Dumbing down of scuba certification courses (PADI) - what have we missed?

[Blackwood]

Hey just noticed that there's an entry for logged dives that's empty near my picture. Let's see. Since 1973 when we started logging I'm up to 4300 or so. I'll go get the book out of the boat. I am impressed by peopkle who list 10,000 dives or 15,000 dives. If you dived every day for ten years (no days off) you'd log 3650+. Most people don't dive every day - certain;y not for years and years. So logged numbers over 5000 are suspect - especially from the many people who claim them. No one shoyuld be upset about this - just do the math. Every day for 30 years would get you 10,950. 365 per year for 40 years would get you 14600. I've been diving for 55 years. I probably have 7000 dives. The measure of a diver isn't how deep he or she goes, but how often he or she goes. I would guess the average person gets to log 25 dives a year.
Swizzle stick scubas can imagine many dives. Good for them.

Calhoun

FWIW, I'm well under the 1000 mark. But some people do manage to squeeze in more than one dive in a day.


I'm not one of them, but there are people who dive professionally who get in 4 dives 6 days a week.

 

[Blackwood]

I believe that most of the deco accidents are due to deco on the fly, which is strictly a GUE issue

[edited for content]

Even if ratio deco as taught by 5thd-x/UTD (read: not GUE) were not as or more conservative than most VPM, RGBM or Buhlmann profiles, the infinitesimal percentage of divers using it invalidates your belief.

 

[TCDiver1]

The Open Water class was better then, but I really do think today's techniques and today's equipment make a difference concerning increased safety.

We know so much more about decompression as compared to what we knew in 1983 - and computers to help us with it.

I for one agree with the above.

My pre 1983 BOW class was better in some ways and worse in others. People who talk about how much "better" scuba equipment & instruction was in the old days have a bad case of nostalgia going on IMO.

- BCD's were not standard gear to almost non-existent in most kits. The first unit i bought and used in the late 70's to early 80's was a horse-collar job with the CO2 cartridge. Now there was a safe buoyancy system. If worse came to worse you could pop the cartridge and red october to the surface ..... not good!

- Octo's were not standard gear which was why buddy breathing (BB) was emphasized more back then. And we trained on BB a lot. I still think training BB is a good thing but it isn't as important as it was back then for that reason IMO.

- Regulator design was no where near what it is today. Fail Safe was not
standard, many regs of the day would just stop providing air. Regulators today have come a long, long way from those old lung busters.

- Tank "J" valves were an accident waiting to happen and were basically the standard tank valve of the day. If not filled in the correct position and dove in the correct position, no reserve was left when it was needed. And make no mistake we drained our tanks expecting that reserve would be there to surface with. It's the way the most i knew trained and did NDL diving. How's that for air management training?

- Some of the air stations back then really should have been used only to fill tires. Air quality could be a significant issue back then. Quality control was non- existent in my neck of the woods. The sniff and taste test was standard fare back then.

- The old Jeppesen manual we used for BOW class was pretty good as i recall. Not all slick and pretty like todays stuff, just the basics. It worked fine for the most part but i think todays manuals do also so maybe the Jeppesen manual sucked also.

- My instructor was more worried about how many push-ups you could do in full gear and how you handled harassment in water. Honestly i think that harassment can serve a net positive purpose if not overdone, which it was. The push ups while not problem at the time served absolutely no scuba related purpose at all.

I also don't recall any real buoyancy control training back then. Most of that we learned later out of necessity when some of us started deco diving a lot.

Training might be far from perfect today but it was far from perfect back then. Few people i've certified and/or dove with today would have made it through the hazing i went through. Actually i doubt i would make it today with some of the physical BS we were put through.

Overall, considering all factors, i think it's much safer today than starting via the pre 83 courses.

 

[Standingbear56]

Hi George,

If buddy's were always within reach, there would never be a reason for an ESA (yes, I know what the C stands for, I simply believe it to be silly to change the name). Of course, if you don't have a pony or other back up source of air, you'll be making an ESA if you've misplaced your buddy (which shouldn't happen).

