I guess its just how I do it. This thread caused me to go back into the Instructor manual last night and all I could find was 60. I think I'll stay with 30 though and mention a max of 60 like I always have.
PADI vs SDI
- Thread starter Jacq:)
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Interesting discussion and some really off the wall points.
My grandmother used to say, "A poor excuse is better than none." Come on, you don't really believe that. If a student is smart enough to remember 60 ft/min, they are smart enough to remember 1 ft every 2 seconds. If they aren't smart enough to remember that, they shouln't be diving. As for the mental math, it's simple enough, but I never left it up to them, I explained it and demonstrated it by walking across the room which really drives home the point just how slow their ascent should be.
The correct method was "Ascend slower than your smallest bubbles." Those bubbles were tiny and they expanded as they rose, so you had to constantly switch to new small bubbles. Most folks followed bubbles that were too large and therefore ascended faster than the rate of 60 ft/min. Even working perfectly (almost impossible) that rate is about twice the one we should be using.
Nope. I know PADI and YMCA require it and NAUI does not. I don't know about other agencies.
Bottom line is none of the agencies are perfect, I can list lots of things I'd like to see changed in all of their programs. The 60 ft/minute is one thing I'd like to see PADI change, but honestly, it's a minor point. If I were suddenly allowed to change one thing and only one thing about PADI's program, I'd have to give it lots of long and careful thought, but the ascent rate is one thing I wouldn't even consider, it's way too far down the list. Put it in perspective, everyone was teaching 60 ft/minute until approximately 10 or 15 years ago. In an emergency, I'm still going to bring an injured diver up at that rate (perhaps a tad faster).
fisherdvm:
My grandmother used to say, "A poor excuse is better than none." Come on, you don't really believe that. If a student is smart enough to remember 60 ft/min, they are smart enough to remember 1 ft every 2 seconds. If they aren't smart enough to remember that, they shouln't be diving. As for the mental math, it's simple enough, but I never left it up to them, I explained it and demonstrated it by walking across the room which really drives home the point just how slow their ascent should be.
Papa_Bear:
The correct method was "Ascend slower than your smallest bubbles." Those bubbles were tiny and they expanded as they rose, so you had to constantly switch to new small bubbles. Most folks followed bubbles that were too large and therefore ascended faster than the rate of 60 ft/min. Even working perfectly (almost impossible) that rate is about twice the one we should be using.
fisherdvm:
Nope. I know PADI and YMCA require it and NAUI does not. I don't know about other agencies.
Bottom line is none of the agencies are perfect, I can list lots of things I'd like to see changed in all of their programs. The 60 ft/minute is one thing I'd like to see PADI change, but honestly, it's a minor point. If I were suddenly allowed to change one thing and only one thing about PADI's program, I'd have to give it lots of long and careful thought, but the ascent rate is one thing I wouldn't even consider, it's way too far down the list. Put it in perspective, everyone was teaching 60 ft/minute until approximately 10 or 15 years ago. In an emergency, I'm still going to bring an injured diver up at that rate (perhaps a tad faster).
FYI the CESA is performed from a depth of 6m/20ft minimum not to exceed 9m/30ft. I would guess most instructors, especially those doing multiple CESA's would prefer more the minimum depth for this exercise. 60ft. per minute ascent rate is still taught in the book, but any competent instructor is going to stress a 30ft. ascent rate at least the last 30ft. or from a safety stop.
D.C.C.
D.C.C.
Yaaaaaaaawwwwwwn n nnnnnnn......
Every single agency has to teach to the standards approves by the Recreational Scuba Training Council. It's an uber-body that sets the standards, folks, and even the most-hateable (insert-your-own-pet-hate-agency-here) agency meets those training standards. A well-taught (PADI/SSI/SDI/NAUI/PSAI/YMCA) (delete as appropriate) course will meet the standards set by the RSTC and will, therefore, be a vaild diver education course. A course taught by an idiot who is just out to make a buck in the least time possible will, on the other hand, be a course taught by an idiot who, etc etc.
Probably already been addressed in the thread, but I'm on dial-up out here and I can't be bothered to read through the pages and pages of uninformed nonsense that follows any agency post. But I do want to say this: yes, PADI probably turns out too many instructors and too many of them end up working in the churn-em-out cert factories, BUT people who love diving and have an understanding of what they are doing can teach somebody to dive using PADI standards. And in the end, that's all you can say about any agency.
If you want to know why PADI teach particular ascent rates, read the user manuals for the RDP. If you can't understand why the RDP has different ascent rates from your dive computer or the personal prejudice of your chosen dive guru, go away and learn about decompression theory.
