SSI or IANTD Nitrox?

[Jarhead]

AaronBBrown once bubbled...
...Drive four hours for a nitrox course!? What a waste of my time. Unless the instructor is ready to do the dives with me on my time, when I want to dive, forget it. I'm not going to pay someone to take up my time unnecessarily. I love diving just as much as anyone else here, but my dollars go to the place that makes it most convenient for me, the customer...

That's exactly what they did! I took the classroom portion here locally last November and made the dives in the gulf this past April. Can't get much more convenient than that.

PS: Any time spent diving (for any reason) in NOT wasted.

I love diving just as much as anyone else here, but ...

But won't drive four hours to dive?

 

[Soggy]

Jarhead once bubbled...
But won't drive four hours to dive?

Sure I will! I'll dive with the people I am interested in diving with. If I want to pay an instructor to help me out with skills, I will (and have). If I were taking AOW or another skills based course and it required traveling four hours away, I'll do it, no problem. At some point I'll probably take DIRf. I just object to paying extra money and giving up extra time to take a course which the in-water time, in my opinion, serves no real purpose except to make the instructor feel better. I'll still go diving on my own. I've gotten up at 4am to get to a dive site by 7:30am to hit the tides right. I was just telling someone today that pretty much the only thing that will get me out of my bed that early in the morning is diving.

That's exactly what they did! I took the classroom portion here locally last November and made the dives in the gulf this past April. Can't get much more convenient than that.

I wish all shops were that convenient! How much did they charge you?

 

[MikeFerrara]

roakey once bubbled...

So why aren't your "remedial" dive up front so they go INTO the class with the skills required (besides "the agency requires me to do so")?

I guess I knew this before, but taking the DIRF class really drove this home. DIRF saved me a ton of money (so much for DIR being a marketing ploy as it's always accused of being). If you're "going technical" it's all the basic skills required for technical diving (and ALL the skllls required for non-technical diving). It has no C card. It doesn't expect you to improve one iota during the class (good thing in my case ). But it shows you where you MUST be before you even CONSIDER the next step.

I knew I wasn't ready for Technical 1, but I didn't realize that I was THAT far away from it. Now I know EXACTLY where I have to be before I attempt the class.

And I'm sure (MHK may be able to help out here now that he's on the board) that Technical 1 doesn't do some classroom and then strap some trimix on you and go to 200 where the instructor does "remedial" work with you. You dive a safe gas at a safe depth and do skills to see if you're ready.

Apply this to Nitrox. Test skills up front and because there's NO new in-water skills to learn, teach them the formulas and give them a card.

Roak

First take note that MHK disagrees with you on this one (check the other thread).
Second I certainly can evaluate skills prior to beginning the class. However this won't reduce the cost it will increase it. I will still conduct the nitrox dives. We are not risking the students life by doing the training dives with nitrox. That is what supervision is there to avoid.

it seems pointless to debate the logic of the entire system here. I for one do the best I can with what I have. I am not at liberty to emulate the philosophy of GUE. On the other hand my students don't feel cheated as you and I do. I don't know if a DIRF would have saved me much money but it certainly would have saved me time.

Also it doesn't seem that GUE is an alternative for a recreational diver who wishes to use nitrox. It looks like they would need to take tech 1 correct?. If a DIRF grad takes a nitrox class I still need to see his stuff especially since the DIRF doesn't require them to demonstrate skills sucessfully.


I think DIRF is a great class but at present it is not a substitute for anything. And...if a diver is lucky enough to find a good instructor they don't need it at all (not that it wouldn't be good practice but there isn't anything there that should be new).

 

[raxafarian]

Aaron.... I originally thought the same as you. I've since changed my mind. Look at the situation from the viewpoint of an instructor. They are going to sign a cert. card stating that a person is certified to dive using nitrox. In a perfect world, that instructor could assume the student knows 'how' to dive. In the real world, they cannot make that assumption (for the most part... yes, they might have students they have taught before).

Yes... the "in-water" portion of a dive is no different than a dive using air. AS LONG AS MOD is not exceeded. If I was an instructor, I would want to see and evaluate the students "in-water". Yes, they should already know how to dive. I would still want to see for myself before signing MY name to a cert. card.

Realize the courses are designed to fit everyone. Yes, there are divers that they would probably feel comfortable certifying without the dives (having seen them in the water in other classes), but there are probably many people they have never seen before.

You can certainly choose your agency/instructor. It looks like you would avoid Mike's classes like he has the plague. If you are confident in your diving skills, understand and can maintain buoyancy, etc.... I can see why you feel the in water portion is a "waste". I think the majority of his students benefit.

 

[roakey]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
First take note that MHK disagrees with you on this one (check the other thread).

First off I'm surprised that no one has called me on the fact that I've changed my tune (previous to MHK's post) that a dive or dives should be done to make sure you have the required water skills.

