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

[Hoomi]

#3, PADI renamed it a few years ago. Putting it at #3 ahead of buddy breathing is insanely dangerous, IMO.

Sometimes, one of the toughest parts of a discussion is reaching an agreement on what each term means.

In our class, there was ample discussion of the risk of lung expansion injuries, including we talked about the case that was discussed on here recently, about the guy that held his breath on the doff-and-don exercise, while his instructor helped someone else in the shallow end of the pool.

 

[Standingbear56]

#3, PADI renamed it a few years ago. Putting it at #3 ahead of buddy breathing is insanely dangerous, IMO.

Hi Walter,
While I agree that buddy breathing can be better than a CESA (CONTROLLED Emergency Swimming Ascent) it is only so when 1) your partner is within reach and most importantly 2) both divers are not only trained in the procedure, they have also maintained current practice with the skills involved. With today's training, even if you have #1, chances of having #2 are fairly remote which is why the CESA is listed before buddy breathing. The big question however would be that since both divers have an alternate air source, why would you buddy breath to begin with? Yes, you and I could buddy breath to our heart content, but what about the average OW diver coming out from any of the agencies today? How many can honestly be able to claim that? Even I prefer a CESA to buddy breathing, and have practiced it from 130 feet just to see if I could do it. No problem, and I didn't have to worry about anyone else in the process. Worst case situation, I and I alone get fubar'ed, while with 2 stressed out Newbe OW divers attempting BB, you would probably wind up with 2.

Save Diving,
George

 

[Hoomi]

Well, as much as I went back and forth with both Walter and Thalassamania, I don't believe either of them said Buddy Breathing was preferable to using the alternate air source. THe point that they were making (and which your post pretty much agrees with) is that Buddy Breathing isn't taught or practiced by some of the big scuba training agencies, meaning that it's not even really an option if needed.

With modern equipment, BB should be such a rare need that it barely rated mentioning. However, as some folks have mentioned here, not everyone bothers to check their octo before a dive to make sure it's still functions as it should. Really, this wouldn't be a bad thing to incorporate into a buddy check before a dive; each of you check your buddy's octo to be sure it's working. It's in my best interest to be sure, because if something happens and I need air, it's far better if both of my buddy's second stages are working, whether I end up using his primary or his secondary.

 

[Walter]

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).

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.

 

[String]

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.

For the first and possibly only time ever i actually agree with all walter said there!

 

[-hh]

Hi Everyone,
The above really sums up today's diver training. In the "Good Old Days" the skills you learned during your course are basically the same that you will learn if you combine today's OW, AOW and Rescue courses along with the Deep Diver Specialty. Plus, we learned Decompression techniques, as we were certified to 132 FSW from the start, and Deco was just another part of diving. "No Decompression Diving" was unheard of. All dives involve decompression in one form or another (your ascent is part of the deco process, so even if you don't need to do a mandatory deco stop, you are still involved in decompression)

All good points, and I'll throw in that my "Pre-1983" training cost all of $100. One can compare that today with total costs of OW + AOW + Rescue + Deep + Boat + etc.

With the advent of the safe second (octopus) buddy breathing is considered by many to obsolete. Like all skills, unless it is practiced on a continuous basis, it is lost pretty quickly, and using it unpracticed can cause a situation to go from SNAFU to FUBAR real fast. BB is a good confidence builder during training however. It teaches you control in a stressful situation and how to work with your buddy in a less than ideal situation.

In general, what I've seen as being lost is a lot of practical practice time. This includes things like Ditch-n-Don which today are gone under the supposed rationale that no one is ever going to jump off a boat to retrieve their lost gear...etc...but this utterly misses the point. The point is that things like DnD, the "NAUI Bailout" and other exercises were techniques to create relatively entertaining games to motivate the student to learn and practice and while the scenario was unrealistic, the need to maintain calm and conduct problem-solving ... and real world prioritation of which problem to solve first ... are EXTREMELY practical real life skill requirements.

Insofar as why things changed, there's two factors IMO mostly at work. The first was the shift in the Industry from the local (invariably coldwater) diver to the travel (tropical) diver, which is clearly 'easier' diving, so you can get away with having lesser skills, fitness, etc.

This happened to occur very roughly at the same approximate time period that technology changes were underfoot, such as the introduction of the Octopus, which resulted in arguments regarding adding technology instead of skills (eg, Octopus versus Buddy Breathing). The dive table and understanding its physics "versus" learning to the dive computer is another example of this technology-vs-skills at work.

There is no simple answer to this question, since technology is mechanically reliable and skills are perishable, yet having a fundimental understanding can anticipate and prevent certain situations and subsequent accidents. Plus, it should be pointed out how human nature works: the advent of Anti-Lock brakes in automobiles should have reduced accidents, but humans compensated for the presence of the new safety system by choosing (often unconciously) to take greater risks.

