Video from a Training Dive with John Chatterton

[Scuba-74]

Here is my honest take on all this. FWIW

Chatterton is without question an amazing accomplished and famous wreck diver. For folks who are passionate and excited about diving and wrecks, getting the chance to take a class and go diving with him is an amazing thing. No question at all.

We can argue about trim all day. I'm still here and for quite a bit of my early tech diving career as a diver and new tech instructor (as of 95) it wasn't even really on my radar. Buoyancy control was. I evolved since then and fee now that trim is an essential and foundation skill that must be mastered in the early stages of technical training. Not because it's always needed, but because it always will make the dive better. In many foreseeable circumstances and environments, it's not negotiable, fine buoyancy and trim control are absolutely needed for safety. It doesn't matter if the tech dive being conducted absolutely requires it, or may be nice or even if it doesn't matter so much during some segments of the planned dive (digging for china, no mount cave), it DOES need to be a tool that the tech diver can employ without effort while task loaded reasonably. That is central to dive safety. You can pull quite a bit off without it and compensate with big brass ones, calm head, a big experience base with lots of mistakes. Some do. However any instructor that teaches that as central is completely missing the point as to why we teach. We should be teaching so that divers learn the techniques, academic knowledge, rationale and yes mistakes of others in as controlled an environment as possible. We shortcut the danger of sole learning by mistakes and reduce the experience needed for the student to gain levels of competence depending on the course. But, we can only go so far, and skill development and experience, guided by instructors and mentors outside formal class still matter greatly. We shouldn't be, especially in the technical diving construct so much a short cut that the student is never expected to master any skills along the way but we keep on taking them deeper, farther, more task loading and ignore the fact that they quite frankly are still not truly competent in basic stuff.

Regardless of all that, we have standards.

I tend to exceed them. For a diver coming to me that expressed they want to learn so they could do the dive the OP did on the last day of class that had the prerequisites that Chatterton lists for the class

1. Students must show a minimum of fifty logged dives.
2. Students must be certified as an Advanced Open Water Diver
3. Students must be certified in Nitrox.
4. Students must be certified as Basic Wreck, Cavern, Ice Diver, or Decompression Diver.

I first would have to do advanced Nitrox, possibly depending on certs a Deco Procedures class. That combined with me is 5-6 days, You can find instructors teaching that in 3 days... and cheaper.. I may very well do that "on" a wreck, but I sure as hell am NOT gonna be doing any overhead environment on that class, no way, no how.. unless they were already a fully certified penetration wreck diver.. which Advanced wreck is so that is the goal, not what they are coming to me with.

Now.. the Hydro is deeper than the training limits of ADV Nitrox (130) or Deco Procedures (150), pkus I am not teaching beyond 130 on air anyhow, so Helitrox. Another couple days.

Then the actual advanced wreck course would be 4 days.

In other words, 11 to 12 days to get to where the 3 day class of Chatterton ended up. I do that for a few reasons, standards, time needed to not just show something but enough for the students to master it and lastly and firstly because I don't want dead students, even after they are no longer students. So I try to do all I can to prevent it within reason and knowing that people will be people. I will most likely in about a quarter to a third of the times I am teaching that type of course progression slam on the breaks and have the students go practice and get some experience before we proceed. That is because there is so much so fast they hit the wall and stop progressing and start regressing. Pushing forward at that point is just useless. I am trying to build, not break. (too badly anyhow)

Anyhow, YMMV.

If you ever find yourself as a student covering up for your instructor when you find out they had been violating standards on your course.. well I get it actually. But you REALLY , REALLY should be considering what the actual quality and value of the instruction was. No matter who that instructor is. No agency is gonna "yank your card" out of hand and will work with you somehow to make sure you either understand the true limits of your training and card, or re-mediate areas of weakness. If your instructor is telling you they know more than any standards..well that is a huge danger sign. The standards are done by committees of very experienced instructor trainers in whatever the standard is. That room ,having been in a few is filled with "strong" views by SME's and the end product I promise you has been beaten to death to ensure they are solid as can be given the state of the industry at that time, and will be an evolving document as time , technology, knowledge and yes deaths and accidents all shape change. IF you are taking a course from a tech agency that hasn't changed the standards in 20 years.. JUST DON'T.

I believe it was you who said earlier in the thread that you saw a couple of "reportable" standard violations in the video. After reading this post, which talks a lot about standards, and even about "students covering up for their instructor", I'm still not clear which specific standards did Chatterton violate? Is that the depth, and if so, aren't any of the depth "limits" just recommended guidelines? And even if they are a little more than "recommended guidelines", aren't all classes by definition supposed to take students on dives that are beyond their current level of certification?

Or are you stating that prerequisites that Chatterton has listed for this class are insufficient, and there is a specific standard that requires additional classes to be taken before that dive?

From my personal uncertified, untrained standpoint I was guessing that alleged violations may have something to do with the rate of ascent, or maybe with not running a line, but after reading your post above I'm utterly confused.

 

[JohnnyC]

FYI standards involving depth limits are inviolable during training without a waiver. You can't take an OW student to 45m/150ft. What they do after class is entirely different as it's outside of a training environment, and those guidelines do not govern activities outside of a training environment.

You wanna go to 45m/150ft on dive #6? Have at it. There's nothing that your certifying agency can do.

 

[abnfrog]

if you want to know if there was a PRECIEVED violation ask an advance wreck instructor they will know , BUT they have to see it not hear about it

 

[Scuba-74]

if you want to know if there was a PRECIEVED violation ask an advance wreck instructor they will know , BUT they have to see it not hear about it

Isn't that what I'm doing?

 

[cerich]

Isn't that what I'm doing?

Yes.

Basically the video showed me stuff that if it was the agency I am responsible for in US and Canada would have been sufficient for me to take immediate action. However, he doesn't teach for that agency but another, that I am an instructor for, in the class being taught and even an instructor Trainer, so I passed along to the appropriate person at the agency that Chatterton teaches under.
They will make any determination and they may not agree with my take on it, or may see more than I did even. I am unlikely to even find out what happens next. All I know for sure is that the instructor in question will know for certain who complained. Frankly that won't make me many friends among the small community I am part of. There comes a point however and for me, silence was not an option.

We have a professional obligation to report, very few do and fewer will be open they did, because of a bunch of reasons.

That all said, if at my level and position, if I am not only willing to report but also be transparent about, who is?

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Frankly that won't make me many friends among the small community I am part of. There comes a point however and for me, silence was not an option.

We have a professional obligation to report, very few do and fewer will be open they did, because of a bunch of reasons.

That all said, if at my level and position, if I am not only willing to report but also be transparent about, who is?

Chris,

It is called integrity, something that society often lacks. While it may not earn you friends, it will earn you more respect from people who value that trait. You have always run Deep 6 with a high level of ethics and integrity.

 

[cerich]

Chris,

It is called integrity, something that society often lacks. While it may not earn you friends, it will earn you more respect from people who value that trait. You have always run Deep 6 with a high level of ethics and integrity.

I sometimes think I am just hopelessly naive..

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

I sometimes think I am just hopelessly naive..

No. I know someone who was tortured for his principles. That didn't stop him from speaking out. Came close to getting killed for it too.

 

[ChuckP]

The helium is key to a lower wob that does help reduce "making CO2.

That is well established

So is less physical effort

 

[Marie13]

Hope the OP is satisfied with the results of posting that video.