Have training standards "slipped"?

[DivingsInMyBlood]

I think what it all boils down to is that when a diver has passed their OW cert they should take AOW and rescue to further their dive training, i bet theres many out there that just stop at open water and end their training there.

 

[Kingpatzer]

that may tell me more than you can imagine.

Probably not. I was a competative swimmer and I've had plenty of training on breathing compressed air at various pressures (just not underwater) and I'm the kind of person who tryies to learn everything he can when taking on a new task . . . so prior to the first class I had not only finished all of the course material, but had read several other books repeatedly.

I still can't stop sculling with my hands and maintain my attitude though . . . and that is something that just hasn't been covered in OW or AOW . . .

I will admit to not knowing what the standards say, so I can only make a guess based on my own training experience. Perhaps I have fared better than average . . .

 

[TheRedHead]

I still can't stop sculling with my hands and maintain my attitude though . . . and that is something that just hasn't been covered in OW or AOW . . .

Find someone to show you how to scull with your fins. Sounds like you might be overweighted and/or have a gear problem if you can't keep position in calm water.

 

[waterpirate]

Thank God for this thread! NE winds gusting to 20knts, and seas 5-6 and building, I got nothing better.

Lets Talk about standards.
I want to talk about the ones that are not in the curiculum.

First on my list is comfort in the water. To be a safe thinking diver, you must be comfortable in the water. You can not teach that, you either are or you need a lot of time in the water to get comfortable.

Second self confidance. To be a safe thinking diver you must be self confidant. Again you either are, or you need a lot of repetition of skills to get there.

Third understanding and excepting your limitations. You either do, or you need a lot of close calls to hit you in the head.

My list goes on and on.
These have no place in the corporate agency curriculum.

Help me out what is on your list?
Eric

 

[Thalassamania]

Mike,

Show me the data where an increase in death or injury is correlated to the length of the diver's OW class.

(All I hear are crickets chirping.)

Here's a reference grasshopper:

Scientific Diving Fatalities, 1970 through 1984--A Fifteen Year Review
Sharkey, P.; McAniff, J.
OCEANS
Volume 16, Issue , Sep 1984 Page(s): 517 - 520

Summary: Over the last three decades, american scientists have been using diving techniques in their research. The files of the National Underwater Accident Data Center were reviewed for references to diving for science. Twenty cases contained such references. Each case was examined and it was determined that ten might be loosely described as involving scientific diving. These ten were further investigated and six were found to fit a rigorous definition of diving science. Each of the twenty cases is presented and suggestions on how to avoid such incidents are made. Other data available on the frequency of nonfatal accidents is presented as is information on the population of diving scientists. The conclusion is reached that diving under the auspices of a diving control program similar to that pioneered at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography has an excellent safety record.

You'll have to take my word that the six remaining cases were divers who, though performing scientific tasks, were not diving under the auspices of a Scripps model diving safety program and who had not been through a 100 hour training program. In point of fact (if memory serves) all six were recreational divers involved in volunteer work for aquaria.

 

[TheRedHead]

You can't learn to be comfortable in a couple of days. That takes experience and being subjected to stress. It is easy to be comfortable when everything is going right.

 

[Hemlon]

Here's a reference grasshopper:

Scientific Diving Fatalities, 1970 through 1984--A Fifteen Year Review
Sharkey, P.; McAniff, J.
OCEANS
Volume 16, Issue , Sep 1984 Page(s): 517 - 520

Summary: Over the last three decades, american scientists have been using diving techniques in their research. The files of the National Underwater Accident Data Center were reviewed for references to diving for science. Twenty cases contained such references. Each case was examined and it was determined that ten might be loosely described as involving scientific diving. These ten were further investigated and six were found to fit a rigorous definition of diving science. Each of the twenty cases is presented and suggestions on how to avoid such incidents are made. Other data available on the frequency of nonfatal accidents is presented as is information on the population of diving scientists. The conclusion is reached that diving under the auspices of a diving control program similar to that pioneered at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography has an excellent safety record.

You'll have to take my word that the six remaining cases were divers who, though performing scientific tasks, were not diving under the auspices of a Scripps model diving safety program and who had not been through a 100 hour training program. In point of fact (if memory serves) all six were recreational divers involved in volunteer work for aquaria.

Thal,

What exactly are you saying that this 23 year old article shows?

 

[Hemlon]

You can't learn to be comfortable in a couple of days. That takes experience and being subjected to stress. It is easy to be comfortable when everything is going right.

In my experience, the best way to accomplish this is to dive often and under varied conditions.

 

[Thalassamania]

Thal,

What exactly are you saying that this 23 year old article shows?

For that thirty year period no fatalities for divers who completed 100 hour training programs. I'm looking for documention for the next 23 years. That was what you asked for, was it not? It also demonstrates the link between longer training and lowered risk.

 

[Hemlon]

For that thirty year period no fatalities for divers who completed 100 hour training programs. I'm looking for documention for the next 23 years. That was what you asked for, was it not? It also demonstrates the link between longer training and lowered risk.

In keeping it in the frame of this thread, no. There is no debate (at least not from me) that extra training (AOW, rescue, etc) makes for safer divers.

The question that I (and others) have is whether or not extra time and/or skills within an OW class makes for a safer diver.