PADI Nitrox Course Review

[A34735]

Discussing risks of ageing with Randy, my local dive shop owner (a grizzled veteran) I was persuaded to sign up for my first course in 40 years (I was originally certified by BSAC in the 1970's) - PADI Enriched Air Diving.

The Course
It took about 30 mins to scan the materials and do the 7 self-assessment exercises. The mistakes/poor quality of the materials were immediately obvious.

(For example on page 12, Exercise 2:

Q7. The potential hazards that can arise from filling an enriched air cylinder improperly include (check all that apply):
a. Fire
b. Explosion
c. Decompression illness
d. Oxygen toxicity
Actual correct reply is a, b, c, d.
Printed book reply: a, b.

Q8 has similar issues).

The Instructor
Kevin was personable and highly experienced: 20 years experience, > 2000 dives, many on TriMix. Despite the poor course materials, did a good job getting the risks across well and memorably (I will never use a Nitrox cylinder I haven't personally tested!). He was surprised the 'new' PADI materials didn't require any mix/depth/pp02 calculations - then remembered 'Ah yes. Whole point of this course is to have you buy a new mixed gas computer' - which is probably true.

The Standard
The self-assessment and test at the end was ridiculously simple, with no obvious fail criterion. I got 24/25 right (which says more about the test than it does about my ability - honestly!). If you got a question wrong, you simply signed you understood the correct explanation the instructor later gave you...

Cost
All in (materials, instructor fee, dive-shop facilities, tax) my Nitrox card took 3 hours and cost about $180.

Conclusions
I'd heard certification standards have declined (and seen some pretty stupid certified divers and even DMs on my travels. Which was also true 40 years ago - I was one of them!) but approached my first PADI course with an open mind, prepared for good tuition, materials and experience. Ultimately I was disappointed. Materials were shoddy and standards really are low. The redeeming factor was the personality, excellence and experience of the instructor.

Will I use Nitrox in future? Still not convinced benefits outweigh risks.
Would I recommend PADI to a friend? No

 

[drrich2]

Debates over what the basic nitrox course should & shouldn't cover have come up before. It is unfortunate that there were errors in the manual itself, though. This is hardly a first edition product.

That said, do you believe the course gave you an adequate grasp of nitrox to dive it the way most people do; shore diving Bonaire or a live-aboard, for example, probably diving EAN 32, staying above 110 feet to keep oxygen toxicity rates low & setting their computer to that mix for more extended bottom time?

Is the use of nitrox as most recreational divers are using it (in my estimation, and I know there are many exceptions) such that 'low standards' are good enough?

I ask because in a past discussion or two I've gotten the impression some people have an Engineer-like 'need' to know a subject in great detail, sort of an 'authoritative grasp' or at least pretty thorough understanding on one hand, and some people like to 'feel challenged' and like they accomplished something 'meaningful' (in other words, rather difficult) on the other, and either camp can be disappointed with a course where the bottom line is 'test your mix & stay above the MOD or you could have a seizure & die, okay, now you can use nitrox' (though the last approach can get a lot of people diving nitrox real fast, perhaps with adequately low mortality risk).

Richard.

 

[TSandM]

That was a poorly worded question . . . clearly they were interested in the physical risks to the filler, rather than all possible outcomes from all possible "improper" fills.

As far as I can tell, one of the things most agencies are working toward is to take as much math as possible out of anything related to scuba, because math is intimidating to so many people. But not to give a student the tools to compute their MOD seems to me to be too much minimizing. There is no guarantee that everywhere you go, you will have a Nitrox computer or even access to a set of MOD tables.

 

[Peter Guy]

OP -- what is it you think you should know that you weren't taught?

In my PADI EAN class, I teach a "30 second Nitrox class" which, in my opinion, teaches a student what they need to know to use Nitrox.

a. Always analyze your own tank.

b. Only use 32%.

c. Stay above 100 feet.

d. Breathe.

