The Philosophy of Diver Training

[ReefHugger]

Thalassamania:

I don't think his point had anything to do with what each agency thinks graduates of it's first level program are (or are not) qualified to do.

You're correct in that he did not make any comparison of first level certs. But, this is the very point I was trying (probably poorly) to make. By not doing so, the (imo) important comparison fell out of consideration.....kinda dropped off the table.

I really consider this first level to be especially important since the majority of divers stop here.

 

[Thalassamania]

I don't think so, because what you are comparing is the agencies' self appraisal of what they believe their students to be capable of. It is quite possible that an impartial outside observer might find CMAS and BSAC too conservative and/or PADI overly optimistic.

 

[DCBC]

I don't know, that's for sure. But scuba seems to defy logic - plenty of people that look like they should die just don't. Do a lot of people die trying to save people that shouldn't have been certified? Any more than other 'adventure' sports?

I have acted as an expert witness in 2 cases where a diver ran into trouble through his own negligence and ended up killing the would be rescuer. In both of these cases, (both which occurred in Ontario, Canada) the rescuer did not have any rescue training. I could list the certification agency of these "certified divers," but on SB, the truth is often called bashing or some other nefarious motive is suspected.

And have you considered that it might be better to get a higher volume of divers at a lower standard out there from a conservation point of view? We need large numbers more than small batches of gurus. We need to bring conservation to the general consciousness and I think I believe that means making access to the oceans more accessible.

I for one am going to ensure that your son or daughter are given the requisite skill-sets to dive safely. If you are suggesting that this isn't needed, that's worthy of discussion. If you want other people's children inadequately trained because you arbitrarily want to generate greater numbers or increase revenue, that's something else.

I can see the benefit of increased numbers from a conservation perspective, but for this to be feasible, people would have to stay with diving, not simply take the course and end-up dropping out. I believe we need to increase the safety margin in diving, so government doesn't regulate everything; like it has done in Quebec and as I understand they are starting to do in Europe.

Regardless of training agency, if the minimum training time is increased, it's reasonable that divers will possess greater knowledge and diving competence. I believe that this will strengthen the industry, not weaken it.

 

[Walter]

Wow... why did so many of your righteously trained students need rescuing in the first place?

Pete, you know it wasn't his students that needed rescuing.

 

[Kingpatzer]

Secondly I believe that we are all about teaching scuba to be a fun sport which doesn't necessarily equate with "easy".

The problem is that scuba is easy. Anyone who insists it isn't is lying to you.

 

[The Chairman]

The problem is that scuba is easy. Anyone who insists it isn't is lying to you.

and the congregation said "Amen!"

It ain't rocket science after all!

 

[Walter]

The problem is that scuba is easy.

It is easy. It's extremely easy. Hook up the regulator to the tank, strap it on, put on a mask, put on fins, toss on a weight belt, jump in the water, swim around and don't hold your breath. What could be easier?

I think we all agree that while SCUBA diving really is that easy, there is more to learn before we'd recommend turning someone out on their own. On the other hand, it could be done and in the past, it was. How much more is essential to making a diver relatively safe? That's where we disagree.

Anyone who insists it isn't is lying to you.

Or maybe they have a fear to over come or maybe they are having trouble learning one of those skills. Everything is easy once you've learned it.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

The problem is that scuba is easy. Anyone who insists it isn't is lying to you.

Depends on the conditions and circumstances.

Scuba diving in tropical, vacation areas is easy. Diving the walls of British Columbia or the wrecks of the northeast ... not so easy ... especially if you have to deal with weather or current.

Scuba diving is exceptionally easy when everything goes right. It's when things go wrong that it becomes difficult. Most times that difficulty has less to do with skills or physical exertion than it does when managing stress and making good decisions. The advantage to the well-trained diver at that point becomes one of bandwidth ... having the ability to think through and resolve what might be a simple problem without having to struggle with fundamental skills or waste effort trying to avoid things like corking to the surface or stirring up muck and wrecking your visibility.

Scuba diving is easy ... scuba diving with decent skills is easier.

Which would YOU prefer?

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Walter]

Scuba diving in tropical, vacation areas is easy.

Bob, things go wrong everywhere. When things go wrong, diving suddenly isn't all that easy regardless of where you happen to be diving.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Bob, things go wrong everywhere. When things go wrong, diving suddenly isn't all that easy regardless of where you happen to be diving.

True ... but tropical diving usually means better conditions, less gear, and DM's to plan and supervise your dive (OK, not for YOU ... but the majority of tropical divers).

The fact is that the more challenging the conditions, the more gear you have to use, the more stuff you have to think about, the easier it is for things to go wrong.

Another fact is that the majority of dive training isn't about how to dive when everything goes right ... it's about what to do when something goes wrong.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)