Hi Walter, yes it is just a name change - done to accomplish 2 things: let the student know that it is (supposed to be) controlled - not some wild bolt to the surface and to distinguish it from the Buoyant ascent where the weight belt is removed thus offering even less control. As for your buddy being within reach, yes this is the ideal situation and is the way it should be. However on most of the dive boats at least in our area, it's generally same day, same ocean style diving. Thus redundancy or ESA are the only real options. I'm not claiming this is the correct way of doing things - it's not, but it is the reality.

We don't train divers in buddy breathing because an ESA is a better choice. ESA is a better choice than buddy breathing because divers aren't trained in buddy breathing. That's circular logic. Buddy breathing is a much better choice than an ESA. We need to train divers in buddy breathing and we need to do a damned good job of it. Buddy breathing is an extremely easy skill.

Agreed, it is an easy skill, for people like you and I who have not only trained and practiced it, but have maintained our skills. For most divers today, it isn't an option at all. I don't see any of the agencies bringing it back at this point, which would be the only answer to being able to utilize it again.

 

[Thalassamania]

I for one agree with the above.

My pre 1983 BOW class was better in some ways and worse in others. People who talk about how much "better" scuba equipment & instruction was in the old days have a bad case of nostalgia going on IMO.

With all due respect, what world where you diving in? Your descriptions do not at all resemble the diving I was doing.

- BCD's were not standard gear to almost non-existent in most kits. The first unit i bought and used in the late 70's to early 80's was a horse-collar job with the CO2 cartridge. Now there was a safe buoyancy system. If worse came to worse you could pop the cartridge and red october to the surface ..... not good!

Many of us were diving Fenzy or Nemrod bottle equipped BCs or a horse collar with a two CO2 cartridge detonators. One with a cartridge and one with an intermediate pressure hose screwed in as a power inflator. No one ever taught the use of the CO2 cartridge underwater. We were careful to weight ourselves for the depth we were planing on diving.

- Octo's were not standard gear which was why buddy breathing (BB) was emphasized more back then. And we trained on BB a lot. I still think training BB is a good thing but it isn't as important as it was back then for that reason IMO.

Everyone knew how to BB, it was no big deal. We did it all the time. Most of us did a few breaths at the start of every dive and, quite frankly, it worked a hell of a lot better than aux use does today, since today's divers don't practice.

- Regulator design was no where near what it is today. Fail Safe was not standard, many regs of the day would just stop providing air. Regulators today have come a long, long way from those old lung busters.

What regulators did you use that would stop providing air? None that I used, like the Dacor 300, the U.S. Divers Calypso or the Voit Swimaster MR-12.

- Tank "J" valves were an accident waiting to happen and were basically the standard tank valve of the day. If not filled in the correct position and dove in the correct position, no reserve was left when it was needed. And make no mistake we drained our tanks expecting that reserve would be there to surface with. It's the way the most i knew trained and did NDL diving. How's that for air management training?

We never used J-valves. Those few that did own them wired them down so that they were deactivated.

- Some of the air stations back then really should have been used only to fill tires. Air quality could be a significant issue back then. Quality control was non- existent in my neck of the woods. The sniff and taste test was standard fare back then.

Sniff and taste is, to this day, you're first line of defense. But from back then I remember many more water lubricated compressors than I see today.

- The old Jeppesen manual we used for BOW class was pretty good as i recall. Not all slick and pretty like todays stuff, just the basics. It worked fine for the most part but i think todays manuals do also so maybe the Jeppesen manual sucked also.

Jeppeson was, perhaps, the worst of the available materials. Most groups use the New Science of Skin and Scuba, we used the US Navy Diving Manual as a standard text.

- My instructor was more worried about how many push-ups you could do in full gear and how you handled harassment in water. Honestly i think that harassment can serve a net positive purpose if not overdone, which it was. The push ups while not problem at the time served absolutely no scuba related purpose at all.