PADI is far from the only guilty party in this regard. Just about everyone made buddy breathing optional because of a misguided fear of AIDS.

While it might have been some 'fear of AIDS' factor, the reality is that in many cases, whatever change PADI made ... particularly those that effectively made their training shorter/cheaper/more profitable ... the other Agencies were pretty much compelled to follow in order to try to remain a viable competitor. A classic example of this was when PADI redefined NAUI's "Advanced Diver" certification and NAUI was compelled to change OW-II to AOW and rename their Advanced to Master Diver because they were getting eaten up competitively by PADI, because novices didn't realize the significant differences between the two same-named products.


-hh

 

[Web Monkey]

All good points, and I'll throw in that my "Pre-1983" training cost all of $100. One can compare that today with total costs of OW + AOW + Rescue + Deep + Boat + etc.

My "Pre-1983" Datsun cost $1800. My 2002 Subaru cost more than 15 times that.

That makes OW plus all the required specialties a bigger bargain than they were when they were "all-in-one".

Terry

 

[Thalassamania]

Well, as much as I went back and forth with both Walter and Thalassamania, I don't believe either of them said Buddy Breathing was preferable to using the alternate air source. THe point that they were making (and which your post pretty much agrees with) is that Buddy Breathing isn't taught or practiced by some of the big scuba training agencies, meaning that it's not even really an option if needed.

With modern equipment, BB should be such a rare need that it barely rated mentioning. However, as some folks have mentioned here, not everyone bothers to check their octo before a dive to make sure it's still functions as it should. Really, this wouldn't be a bad thing to incorporate into a buddy check before a dive; each of you check your buddy's octo to be sure it's working. It's in my best interest to be sure, because if something happens and I need air, it's far better if both of my buddy's second stages are working, whether I end up using his primary or his secondary.

If Walter and I were to go diving and one of us was to need to BB with the other, there'd be no issue and no problem and I'd rather BB than do a free ascent. The problem is that most divers today are not trained to BB and have not practiced it enough in class to be able to do in in a pinch, so they'd be best advised to attempt a free ascent.

 

[-hh]

My "Pre-1983" Datsun cost $1800. My 2002 Subaru cost more than 15 times that.

A new 1971 Subaru FF-1G was $2,500.
A new 1984 VW Scirocco was $11,006.
IIRC, wife's new 2008 Audi A3 was $30K.

Sorry, but using new car costs, I'm only seeing "12x" growth across 37 years, and only ~3x growth for the period of circa 1983 to present.

And sure, car prices have gone up over time, but so too have the content. I don't recall having airbags, ABS or traction control in my '84 VW and my '71 Subaru didn't even have air conditioning ... nor even an automatic engine choke, for that matter.

From a scuba analogy, these cars were akin to the 'Mae West' horsecollar that lacked a power inflator, with its viciously endearing 3/4" wide crotch strap. Hurray for modern technologies...but let's remember to pay for them too.

That makes OW plus all the required specialties a bigger bargain than they were when they were "all-in-one".

Not really. The modern class typically today is arguably around $300 and the 4-5 of them that you need for comprehensive content equivalancy means that you're in the $1200-$1500 range, which pretty much matches your 15x claimed cost growth value. OTOH, if we use the cost growth numbers that I listed above, then today's products are at least 4x higher than what is explained by mere inflation.

Shifting inflation benchmarks, in 1983, the price for a gallon of gasoline was 81 cents. Today its roughly 4.5x higher and using that, the $100 class becomes equal to $450 today...which buys probably OW + AOW, but not Rescue, Deep or Deco.

Granted, we really should go to the Government's Consumer Price Index, so using this tool and the years 1982-2007 (since 2008 isn't available yet), it reports that what cost $100 in 1982 would cost $212.21 in 2007.

Care to list a couple of places where one can get even just an OW class today for $212, including the pool equipment and textbook?


-hh

PS: just for the heck of it, by backing it up to 1960 (IIRC, roughly when PADI was founded), $100 in 1960 would cost $692.89 in 2007. IMO, that's still not enough for four classes today.

 

[Nemrod]

In my only out of air situation I buddy breathed with my wife. We were both trained to buddy breath. She had no octopus, neither did I and neither did anybody else. It was in 80 to 100 feet, I forget at the moment, while drift diving out of Lauderdale. It is a long story but essentially I was more aggravated with an insta buddy my wife and I had been stuck with than monitoring my spg. I buddy breathed with her, and she was a good thirty feet away when I ran completely out of air (so she had to swim over to me because I was still fooling with the drift bouy), up to about 60 feet or so and then made a leisurely free ascent to the surface. It was no big deal.

N