Should OW certified divers be taken into a deep wreck? Overhead? Thread split

[Jim Lapenta]

Gilboa also has a big helicopter. Never seen the one at dutch.

 

[NAM001]

My point for the prior comment is that when agencies give you limits,,, students when completed with training are bombarded, like in this thread, with There are no limits, pay no attention to what you learned in trainnig,,,, for what ever reason. In doing so what do we expect these students to take seriously when we as a group make a mockery of the limitations of the training agencies. What is clear to any student is that you need a qualified certifying instructor to get the card, and any bozo from that point on can qualify to acknoledge "experience". Expreience that has no standards, Experience gained through formal training is experience with standards via knoledgable ertified instructors. The card or lack of today has become nothing more than a roadblock to getting a tank filled. REasoning like there is no scuba police, there is no law, ect does not answer whether a diver can show a certificaton that says they can do the dive based on an accountable certification, beyond the certifying agency's recommended limitations. It is inconcievable to me how a new OW is considered ok to do a night dive to 80 ft/ or any depth and never been trained about loss of lighting ect but "ITS OK" is the blatant opinion of most who have any intrest in collecting GEORGES.

This thread like most others on this topic wants to dwell on the legal loophole aspects and never the divers safety. If anyone needs examples of this just read boulderjohns last post. So much so that he wont acknoledge the 130 ft line and shifts that to the insurance limit. Not to pick on johns post but does anyone apply common sence to what dives one should or should not do. A new OW has no business even in swim throughs, but its ok cause that is a suggested limit and not a binding one.

My next xstatement is a bit unfair but ill say it anyway.

Every thread of a lost/injured/dead that gets posted,,,,, without even looking at it i think, Another ill prepared or overconfident diver left thier training limits and got themselves had. Each one of the threads ends up on a discussion of who is at fault and its always the diver because trainers have thier loop holes, operators have thier loop holes. While i agree that the diver is the only one ACCOUNTABLE for thier demise there are so many more that are responsible for setting the stage. Every time we turn our head for sake of a GEORGE, we are telling every one that there are no consequence for thier actions. The other thing I see is that majority of incidents do not involve technical level divers. They have the same non existant scuba police that the rec world has but they dont get hurt like rec divers do. Is it the back plate and wing that makes it safe or not,,,, or is it more fundimental than that.

Old school i will try to remember the chopper aspect.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

Wow I think boulderjohn is just point out the obvious. It really is simple. The training agencies can only control what happens when instructors are TRAINING people under their "authority" during courses. I think it more about being REALISTIC. They can make recommendations but can not control divers actions after the course. Instructors can and do try to give supposedly competent adults the necessary information to make good choices for themselves.

Dive courses are not the only ones that operate on the principle that people have a right/responsibility to protect themselves from death or injury when trying to aid someone else. Police, fire, ambulance and first aid courses all teach that there is a point where you should ensure you don't add to the body count with YOUR body. If this is what you mean here

your buddy till something goes wrong and then you are on your own

If I do something stupid I would expect my buddy to do all that is reasonable possible but not kill themselves in the process.

Oh and by the way I was taught to always point the gun towards earth:doh:

 

[Jim Lapenta]

My biggest issue with this as I have stated before is why are "professionals", and I use the term loosely, negating previous training? Maybe my morals and ethics are too high? I just feel that if, as an instructor, I cannot take a student into an overhead in an actual class other than one that involves training for overheads, how I can then lead them into one? How can a DM, who is not allowed to teach much of anything call themselves a professional if they are also negating the training the diver received?

To me they can't. Not and still consider themselves role models. In the DM training materials for every agency I have standards for, only nine of them but hey it's a start right, DM's are supposed to be role models for new divers and students. The wording may be different but the idea is the same. Instructors are supposed to be role models as well. You don't tell someone not to do something without proper training and then lead them into those situations without that training.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

Every thread of a lost/injured/dead that gets posted,,,,, without even looking at it i think, Another ill prepared or overconfident diver left thier training limits and got themselves had.

Each one of the threads ends up on a discussion of who is at fault and its always the diver because trainers have thier loop holes,

Honestly you can't hold a trainer accountable for anything but ensuring that their students have the required skill set when they sign them off. The trainer can not control their student's behaviour off course. I am sure that if it can be proven that the trainer did not provide the required level of instruction they should, can and hopefully will be held accountable

operators have thier loop holes.

Where they can be proven to be negligent waivers can and have been deemed to be invalid.

While i agree that the diver is the only one ACCOUNTABLE for thier demise there are so many more that are responsible for setting the stage.

If you changed that statement to "there may be so many more.."...I would be in total agreement with you!

Every time we turn our head for sake of a GEORGE, we are telling every one that there are no consequence for thier actions

We are talking about adults here aren't we? If they haven't worked out the consequences thing by the time they got to the dive shop. I think most people have worked out that businesses are in business to make money not loose it:doh:

The other thing I see is that majority of incidents do not involve technical level divers. They have the same non existant scuba police that the rec world has but they dont get hurt like rec divers do. Is it the back plate and wing that makes it safe or not,,,, or is it more fundimental than that.

Perhaps I need to rethink my opinion that a disproportionate proportion of deaths occur with experienced divers who got too complacent:doh:

---------- Post added March 13th, 2015 at 09:44 PM ----------

My biggest issue with this as I have stated before is why are "professionals", and I use the term loosely, negating previous training? Maybe my morals and ethics are too high? I just feel that if, as an instructor, I cannot take a student into an overhead in an actual class other than one that involves training for overheads, how I can then lead them into one? How can a DM, who is not allowed to teach much of anything call themselves a professional if they are also negating the training the diver received?

