What is the fundamental reason that prevents scuba diving from becoming popular?

[boulderjohn]

There is a lot of CYA in all dive agency language. I especially found that out in a lengthy exchange with PADI over their proscription of overhead environments. They tell you not to go into overhead environments without proper certification. Yet, all around the world brand new OW divers are swimming through coral swim throughs and under the decks of sanitized wrecks, and there is no indication of a concern from any of the agencies that tell you not to go into overhead environments.

It turns out that those common swim-throughs are not considered overhead environments. If there is an exit nearby, there is no problem. You can even take OW students into a short swim-through, as spelled out in a 21-year old training bulletin. Will you see that written anywhere? Nope. I asked why that was not spelled out clearly anywhere, and they said it doesn't need to be because everyone understands that. You can tell that everyone understands that because everyone is doing it. All the dive operators leading divers through such environments obviously know it. When I got that response, I asked a local dive operator that makes its living taking divers to wrecks where they swim around inside, and they said, no, they don't understand that. They think they are taking a necessary risk, because if they didn't allow it, the divers would use an operator that does.

BTW, as a result of our discussion, they now spell out the difference between a swim-through and a penetration in the wreck course, using the language I provided.

 

[El Diablo]

Thanks. I was able to find that on PADI's Blog. At least for PADI, the 60'/18M does appear to be their limit.

I looked through the Open Water Standards published by WRSTC. I saw reference to depth limits during the checkout dives, but nothing beyond that.

That might be why different agencies seem to have different interpretations. SSI lists 60' as a Recommended limit for OW and/or an explanation of what to expect during the course, not a Maximum depth.

I haven't taken a PADI course since 1990.

You are right about small discrepancies between organizations. I started with PADI, AOWD with SSI and became a DM with CMAS... now switching to PADI again for professional reasons.

 

[El Diablo]

I have watched these last pages with something akin to despair. This issue of certification depth has appeared in threads over and over and over and over and over and over in the 18 years I have participated in ScubaBoard, with the last 17 of those years as a professional. The consensus finally is usually the same at last, but not in this thread.

Here are some points that I would like to make as a long-time instructor.

• Whatever disputed language PADI may make, it has absolutely no authority to govern your dives outside of training. A dive operator leading your dives may make such rules, but no agency has that power. A local government may make such rules, but no agency has such power. A good example of this can be seen in the public letter PADI wrote to Belize about a decade ago about the common practice of taking newly minted OW divers to 130 feet in the Blue Hole. That letter said such dives are a bad idea and implored them to make rules against it. They had to beg the local authorities to act because they had no such power themselves.
• PADI uses strong (probably overly strong) language suggesting people dive within the limits of their training and experience. New OW divers are trained to a maximum of 60 feet, and so that is a recommended limit until they extend it via training and experience. One way divers can extend that limit is to dive gradually deeper and deeper. Another way is with further training. Most people do both.
• Many dive operators will require AOW or its equivalent for deeper dives (in the 100 foot or more range), but that is their requirement, not the requirement of any agency. It is usually a product of their insurance, looking for some objective means of determining a diver has the proper credentials for the dive. (The operator's judgment of your ability can be challenged in court; a certification card cannot.)
• Many dive operations impose their own limits on divers and then flat out lie to them by saying it is because of an agency requirement. That lie is to hide the fact that it is their rule. When I was on the liveaboard Spirit of Freedom in Australia, they made two such lies. They told us that during a dive day, we could not dive any deeper than a previous dive, and they told us we could not dive within 24 hours of our planned low altitude flight back to the mainland. They said they had no choice because of PADI requirements. Neither is true, as the dive leader admitted when I challenged him privately. He admitted it was just company policy.

Summary: Whatever the language is on certification depths, it cannot possibly be more than a recommendation because no agency has the power to govern anything you do on your own.

I believe people creates confusion where there's none...

PADI certifies OWDs to 18m. After certification, divers have to use common sense and impose limits to their selves. There's no regulation, no monitoring / scuba police nor fine for going deeper.

