To those considering an OW class...

[neil]

To better understand the background of the periodic citation, across this and other threads, of a '100 hours' training stipulation, could you direct posters to a useful reference describing the content of such a program? The AAUS standards, for example, refer to 100 hours, but that is for their Scientific Diver designation, which would seem to go beyond what an entry-level recreational diver might need. I balance that comment with acknowledgment that there are data indicating the incidence of DCI among scientific divers is lower than for recreational or commercial divers, In a 1991 publication, the risk of DCI (in the US) was estimated at 1-2 incidents per 1,000-2,000 dives for commercial diving, 2 incidents per 10,000 dives for recreational diving, and 1 incident in 100,000 dives for the scientific diving community. I haven't seen more current data specifically comparing the three domains, but have no reason to presume it has changed.

I am not in any way disputing the value or appropriateness of the '100 hours / 12 dives' approach, just trying to get a better appreciation of the content of such an curriculum. I think others would welcome the opportinuity to better understand it as well.

You can do a search for AAUS standards or diving manuals and find it on the net. Many colleges' diving manuals are basically the AAUS manual.
At least out here in the UC system, the core of the 100 hr course is the NAUI Master Scuba Diver Course, and then actual scientific techniques are taught beyond that.
One of the reasons for the existence of these programs is to satisfy OSHA standards. At least that's my understanding.

Here, I found the USC/Wrigley manual. It doesn't get more anal than this :
http://wrigley.usc.edu/spotlight/PDF/DiveManual.pdf

 

[Thalassamania]

To better understand the background of the periodic citation, across this and other threads, of a '100 hours' training stipulation, could you direct posters to a useful reference describing the content of such a program? The AAUS standards, for example, refer to 100 hours, but that is for their Scientific Diver designation, which would seem to go beyond what an entry-level recreational diver might need. I balance that comment with acknowledgment that there are data indicating the incidence of DCI among scientific divers is lower than for recreational or commercial divers, In a 1991 publication, the risk of DCI (in the US) was estimated at 1-2 incidents per 1,000-2,000 dives for commercial diving, 2 incidents per 10,000 dives for recreational diving, and 1 incident in 100,000 dives for the scientific diving community. I haven't seen more current data specifically comparing the three domains, but have no reason to presume it has changed.

I am not in any way disputing the value or appropriateness of the '100 hours / 12 dives' approach, just trying to get a better appreciation of the content of such an curriculum. I think others would welcome the opportinuity to better understand it as well.

The point is that the "research diving class" is not some highfalutin' thing that teaches fancy stuff. It is an entry level course for non-divers that results in nothing more than a competent diver. All the recreational programs were originally modeled after that 100 hour course, so the original recreational programs were no different. Here's a sample schedule.

 

[Thalassamania]

You can do a search for AAUS standards or diving manuals and find it on the net. Many colleges' diving manuals are basically the AAUS manual.
At least out here in the UC system, the core of the 100 hr course is the NAUI Master Scuba Diver Course, and then actual scientific techniques are taught beyond that.
One of the reasons for the existence of these programs is to satisfy OSHA standards. At least that's my understanding.

Here, I found the USC/Wrigley manual. It doesn't get more anal than this :
http://wrigley.usc.edu/spotlight/PDF/DiveManual.pdf

Er ... you've got that a bit backward, the NAUI Master Diver Course closely resembles the 100 Hour Research Course because NAUI contracted with me to design the Master Diver Course and write the standards for it. Let's keep the cart behind the horse. Similarly, it was the existence and quality of that course that persuaded OSHA to exempt us from their Commercial Diving Regulations, the course had been around for 25 years before OSHA started writing diving regulations.

 

[Thalassamania]

You sir are one of the contributing reason why certifying agency are allowing less and less instructor insight and more and more firm guide lines removing the possibility of personal opinions and over inflated egos from controlling this wonderful sport.

