PADI vs NAUI

[The Chairman]

In your minds, as dive professionals, what does the PADI OW course (and hell, include AOW if you want) prepare someone to do?

It's more about the instructor than the agency.

At what point of independence for a diver (pair) is it irresponsible NOT to get rescue certified?

If you were trained adequately, you should not feel irresponsible for not taking rescue diver. Hey, it's a fun course, but not essential to being a safe diver.

What is the best way to refresh this knowledge for once-a-year divers?

Dive.

Related to the above, any good reference books to help us refresh our knowledge base?

ScubaBoard!

 

[boulderjohn]

My impression from this thread is that the PADI coursework contains the contents of the earlier YMCA courses, but broken up into pieces all the way through rescue diver, and possibly some material only in some of the specialties? Is that accurate?

Not at all true.

PADI was created out of NAUI in 1965. NAUI was going through one of its all-too-regular financial problems at the time, and they decided to withdraw from the national market and focus in California, When they made that decision, they canceled a major instructor training program scheduled to be held in Chicago. The Chicago branch of NAUI then created a new program--PADI. Its OW training program was pretty much the same as NAUI's at that point.

Soon after that, the Los Angeles County program, feeling that too many divers were dropping out soon after certification, decided to add another program that would teach some more skills but mostly introduce divers to different kinds of diving in the hope that something would pique their interests. They called that new certification advanced. NAUI, which had been formed by former members of the Los Angeles program, followed suit. PADI added the Advanced program later.

The rescue programs and specialty programs were added by the different agencies one by one over the years. Each was an addition to what had previously been taught.

The YMCA program was not part of that development path. One of the important characteristics of the YMCA program was that it was really programS. Different sites were allowed to do it their own ways.

The idea that PADI took an existing encyclopedic program and broke it into small bits is one of the most persistent myths in scuba.

 

[Allison Finch]

Not at all true.

PADI was created out of NAUI in 1965. NAUI was going through one of its all-too-regular financial problems at the time, and they decided to withdraw from the national market and focus in California, When they made that decision, they canceled a major instructor training program scheduled to be held in Chicago. The Chicago branch of NAUI then created a new program--PADI. Its OW training program was pretty much the same as NAUI's at that point.

Soon after that, the Los Angeles County program, feeling that too many divers were dropping out soon after certification, decided to add another program that would teach some more skills but mostly introduce divers to different kinds of diving in the hope that something would pique their interests. They called that new certification advanced. NAUI, which had been formed by former members of the Los Angeles program, followed suit. PADI added the Advanced program later.

The rescue programs and specialty programs were added by the different agencies one by one over the years. Each was an addition to what had previously been taught.

The YMCA program was not part of that development path. One of the important characteristics of the YMCA program was that it was really programS. Different sites were allowed to do it their own ways.

The idea that PADI took an existing encyclopedic program and broke it into small bits is one of the most persistent myths in scuba.

That's not altogether true.

I had been diving well before PADI was founded. I was both NAUI and NASDS and SSI certified. I know what their certs contained. I got my night diver, rescue diver, wreck diver, and many other "Extra courses" (under PADI) in my initial training. My card had check offs for these on the back. There was no charge for these courses. Padi was the first who saw dollar signs in adding what had been normal training as "extra certs".

That's why so many of us took a LONG time to see PADI as a responsible organization.

 

[Scoo]

It's more about the instructor than the agency.

This is a strange answer to the question of what C-card training prepares someone to do. “It depends on the instructor” gives me no way to make any risk-informed decisions about what my training prepared me to do.

 

[caydiver]

I guess I have a few different perspectives here. I am NAUI open water and advanced. My open water course was 2X a week for ten weeks. Our pool and skill work was deeper than padi and ssi which was more geared towards recreational diving. We had no idea at the time. We did a referral and certified in Grand Cayman. We went with Red Sail that had a NAUI Instructor for our certs. Didn’t (and no need to understand how it worked at that time). I remember that we were much more comfortable with completing our skills that the other two couples that were with us. We were very relaxed in the water. I don’t know how many NAUI instructors are around anymore. Now you can get a universal cert. people don’t want to put in the time. That said both of my kids are PADI from start to finish. They are awesome divers that I learn from. I think it depends on how much you are willing to put in rather than the agency. Now we have an op and some of the least skilled divers might be 500+ but they have just been practicing the same poor skills and think they Posiden in his prime.