Your instructor seems to me a rare idiot living who was reliving his military experiences whilst existing in splendid isolation from the mainstream of diving.

I also don't recall any real buoyancy control training back then. Most of that we learned later out of necessity when some of us started deco diving a lot.

From the first moment in the pool, we were not allowed to touch the sides, or the bottom, or to come to the surface unless the specific skill we were doing required us to. Would that courses today do the same.

Training might be far from perfect today but it was far from perfect back then. Few people i've certified and/or dove with today would have made it through the hazing i went through. Actually i doubt i would make it today with some of the physical BS we were put through.

As I said, the instruction you received was way, way outside of the mainstream, and that's coming from someone who went through what was, perhaps, the most physically challanging civilian training that there was.

Overall, considering all factors, i think it's much safer today than starting via the pre 83 courses.

I disagree.

 

[Hoomi]

Going back to the last question I posted, though:

Does anyone have a realistic suggestion how to restore training to what you believe would be a safe level? How do you think groups like PADI and SSI could be motivated to expand their basic Open Water training to make their students safer and better divers?

 

[Blackwood]

Going back to the last question I posted, though:

Does anyone have a realistic suggestion how to restore training to what you believe would be a safe level? How do you think groups like PADI and SSI could be motivated to expand their basic Open Water training to make their students safer and better divers?

As far as I see, there are only two ways:

(1) Instill an societal change (which would lead to consumer demand), or
(2) Pass legislation (as was noted either here or in another thread, PADI et al have higher standards where required by law).


While I personally wouldn't want more bureaucracy involved in dive training, I wouldn't be adverse to testing divers before admitting them to certain sites. If divers were required to prove competence before being allowed to dive what pristine sites remain, perhaps we'd see part of (1) come out of (2). Of course, that begs the question: who would establish and enforce the minimum admittance standards. And even if that could be favorably answered, there is the likelihood (in the United States, anyway) that people would complain, jump up and down, scream in protest, and policies like 'equal opportunity diving' would crop up and standards would fall.



In the end, it's going to come down to the divers. Those of us who are motivated to excel and improve ourselves will, either by practicing, seeking out renowned instructors (such as Thalassamania who I'd personally be very excited to study under), or both. Those who couldn't care less won't.

 

[String]

Working in a busy resort its quite possible to do 3 or 4 dives a day, 7 days a week for 6-8 months of the year. Work in those places for 5 years or so and the total isnt that hard to pass. Granted its a lot hard for non-teaching/working divers but it is possible.

The measure of a diver isn't how deep he or she goes, but how often he or she goes.

I'd argue with that. If someone dives 3 times a week in the same 10m deep quarry they may not be as experienced or useful than someone that dives twice a month in the sea and varied conditions. Quantity is not a great measure of diving ability alone.

I would guess the average person gets to log 25 dives a year.
Swizzle stick scubas can imagine many dives. Good for them.

Depends where you live. If you live somewhere warm, sunny and next to the sea its certainly not impossible to log more than that a month even doing it just for fun. Some others only dive on holiday so get 10 a year. Most are somewhere in between.

 

[nereas]

Going back to the last question I posted, though:

Does anyone have a realistic suggestion how to restore training to what you believe would be a safe level? How do you think groups like PADI and SSI could be motivated to expand their basic Open Water training to make their students safer and better divers?

I would not put SSI in the same sentence with PADI.

SSI quality is miles ahead of PADI, generally speaking.

 

[nereas]

And your proof for that particular statement is where exactly?

String-Bean, those are internal PADI stats. They feel to encourage their OWSIs to impress upon their students quickly to enroll in the AOW-Adventures course to get over this 10-dive window of theirs. Talk to them about it, String-Bean, if you want more info.

Your doubting-Thomas attitude is particular annoying now that I know you know little or nothing about trimix. But that is strictly an aside.