To those considering an OW class...

[TSandM]

Mike, utterly superb post (as usual)!

 

[jbichsel]

Mike Ferrara,
Excellent as usual. I can't believe that people balk at the idea of tightening up standards and having the certification actually match what it's description is.

 

[dbulmer]

"You can certainly do without any one or all of those standardizations but 3 DIR guys from oposit ends of the country can meet in the middle for a dive and everything just clicks. All they have to plan are the things that are specific to the dive. All the mudane stuff is built into the system and doesn't need to be discussed again. "

Sorry to nitpick but IMHO you have to consider that opposite ends of the country is not correct - I think it would be fair to point out that 3 DIR guys from opposite ends of the planet can meet ..... both Mike Kane,JJ and Richard Lundgren for example have travelled extensively.

 

[lowwall]

Mike. That post was as substantive as it was substantial

I learned some things. For one, this is the first time I've heard anything other than "meet at the bottom" for a descent plan. Ganted, I've only dived in warm, high viz conditions, but even so I can see the sense in actually descending with your buddy now that you've pointed it out.

I also find your description of resort diving to be spot on. But which really came first - the babysitter DMs or minimal OW cert standards? I'd guess once divers started arriving in the Caribbean in any real numbers, operators pretty quickly found they'd need to either shepherd the divers around or spend a lot of time looking for them after every dive.

However, even if we can all agree on the advantages of standardization, we still have the real world problem that only a very small percentage of certified divers follow a standard system. Since I believe we can also agree that a certain percentage of those non-DIR divers want to improve their skills, the question becomes: Are divers better off with additional skills, but without standardization?

I assumed the question was rhetorical. But maybe it isn't. Perhaps teaching advanced skills would increase divers' comfort level to the point where they are likely to put themselves places they don't have the knowledge to get out of if something goes wrong.

If so, the practical question question now becomes: Is there some combination of skills and knowledge that could be taught to OW/AOW divers to make them better and safer than they currently are that does not require the standardization of DIR?

If the answer is no, then let's drop the whole thing and become proselytizers of DIR. But if some combination of physical skills, gas management and basic dive planning would help make the average diver who wants to improve safer, better and happier under water without the necessity to throw away their equipment, then there is a reason to explore addressing that need.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Mike. That post was as substantive as it was substantial
I learned some things. For one, this is the first time I've heard anything other than "meet at the bottom" for a descent plan. Ganted, I've only dived in warm, high viz conditions, but even so I can see the sense in actually descending with your buddy now that you've pointed it out.

Clear water may allow you to be able to see your buddy from further away but it doesn't help you get to him any faster should the need arise. Seeing the need is first but what's really important is response TIME and the actions taken. In order to minimize that response time, you have to be close, aware, in a position that allows you to quickly move in the right direction and know what to do when you get there.

However, even if we can all agree on the advantages of standardization, we still have the real world problem that only a very small percentage of certified divers follow a standard system. Since I believe we can also agree that a certain percentage of those non-DIR divers want to improve their skills, the question becomes: Are divers better off with additional skills, but without standardization?

I assumed the question was rhetorical. But maybe it isn't. Perhaps teaching advanced skills would increase divers' comfort level to the point where they are likely to put themselves places they don't have the knowledge to get out of if something goes wrong.

What's an advanced skill? I'd be willing to call the transport and staging of 10 bottles into a cave an advanced skill...or conducting detailed surveys...or staged decompression with gas switches. However, fine buoyancy/position control, efficient and effective propulsion techniques, gas management, controlled ascents and descents, buddy awareness and effective reliable problem management are NOT advanced skills. They are the very bottom rung basics that apply to just about every single dive that any diver will ever do. We come to the need for advanced skills when we apply those basic skills to more demanding environments and dive objectives.

If so, the practical question question now becomes: Is there some combination of skills and knowledge that could be taught to OW/AOW divers to make them better and safer than they currently are that does not require the standardization of DIR?

If the answer is no, then let's drop the whole thing and become proselytizers of DIR. But if some combination of physical skills, gas management and basic dive planning would help make the average diver who wants to improve safer, better and happier under water without the necessity to throw away their equipment, then there is a reason to explore addressing that need.

The first thing that GUE standardizes is the skill level they required. They do a good job of defining what is expected of a diver at each level.

Other agencies do too but they tell divers to watch their guage and not empty their tank rather than how to make certain they have enough air to surface with an OOA buddy. The make a student get neutral and some point during the training but they don't require them to stay neutral throughout a dive. They require a student to do a descent without a tactile or visual reference but they don't require them to do it with a buddy.

So, my answer to your question is yes. I think there is lots of room for improvement without going into the required contents of the right thigh dry suit pocket as apposed to the left. In fact, there is an awful lot of what modern corporate buzz word speak would call low hanging fruit...stuff that's easy to spot, a no brainer to fix, the solution is cheap and easy and the payback is HUGE.

 

[lowwall]

So, my answer to your question is yes. I think there is lots of room for improvement without going into the required contents of the right thigh dry suit pocket as apposed to the left. In fact, there is an awful lot of what modern corporate buzz word speak would call low hanging fruit...stuff that's easy to spot, a no brainer to fix, the solution is cheap and easy and the payback is HUGE.

That's what I thought. I was just trying to define the problem. So what would those low-hanging fruits be? Actually, it looks like you have a rough outline already...

However, fine buoyancy/position control, efficient and effective propulsion techniques, gas management, controlled ascents and descents, buddy awareness and effective reliable problem management are NOT advanced skills. They are the very bottom rung basics that apply to just about every single dive that any diver will ever do.

This gets back to the discussion we had off-line. You can certainly teach these things as part of an OW course (and apparently do it in not all that much longer than the quickie OW courses). But how long would it take to teach these things to existing OW/AOW divers who have only been taught to RSTC minimums? Looking through the Why Not Fundies thread, it seems that 2 full days is insufficient if you want students to have a reasonable expectation they will be able to execute the skills by the end of the course. Perhaps there is something that can be left out (doubles stuff, shooting a bag?) that can get it down to a realistic weekend course.

 

[TSandM]

Part of me doesn't think that you can make a meaningful difference in somebody's buoyancy control and ability to manage task-loading in a weekend. That's based on my experience with Fundies, but I also have to admit that I'm a slow learner and not particularly coordinated.

On the other hand, my friend dsteding took Bob's AOW course over this last weekend, and both he and Bob said there were striking changes in the diving skills of both students in the class over the five dives.

I think the ideal arrangement for a class for already certified divers would be two weekends, perhaps two or three weeks apart. Introduce the ideas and skills the first weekend, let the divers go practice, and review and assess on the second weekend. This is what I think Fundies ought to be as well, but that is complicated by the fact that the instructors are often coming in from out of town. If an instructor were teaching such a class locally, splitting it up like that wouldn't be as much of an issue, I wouldn't think.

 

[Thalassamania]

Yes ... learn, practice, reinforce.

 

[eric1979]

As a new guy looking to get into this I found this very informative. Thanks for the info.

 

[peterbj7]

Mike Ferrera's second to last post is the most persuasive argument I have yet to see in favour of DIR/GUE, and those who know me will realise that I take a lot of convincing!