 

[Wibble]

I believe people creates confusion where there's none...

PADI certifies OWDs to 18m. After certification, divers have to use common sense and impose limits to their selves. There's no regulation, no monitoring / scuba police nor fine for going deeper.

But there are consequences for exceeding your experience and training levels. Not least invalid insurance and massive costs.

 

[El Diablo]

Same when I challenged an instructor who said I could not do a deeper than 30m dive. Privately he said OK I have seen your dive logs 30% are deeper than 30m so you can do the deep dives but please don't tell our other customers as the business wanted to push them to do the padi deep certificate so they could dive deeper than 30m. Had nothing to do with Padi but to do with the center pushing certs and making money. Plus I asked him to show me his DM's deep diving certs as they would be guiding me. They didn't have deep diving certs either lol.

How does a DM not have a certification for diving deep(er)?????????

It is easy to assume that dive organizations want to just 'make money' selling you the AOWD course. IMO, it is quite more complex and clearly depends on the professionalism of the individuals. A DM needs to be able to lead safely a group of divers and the preconditions to do this exceed by far 'dive deeper than 30m'.
I had to excel in rescue techniques, manage real life emergencies, navigation, search & recovery, DECO theory, physiology & physics, and of course, deep diving...

If it is so easy and you already have all the answers PLUS you can ascend from 40m recycling your BCD air, why not getting the course and experience the thrill for yourself?

 

[Wibble]

How does a DM not have a certification for diving deep(er)?????????

Because a DiveMASTER "qualification" is a worthless marketing gimmick that requires no mastery of skills nor in-depth knowledge.

 

[El Diablo]

But there are consequences for exceeding your experience and training levels. Not least invalid insurance and massive costs.

Absolutely.

For some reason (probably poor OWD training), folks assume that diving to 40m have the same effects on your body and dangers as diving to 18m... the majority of diving incidents I've been involved in my 20 year diving / career are related to divers exceeding the depth limits they've been certified for, running out of air, panicking and rushing to the surface.

As I wrote previously at 18m the NO DECO time is approx. 55mn (there will be slight variances due /according to the different algorithms and agencies*). At 40m around 9mn...
This IF the dive profile is going straight to that depth (from a boat to a wreck for example), if diving from the shore and going deeper progressively / cruising around, you get effectively 3-4mn before a mandatory DECO stop.

*I believe BSAC is a little more flexible.

 

[El Diablo]

Because a DiveMASTER "qualification" is a worthless marketing gimmick that requires no mastery of skills nor in-depth knowledge.

I hope you are joking

 

[Wibble]

I hope you are joking

Not at all.

Entry requirement: 50 dives. You know nothing at that point and have done nothing but courses (min OW, AOW, Rescue and maybe your putting up a SMB speciality)

A DiveMASTER spends a lot of time herding newbies around therefore is diving solo. The entry qualification for solo is 100 dives. Strange that "Self-Sufficient Diver" isn't one of the pre-requisites, along with gold peak performance buoyancy, nitrox, deep, etc.


Of course some DiveMasters are fully experienced with great skills and extensive knowledge; none of that gained from the DiveMASTER course.


Oh, and we can all laugh out loud at the concept of the "MASTER scuba diver" who's main requirement was enough money for 5 speciality courses plus Rescue, AOW, OW. And they have the sheer cheek to charge you for the card!!! Pure 5Star marketing nonsense.

 

[Wibble]

I've been around enough of them to know their skills are sufficient for "DiveLeader" within the very limited requirements of NDL diving.

Master of scuba diving they are not (or to be more accurate, many are not).


Your tech diving point... The point of technical diving is to develop your skills to be able to dive where there's no access to the surface due to hard or soft overheads. This requires very good skills and lots of practice managing failures, especially using redundant equipment. In other words they need to be completely self-sufficient and self-reliant (I'll exclude extreme dives from this where they do extensive team planning and practice).

If you have been through the technical diving route -- Intro, fundies, ANDP, normoxic, cave, etc. -- then you will be an accomplished solo diver; a quick assessment and nothing new learned.