To me they can't. Not and still consider themselves role models. In the DM training materials for every agency I have standards for, only nine of them but hey it's a start right, DM's are supposed to be role models for new divers and students. The wording may be different but the idea is the same. Instructors are supposed to be role models as well. You don't tell someone not to do something without proper training and then lead them into those situations without that training.

If a condition of maintaining their certification as a DM or Instructor is that they are "role models" I agree with you. I know of one local dive operator who would not allow their Instructors or DM's to conduct solo dives because it set a bad example for their students/clients.

I also agree that Dive operators need to carefully consider the customers are qualified for the dive they book on for. It seems to me that some Dive professionals really aren't very professional when it comes to what they are willing to do for the sake of a job!

 

[Redshift]

I also found it in my PADI OW manual. However it was about half a page in the "Dive Environments and Conditions" section under the heading "Overhead Environments". Without posting the entire couple of paragraphs on it, they stress that even if it looks safe, there may be hazards you are not aware of until it's too late. The wording they use is "If you can't swim directly up to the surface, you're in a special situation". They don't say exactly what training you need, but I notice that they seem to have a specialty certification for every type of overhead they mention in that section "wreak, cavern, ice, etc...".


In my manual it says "As a new PADI Open Water Diver, you're qualified to a maximum of 18 meters/60 feet." and on my exam, although I don't remember the exact wording, I'm certain that there was a question that reinforced the fact that we were only certified to 18m/60'.

I think it's clear enough. And why do they need to say which training is needed for overhead? It will depend on the overhead. Do they mention all the possible training needed for all types of diving an OW diver can't do? No.

In this paragraph you use qualified and certified interchangeably. The words do not mean the same thing. I would accept your quote as truth. An Open Water diver straight out of class is qualified to 60 feet. They are, however, certified to 130.

I don't want to beat this to death, because Bowl of Petunias is doing her best to keep this on topic, so if you don't believe me, try the PADI website here where it says

"With the necessary training and experience, the limit for recreational scuba diving is 40 metres/130 feet. Beginning scuba divers stay shallower than about 18 metres/60 feet. Although these are the limits, some of the most popular diving is shallower than 12 metres/40 feet, where the water’s warmer and the colors are brighter."

I think both the text mentioned by Pinecube and what you posted from PADI's website are clear. OW divers are limited to 18m/60 feet. Notice the words "with necessary training AND experience", not training or experience; "beginning scuba divers stay shallower", not should stay shallower; "Although these are limits"; limits, not one is limit, the other is recommendation...

The recreational depth limit may be 40m/130ft, but there isn't just one level of recreational divers, so I don't see the problem in acknowledging that different levels will have different limits. The maximum speed at which I can drive here is 120Km/h. That does not invalidate the fact that in a city I can only drive at 50Km/h... or 30...

But we have to also realize that OW divers are autonomous, so these rules need to be safe in a situation of two OW diving together. Are there exceptions then? Well, a clear one is during training. In that situation a diver is going past the limits of previous certifications and experience. How about when it's being guided by a more advanced diver?
I don't know if PADI directly addresses that. In Europe there is legislation that groups the different diver levels into European levels. PADI OW is an "AUTONOMOUS DIVER LEVEL 2 - EN 14153-2", which is limited to 20m, but "If accompanied by a scuba instructor, a scuba diver at level 2 – "Autonomous Diver" may gain progressive experience beyond these parameters." Does not specify it needs to be in a course.

 

[oldschoolto]

The minute that " THEY " said.... Scuba diving is FUN, FUN, FUN.... Anyone can do it.... The sport went down hill... The same thing is happening in Skydiving just on a much smaller scale... I can't help to think about the thread about the person taking a rescue diver class running out of air and bolting to the surface, Then blaming the shop and instructors... I got " REPORTED " by NetDoc for being not nice , telling them to take up bowling and it was all their own fault... NetDoc then told the poster that diving was FUN, FUN , FUN.... And they just needed to find the right shop that was better and would pass them..

Well, Diving is FUN, But it will kill you faster than you think... Most people shouldn't be doing what they are doing... Skills are a boring thing to teach and to learn... I think back to teaching my wife how to control her buoyancy with her breathing.... laying on the bottom of a pool making her go up and down like she was doing push ups... FUN , FUN , FUN....

And that's what people in business do... Tell you how great they are at it, How bad the others are... It's going to be Fun and Safe and They will be super stars when they get that C-Card... Diving is a Money Machine to a lot of people... Almost every student with his freshly printed C-card dreams and is encouraged to be a DM and INSTRUCTOR...

Jim....

 

[Redshift]

That's it, diving is fun and saying "no" to customers looks bad and is not fun at all. It's much better to say "Don't worry, we'll take you".

 

[Basking Ridge Diver]

Almost every student with his freshly printed C-card dreams and is encouraged to be a DM and INSTRUCTOR... Jim....

It is a for profit business - sales is part of the pitch - Instructors to New OW student => "think of how much better you will be if you go get AOW now... would you like to signup?" or whatever course is next for that student...

I dont blame anyone that likes to teach but it is not just teaching - it is selling your skills, courses and wares so you can continue to teach and make money. Some of it is spin and some of it is marketing...

IMO

 

[AdivingBel]

I dont blame anyone that likes to teach but it is not just teaching - it is selling your skills, courses and wares so you can continue to teach and make money. Some of it is spin and some of it is marketing...
IMO

Some of it happens on SB...