What is exact outcome of AOW courses?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Great summary, @lowwall. I scratch my head at this bit, though: Can Open Water Divers dive deeper than 18 metres/60 feet? Frankly, yes." Why the "frankly"? This implies to me an admission that there are instances in which PADI is not being frank.

edit: Indeed, I believe this is what you were getting at with your parenthetical note: "[retrieved from archive.org as it's been scrubbed from the current site presumably because it contradicts the false impression they are trying to make elsewhere]"
 
at the time you needed AOW to take Nitrox
Not quite. The prereq for Nitrox was AOW or OW plus ten dives beyond OW training. This was true when PADI opened the course in 1996, and did not change until 2003.

Added for completeness: In 2006 the requirement for dives was eliminated.
 
You are cherry-picking the available info. Yes, immediately post-OW certification PADI says you are trained to 60 ft. The "rest of the story" is that you may go deeper with additional training and experience....no additional certification is needed. What AOW does is proves you've had some additional training and experience, so "allows" you to go to 100 ft. But your recreational certification to 130 ft has not changed.
Yes. I've often thought about this. Always wondered why in the PADI OW manual it doesn't spell this out. In my recollections it says something like "certified to 60 feet in conditions equal to or better than in your training" (not a direct quote). Doesn't say you can go deeper if you get more training (that could be just diving with a pro or other experienced diver I guess, not necessarily AOW or some other cert. OR simply more experience. Semantics I suppose.
 
Not quite. The prereq for Nitrox was AOW or OW plus ten dives beyond OW training. This was true when PADI opened the course in 1996, and did not change until 2003.

Added for completeness: In 2006 the requirement for dives was eliminated.
My IANTD Nitrox card is dated May 1995. I don't recall PADI offering it back then but I could be wrong.
 
My IANTD Nitrox card is dated May 1995. I don't recall PADI offering it back then but I could be wrong.
No, PADI began in 1996, as I said.
 
I appreciate the posts by @lowwall here. I've never dug into the weeds of it like you apparently have but that is precisely the way I've always thought it was... and the way I was taught back in the 1990's

I've seen language in some of the training standards that I've read through over the years that say something like "divers will be trained to a depth limit of x," so it does seem that there is an effort to change something. Is it a conscious effort or not, I don't know... but it seems like it's similar to how definitions of words change over time

Anyway, i agree with what @lowwall is saying...or at least agree that this is how it should be
but
having just recently audited a full SDI open water training class that my wife and three kids went through, I would say that the level of training is insufficient for this premise. As I understand it this is across the board with all mainstream agencies ... so I'm not dinging SDI alone. The instructors were all solid and good, and many things were taught well, but there are some HUGE shortfalls in the syllabus and training materials
Specifically, dive planning, ND limits, and ascent rates. They were given rental computers and told to look at them, but were never really taught what the computers are showing them, where to look for what information, what the computers are actually calculating, etc....
Then, even if they had been shown how to actually read the computer, they were never put into a situation with enough depth and time where they could really understand any of it in a practical sense.

My IANTD Nitrox card is dated May 1995. I don't recall PADI offering it back then but I could be wrong.
mine is dated Feb 02 1995, so I suppose our IANTD cert numbers are very close!

No, PADI began in 1996, as I said.
I didn't realize padi started offering quite that soon, but I do remember it coming on pretty strong mainstream not long after my certification. Regardless, the way I remember it anyway in that time only the tech agencies were offering it and it was rather envolved
there was a lot of classroom time and then a few required open water checkout dives
I'm probably remembering wrong, but I feel like it was 4 classroom sessions spread over 4 evenings and 2 weeks (maybe it was two classroom sessions but I feel like it was 4), + a trip to the local training hole for two dives. Looking in my logbook I see that we made a dive to 135 ft for 40 minutes... apparently to check for narcosis (I noted no signs of it), and the second dive was to 120 ft for 27 minutes on EAN31.5

I do remember not long after that the mainstream recreational agencies started it, and started the trend of simplifying the rigor required to earn it...
 
