie, but I can tell when I'm talking to a nondiver or a diver with very little experience even when they tell me they are very experienced. I'm sure you or another very experienced diver could coach a novice diver to a point they could fool me, but frankly you wouldn't do that nor would any other very experienced diver.

I have yet to see such an AOW class. Most that I am aware of take the student to the 80-100' range. Do you consider that deep or do you have a personal definition of what constitutes deep?

If you or I haven't seen it isn't the point. It happens. I suspect it happens more frequently than we'd like to think. Standards allow AOW with 1 dive to 60 ft. I see a problem with that. Just for discussion, let's assume all the agencies change their standards to require that dive to be at least 80 ft. Now we would be assured that all AOW divers, from that time forward, will have at least one deep dive. Would you think one deep dive in a quarry gives a diver the necessary experience to dive the Bianca C? The Duane on a rough day in strong current?

I see some problems. One deep dive is simply not enough experience to really know what to expect on a deep dive. Diving in a quarry doesn't prepare a diver for seas or current.

There's a lot to be said for a diver who has elected to extend his training over one who has not. The school of hard knocks is a harsh mentor and quite often kills the pupil. Far better to learn something from someone who has been there and is trained to monitor you on your first deep dive.

I agree with most of this. The exception is your statement that divers learning on their own quite often die. That's simply not true. I agree that even one death is one too many, but we both know divers do stupid things quite often and almost always survive. In fact, they rarely have anything go wrong and don't realize what they did was stupid.

I teach advanced classes. I'm certainly not trying to talk anyone out of taking classes. I'm not encouraging new OW divers to start diving to 100 ft. All I'm saying is there are OW divers who are qualified to make deep dives and AOW divers who are not.

It's possible (not with PADI as it would be a standards violation) for a newly certified diver to have 4 dives to 60 ft (a newly certified PADI diver could have 2 dives to 60 ft). That diver would be qualified to dive in the 60 ft range. That's not to a maximum of 60 ft, but to about 60 - 70 feet. That diver could safely make several dives to 70 ft. Then he could safely extend his deep diving experience progressively going deeper gaining experience at each depth before moving deeper. Such an OW diver would eventually be qualified to make 100 ft deep dives without ever taking AOW.

Also keep in mind that there was a time when the basic class included more than is now included in OW, AOW and Rescue. A diver certified at that time who has remained an active diver would be more qualified to make deep dives than a newly certified AOW diver.

An operator who looks at certification level only is setting up unsupervised trust me dives and is, in my opinion, not safe.

I believe it's hyperbole to claim that divers are convinced by the name of the course "Advanced" or the theoretical depth limit imposed (100 ft) that they are qualified to do particular dives because they hold the certification.

I agree. They are not convinced by the name. They are convinced by the "expert" at the shop who told them they can make the dive since thay have AOW.

There will always be abuses of the system. Two out of how many? To me, that's pretty insignificant and indicates that it's not the norm.

It's not the norm where we live. We have fairly easy access to deep water. It is the norm where quarries are only so deep. If the local quarry is at least 60 ft and nothing else deeper is easy to get to it will be the norm in that area. Read post 47 by tddfleming again. The local quarry is 65 ft deep, so that's the deep dive for AOW in that area.

Ya know guys I get the frustration some feel over the whole Padi training system.

This issue isn't restricted to PADI.

Does anyone remember what rec diver training was like before Padi/Naui?

Before PADI there were several excellent agencies teaching diving, including NAUI.

Before NAUI, there was YMCA and LA County in the US and others in other countries.

At least nowadays there are standards and established safe limits to offer some level of "safety" for a rec diver.

That level has generally decreased since the late 1970s.

 

[DevonDiver]

That level has generally decreased since the late 1970s.

It's just a different system, not a worse one.

There are many, many more divers now, than in the 1970's... and yet accident figures have declined sharply. Why is that?

Modern entry-level scuba courses contain a lot less, but they are linked with recommended restrictions that keep those divers safe appropriate to the training they have recieved.

Modular training systems, coupled with defined steps in diving technicality and limitations, lead to a progressive development that aligns training, experience and the risks that divers are exposed to.

Accidents only tend to happen now, when those limits and 'safe diving practices' are breached by individual divers.

Old-styled scuba courses taught more. But those divers weren't directed to follow any coherent recommended limitations. Accident figures were proportionally higher.

 

[TSandM]

Yep...a couple of holidays with insta-buddies on a cattle boat... following a disinterested dive guide like sheep... can quickly divorce even the best trained novice diver from their training, personal responsibility and common sense.

I hadn't thought about it in quite this way before, but immediately going to AOW is an opportunity for an instructor to continue to ingrain good safety habits, before the diver is exposed to the greater world where they are largely ignored. (Of course, MY advanced open water instructor, who was my buddy for a number of my dives, completely ignored buddy checks, and when I asked him about it, he said, "Well, I looked you over and you looked okay.") I spent some time yesterday telling our students that, when they went elsewhere to dive, they would find safety checks and dive plans would be the exception, rather than the rule, and really trying to impress upon them to BE that exception.

