PADI vs NAUI

[Blackwood]

It's certainly possible. But consider the history of FAA and its predecessors. It grew along with the aviation field.

This would be late in the game for SCUBA.

If they called upon USN and NOAA, they may have a credible headstart at establishing baseline requirements for sport diving, but otherwise they'd likely call upon major industry players and end up bestowing something tantamount to WRSTC with the force of law.

*shug*


(and of course, part 25 would be appropriately be compared to how manufacturers develop equipment, not how training agencies operate. That would likely be structured more like Part 61, but as an aerospace engineer 25 is what I'm most familiar with).

 

[Thalassamania]

It's certainly possible. But consider the history of FAA and its predecessors. It grew along with the aviation field.

This would be late in the game for SCUBA.

If they called upon USN and NOAA, they may have a credible headstart at establishing baseline requirements for sport diving, but otherwise they'd likely call upon major industry players and end up bestowing something tantamount to WRSTC with the force of law.

*shug*


(and of course, part 25 would be appropriately be compared to how manufacturers develop equipment, not how training agencies operate. That would likely be structured more like Part 61, but as an aerospace engineer 25 is what I'm most familiar with).

I think that the best baseline to begin with is AAUS (of the similar WKPP model), not USN or NOAA. Funny, the academic diving community was the baseline that recreational diving started with in the early 1950s, before it was hijacked by the quick buck artists pedaling their form of "economic reality."

 

[endurodog]

With a gov run program you have to fund it. The group would only oversee setting standards as is outlined by others here so PADI, NAUI, and the rest would still be involved. Then you need enforcement, inspections, record keeping. All of this at gov wages. Count on your diving getting more expensive

Again I ask what are the hopes of having a single standard and who gets to set that standard???

Will it be set so low but yet we encure the gov cost and now they are in our sport so nothing changes?

Most important I will say. What are we hoping to accomplish???

 

[Rhenry]

It is interesting looking back at this thread, The common issue, complaint, point of contention, whatever you wish to call it is the different agencies. PADI does this, NAUI does that etc. and the Instructor. Now wouldn't it be nice to hold all instructors to the same high standards? This is the ultimate solution, the only real question here is who and what those standards will be. A universal set of policies and dive protocols. When we all go diving, we would all have the same level of knowledge, but our experiences would differ. The key element here is the expectations would be the same for all, and would be laid out.

 

[endurodog]

So it's not a safety thing but just have people on the same page? What's an example of people being on different pages that could be fixed by having an overall standard? Is the down sides of having a gov control on standards worth it? Would a standard be written so soft that the certifications agency will continue doing it the way they have but now we have the gov involved? Safety standards for cars leave lots of room for the makers to put all sorts of different things together with some being good and some being bad.

Along the same line as other post in this thread. Would this weed out bad instructors? If there is a bad instructor how long would it take to have a bad instructor ruled as such and removed, if ever.

What about the large number of divers certified in other parts of the world? Should this be an international standard? Would the UN administer that?

The base idea isn't bad but I see it as unworkable and not able to attain the goals set out (the goals set out in this thread are vague at best) here while only bringing the gov in to our sport.

 

[matt_w]

It is interesting looking back at this thread, The common issue, complaint, point of contention, whatever you wish to call it is the different agencies. PADI does this, NAUI does that etc. and the Instructor. Now wouldn't it be nice to hold all instructors to the same high standards? This is the ultimate solution, the only real question here is who and what those standards will be. A universal set of policies and dive protocols. When we all go diving, we would all have the same level of knowledge, but our experiences would differ. The key element here is the expectations would be the same for all, and would be laid out.

You hardly ever have two people leave the same class with the same level of knowledge. People will get out of class whatever they put into it, and then dive how they feel is best. I do not care what the course is or who the instructor is, people do not all learn the same things. Certification will remain at he discretion of the instructor unless we start doing independent evaluations of open water divers. That would just be silly.

In the 25 years I have been diving, I have met good and bad divers from just about every agency of note. I have met great divers with no formal training at all. I have met people who have no business taking a bath alone with instructor certifications (this particular person was an active NAUI and PADI instructor at the time).