 

[Bob DBF]

This is a strange answer to the question of what C-card training prepares someone to do. “It depends on the instructor” gives me no way to make any risk-informed decisions about what my training prepared me to do.

And yet is the most accurate.

Agencies give guidelines (standards) to conduct the class, theoretically all the classes will be conducted to the same level. However, it is the instructor to decide how he conducts the class and how seriously he meets or exceeds the standards. Some do not even meet standards, and since there is no quality control, the agency has no idea how low a bar their classes are taught unless there is a complaint or casualty.

AOW can be five fun dives with minimal work, or an actual learning experience with practical application.

I actually haven't heard of a bad Rescue class, not saying there arn't any, but with the seriousness of the class and how involved it is, any instructor that wanted to cut corners probably wouldn't be interested in teaching it. The ones I've attended have been quite a production.

The informed decision comes from talking to the prospective instructor about how he runs his classes, and what he expects students to achieve and learn from the class.



Bob

 

[oly5050user]

This is a strange answer to the question of what C-card training prepares someone to do. “It depends on the instructor” gives me no way to make any risk-informed decisions about what my training prepared me to do.

I tell students, first meeting, that certification means you should be able to plan, execute a dive with your buddy, without input from a dive pro. Anything else you are doing a "trust me dive" following a dive leader around on a dive . Nothing wrong with that if that is your comfort level, but realize that the dive leader is not responsible for your safety, only you are. This means not only you should be able to independently plan the dive and execute it, you should be properly equipped with gear for the dive that you know how to use, and what the limits of your training and experience allows you to do. Anything else you are fooling yourself saying you are a certified diver.

 

[MichaelMc]

+1 on Agencies get guide lines, some instructors do not follow them, or only do so half ass, others do a great job. So what the class name or instruction guidelines say may not mean that much....

A class considered very solid is GUE Fundamentals, GUE has a reputation for ensuring the level of instruction. I have no connection, but am thinking of taking it. Being in control in the water, Buoyancy/Trim/Propulsion, is a base to operating safely. It is getting more emphasis, including in standards. But with an instructor that does not believe in them, it is entirely possible to do all of OW/AOW/Rescue with no clue of them. Teachers that also teach technical diving are more likely to provide this properly.

Some Master scuba diver rating are just recognition of some number of dives and classes. Others, NAUI, are a specific class.

Rescue is always a good idea. Right after AOW might be a bit soon, but 75 dives is amble experience and more than time that you should take it.

Solo/Self Reliant rated is likely a good mark of an independent diver (or dive pair). But the skills for it are not something you would learn in its few class dives. For control in the water, Buoyancy/Trim/Propulsion, an intro to tech or cavern class could be good. From a tech diver or cave diver, not just someone that 'can teach it'. Not to take them for any increase in depth, or actually cavern/cave diving, but for their attention to control.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

This is a strange answer to the question of what C-card training prepares someone to do. “It depends on the instructor” gives me no way to make any risk-informed decisions about what my training prepared me to do.

There are some key differences in the framework from different agencies. Whatever you decide, I'd suggest first interviewing potential instructors and go into details about the class. Then choose the one that appeals most to you.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

A class considered very solid is GUE Fundamentals, GUE has a reputation for ensuring the level of instruction. I have no connection, but am thinking of taking it. Being in control in the water, Buoyancy/Trim/Propulsion, is a base to operating safely.

That and UTD Essentials (I took fundies). I recommend whatever is closer. believe that of the mainstream agencies, only RAID and SNSI have objective standards like the DIR agencies. These are agencies I'm watching. I wish them both tremendous success.