Rec Diving Then vs. Now

[fnfalman]

No glibs because inquiring mind does want to know.

Has anybody gone through OW training, say, 20-years ago, then recently attended same training from the same agency? I really like to know how much the current training regimentations had laxed in standards as opposed to back then. PADI/NAUI/SSI/LA County/BSAC then versus the same agencies nowadays.

I have kids that work for me who take scuba classes as PE classes in college and their experiences also varied widely. One claimed that he did rescue training, Nitrox, no mask underwater drill, lots of freediving activities. The others claim they did the same as basic OW for PADI/NAUI/SSI.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

Has anybody gone through OW training, say, 20-years ago, then recently attended same training from the same agency? I really like to know how much the current training regimentations had laxed in standards as opposed to back then. PADI/NAUI/SSI/LA County/BSAC then versus the same agencies nowadays.

I became a "certified" diver 5/23/92, when I was living in Kapa'a, Kauai. Nearly 19 years later, I am a Maui dive instructor/guide.

From the "student" perspective of my OW class compared to the OW classes I teach today, not much has changed. From the perspective of plain old recreational diving, the personal dive computer is the main difference, with a slower 30' per minute ascent rate the only actual physical change in diving, afais.

....

In our first 5 dives after certification my classmates and I did a 90' wreck dive, a few cavern dives and a night dive, all without a guide. I now get paid to guide new divers on 100' wreck dives, cavern dives and night dives.

Other than cost, the only real difference is my Suunto Viper that has been hp hose mounted since ~ '03.

We practiced buddy breathing back then; no buddy breathing now. We swam 200 yards back then; 300 yards of mask, snorkel, finning is accepted now. CESA may have been from 40 feet deep; CESA is now 20-30 feet deep.

(post #39 of this thread)

 

[robbcayman]

It cracks me up hearing stories from the past generation. I'm in several different hobbies and hunting is another one I'm in. There are a lot of guys who detest guys who use new muzzleloaders with inline barrels, shotgun primers, scopes etc.. They always say it was better back with traditional and they killed deer dead. It's like innovation threatens some people.

I think the appeal really lies with nostalgia. A lot of guys detest new innovations, even if they make the prior equipment better. I think the same is true with diving gear. Computers, rugged BCD's, split fins etc.. make diving easier, IMHO. However, if you like older gear then stick with that. You may not need a computer, split fins etc.. but it makes it easier, safer and more comfortable for most divers.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

Computers, rugged BCD's, split fins etc.. make diving easier, IMHO. However, if you like older gear then stick with that. You may not need a computer, split fins etc.. but it makes it easier, safer and more comfortable for most divers.

The computer I have is 10 years old and is a big improvement over computers 20 years ago, but to say that a diver who knows how to use tables is safer by not using tables seems pretty ignorant to me; many of the best technical divers on the planet do not use a PDC (at least not in PDC mode).

The BCD's I own are all more than 10 years old, all have more than 1000 pool dives and more than 1000 ocean dives, but my original used rental BC bought 19 years ago was perhaps more rugged.

Are split fins really making diving easier, safer or more comfortable for MOST divers?

Diving has not changed much in 20 years, for THE VAST MAJORITY of divers (afais).

 

[novicediver]

Diving is diving. I learned with a horse collar bc, backpack, weight belt, no octopus, oral inflator and it had a CO2 inflator that I never tested. My mask was from some sporting good store and the fins were used tusa's that I bought for 40 dollars from the shop. I was 14 in 1985 when I certified. I still don't use a computer, prefer farmer john's and the kind of diving I do would be categorized as much diving or dork diving. I stay away from any dogma, have "only" an OW cert, and I am completely comfortable in my abilities and limits.

 

[Teamcasa]

No glibs because inquiring mind does want to know.

Has anybody gone through OW training, say, 20-years ago, then recently attended same training from the same agency? I really like to know how much the current training regimentations had laxed in standards as opposed to back then. PADI/NAUI/SSI/LA County/BSAC then versus the same agencies nowadays.

My original training in the 70's was significantly more involved and comprehensive than the PADI OW and AOW I recently took with my wife.

But, she's now certified and does pretty well with the skills she learned in class. I helps that she still loves to dive and has gained a ton more experience than any class can provide.

 

[fnfalman]

My original training in the 70's was significantly more involved and comprehensive than the PADI OW and AOW I recently took with my wife.

But, she's now certified and does pretty well with the skills she learned in class. I helps that she still loves to dive and has gained a ton more experience than any class can provide.

Dave,

Was your original training with PADI? That's what I want to know. Yes, I know that back in the days, students have to do pushup with tanks on back and masks on face and all that stuff. But I'm truly curious because people kept bringing it up about how much harder it was back in the days.

Has LA County relaxed its standards through the years? Had PADI/NAUI/SSI basic OW classes become easier?

I would like to know if the agencies themselves had relaxed the standards. Comparing trainings between two different agencies is pretty much worthless. I'll bet that the UTD or GUE Rec Diver class is a lot more stringent than the PADI/NAUI/SSI class. But is it fair to compare them to the more common agencies? What if you were to compare training from back in the badass old days to the current GUE/UTD Rec Diver training? Which one is tougher? Apples to oranges.

That's why I just wanted people with experiences of OW trainings from back then and now by the same agencies to give feedbacks.

 

[fnfalman]

We practiced buddy breathing back then; no buddy breathing now. We swam 200 yards back then; 300 yards of mask, snorkel, finning is accepted now. CESA may have been from 40 feet deep; CESA is now 20-30 feet deep.

(post #39 of this thread)

Sorry, I must have skipped over post #39 somehow.:shocked2:

Anyway, but a mere 3 years ago, in October of 2007 to be exact, when I did my PADI OW class, we had to do the 200-yds swim, buddy breath (only in pool session), and CESA was around 30-ft. Our AOW deep dive went all the way down to 130-ft.

Maybe it was just this instructor.

 

[Teamcasa]

Dave,

Was your original training with PADI? That's what I want to know. ...

No. It was a YMCA class.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

Sorry, I must have skipped over post #39 somehow.:shocked2:

Anyway, but a mere 3 years ago, in October of 2007 to be exact, when I did my PADI OW class, we had to do the 200-yds swim, buddy breath (only in pool session), and CESA was around 30-ft. Our AOW deep dive went all the way down to 130-ft.

If someone had not been able to swim 200 yards but did snorkel 300 yards, PADI Standards for at least the past 10 years would say that someone has "passed" the swim requirements.

Buddy Breathing was an "optional" skill for confined water training up until a couple years ago; I do not think Buddy Breathing is even an option in the current PADI training.

PADI Standards used to allow CESA from depths as deep as 60 feet (maybe even deeper), but now I believe 30 feet deep is the deepest by Standards.

I'm sure you are aware that the AOW Deep Dive Standards are no deeper than 100 feet, unless the Instructor has written permission to go a little deeper due to the site; there is no way they would give permission for 130 feet.

Maybe it was just this instructor.