What really is an "Advanced Open Water" diver?

[The Cosmicist]

I'm sorry you had such crappy experiences with such crappy instructors.
I'm also sorry you feel you are now qualified to judge and denigrate the entire process and content, globally.

Despite your caustic tone, you bring up a good point. My experience is just from one person and one set of instructors within the confines of NAUI course material. It's certainly not indicative of the whole. Hell, I would have taught it better! I've been an instructor, of sorts, before. I'm self-aware enough, @tursiops , to know the holes in what I'm writing. Waddya want, a book with logical arguments and sources cited?

Because instructors are so important to this sport and this course, I thought it was bearable to post my experience.

I also stand by what I said regarding the NAUI online training and the course in general. But again, that's just for NAUI, with instructors doing the bare minimum.

And people criticise me for recommending fundies after open water.....

I think you're on point. Even if that person doesn't become a GUE true believer.

@The Cosmicist

There's a NAUI shop in R'lyeh? What did you expect?

HA! The service at the shop was... wait for it... HORRIFYING. At least they could have thrown in going mad for free...

Yeah. It definitely sounds like you had a bad set of instructors. Unfortunately, they are out there. All you can really do is provide feedback to the agency, and recommend others when the time comes.

This, on the other hand, is an agency issue. I’m guessing PADI, but some others do this as well. I really don’t get the PADI AOW course. It is exactly like you describe above, an introduction to specialties. You might learn a little, but you definitely aren’t taking the full specialties.

Not all agencies do it that way. I got my AOW through SSI. There is no SSI AOW course. Instead, you get the AOW card after completion of 4 specialties. These are full specialties. I had previously done EAN many years ago, and added Deep, Night/Limited vis, and Navigation as specialties 2-4. EAN was done without any dives, but we definitely did tank analysis as part of it.

As I mentioned, I’m not really a fan of the PADI AOW course. I guess it comes down to what the diver wants it for. If the goal is to be able to get a card that says Advanced (for dive op requirements, or bragging rights), then maybe this makes sense. If the goal is to actually learn something, then the diver would be better served by taking the actual specialty that they want to learn.

As I mentioned, my 2nd OW course was a bit more thorough than most OW courses. So, my Deep course wasn’t really anything new from OW. Dives were slightly deeper, but nothing really new for me. EAN was new. Nav was also useful. I probably could have learned this on my own, but it wasn’t a complete waste. Night/Limited vis wasn’t really new, but it was useful. Helpful to have an experienced instructor along on that first dark dive.

Sure, it does happen. I've seen bad instructors before, and I'm sure I will again. I'm not dressing in black and cursing the world because of it, but I did feel like I wasted my money. It surprised me, honestly. I have to say, it didn't occur to me to send an email to the agency because of it. I'll look into that.

My AOW course was through NAUI, and it's interesting to see the differences between agencies in your post. The SSI path seems more practical from the standpoint of a diver's experience, training, and competency level. Maybe it does matter what agency you choose after all? Like you said, though, your need for the AOW card comes in play. For me, it was the next "logical" step and I needed it to do deeper and more interesting dives with a local charter. There are only a few charters in R'lyeh, so you go with the wind.

 

[Tripp]

Alphabet wars...

 

[The Cosmicist]

Sing the alphabet song with me! Ready...

"IDEA... NAUI... S.D.I... PADI, P-DIC, and A.C.U.C. S.S.I, G.U.E, C-MAS, B-SAC, I.A.N.T.D.

Now you know your ABCs... "

Sorry.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

I think you're on point. Even if that person doesn't become a GUE true believer.

Well, one of those persons created a PADI distinctive specialty modeled after GUE fundies. I find that quite interesting.

it's interesting to see the differences between agencies in your post..

As someone who has taught for 3 different agencies, I have found the framework to vary dramatically to the point that it did affect how I taught. What I could do in one agency, I could not do in one or two of the other. Agency absolutely matters. If an instructor doesn't take advantage of those differences, well, not sure what to say (and oh God, that is not a challenge to start bickering with anyone here. Send me a PM instead please).

 

[O-ring]

Well, one of those persons created a PADI distinctive specialty modeled after GUE fundies. I find that quite interesting.

Peak Performance Buoyancy? Fish Identification? Hmm...it can't be Self Reliant Diver.

 

[scubadada]

So, I did PADI wreck, nav, deep, PPB, and DPV. in 2004 in Grand Cayman. I did the course with only my son and a good instructor. I had nearly 80 dives at the time including 19 >100 feet. The course was fine, I learned a few things. I used the AOW almost immediately to do dives on the Spiegel Grove and the Duane in Key Largo. Much easier than proving recent deep dives. I did PADI Rescue in 2005, the end of my PADI training. I did SDI Solo in 2013 to increase my ability to dive solo with operators who did not already know me, worked out well

 

[Rukkian]

Different words, but exactly what I said. Again, getting back to how you define the word advanced, or "mastered the skill" as mentioned in a recent post.
Yes, some just can't accept advanced as just being a title or word. Again, for those who think it really means you're a real expert diver and therefore take unwarranted risks, well, I just don't think about those folks.

