'Maximum' dive depth based on certification

[NAM001]

Thanks for putting words in my mouth; I never mentioned doing only one module. That is your horse to flog, not mine.

doing one part of the pipeline is what the conversation is about the module is called OW.

Review this: you even underlined modualized. that nodule is OW or AOW or deep or master...

I had one of those single do-it-all classes many years ago; it was 3 months long, several days a week, many dives. Todays classes are the same total content, but modularized.

 

[tursiops]

doing one part of the pipeline is what the conversation is about the module is called OW.

Review this: you even underlined modualized. that nodule is OW or AOW or deep or master...

I had one of those single do-it-all classes many years ago; it was 3 months long, several days a week, many dives. Todays classes are the same total content, but modularized.

ignore

 

[NAM001]

Hopefully this is on-topic: as some have pointed out, PADI maintains that their OW cert is for up to 60 feet, AOW is for up to 100 feet, and you need the deep diver specialty to go all the way to the recreational depth limits. But then in some places they seem to suggest experience matters as much as or more than formal training, which is also what common sense would dictate. So if I'm AOW but not deep specialty certified, does my DAN insurance cover me if I get bent diving between 100-130 feet? Does it matter if I'm with an instructor at the time, or how much experience I have at those depths? (Hypothetical at this point; I haven't been below 100 feet.)

Lots of good questions... technally they say that limits are a recommendation. they are right. there are no laws or police to enforce it. equally the minimum skills taught in OW are to get you to successfully do a dive to 60 ft with out having narc problems or be ooa before ndl and if all fails you can CESA. things change when you go deeper and then AOW now calls for 100 ft. You dont do CESA any more you do better planning and you are more tuned you your environment because you have basic skills. You have that becasue you have been guided to 80-100 and got formal supervised experience in a classroom setting from a person qualified to determine that you can do a dive to 100 ft. Then comes deep when you go to that point that being NARCed is an issue and the same supervision and evaluation and demonstrations are done in a training environment. An OW's first encounter with high cu ft usage due to depth should not be done on a deep dive. Likewise one comimg face to face with being narced is the same type of thing. My opinion is if you have the skills ,,,,,get the card that documents that. AOW should be the standard card carried. An OW to me is a working on my AOW card card . As for deep I dont have that much concern about that when you have an AOW. But New OW's going deep is a whole other thing.

Being with or with out and instructor changes things a bit as you are under the protection of the instructor. they have training limits like OW in 40 ft or less during formal training. After formal training you get a formal documented proof of training . Experience dives you get nothing and can hence prove nothing.

As Dan goes yo need to call them and get the skinny from them direct..

 

[tursiops]

training limits like OW in 40 ft or less during formal training

60 ft, not 40 ft.

 

[NAM001]

60 ft, not 40 ft.

If you say that OW can be taught at 60 ft ,,,, Ill give you that. The last class I attended said their OW course training restriction was 40 ft and that no open water dives would exceed that depth. things change and that is OK., I was unclear is saying that limitations vary whether it is associated with training instructor limits or post class limits, or even national legal limitations such as a hired dive must have a DM in the water. Another situation is the difference is operations that are responsible for the passengers from departure till return vs only when onboard ( known as taxi states)

 

[jlcnuke]

Lots of people talking about PADI etc "recommendations". Anyone bother to quote the ISO or EN standards that an OW diver is certified to (ISO standards having some legal standing in many places...)?

 

[rsingler]

Lots of people talking about PADI etc "recommendations". Anyone bother to quote the ISO or EN standards that an OW diver is certified to (ISO standards having some legal standing in many places...)?

And this is part of the problem. This is where 20m/60ft comes in. But once again, if you read the fine print, there's STILL the additional training and experience exception (see red text):

EN 14153-2 / ISO 24801-2 - LEVEL 2 "AUTONOMOUS DIVER"
Competencies of a recreational scuba diver at level 2 "Autonomous Diver"

A scuba diver at level 2 "Autonomous Diver" shall be trained to have sufficient knowledge, skill and experience to dive with other scuba divers of at least the same level in open water without supervision of a scuba instructor.

Scuba divers at level 2 "Autonomous Diver" are qualified to dive within the following parameters unless they have additional training or are accompanied by a dive leader:

• dive to a recommended maximum depth of 20 m with other scuba divers of the same level,
• make dives, which do not require in-water decompression stops,
• dive only when appropriate support is available at the surface,
• dive under conditions that are equal or better than the conditions where they were trained.

