Diving techniques: New vs Old

[DCBC]

And for the 50 year old overweight out of shape person there would always be the standard PADI class for them.

But if someone flashed a plus card on a dive boat when it was sign up time, that plus card would really mean something. The way I think it should be would be to have open water, advanced, rescue, freediving, some DM stuff, and a whole lot more all in one class. It would be better for the agency because they would be getting more money right off the bat and they would have some very happy students (the ones who passed) The ones who didn't, oh well, there's always regular open water. One problem I see would be to find instructors to fill the positions that would be able to do the stuff themselves.

I know that if they offered such a thing when I got certified I would have been all over it, especially if they expplained it well and showed me the differences.
Even now, I hear about stuff they've eliminated from when I got certified and I can't believe it! I got certified in '98 so I'm still a baby in the diving world.

I don't know how much further down they think they can take it. Eventually I would think somebody would get the bright idea to restore training as a sales edge.
Quality training, wow! what a concept!

It use to be this way. In-fact when diving wasn't that big (in Canada at least), it wouldn't be the name of the agency (some instructors weren't certified), but the name of the instructor that counted the most. That's almost something that's beyond comprehension now.

When I became an instructor in 1971, the Basic Diver course required diver rescue as part of the program (there were no "rescue" courses then). Most agencies have still retained submerged victim rescue in their initial program. There wasn't the delineation of depth either. The sport limit was 130', so divers were certified believing that 130' was within their diving envelope on the first day they were certified (although we strongly recommended them to gain experience first). The "Advanced course" often involved: deep diving (120-130'), night diving (or limited visibility) and an overhead environment such as a wreck, or ice (there were no "specialties"). If a diver wanted to use a dry suit, they wore one and figured it out in the water.

PADI saw the "benefit" of splitting up the regular certification program into smaller modules; which bred the "easy road" to certification with a much shorter time commitment. Other agencies went along lowering their standards for certification to get a piece of the new market. Other agencies didn't.

When I owned an LDS, it was an uphill battle to "sell" a longer program to some customers. Fortunately, I taught (and still teach) in close proximity to a military base, so lots of fit young men and women who want to learn (and love a challenge), seek-out training that's more demanding of them. I teach recreational diving in a slightly toned-down way, as I have taught in the Navy and Commercially. Fun is experienced, but it's secondary. They are there to learn and are physically and mentally challenged: developing in-water endurance, snorkel skills, doff & dons, blackout & bailout drills (with mild harassment). Divers have to complete a CESA in o/w from 50' and 100' for "advanced". It's certainly not the type of program for the average person, but it fits the bill for a certain segment of the market.

Like you said, people have a choice. I don't mind how people decide to be trained, but I do expect all divers to have a reasonable degree of competence before they are certified. Unfortunately, this isn't always the case.

 

[Akimbo]

Actually, I wasn't thinking so much for myself to try and get this set up, I was thinking more like PADI doing it. I know, before you hit the floor laughing , they really need to think about doing something like this because it's gotten rediculous.
It would be a win win for everybody. PADI likes money and they would get to sell a very expensive course, and the student would get a first class training program better than if you were to take all the PADI classes short of DM.

I think you miss the point. PADI does not sell training, they sell rec diving business models and services to keep them running.

Open a Dive Shop or Resort with PADI - Guide to Success Operating a Business in Scuba Dive Industry

Your premise of "PADI likes money and they would get to sell a very expensive course" doesn't compare to their current option. One course, and the additional equipment that often accompanies it, to produce a competent and confident diver is a smaller number than selling 47 merit badges. Figure out how to reverse that number and you will have an argument.

Rare Moment of Fairness: Not many of us geezers like it, but their business model sort of works. Their doors are still open even if their shops are tiny, inventory is minimal, and staff may be less than knowledgeable — at least the compressor usually runs. I have yet to meet a dive shop owner who is really prosperous. Small business is hard and retail especially.

That is why I think a new business model, separate from dive shops, is needed. Not selling gear may also give this mythical company some Consumer Reports-like street cred. It is all about offering a niche service and controlling quality and costs.

 

[DCBC]

...Not many of us geezers like it, but their business model sort of works.

From a business perspective, it works great! But on the other hand, so would selling C-Cards on the Internet.

 

[Akimbo]

From a business perspective, it works great!...

I'm shocked! Do I detect sarcasm on this board? Judging from dive shops I see, you may have some dissenting opinions.

… But on the other hand, so would selling C-Cards on the Internet.

Isn’t there a template in Microsoft Word already? It's between the Astronaut and US Senator badge I think.

 

[duckbill]

My underwater swimming was sluggish and slow.......That was before I used Handee Fins! Now I swim like a gillmanfish!

 

[Fish&beer]

duckbill...... your killing me!..

