To those considering an OW class...

[Matsya]

I'm not aware of any PADI restriction saying OW cert. divers shouldn't dive deeper than 60 ft (which is around 18 meters). I don't think they are supposed to do any OW cert. dives deeper than that. But, beyond your cert. dives, I don't think there is any regulation, at least not one that's enforced.

Deep dives are different than a 40 ft. dive, I'll give you that. But, all it takes is one in your AOW cert. process & PADI says you're "qualified" to do deep dives. So, I've done over 50 dives, not sure right now exactly how many were "deep" but probably 1/3 of them were. If it helps, I did all of them with my PADI divemaster friend as my buddy.

Absolutely. There is a PADI "recommendation" (it can only be recommendation because obviously it cannot be enforced). With Open Water certification you are NOT SUPPOSED to exceed 18 metres/60 feet. The fact that you were not made aware of this is in itself a reflection of improper instruction.

IN the AOW course you are made aware of the risks in deep diving. SO what PADI "qualification to do deep dives" means is that you have now been made aware of the risks of deep diving and are expected to manage them !!!

 

[Fotoz4FX]

So how long should someone wait after being certified before taking the 2 day AOW? Ok bad way to state it. How many dives should one have before hand? The class is quick and someone told me that use to they wanted you to have some dives in and know what your doing. When I was finishing up my OW the instructor said if we wanted we could take the AOW right away. He said its good before you start to pick up bad habits.

Thoughts?
Stacy

Stacy, asking how many dives is akin to the question of how old can you be to learn. Unfortunately, PADI and others seem to think age is a determining factor and the number of dives should not be either.

Skill is not developed in quantity but rather in the quality of dives made. Most students get told what to put into their dive log and rest assured from what I've seen (even in some of mine) that dive didn't educate squat. I've done hundreds of dives teaching students that were logged and I logged them because a student might need or want to refer to a particular event during a dive that I may have added on their summary (I do write information on student log pages for their improvement).

I think it's a good idea for OW divers to seek educators to dive with so they may hone their skills further by questioning and being evaluated to a level where their 'mentor(s)' might then recommend the next logical step of proceeding to Advanced levels.

Unfortunately, PADI professes that advanced skills get incorporated into dive 5 to introduce the student into the Advanced thought... a marketing ploy that I refuse to do on the first certified dive... I usually accompany them and discuss the dive both before doing it and after so I can point out bravos and what ifs that are food for stimulating conversation during our campfire sit around. I've been fortunate to have numerous students call me aside to tell me that I have been so helpful to their improvement yet at the same time my Senior instructor just hounds me to push them through to the next level (as does the manager who is up his butt hole).

I recently left that Shop and have since gone over to Mar-Vel where I have been received well by the staff and customers alike.

Age or quantity should not be determining factors is what I'm trying to say with all this elaboration... they aren't qualifying agents for making determinations of level of competence.

I'll shut my trap now.

 

[Twiddles]

Read most of the sixteen pages =). Have a couple comments, first off I did the resort course. Spent 3.5 days doing it and enjoyed (well not really) the hell out of it =). I spent the first two nites of the coures reading 250 pages and doing dam quizes. I am a bit disappointed to see so much chest thumping going on about how unprepared I and all the other "short" course divers are going to be. Fact is, it usually the person pointing the finger who is least prepared. I learned the basics of diving ( I havent mastered --it). I learned my tables I learned about bouyancy control and how important it is and I learned how to take my gear off under water and put it back on, I learned all sort of things in those 3.5 days. All that I learned means I can dive safely to 60' not because some instructor who wants to boast about how hard things used to be and how easy I have it now. But because I know my gear, myself and the very finite limits of my ability and experience. I know I NEED a buddy, I know I need MORE DIVES (not just for the experience =). I know I need practice on my bouyancy (certain im spelling this wrong) although I can hover and rise and fall just using my lung capacity, I can even do it with my bcd empty =).

Most of all I know that I have common sense and a belief in what I have been taught. For some people 3.5 days may not be enough, for some people it may be too long (maybee somebody has done 50 rope dives under supervison). The point is the class isnt about making you a diver, its about teaching you what the minimum skills you must have are and about instilling confidence in your abilities with those minimums. Once again as has been chanted on a thousand posts on this forum, its about how well you were taught, how well you retain, how well you perform with what you have been taught. I have seen men with 10 years experience freeze and dam near die, I have seen students with almost no experience do remarkable things (rock climbing). Because you spent 3 months learning to dive means you are a better diver than someone who spent 3.5 days (at least I would hope you are). You could still freeze, you could still make a stupid mistake. Most would say you are less likely to make a mistake and I would agree. How diffrent are you from me? If you spent 3 months learning and you have 4 dives or even 10 dives? If you think you are any diffrent you are wrong and likely on your way to becoming one of those cocky "experienced" divers.

Give people some respect, some of us know our limits and are quite capable of saying no not ready for that yet, or even dam I dont think I have that yet, could we go over it a few more times? Hell if the urge hits me I might even do a refresher before my next dive and I didnt even have some instuctor there to tell me I needed it.

