PADI vs SDI

[Walter]

Actually, this was the original statement. "Walter, I would not include "PADI" in any sentence together with the word "quality."

No arguments there.

This thread is about SDI versus PADI, so that's the two agencies that need to be addressed.

Perhaps in general, but you quoted me and were replying to a question which I posed. That question did not include SDI or any other agency except PADI.

The quality between those two agencies and the Instructors therein are where the focus. If you want to go outside of that, you should have mentioned it.

Reread the question of mine that you quoted in your post. I believe you will see it was not outside that, but was, in fact, narrowed to a more specific topic.

Now thats an issue that is debatable, but instead of writing a book about it, let's stay on point.

What part is debatable? Drop by, I'll show you PADI standards from 1972, 1977 and 2002. It is a fact that they've removed a great deal of skills from their standards over the years.

PADI rewrote the OW class in a manner that would allow more people to become certified.

No. They rewrote their class in a manner that encouraged the instant gratification crowd to get certified. No one (with the exception of non-swimmers after 2000) passing the class today would not have been able to pass the class using PADI standards from the 70s. In fact, the standards from the 70s (assuming someone who actually knows how to teach is conducting the class) are actually easier with the skills that were later taken out.

Skills were changed, added or deleted as accidents dictated.

Do you actually believe anything except the market has driven changes in PADI standards?

Since PADI started certifing divers, the amount of divers have increased exponentially, while the amount of accidents has not changed much. Hmmm, lets see what that tells you about the quality of PADI instruction.

It tells me nothing about the quality of PADI instruction. First, I don't believe accidents are the best measure of the quality of instruction. Over the years, I've seen lots of accidents prevented by fast acting DMs. I've personally rescued (and stopped them from being added to the statistics) over 30 quality trained divers. Second, there are no valid accident statistics about diving. No one knows how many divers there are. No one knows how many dives are made in any given time period. No one knows how many diving accidents take place. Third, even an inadequate amount of instruction is likely to be better than no instruction at all. The time periods you'd like to compare are ones in which a very large portion of divers received no instruction at all and one in which the majority of divers are trained by PADI. If the statistics usually quoted were valid (they aren't), I wouldn't try to use them to show PADI's doing a good job. Fourth, in days of yore, divers were diving. Today, a very large number of dives are made with a professional holding the hands (often literally) of the "divers" to keep them from hurting themselves. They've had to resort to this in many cases because the divers are so poorly trained that they can't dive on their own.

 

[nereas]

PADI= Pay Another Dollar In

or:

Pay And Dive Immediately

 

[nereas]

Here is why it doesn't matter! Your on a live aboard dive boat and it is your 3rd day, now your on your third dive of the day at 100fsw and your computer dies! Now what? You going to do the tables in your head? You going to carry them and sit down on a coral head and figure out whats up? Are you going to make a safe accent to the hag bar and do 5 minutes instead of 3? At a hundred feet some couldn't add three numbers let along do tables! So carry a back up hockey Puck and do a little extra on the hang bar. The Puck has been with you you're back in business! First diving is pretty simple these days within rec limits and all agencies want you, they want your dollar, so be a part of all of them and stop criticizing each one of them! Capitalism has a way of weeding out the weak! There is good and bad in all of them because they are us!

If you have a choice between PADI and anything else, it does matter, and you are normally better off with anything else.

And if you have an SDI instructor available to you, that is one of the best choices that you could ask for.

Regarding dive computers, I personally recommend always using a good one, with a backup. My backup is another dive computer.

Regarding dive planning, I recommend using deco software, if you have it. Then after planning your dive, dive your plan with a dive computer. Then you would be cutting edge.

Most dive computers allow you to plan NDL dives with their features instead.

I do not recommend any of the in-your-head or on-the-fly methods for NDL or deco diving. They are fine, and they sort of work, a little, but they are not very precise, and therefore they are not worth the risk factor that comes with using them.

You can dive like a cave man, without computers, if you want, but in this modern day and age there is simply no need.

 

[Walter]

And if you have an SDI instructor available to you, that is one of the best choices that you could ask for.

Sorry, but you'll have to come up with more than, "they don't teach dive tables," to convince me they they have any quality in their classes. If that is truly your only reason for thinking they are excellent, why do you believe NAUI is better? In case you weren't aware, NAUI still requires dive tables.

 

[Scubakevdm]

Ummm, that's 60 feet per minute, SSI and other agencies are half of that, they don't say to make sure you're going at least 30 feet per minute MINIMUM, it's 30 feet per minute MAXIMUM.

I got a kick out of the 5 point ascent. They made a lot out of very little, lol.

SDI's recommended ascent rate is the safe rate indicated by the computer. Their book doesn't address the eventuality of a computer croaking on the dive, or how one should gauge their ascent with a watch at 30 fpm, 60 fpm or otherwise. I haven't made it all the way through this thread yet, but the inadequate levels of instruction found throughout the industry is one of my personal crusades. I work in a shop that had intended to offer SDI instruction, but have refused to cross over because I feel that their OW program is inadequate, and want no part of teaching it.

 

[Dave Distel]

My work is done here. I'm now off to straighten out the "splits vs paddle" crowd.

That made my day.

 

[Scubakevdm]

The eRDP is not the wheel. The eRDP is simply the table, in an electronic form. I think it is a stupid piece of equipment... But, some folks probably like it.

Whe wheel is not stone age technology. It is the same type of data in dive computers. It is very unique and interesting to use. It is as close as you can get to a computer, without having one.

Don't knock the wheel until you have learned how to use it. It doesn't matter whose data was used to construct the wheel, the fact that some ingenious person put the data in such form makes me want to pat him/her on the back.

I like the wheel too. It's much more precise.

 

[Scubakevdm]

I can't stand it anymore. My OW cert is with SDI and I was REQUIRED to be proficient with the use of tables and then demonstrate that proficiency during the written examination..

I don't know how it was back when you were certified, but that's certainly not the case anymore.

 

[Scubakevdm]

If you sign up at a local college for a logic class, and take it, then you would perhaps understand afterwards that PADI's multitude of certifications tells you absolutely nothing about its quality.

More relevant to PADI's multitude of certifications would be that they are fast.

I have never seen any reference in PADI or any other agency's standards that put the class on a time line.

 

[fisherdvm]

I suggest that we end this silly thread. One troll lead us off... and it doesn't end.