When I was teaching, the Advanced Course I offered through SDI was a minimum of 6 dives.
1 Advanced Skills - Refine buoyancy and trim, DSMB use, stage bottle use, and communication, non-silting kick techniques
2 UW Navigation - Compass, natural, line and reel/spool, sharing the responsibilities with a buddy
3. Night/Low Vis - Our local conditions can go to zero vis quickly. Light selection and use, touch contact, swimming and communication
4. Search and Recovery or Wreck (survey wreck) Lift bag use, line and reel use, team skills. Wreck - outside survey, locate hazards, entry and exit points, orientation, and identification because no one without actual wreck penetration training has any business in an overhead environment.
5 Deep - planning, stage/deco bottle use, narcosis identification using an actual dive skill. What I usually did was have students descend to between 80 and 100ft, depending on location. Tie off a reel and swim as a buddy team for a distance, with one watching depth and time. Stop, turn, and switch roles. Get to the tie off and begin ascent using simulated deco stops to control ascent. Somewhere right after starting I'd spit out my reg and give an out of air signal. Their reaction told me how narced they were. Usually, stops were planned for every 10 ft starting at 50. At 20 we'd switch to the stage bottles using proper notox procedures and do the final two stop on those
6 Buddy skills and assist (rescue skills). Non-responsive diver from depth as a team, no guided no mask 100ft swim and then switch roles. No mask guided no mask ascent from 20 ft. Descend and switch roles. Then buddy team would do a rescue tow to entry while loosening the victims gear.

I came up with the dives based on the most common interests of my students who were often planning on diving the Great Lakes, cold quarries, or wrecks in various locations. I did not offer things like Fish ID or photography. Fish ID was not my passion. Better instructors for that. I had actual underwater photographers who were not instructors that I referred photo interested students to.
The order of dives was intentional because all dives built on the previous ones. And I had minimum course entry requirements of being able to do all skills neutral and horizontal with less than 2-3 feet change in buoyancy. We usually managed to get that down to less than a foot in the class.

There was also around 6 hours of classroom instruction on equipment, dive planning, gas management, and emergency procedures. We used my second book - "SCUBA: A Practical Guide To Advanced Level Training" as a supplement to the SDI materials.
I welcomed single tank divers, those using doubles, and sidemount. The last two may seem strange, but I had DMs and a couple of instructors from other agencies take my advanced class to see what I was doing. As well as those who had taken AOW from someone else and didn't feel they got what they paid for.
 
My NAUI advanced from 25 years ago was all about learning to dive the more advanced sites around Monterey/Carmel. We definitely learned and used all of the required advanced skills, cause that's what we needed to complete many of the dives. But each dive site was chosen because it was a challenging local dive. So, you'd also pick up a lot of local knowledge about things like rough water or rock entries, super limited viz navigation, and avoiding hazards at the different sites. It was a ton of diving, but made you a more confident and competent local diver. It's unfortunate that none of the local shops want to build out anything like that again. I did AOW with the same shop around 18 years later (now a PADI shop, mainly because my 12 year old daughter was taking jr. AOW and I had to drive her to the dives anyway) and that class had regressed to just OW+, where everything but the boat dive had us doing required skills at the same site that they teach all of the intro classes.
 
mine is dated Feb 02 1995, so I suppose our IANTD cert numbers are very close!
10,78x
book work, still have the book, 1 day of classroom and I think 2 checkout dives whan I took it.
 
I feel like I should say this
any of my negative posts about AOW really have no bad intent towards the instructors or even the dive shops/schools. My complaints are more about the agencies and the decisions they've made in putting togteher their course catalogs and such.

I know that you instructors work very hard and really do try to present something so that your students can get something out of it. Many of you probably work hard and stress over coming up with good ways to teach the content, etc.. and much of what you teach is valuable and necessary.
I just think that most of it should be structured into the OW course
 

Back
Top Bottom