Every single agency has to teach to the standards approves by the Recreational Scuba Training Council. It's an uber-body that sets the standards, folks, and even the most-hateable (insert-your-own-pet-hate-agency-here) agency meets those training standards. A well-taught (PADI/SSI/SDI/NAUI/PSAI/YMCA) (delete as appropriate) course will meet the standards set by the RSTC and will, therefore, be a vaild diver education course. A course taught by an idiot who is just out to make a buck in the least time possible will, on the other hand, be a course taught by an idiot who, etc etc.
Probably already been addressed in the thread, but I'm on dial-up out here and I can't be bothered to read through the pages and pages of uninformed nonsense that follows any agency post. But I do want to say this: yes, PADI probably turns out too many instructors and too many of them end up working in the churn-em-out cert factories, BUT people who love diving and have an understanding of what they are doing can teach somebody to dive using PADI standards. And in the end, that's all you can say about any agency.
If you want to know why PADI teach particular ascent rates, read the user manuals for the RDP. If you can't understand why the RDP has different ascent rates from your dive computer or the personal prejudice of your chosen dive guru, go away and learn about decompression theory.
Actually, no. Only agencies who are members must have standards that meet or exceed those set by the RSTC. Standards are not approved by the RSTC. Not all agencies are members.
Each agency sets their own standards, nit the RSTC. The RSTC standards are extremely low. If an agency has standards that doesn't far exceed those of the RSTC, they have serious problems. The RSTC is a joke.
Valid by what definition? Certainly not vaild by any definition that includes quality.
I would sure be interested fromwhat data base @neras above can make such a broad stroke statement. "Originally Posted by nereas
Alex, virtually no one doubts that NAUI has the most challenging materials and trains the best divers. The issue is whether any given student has what it takes to get through NAUI's programs. They do not guarantee certifications, like many of the other agencies do.
It's hard to believe that any agency "guarantee certifications" PADI and SDI Instructor
Alex, virtually no one doubts that NAUI has the most challenging materials and trains the best divers. The issue is whether any given student has what it takes to get through NAUI's programs. They do not guarantee certifications, like many of the other agencies do.
It's hard to believe that any agency "guarantee certifications" PADI and SDI Instructor
seaducer
Contributor
Well, my first OW course was PADI way back (for me) in 1991, they taught real buddy breathing, ascend at 60FPM, and we did a CESA the length of the pool, sorry not sure how long that was. I recertified in 1998 and they pointed out the RDP suggests a max rate of 60FPM, but they told us virtually everybody is recommending 30FPM, and while PADI no longer requires real buddy breathing, we did it anyway, though in the pool only. Our CESA was the same as before.
Personally I think that PADI doesn't want to reprint all their materials to reflect the 30FPM recomendation. Since 60FPM was the norm for decades with no real ill effects I don't have a major problem with it, but it would still be nice to get on the same page as everyone else, and all the PADI instructors I know feel the same and teach it that way.
I am not an instructor, but if I were in a position to change the PADI OW course, and had to make a snap decision I would add the AOW core dives and skills to OW. The stats don't back me up, but my gut feeling is that newly certified OW divers are really not experienced enough to go out and dive on their own, but they are perfectly capable of doing so based on the card.
And that is not a knock on PADI, but all agencies I know of...
Everybody likes to bash PADI, I guess because they are the biggest agency, but some people are in some pretty thin paned galss houses here...
Personally I think that PADI doesn't want to reprint all their materials to reflect the 30FPM recomendation. Since 60FPM was the norm for decades with no real ill effects I don't have a major problem with it, but it would still be nice to get on the same page as everyone else, and all the PADI instructors I know feel the same and teach it that way.
I am not an instructor, but if I were in a position to change the PADI OW course, and had to make a snap decision I would add the AOW core dives and skills to OW. The stats don't back me up, but my gut feeling is that newly certified OW divers are really not experienced enough to go out and dive on their own, but they are perfectly capable of doing so based on the card.
And that is not a knock on PADI, but all agencies I know of...
Everybody likes to bash PADI, I guess because they are the biggest agency, but some people are in some pretty thin paned galss houses here...
nereas
Contributor
- Messages
- 2,735
- Reaction score
- 6
- # of dives
- 500 - 999
I hope you do not teach this.
Because if you do the math, then 100 / 30 = 3 mins to ascend from 100 fsw/ffw.
How many people do you know that can stay conscious for 3 mins on a single breath of air? Can you?? Ever tried it yourself???
But not to hijack the thread on this trivia, the OP was asking about a comparison between SDI and PADI. ESA/CESA would certainly be taught in both. So the ESA/CESA issue would not be relevant.
Archaic dive tables versus modern dive computers, and the time and effort spent learning each, is a more relevant issue for the O/P.
Similar threads