Recreational scuba diving is remarkably safe, all things considered. I doubt you will find a significant difference in serious accidents or deaths among OW students from any particular agency. I do not need to know what standards a potential budd was trained to, I can make a pretty good determination of a new buddy in a 1 minute conversation. In 1 more minute I could easily align our dive procedures for any OW dive. No additional layers of standards would change any of this.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

First agree lets keep the politics out of this. Every one jumps to conclusions and should have clarified my statement a bit more, what i said what the "effect of law", not making a law. There would be no government involvement other than to recognize this agency as the authority for scuba diving. What i am proposing is an NGO, and as such it would be run by us as a consensus, in a similar fashion to RSTC and WRSTC . The difference is that they would be the authority in certification.
We would have the flexibility to change rules that would improve our sport/recreational activity. The obvious government agency we are trying to avoid is OSHA, they given the chance would by proxy make rules for us. The back door approach. Look at it this way, if we band together and prevent the government from getting involved we will be far better off the the Orwellian scenario most of you bring up.

Rather than creating another regulatory body, the best way to enhance the quality of training would be to separate dive training from dive equipment sales, and stop using training as a loss leader to sell gear. We're gonna end up going there anyway, as the Internet redefines how people shop. And charging for value will tend to raise people's expectations for better quality.

The other thing that needs to happen is for the certifying agencies to raise the current entry requirements for dive instruction. Having someone teaching scuba after only 100 dives ... most of which are usually either their own class dives or some meaningless time in the water to "get their numbers up" is absurd. People need to learn how to dive before they assume they can teach it ... you can't train competent divers unless you first become one.

Finally, it would be a really neat idea to stop this business of training people on their knees. OK ... I can concede that maybe the first checkout dive or two people need to be taught in a way that provides a stable platform ... but by the time they're ready to receive a C-card, they should be able to perform any skill required at that level without relying on contact with the bottom.

Of course, as long as the objective is to cycle people through as many classes as possible, as quickly as possible, no regulatory body will be able to make it happen.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Thalassamania]

Rather than creating another regulatory body, the best way to enhance the quality of training would be to separate dive training from dive equipment sales, and stop using training as a loss leader to sell gear. We're gonna end up going there anyway, as the Internet redefines how people shop. And charging for value will tend to raise people's expectations for better quality.

The other thing that needs to happen is for the certifying agencies to raise the current entry requirements for dive instruction. Having someone teaching scuba after only 100 dives ... most of which are usually either their own class dives or some meaningless time in the water to "get their numbers up" is absurd. People need to learn how to dive before they assume they can teach it ... you can't train competent divers unless you first become one.

Finally, it would be a really neat idea to stop this business of training people on their knees. OK ... I can concede that maybe the first checkout dive or two people need to be taught in a way that provides a stable platform ... but by the time they're ready to receive a C-card, they should be able to perform any skill required at that level without relying on contact with the bottom.

Of course, as long as the objective is to cycle people through as many classes as possible, as quickly as possible, no regulatory body will be able to make it happen.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Hear! Hear!

 

[matt_w]

Rather than creating another regulatory body, the best way to enhance the quality of training would be to separate dive training from dive equipment sales, and stop using training as a loss leader to sell gear. We're gonna end up going there anyway, as the Internet redefines how people shop. And charging for value will tend to raise people's expectations for better quality.

The other thing that needs to happen is for the certifying agencies to raise the current entry requirements for dive instruction. Having someone teaching scuba after only 100 dives ... most of which are usually either their own class dives or some meaningless time in the water to "get their numbers up" is absurd. People need to learn how to dive before they assume they can teach it ... you can't train competent divers unless you first become one.

Finally, it would be a really neat idea to stop this business of training people on their knees. OK ... I can concede that maybe the first checkout dive or two people need to be taught in a way that provides a stable platform ... but by the time they're ready to receive a C-card, they should be able to perform any skill required at that level without relying on contact with the bottom.

Of course, as long as the objective is to cycle people through as many classes as possible, as quickly as possible, no regulatory body will be able to make it happen.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Bob,

I agree with most of your points. The only one I would take some issue with is separating training and equipment sales. OW training is a loss leader (or nearly so) for many shops in the US. I suppose if there was a legal mandate to separate the two, then the price of training would rise to an appropriate level, but it is likely some would find loopholes and leave the honest practitioners at a disadvantage.

All of your other ideas should be incorporated by the current certification agencies. I still do not see a compelling reason for a higher level authority.

 

[endurodog]

Bob and others, and not to hijack the thread. What should be the standard for dive instructor. If we set another number as the limit on dives that can be met by just sitting on the bottom of your local lake as the 100 can be. The other standards are in place. What is a way to have a standard that is more in tune with your thinking? As many have said there are instructors with 1000's of dives that shouldn't teach and there are those with minimum number of dives that are great teachers. Again not sure if there is an easy way around this.