 

[MikeFerrara]

No, of course I wouldn't want the untrained to operate on me. Isn't that what I said? But remember the entire quote (not edited and taken out of context). The OW C-card represents:I don't want the newest surgeon, but I'm not about to tell the AMA or state boards that their requirements are not sufficient. They stand as the reputable accrediting agencies, as do the certification agencies for recreational diving. They have determined the minimum level required for some autonomy. Notice, no one said "Optimal," or "maximum." It is the amount required to go and get more experience.

The recreational diving certifications aren't accredited by any one as far as I know. They are just companies selling a product. After being subjected to their advertising you may be of the opinion that they are experts in diving but after teaching for a couple of them, I don't see them as experts.

They haven't determined the minimum required other than from a marketing stand point. they know what they want to sell and they know what they are able to sell.

Excellent suggestion. What can I say? Choice is always good.
Unfortunately, it is also somewhat Quixotic. It is the available choice, between longer and more involved training, and the (for better or worse) accelerated/abbreviated course that the public is exercising their choice, and it is not, apparently, in favor of the more rigorous option. Those offering the more difficult course (your University, for example, as well as mine) are not seeing a flood of applicants.

Actually most new divers don't really have a choice. Most shops are offering similar courses and if there is anything else out there they aren't likely to find it. If there is anything else they could or should have, there isn't any one who will inform them of it. Choice is fine, so lets give them a choice.

I have no doubt that you jumped through more hoops, and I have no doubt that you are a very good diver. But:
All the pool time in the world will not create a diver who doesn't silt the bottom. I have never seen anyone who could silt the bottom of a pool. Conceivably, it could actually hurt the student divers' skills: "Wow! I'm silting up the cave! Funny, that never happened in all those hours in the pool!"

If I'm understanding your point correctly, I disagree. You absolutely can teach skills in class and confined water that enable a new diver not to silt. By teaching them the mechanics of trim, body position/control, finning techniques and providing time enough to practice in confined water, the result will be an OW class that gets through the OW portion of their training remarkably silt free. They then have the skills needed to build on rather than just practicing bad habits.

Now this doesn't have to take a very long time. It makes learning easier for the students and it makes teaching easier on the instructor. However, the skills needed aren't required by standards at all. Many instructors aren't qualified to evaluate the potential value of teaching this way because they were never taught those skills either.

the blind leading the blind.

Like it or not, buoyancy and fin control come from actually diving. How do you practice staying level for an ascent and a 15' safety stop in a 12' pool? Like it or not, I have actually heard surgeons say (tongue in cheek, I hope) that "you gotta' kill a few to get good at it."

Again, I disagree. In class and confined water a student learns the mechanics and practices the techniques. When a student can demonstrate basic scuba skills horizontal a midwater in a shallow pool, the will do just fine in OW. If a students can do a slow controlled ascent/descent in the pool the are ready to try it in OW.

When we take students to OW without teaching these skills, it's a mess. When we certify them without teaching these skills, the mess goes on possibly without end.

 

[MikeFerrara]

This is exactly where the changes need to occur--at the instructor level. Very well said Jerry.

I don't agree Jim.

If an instructor teaches to his agencies standards in the manner they were taught and tested on when they became an instructor then they are, by definition, a good instructor. However, if the results are not what is desired, then it's the agency that is lacking. If you can't use your agencies training standards (to the letter and exactly as written) then you need to step up and demand MORE from the agency. You are the real customer of the agency. You can become an instructor for any agency you wish and issue any card you want. Make the agencies compete.

Of course instructors and shops do pressure agencies but shops and instructors are typically interested in getting more students through and are in favor of reducing requirements. the agencies respond in order to keep their customers which are of course the shops and instructors...and NOT the students.

We can't expect instructors to teach material that they were never taught. We can't expect them to teach material that they were never taught to teach. Why should we expect them to write their own course and assume that risk.

What are we paying the agency for anyway?

 

[Thalassamania]

In your haste to beat the dead horse I fear that you're missing the point.
The problem is that PADI (and the others) lie. They advertise diving as "safe" and use that excuse to reduce the required training.

I have no problem with turning folks loose after they read one book and have no other training, as long as they have an honest explanation of the risks, not, "diving is safe and here's training that is clearly inadequate to make you safe." That's wrong. honest informed consent should be what it's about.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Mistakes are unacceptable in medicine, obviously because people's lives are in your hands. It was a lose comparison to diving. Dive certification after dive certification doesn't mean you'll never make a grave mistake. Unfortunately, many diving deaths involve highly skilled & certified divers. Point is, diving is one of those sports where it makes sense to restrict participation to those who have been deemed competent & are thus certified according to PADI or NAUI or whoever's standards.

Going by documents like the DAN report, one of the leading causes of diving accidents is poor skills. Divers with little training and/or little recent experience are a high risk group and buoyancy control problems are reported in a large percentage of dives that end badly.