If diving conditions are significantly different from those previously experienced, a scuba diver at level 2 "Autonomous Diver" requires an appropriate orientation from a dive leader.

If accompanied by a scuba instructor, a scuba diver at level 2 "Autonomous Diver" may gain progressive experience beyond these parameters and develop competency in managing more challenging diving conditions (e.g. increased depth and current, reduced visibility, extreme temperatures) designed to lead to higher qualifications.
* * *

Unfortunately, the next "higher qualification" is Level 3 Dive Leader. That's more than AOW. So getting "permission" to dive to 130 feet as a simple recreational diver is complicated via this route. In fact, it's even worse! ISO standards require you to get your additional experience via an instructor, as opposed to just an experienced dive buddy:
If accompanied by a scuba instructor, a scuba diver at level 2 "Autonomous Diver" may gain progressive experience beyond these parameters...

 

[AdivingBel]

I mean, listening to @Sam Miller III 's stories of watermanship requirements suggests that an extra few days of class and an extra 4 dives is not too much to ask, to get a newly "required" Advanced Open Water ticket. It's clearly better for new divers to get more training, albeit at a cost.

I have absolutely nothing against additional training if that's what an individual wants. I get that this is a worldwide audience and some of you guys/gals dive in some places that require additional skills and local knowledge, but what is driving this push for depth limits? Is there really an uptick in accidents & incidents considering the number of dives performed daily these days. Lots of these dives are in warm water, benign conditions. Why should someone after having their OW training have to get additional certs to go to 80 ft. in of all places the Caymans? What are they really going to learn in an additional AOW class that is going to benefit them in that situation that they can't learn through diving experience? How to rig and use the additional gear...a new breathing technique...a new propulsion technique...there is nothing that isn't covered in the OW standards that a diver needs to know. Sure it's nice to go there once with an instructor and see that gas goes faster or that you might encounter a narc, but those things were discussed in my OW (it wasn't that long ago) and there is no reason a reasonable person can't progress through experience to recreational depths.

I thoroughly enjoyed my AOW. I had a great instructor and those dives helped me progress as a diver given it was time spent with an instructor after I had dived enough that the process had "slowed down." I could better appreciate his input, but it in no way imparted any additional info applicable to diving between 60 ' and 130' that wasn't included in my OW training beyond documenting I had been below 60 ft. at least once. I get that this, if for no other reason, is why dive ops like AOW for advanced dives. Hopefully it also shows an additional interest in the sport/hobby and maybe they'll be less likely to have "drama" on the water, but none of that is a given. There needs to be easy work-a-rounds whether it's checkout dives, further discussion with the diver in question, vouching by other known divers etc.. I'm not saying divers should be able to walk-in off the street and demand an advanced dived (even if they have an AOW) without some level of vetting, but just going below 60 ft. in benign conditions doesn't make for an advanced dive and making an experienced OW diver jump through an additional hoop for just this reason is, IMHO, silly.

Why is mandating additional training due to depth limits for recreational diving (ndl less than 130 ft.) necessary? Is it truly for safety? Is it due to a litigious environment? Does it make life easier for a dive op to say these are agency limitations as opposed to there own imposed limits (their right, their boat, their rules) that can be negated by divers voting with their fins? Is it that some folks can't deal with other divers not diving like them (DM guided dives only at some mandated depth because that is what they are comfortable with)? Some divers not wanting the masses to enjoy the underwater environment because that somehow diminishes their own achievement? An entire segment of the diving industry that makes a living selling additional training (I don't really want to go there because, IMHO additional training is a good thing and should be available for any diver that wants it, but for progressing from 60 ft. to 130 ft.? C'mon....really???).

Sorry for the rant... but I guess I do think there are situations "where it's too much to ask." I dive with OW divers who have hundreds if not thousands of dives where mandating it is "too much to ask." All IMHO, YMMV.

 

[rsingler]

Sorry for the rant... but I guess I do think there are situations "where it's too much to ask." I dive with OW divers who have hundreds if not thousands of dives where mandating it is "too much to ask."

No argument! I've been there, and I was frustrated as h*ll!
But if that's our karma (thank you, lawyers), then for new divers, AOW is only a good thing. For old divers, it's not really a hurdle, except for the expense.
Ah, for the days of riding my bike without a helmet!

 

[AdivingBel]

LOL...no problem here with helmets. Maybe we should wear them while diving...hey, incorporate them into hoods...now for sale at LeisurePro...