 

[John C. Ratliff]

Okay, I'll address some of the issues that I saw in this thread. First, the "Mike Nelson" style of swimming. I watched Sea Hunt as a kid, waiting for my swim team practice after school. So I saw them both as a kid, and as a Hulu download just the other day. I also was struck by the underwater swimming style, as I am studying underwater swimming techniques in an effort to come up with much better ways of swimming underwater (and I have some now too). Let my give some perspective, as I began scuba diving after buying a Healthways Scuba regulator and a 38 cubic foot tank in 1959 from money I made picking strawberries and beans in the summer (yes, it was used gear even then). I was certified after we formed the Salem Junior Aqua Club in Salem, Oregon; certified LA County in 1963. We brought an instructor in for our club. I had been diving for three years prior to being certified in the lakes and rivers of Oregon, and on the coast too. We did not use the arm swimming technique you saw on Sea Hunt for most of our diving--with one exception. I use that technique all the time in the river, when the current is very high. But I'm not strictly swimming, but grabbing rocks on the bottom to pull myself upstream against a heavy current (5 knots +).

When I got into the USAF, I was sent through the US Navy School for Underwater Swimmers. We were told point blank not to mimic anything that "Mike Nelson" would do on TV, as it would get us 25 pushups (ever tried 25 pushups with twin 90s on your back?). This includes Nemrod's favorite facemask-on-the-forhead technique of "looking cool." If we did that, it was another 25 for the Navy, plus 5 for the Air Force--pushups that is. If we ever separated from our buddy (Mike Nelson style), we got to carry the "buddy line" for a day; it was a long piece of rope about 4 inches in diameter, and we got to sleep with it--it was a good way of emphasizing the buddy system. (I now routinely dive solos--that's a different story though.)

Now, about those comments about hand and arm motion "pumping water through a wet suit" and chilling people--not true. Today's wet suits are not built like those of the 1960s, before nylon-lined suits existed. The seams on many of today's suits are destroyed by sewing, with thousands of holes through the seams. So any movement of these suits does pump water through the seams. Yesterday's suits were glued seams that were waterproof. The suits were "semi-dry," in that parts of my arms and legs never got wet! I still have a Harvey's "wet suit" from the 1980 that I ordered "skin in." It has nylon on the outside, but none on the inside. You need powder to get into the suit. It is extremely warm, and allows diving in very cold waters comfortably (37 degrees--Clear Lake in the Cascade Mountains).

Getting back to underwater swimming techniques, we swam mostly with our legs, arms trailing or in front of us (for streamlining in current--many of us were ex-swim team members). We recognized the problems with buoyancy compensation, and experimented a lot with different techniques. Today's divers are what we called then "push-button divers," as the BCs of today allow a diver to push a button and go up or down. Swimming is now not necessary. Indeed, the "frog kick" is see today's technical divers doing would not allow me to swim in the Clackamas River except at extremely low water flow (drought) conditions. I'd like to see today's divers try an underwater compass swim of 500 or 1000 yards. To pass the US Navy Underwater Swimmers' School in 1967, we had to do these several times, and finally do a 1500 yard underwater compass swim. I would sometimes swim with my hands out in front of me simply because that is a more streamlined position, such as when this photo was taken of my by Bruce Higgins in about 1973:

I understand the need for conservation--I got irritated when a diver without good control got into the spring area of Clear Lake and destroyed the delicate algeal formations over the springs. But you don't need to use a frog kick to have good trim and buoyancy control. You simply have to be good at diving.

SeaRat

 

[AfterDark]

John C. Ratliff, You always educate. Good post. I still use my hands for stability in strong currents or for hovering. Most of the Sea Hunt stuff was Hollywood. Someone mentioned they thought the best divers were used to portray the best techniques of the day. No way that wasn't happening, back then diving without a buddy was a BIG taboo more so than today. Mike Nelson was the original solo diver. I sometimes wonder if that's one of the reasons Sea Hunt is rarely seen in reruns even on TV Land. Hey, I've worn my mask on my top of head when not in use for 40 years I'm not going to change now!

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Okay, I'll address some of the issues that I saw in this thread. First, the "Mike Nelson" style of swimming. I watched Sea Hunt as a kid, waiting for my swim team practice after school. So I saw them both as a kid, and as a Hulu download just the other day. I also was struck by the underwater swimming style, as I am studying underwater swimming techniques in an effort to come up with much better ways of swimming underwater (and I have some now too). Let my give some perspective, as I began scuba diving after buying a Healthways Scuba regulator and a 38 cubic foot tank in 1959 from money I made picking strawberries and beans in the summer (yes, it was used gear even then). I was certified after we formed the Salem Junior Aqua Club in Salem, Oregon; certified LA County in 1963. We brought an instructor in for our club. I had been diving for three years prior to being certified in the lakes and rivers of Oregon, and on the coast too. We did not use the arm swimming technique you saw on Sea Hunt for most of our diving--with one exception. I use that technique all the time in the river, when the current is very high. But I'm not strictly swimming, but grabbing rocks on the bottom to pull myself upstream against a heavy current (5 knots +).