So I don't think that MHK and I disagree, prefoficcency should be shown and yes, training on how to rescue a toxing diver should be taught. I know of no mainstream agency that requires ANY rescue skill demonstration in their Nitrox class. Note I'm not saying no one teaches them, I'm saying no AGENCY requires it.

Roak

Ps. No pro-dive person has YET to show how diving with Nitrox improves the wet experience, which is supposedly the reason for diving Nitrox after the classroom. These experience dives can be done with air and it'd be much safer while you determine if someone has the buoyancy control to dive it. Personally I think that the required Nitrox dives after the classroom is to give the student some sense of value from a class that, if you follow the mainstream agencies gudelines, gives them nothing but a couple of formulas.

 

[Soggy]

raxafarian once bubbled...
You can certainly choose your agency/instructor. It looks like you would avoid Mike's classes like he has the plague. If you are confident in your diving skills, understand and can maintain buoyancy, etc....

I would avoid his nitrox class simply because I understand that at the heart of the matter, diving nitrox is just math and physics. I don't feel the need to have someone accompany me because I understand the concepts and my bouyancy skills, while certainly not perfect, are good enough to not put myself in danger.

I can see why you feel the in water portion is a "waste".

Not a waste, but unnecessary to learn how to safely use nitrox.

I think the majority of his students benefit.

I totally agree. I'm sure they learn a ton from his class about bouyancy, trim, planning, etc....all good and important things. All I'm saying is leave that stuff for a bouyancy class and let nitrox be about nitrox. I understand his concern, but I wouldn't interpret a signature on a nitrox card as anything other than "This student knows the physics of nitrox." That is probably naive of me, though.

 

[MikeFerrara]

roakey once bubbled...

First off I'm surprised that no one has called me on the fact that I've changed my tune (previous to MHK's post) that a dive or dives should be done to make sure you have the required water skills.

So I don't think that MHK and I disagree, prefoficcency should be shown and yes, training on how to rescue a toxing diver should be taught. I know of no mainstream agency that requires ANY rescue skill demonstration in their Nitrox class. Note I'm not saying no one teaches them, I'm saying no AGENCY requires it.

Roak

Ps. No pro-dive person has YET to show how diving with Nitrox improves the wet experience, which is supposedly the reason for diving Nitrox after the classroom. These experience dives can be done with air and it'd be much safer while you determine if someone has the buoyancy control to dive it. Personally I think that the required Nitrox dives after the classroom is to give the student some sense of value from a class that, if you follow the mainstream agencies gudelines, gives them nothing but a couple of formulas.

Assuming we plan and diver well within limits I'm not sure what would be gained by diving 21%. I think we are making this too complicated. We learn theory in the class room. we apply the theory and other applicable skills under real diving conditions. We learn then we reinforce the learning by doing. It's that simple.

There are other ways I'm sure. If you were going to design a nitrox class what would it be like? What would you need to see before you signed the student off?

 

[AquaTec]

roakey once bubbled...

Ps. No pro-dive person has YET to show how diving with Nitrox improves the wet experience, which is supposedly the reason for diving Nitrox after the classroom. These experience dives can be done with air and it'd be much safer while you determine if someone has the buoyancy control to dive it. Personally I think that the required Nitrox dives after the classroom is to give the student some sense of value from a class that, if you follow the mainstream agencies gudelines, gives them nothing but a couple of formulas.

Roakey
I thought I answered this question with a questipon earlier.

The reason i like to take students on a dive, is to emphisise some of the benifits of diving nitrox. is this a skill no but it is the purpose for the nitrox course [one of them]

do they feel better after the dive, YES they do feel better

Also there is a phycological barrier about diving nitrox and maintaining a MOD, the comfort of having an instructor there is benifitial..

there are a lot of recreational divers who do have good boyancy control and situation awareness. yet they have not needed to practice this so much, they dive a saw tooth dive profile, now with nitrox they have a hard bottom. the barrier.

 

[AquaTec]

In defence of those who feel that diving skills should be a part of any nitrox course.

Most students who take this course, the course will become their highest level of certification. yes that is debatable.

but it is the card that will probably be shown to others the most, dive opperators, dive shops, etc. so when an instructor puts his name on the card without ever diving with the student, it is probably his instructor abilities that will be evailuated.

when the student has no boyance control, or maybe no diving skills at all it will be the nitrox instructors signature on the card presented.

so skill evaluation is important, is skill teaching required for the nitrox course, no. but skill accomplishment should be a part of the course, it is up to you if you wish to teach them, evaluate them, or ignor them

 

[Soggy]

AquaTec once bubbled...
so skill evaluation is important, is skill teaching required for the nitrox course, no. but skill accomplishment should be a part of the course, it is up to you if you wish to teach them, evaluate them, or ignor them

This, I can understand from an instructors point of view....It is ultimately about covering your butt. I can understand and respect that.