 

[Peter Guy]

Old-styled scuba courses may have taught more.

Fixed it for you!

I get so tired of the "Back in my day" statements because they are such BS! It may be true that SOME courses "Back in the day" taught the students a lot more -- but not ALL OF THEM DID! I believe I have the right to make this statement:

MY "back in the days" course did NOT teach me:

a. How to use an alternate air source;
b. How to use a Buoyancy Compensating Device;
c. How to use an SPG;
d. How to use a dive computer;
e. How to decide on different types of fins;
f. How to maintain neutral buoyancy in the water column;
g. How to use lights for passive or active communication;
h. How to use an underwater compass;
i. How to use a dry suit; and
SO MUCH MORE.

And, of course, MY "back in the days 15 week course" didn't even have me do a checkout dive in Open Water. We were encouraged to do so, but we got our cards without ever setting toe into water outside of a pool. (BTW, I'm willing to bet that NONE of the "back in the day" courses circa 1966 taught any of those items I've listed -- not just my cow college university course.)

I'm also so tired of reading about how "some of my (insert instructor's name here) classes" teach so much more than PADI Open Water classes and thus there is no need for a PADI AOW course. Well, when you put OW and AOW together, they tend to BE the equivalent of "that" class -- so really, what is the difference? (Case in point -- I just finished a "class" for some high school kids that included 5 days of open water -- 10 dives -- and guess what, at the end of the week those kids had much more experience, and a better skill set, than the students I just certified yesterday after 2 days of open water -- 4 dives. Gee, what a concept -- you teach students more and they learn more -- but the students from yesterday DO HAVE THE BASIC concepts and skills. And, more than that, I believe they also have the maturity to know they are beginners and will thus limit their dives as appropriate.)

To the extent I have a complaint about PADI AOW it is that perhaps too many instructors "just mail it in." The students should demand more from their instructor -- get the value added and then it IS a good program.

 

[Griff..]

The advanced open water course is essentially 5 adventure dives (the first dive of the specialty course)

you will not be qualified in any of the speciality you take, but the dives will count towards the speciality course should you choose to take it

 

[Peter Guy]

but the dives willMAY count towards the speciality course should you choose to take it

While "the book" says one can use the AOW dive towards the specialty, I've not really understood WHY someone would use it -- unless they are getting a price break -- and a real one at that. Especially if you aren't getting any sort of a price break, why NOT take all the dives and use them as a learning opportunity?

 

[oddible]

This identical thread pops up about every two weeks it seems.

As a correction to the above information, Rescue does not require AOW, it requires Adventure Diver which means 3 adventure dives. "Advanced" just means 5 total adventure dives (two of which must be underwater nav and deep).

I was originally pretty cheesed by the PADI AOW system - seemed pretty lame, get 5 specialty dives so you'd be committed to the PADI system if you wanted any of those specialties, no additional training. So why not just take 5 specialties? In a thread I started about this last year I was told that some shops or even PADI (I'd have to look it up, I called them) will certify you as AOW if you've taken 5 specialties with them - even without taking the AOW course specifically - you just pay their administrative costs. On the other hand, I've had shops tell me that they would not count the dive from AOW as one of the dives for the specialty and would make me pay full price and do all the dives. Probably good to stay in the favor of your LDS

My feeling now is that 5 specialties takes a lot of time and $$, but with AOW you can get 5 instructed dives in a weekend. It doesn't make you "advanced" but even with a crappy teacher you're probably going to be better off after AOW. Best to find a good instructor and stick to them and request them at your LDS, and if they leave the LDS, get their contact info!

 

[Griff..]

While "the book" says one can use the AOW dive towards the specialty, I've not really understood WHY someone would use it -- unless they are getting a price break -- and a real one at that. Especially if you aren't getting any sort of a price break, why NOT take all the dives and use them as a learning opportunity?

Agree'd..

Its like DSD's can be counted towards open water + scuba diver courses, but why would you unless your getting a price cut..

I remember when I first started to dive, I did a shoddy scuba diver course abroad, and payed for a full open water when I returned to the UK just because I wanted to dive more before I got qualified..

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

Sorry to back this discussion up a day, but I was diving on the other side of the Island yesterday and came late to this party.

As an aside: many insurance companies will link the validity of their coverage to the principle that the diver concerned follows Safe Diving Practices. Those safe diving practices include "diving within the limits of your training and experience". Thus, exceeding recommended limits appropriate to your experience and training may be deemed imprudent...and thus your insurance could be invalidated in the event of an accident.

I am confused by your statement that "many insurance companies will link the validity of their coverage to the principle that the diver concerned follows Safe Diving Practices."

Since there are not "many insurance companies" insuring dive shops, dive boats &/or dive instructors, I have to guess that you are talking about individual recreational or technical divers non-diving health insurance, life insurance and perhaps their personal diving insurance (like DAN)?