Advanced as in advanced past ow, which it is. While technically you can do the deep at 61', that, to me is cheating. I did my deep on a 93' drift dive in key largo. It was a great experience, and I was able to learn quite a bit while experiencing something new. The night and ppb dives were useful as well, but I thought the navigation really wasn't much more than what I had in ow. I am glad I was able to do all of that with an instructor there. We found my son was not ready, and dropped out of the dives. Since we did our ow in a cold, dark, low vis quarry, it was great doing aow in nearly opposite environments.

Changing the name to ow2 does not really do anything, that was my point. It really doesn't matter if it is called ow2 of aow, or (pick the name). The name really doesn't matter as long as people know what it means. It universally (at least at this point) means you are now trained to go to 100', and have experience with an instructor in more situations than what you had in ow. Nobody is claiming that aow means you are an expert diver, just that you are trained to go to 100' (vs 60' that standard ow trains for at this point).

 

[lowwall]

Nobody is claiming that aow means you are an expert diver, just that you are trained to go to 100' (vs 60' that standard ow trains for at this point).

Except that you aren't trained to go to 100'. PADI wants to have it both ways, they claim that it does not teach advanced skills, that it's just a sampler course so you can determine if you want to complete, say, Deep Diver. Yet PADI-affiliated ops treat it as one and PADI-trained divers are clearly told that it is advanced training which allows them to go to 100'.

The whole "trained to x feet" thing is odd. Open Water divers are certified to the recreational limit (130'/40m). There is no such thing as depth training limit or guide requirement in the WRSTC OW standard, "A certified open water diver is qualified to apply the knowledge and skills outlined in this standard to plan, conduct, and log open-water, no-required decompression dives when properly equipped, and accompanied by another certified diver."

The "requirement" for AOW is basically an admission that the usual PADI-style OW training has become too abbreviated to adequately prepare divers to the OW standard.

BTW, WRSTC doesn't even have a standard for any type of advanced open water diver. The only "advanced" standards they have are for rescue diver and professional certs. See Standards Downloads - WRSTC

They do have a standard for "Supervised Diver" which does have a limitation on depth and requires a minimum of a DM to provide supervision on dives. PADI offers this as "Scuba Diver." Thus my suggestion that PADI could start marketing Scuba Diver as the quick entry level cert and beef up the minimum requirements for OW to where it will produce competent divers.

It's not like non-divers will know the difference between the certs.

 

[johndiver999]

Padi aow has been around for a long time. Decades, so the existence of the aow course should not be interpreted as some sort of acknowledgement that the ow course is (now) too simple or short.

You might make a very convincing argument that the ow is too abbreviated in many situations, I think aow has been a worthwhile course for many people for a long time.

 

[Rukkian]

Except that you aren't trained to go to 100'. PADI wants to have it both ways, they claim that it does not teach advanced skills, that it's just a sampler course so you can determine if you want to complete, say, Deep Diver. Yet PADI-affiliated ops treat it as one and PADI-trained divers are clearly told that it is advanced training which allows them to go to 100'.

The whole "trained to x feet" thing is odd. Open Water divers are certified to the recreational limit (130'/40m). There is no such thing as depth training limit or guide requirement in the WRSTC OW standard, "A certified open water diver is qualified to apply the knowledge and skills outlined in this standard to plan, conduct, and log open-water, no-required decompression dives when properly equipped, and accompanied by another certified diver."

The "requirement" for AOW is basically an admission that the usual PADI-style OW training has become too abbreviated to adequately prepare divers to the OW standard.

BTW, WRSTC doesn't even have a standard for any type of advanced open water diver. The only "advanced" standards they have are for rescue diver and professional certs. See Standards Downloads - WRSTC

They do have a standard for "Supervised Diver" which does have a limitation on depth and requires a minimum of a DM to provide supervision on dives. PADI offers this as "Scuba Diver." Thus my suggestion that PADI could start marketing Scuba Diver as the quick entry level cert and beef up the minimum requirements for OW to where it will produce competent divers.

It's not like non-divers will know the difference between the certs.

You are confusing trained with certified. In theory, an ow duvet from any agency can technically go to 300', but shouldn't be doing that. Same thing applies. Can you go to 100' on your first dive after ow- yes, but I would suggest you shouldn't without either more training, or learning.

You are trained to go to 60' after ow (even if you are certified to go as deep as you want)-, and is a good safe place to stay until you get more training or experience or knowledge. Doing a deep dive to 100' for the first time with an instructor is a good way to start, but it's not required. Not saying you can't go deeper, and I am sure some people immediately go much deeper. For me, I was glad I did my first boat, deep, night, and drift dives with an attentive instructor. Not saying everybody needs to.

PADI does not say this is only a sampler, that is what others have said. Sampling is a part, but it's also to: Gain more diving experience, Practice navigation, Sample different types of diving, Learn How to Explore below 18m/60ft, Improve your buoyancy, Use a compass.