And I can "teach" that in about 30 seconds. OK, what else does a recreational diver need to know?

But, back to your critique -- How does "improper filling" of a tank increase the risk of DCS? Perhaps you are overthinking the question?

I (unfortunately) teach the "computer only" PADI class -- but I also give my students the formulas to calculate MOD and EAD and have them work the problems. I have no idea why others won't/don't do this.

 

[TMHeimer]

A34735, I took the course in '06. The only real work involved for me was learning the nitrox tables. A few other important facts. Nothing difficult or challenging. Are you maybe saying that $180 is just too much for that?

 

[DiveMaven]

I have to agree that answers c and d aren't really risks over improperly filling a tank. They're more risks of improperly analyzing a tank (or not analyzing at all).

 

[TracyN]

Ah question number 7, I believe I missed that one. I also chose all of the above as well but after reading the question again and discussing it with the instructor I could see that it was only talking specifically about the filling process. It was a poorly worded question. I wasn't impressed by the course but fortunately the instructor told me all the important stuff I needed to know to stay alive. That's good enough for me.

 

[Quero]

A34735, it sounds to me like you are trying to justify your incorrect answer by complaining about the course materials and the instructional approach. Maybe what you need to do is to try to look at the course, the materials, and the teaching/learning process in a different way.

In fact, c and d are not correct answers to the question. Those are definite risks, but they're risks of using an improperly labeled or analysed blend, not risks of filling a tank improperly. The whole point of that question is to dissuade people from getting their own tanks filled at places like welding fill suppliers rather than at scuba fill stations, but maybe you missed that insight. It doesn't matter that some people get that question (or any question) wrong--I use any incorrect answer, such as they one you gave, as an opportunity to reinforce these important points. The objective of the test is not to pass or fail the candidate--the test is more like a diagnostic tool that allows both the student and the instructor to find gaps in understanding and to discuss the topics further.

There is nothing hard about diving Nitrox or learning to dive Nitrox at the recreational level. I fail to see why you want the course to artificially turn something that is easy into a weed-em-out-by-failing-their-sorry-asses sort of course, but if you are comparing today's scuba instruction with what was offered by BSAC decades ago, you will find virtually no course as militaristic and gung-ho macho as those courses used to be (and yes, even BSAC has gone "soft", if by "declining standards" you are parroting the "in the old days" mentality that so many spout here).

 

[TMHeimer]

It's a typical PADI pooly worded question. Yes, c & d would result if the gas is improperly analyzed by the diver or by the shop and not properly analyzed or not analyzed at all by the diver. But if any of that happened and c or d resulted, then you could say there was the potential for c & d to occur..... In other words (!): We're taught if you dive the wrong gas you can get DCS or OxTox. If the wrong gas is in there that happens. If the wrong gas is in there it has been improperly filled. You correct that by analyzing it yourself. But if you don't, you can get c & d, so the POTENTIAL is there. You shouldn't have to think in circles to get the right answer.

OW test: Check those that cause DCS:
1. Too deep 2. Down too long 3. Hungover 4. Tired from surface swim
5. All of the above

Correct answer in the book: 1 & 2. 3&4 are not the MAIN causes, but only contribute. But the question didn't say MAIN.
I put 5. So that was my one wrong on OW.
How difficult is it to word things simply? It's not like there are 1,000 questions on any of the tests.

 

[Quero]

But TMH, neither being hungover nor being tired from a surface swim causes DCS at all. What causes DCS is nitrogen supersaturation in the human body, and the way tissues get supersaturated is by staying down too long or going too deep. No matter how hungover or tired a person is, s/he will not suffer from DCS without getting in the water on scuba and staying down too long or going too deep. Adding the word "main" to the question would not make those other answers any more incorrect than they already are. The important point that is being made by that question is that time at depth is what loads nitrogen into tissues of the human body.

Instead of fixating on how their egos "got bent" by getting an answer wrong, dive students should consider what doing the course contributes to their enjoyment of diving safely.