In the original post, it was stated that "diving, like many sports, isn't much fun unless you've been given the skills to do properly and those skills can't be learned in two days." I disagree with that. I think you can learn the skills required to dive in a 2 day PADI approved course. Doesn't mean you'll have experienced everything diving has to offer, both good & bad. But, you should be ready for everything a recreational dive has. Doesn't mean you'll do it perfect the first time, but you're not likely to die either. OW cert. doesn't mean you should go on a 110 foot dive as your first real OW dive. But, you could probably do it as one of your first ten dives. I did with no problem. Maybe someone else couldn't do it but, according to PADI, you can get your AOW right after OW so you could be making your deep dive pretty soon after OW cert.

I disagree that the needed skills can be learned in any length class because the most important skills aren't taught at all.

I concede that you are unlikely to die because of it. However, I dived for years before ever being certified and I didn't die either. One reason that even a poorly trained diver is unlikely to die sis that we can drop to the bottom, walk around for a while and climb the rope back up and there isn't usually anything fatal about that. On the other hand, if you examine, dives where problems do occur, I think you'll see that the average certified divers doesn't stand much of a chance all of a sudden.

Bottom line is diving is supposed to be fun. It's a very equipment oriented sport that can have a very negative impact on the human body. It makes sense to have some sort of training/certification in order to do it safely. PADI, NAUI, DAN, etc, etc. are all doing a great job with certifications, studies, recommendations, continuing education, etc, etc. Let's not kill the industry by making the certifications more complicated & lengthy than necessary.

On one hand you seem to be saying that divers need the training that agencies offer but that we shouldn't expect much from the agencies. Which is it?

I don't think the agencies are doing a great job at all.

 

[MikeFerrara]

I agree that you don't develop a high level of skill after 10 or 12 hours. We have to ask ourselves (& PADI, for that matter) what the goal of an OW cert. is? Is it a high level of skill? Maybe it doesn't produce a highly skilled diver, but does the individual have enough skill to build on?

My answer is NO. Since standards don't require the teaching of some very important things and most instructors don't teach those things, most divers just continue to practice with little or no improvement. For example, you can't practice your trim, if you don't know what it is and you won't find any mention of it in your average OW course or text. You won't practice problem management midwater because no one ever told you that you should.

What's the purpose of the OW class? I think that PADI words it something like this...You will be qualified to independently plan and conduct OW dives in conditions as good or better than those in which you were trained.

Does it do that? Since a student is NOT required to independently plan or conduct any such thing prior to the completion of training, I say, demonstrable NOT!

From my experience, the OW cert. did give me enough skill to build on. But, I dive within my experience/comfort level mostly. I'm not interested in cave diving, tech diving, penetrating wrecks. I'm a pretty conservative person as a whole so I dive pretty conservatively. Some people are risk takers. The diver who ran out of air is most likely more of a risk taker. So, more hours of training in an OW cert. course probably wouldn't have helped.

One reason that divers run out of air or low on air is that gas management is one of the things that ARE NOT taught. Sure, they tell you to watch your SPG. What it for what is the question though. How much gas do you need to get back? How much gas do you need to get back in the worst case where a buddy suffers a total gas loss at the furthest point of the dive? How do we figure that out for the planned dive?

It should be no surprise at all that divers run out of air. No one is teaching them how to avoid it.

So..more hours wouldn't have helped but about a half hour of explanation and examples would have.

 

[vondo]

Absolutely. There is a PADI "recommendation" (it can only be recommendation because obviously it cannot be enforced). With Open Water certification you are NOT SUPPOSED to exceed 18 metres/60 feet. The fact that you were not made aware of this is in itself a reflection of improper instruction.

IN the AOW course you are made aware of the risks in deep diving. SO what PADI "qualification to do deep dives" means is that you have now been made aware of the risks of deep diving and are expected to manage them !!!

That's actually not what PADI says. In the final safety recommendations of the OW manual:

"Limit your depth to 18 m/60 ft as a new diver. Remember that 18 m/60 ft is the recommended limit for new divers..." There is no mention of getting advanced so you may go deeper.

Now, considering how market driven PADI is, I don't think it is an accident that they say "new diver" instead of "PADI Open Water Diver" which they use elsewhere.

So, they suggest sticking to <60ft when you are "new." New is not the same as "only OW certified."

 

[Dive-aholic]

I'm not sure that's the reason they don't want the Scuba cert. The scuba diver cert has a couple of other "features."

1) One can't do scuba diver, then do a bunch of supervised dives, and graduate to Open Water. It requires taking everything again. Ok, maybe the standards say you can, but in general it doesn't seem like an option unless you take private instruction and the cost is higher

2) Maybe I am confusing this with a resort course, but doesn't it generally mean you can dive for the week but after that you are back to square one?

You're confusing it with the resort course. PADI Scuba Diver is an actual cert. You get a card for it. To upgrade to Open Water Diver, you need to complete the last 2 classroom confined water sessions and last 2 open water dives. You don't have to start all over.