When I got into the USAF, I was sent through the US Navy School for Underwater Swimmers. We were told point blank not to mimic anything that "Mike Nelson" would do on TV, as it would get us 25 pushups (ever tried 25 pushups with twin 90s on your back?). This includes Nemrod's favorite facemask-on-the-forhead technique of "looking cool." If we did that, it was another 25 for the Navy, plus 5 for the Air Force--pushups that is. If we ever separated from our buddy (Mike Nelson style), we got to carry the "buddy line" for a day; it was a long piece of rope about 4 inches in diameter, and we got to sleep with it--it was a good way of emphasizing the buddy system. (I now routinely dive solos--that's a different story though.)

Now, about those comments about hand and arm motion "pumping water through a wet suit" and chilling people--not true. Today's wet suits are not built like those of the 1960s, before nylon-lined suits existed. The seams on many of today's suits are destroyed by sewing, with thousands of holes through the seams. So any movement of these suits does pump water through the seams. Yesterday's suits were glued seams that were waterproof. The suits were "semi-dry," in that parts of my arms and legs never got wet! I still have a Harvey's "wet suit" from the 1980 that I ordered "skin in." It has nylon on the outside, but none on the inside. You need powder to get into the suit. It is extremely warm, and allows diving in very cold waters comfortably (37 degrees--Clear Lake in the Cascade Mountains).

Getting back to underwater swimming techniques, we swam mostly with our legs, arms trailing or in front of us (for streamlining in current--many of us were ex-swim team members). We recognized the problems with buoyancy compensation, and experimented a lot with different techniques. Today's divers are what we called then "push-button divers," as the BCs of today allow a diver to push a button and go up or down. Swimming is now not necessary. Indeed, the "frog kick" is see today's technical divers doing would not allow me to swim in the Clackamas River except at extremely low water flow (drought) conditions. I'd like to see today's divers try an underwater compass swim of 500 or 1000 yards. To pass the US Navy Underwater Swimmers' School in 1967, we had to do these several times, and finally do a 1500 yard underwater compass swim. I would sometimes swim with my hands out in front of me simply because that is a more streamlined position, such as when this photo was taken of my by Bruce Higgins in about 1973:

I understand the need for conservation--I got irritated when a diver without good control got into the spring area of Clear Lake and destroyed the delicate algeal formations over the springs. But you don't need to use a frog kick to have good trim and buoyancy control. You simply have to be good at diving.

SeaRat

Thanks SeaRat, I do appreciate the clarification from somebody who knows and was there.
The mask on the forehead:
I had an instructor that told us if he saw, or if any of the DM's saw a mask on a forehead they would slap it off and it would be up to us to find it or we were out of a mask that day. Nobody put a mask up on their foreheads.

The arm swimming technique:
I'm really surprized the divers in the show dove this way now that I know it was a bunch of BS. I would have thought it would be automatic for them to use proper technique. Learn something every day.

Suits:
I have a custom made old school suit that is skin in and fits very well. No matter what movements I make or what I do I don't get any water pumping through.

Arm foreward technique:
Some back pack lobster divers that I know dive with their hands extended foreward. This is so they are ready to grab bugs as soon as they see them and also to create a slipstream so they can move faster and they aslo guide themselves by using their hands as foreward horizontal rudders (no BC). The only time I dive with my arms foreward is freediving sometimes for abalone in low vis I will extend my arms so I don't smack my head in the bottom when I can't see it coming up.

 

[John C. Ratliff]

My buddy at the US Naval School for Underwater Swimmers, Bob Means, was on a compass swim with me in Key West, and we swam with our arms forward. The reason was that we had a wrist compass on, and would have our right arm forward, and our left arm grabbing the right with our compass right under our noses so we knew the direction to swim. Some of the divers on those swims didn't know how to use the compass, and to put the illuminated dash into the two other dashes to ensure we were going the right direction. They started heading for Cuba, and had to be picked up (we were trailing a buoy at the time). Anyway, we got close to shore with a lot of stuff kicked up in the waves, and Bob put his hand into the bottom onto the spines of a fish, and get stung with some venum. It wasn't bad, but it hurt a lot. So be careful where you put your hands in low visibility.

If you think about the Sea Hunt swimming technique, there arle not a lot of ways to show speed in swimming for the camera. This, I think, was a way to visualize the drama of a chase scene underwater.

SeaRat