PADI v NAUI Master Scuba Diver Rating

[RTC'83]

I am not an authority on diving and far away fro Master Scuba Diver under either of the mentioned organizations. I will not comment on NAUI's courses because I have never taken one. As per PADI specialty courses, you have several dives per specialty, you are given a book or booklet on the specific specialty, then you are tested on the matter. Usually 25 questions. In essence by the time you have completed the 5 specialties you have the ability to complete all the objectives of the dive and have the book knowledge plus an instructor that reviews both; the dives and knowledge.
Once you have those specialties plus Rescue on your way to MSD.

I had some mistakes on my original post. Have corrected them.
As per the knowledge questions, basing it on what I have been expose too up to today

 

[tursiops]

Once you have those specialties plus S&R you on your way to MD.

And 50 dives. Rescue, not S&R, and MSD, not M(aster) D(iver). As someone who worked with the Navy for many years, Master Diver is an entirely different animal than Master Scuba Diver.

 

[BoltSnap]

My old take on the MSD debate is simple-the 2 agencies are different. With NAUI you get 8 dives minimum. With PADI, there could be a few more or less than 8. I recall my PADI MSD went like this:
NAV: 4 dives
Night: 3 I think
Deep:4
Wreck:4
Equpi. Specialist:0

==15 dives.

This isn't a true comparison or even a "comparison" at all. You are ignoring the entire picture of what the NAUI MSD course is all about and the requirements and qualifications of the graduates of the NAUI MSD course.

 

[BoltSnap]

It is very presumptuous to state that the NAUI MSD is comparable to the PADI AI & DM academic knowledge, I guess the PADI guys want to make themselves feel better but it isn't true at all. The academic knowledge of the NAUI MSD course is at a much higher level than the PADI DM/AI or even entry level instructor. The NAUI MSD course with its emphasis at the very high level of academics is designed to provide academic and practical diving knowledge and skill for the graduates to be at a -NAUI- "entry-level instructor" academic knowledge level. The MSD is a prerequisite to be able to pass the NAUI AI/DM/Instructor exams. These exams are much more challenging and cover deeper knowledge than what the other big agencies requires from its entry-level leadership candidates. In fact, from numerous examples and experiences in the past, the DM/AI/Instructors from the PADI and the like agencies won't be able to pass the NAUI MSD/DM/AI/Instructor academic sections of the exams, or at the absolute most, barley pass it with great difficulty and minimum passing grade.

In short, when comparing the NAUI MSD course offering in terms of academic and skill level of this course graduates to the PADI MSD "recognition" card payoff, it is a totally misleading and meaningless comparison that doesn't make any sense at all.

 

[TMHeimer]

RTC'83, I took a written test for Nitrox and Deep specialties. None for Wreck, Night, Equip. Specialist, UW NAV or PPV..unless I recall incorrectly. Things well could've changed since I took them in 2006,2007.

BurhanM, Yes, it was presumptuous for me to compare the academic knowledge of the two agencies since I have no personal knowledge of NAUI material. Can you give an example (or a few) of specific more advanced info. that NAUI teaches as opposed to PADI? It must be extremely in depth, as I found the (old) PADI DM course to contain far more info. than I found I needed to assist with OW courses.
Yes, I was presumptuous. I based my post on what I have read over the years here on the board. Many times I have read here that basically the NAUI MSD course is the same as the PADI DM course minus the skill demonstration & teaching aspects (including 3 people I think saying that on this thread alone). Are you saying not true? I'm not saying I don't believe you, just that I haven't really heard that before on SB. Now, some of these people may be comparing the NAUI MSD to the "new" (post 2010) PADI DM course, some comparing it to the "old" course. The old course had a written test of 160 questions (8 twenty question tests) and the present one a test of 120 (2 sixty question tests). So somewhere along the line 25% of some knowledge was dropped. One of my last readings from PADI (before I "retired") was that the theory left out of the DM course was now done in the Instructor course.

 

[BoltSnap]

Yes, it was presumptuous for me to compare the academic knowledge of the two agencies since I have no personal knowledge of NAUI material.

@TMHeimer I wasn't referring to you with this "presumptuous" part at all, it was directed to others. My reply to you was stated in the prior post only

 

[RTC'83]

And 50 dives. Rescue, not S&R, and MSD, not M(aster) D(iver). As someone who worked with the Navy for many years, Master Diver is an entirely different animal than Master Scuba Diver.

Thank you for the clarification. I have corrected my original post.

 

[TMHeimer]

@TMHeimer I wasn't referring to you with this "presumptuous" part at all, it was directed to others. My reply to you was stated in the prior post only

My fault. Sorry, I read that wrong. Your reply to me was the PADI MSD and NAUI MSD are two different animals --yes, indeed. Apple to Oranges. Of course I agree the NAUI MSD has all the theory, etc. and PADI's has none, so not comparable. Except perhaps in number of dives, as per my post.
I would nonetheless like to know some specific examples of the much higher lever academics the NAUI MSD as compared to the PADI DM. It does seem that you disagree with those many saying it is relatively the same. If I weren't so lazy I'd go look it up.

 

[boulderjohn]

OK, folks, prepare to be pissed off.

Back when the few agencies in existence created their versions of Master Diver, or whatever you want to call it, scuba diving was in its infancy. Only a few agencies were teaching only a few classes. If you got the "Master Whatever" rating, you had pretty much exhausted the instructional possibilities. There was no real technical training going on. There was no cave training going on. People had no idea what they were doing with wreck training. Equipment was rudimentary compared to what we have today. Our knowledge of decompression theory and deep diving mechanics was just beginning.

So a person who achieved the master diver rating back then had scored a major certification, something to be proud of. The requirements for those ratings have not changed in the half century since they were created, but the world of scuba has changed dramatically during those years. Thus, to many people, reading posts about whether one agency's "master" rating is superior to another reads a lot like arguing whether an 8th grade education or a 9th grade education demonstrates true mastery of academic content.

 

[tursiops]

OK, folks, prepare to be pissed off.

<snip>

I'm only pissed off that you didn't say this earlier.
Also, just because it hasn't been said for a while, Advanced Open Water does not mean you are an advanced diver; it only means you have advanced beyond OW.