Your sir, appear a fool. It’d appear that you have no idea of what you are talking about. Please let us know what in your background gives insight into what the training agencies have done and why they have done it.

Your statement above pays testament you'd be one of the reasons for these standards.
You assume my profile is up to date, also unknown to you is by personal choice I only log my personal dive, none of my working dives. I keep them in a separate journal.

I suppose those dives are so secret that if we knew about them you’d have to kill us? Give us a break.

Now lets do some math about your two 12 year olds, They can only be legally diving for 2 years now so 365daysX2years= 730 days X2 dives per day = 1460
They sir do not have more dive then me alone and number 1460dives, this is a virtual impossibility with sea and weather conditions, school days, sick days, and bad behavior days.

First, you only represent yourself at having between 200 and 499 and you bud’ only claims 100 to 199 dives. So I was saying that I know two 2 year olds with more than 698 dives, and that’s the case. Second, there are lots of kids who started diving long before age 10, (I happened to start at age 6). Age is not a legality concerning diving, it’s an agency policy concerning certification. I’m sorry sir, but your tank just flunked hydro and will have to be condemned.


BTW: We all know folk who live in the tropics, with great diving right off their house and a boat right there too. These folks will often make 2 to 4 dives a day, at least on weekends, so if someone is making, let’s say 10 dives a week, they’d be way past what you and your dud’ represented yourselves as in just two years. And even if you did not start diving until your 10th birthday (and that’s a PADI thing, not all agencies start that young) you have three years of diving until you are no longer twelve, so just five dives a week would yield more than 698 dives. I’m sorry sir, but your regulator too far gone for repair, it will have to be condemned.

 

[neil]

Er ... you've got that a bit backward, the NAUI Master Diver Course closely resembles the 100 Hour Research Course because NAUI contracted with me to design the Master Diver Course and write the standards for it. Let's keep the cart behind the horse. Similarly, it was the existence and quality of that course that persuaded OSHA to exempt us from their Commercial Diving Regulations, the course had been around for 25 years before OSHA started writing diving regulations.

If you say so. I have no idea who the heck you are but I'll accept that. Did you invent water also? Maybe the opposable thumb?

 

[neil]

......... the course had been around for 25 years before OSHA started writing diving regulations.

For those who don't know, what used to be the NAUI Advanced course is now the Master Scuba Diver Course, I think since 1995. NAUI's old MSD was just about everything included in a DMC/ITC except for the leadership skills. I still have the S&P from then: 12 dives, 20 CR hrs. minimum. Lots of stuff.
Now it's clear to me where the 100 hr. course comes from.

 

[Thalassamania]

If you say so. I have no idea who the heck you are but I'll accept that. Did you invent water also? Maybe the opposable thumb?

Water is not my fault, but I did have some input on the molecular design that lets ice float.

Opposable thumb was a whole 'nother department.

 

[Diveral]

The point is that the "research diving class" is not some highfalutin' thing that teaches fancy stuff. It is an entry level course for non-divers that results in nothing more than a competent diver. All the recreational programs were originally modeled after that 100 hour course, so the original recreational programs were no different. Here's a sample schedule.

Heck that looks a lot like the YMCA course I took in early 80's. That was a very good and effective course.

 

[Thalassamania]

Heck that looks a lot like the YMCA course I took in early 80's. That was a very good and effective course.

There's a reason why ... once upon a time they all looked very similar.

 

[billeelou]

Have you seen the news release? According to AP, PADI just announced they are merging with DAN,SSI and Naui under a not for profit corporation and will be issuing restructured guidelines for OW certification, including periodic "refresher course "requirements for ALL dive specialties below dive instructor. The Panel is to be headed by their European regional head, a Mr. L. Lirpa. He stated, "The agenies have decided the training of a once for a lifetime is no longer adequate with the number of new dives entering the picture." Loof also stated he was personally opposed to any standard that did not have the utmost of training and physical fitness in mind.

www.drudge.com