When are we gonna learn?

[Lorenzoid]

Yeah, it has been pointed out in previous threads that "Advanced Open Water" is only intended to mean the diver's training has advanced beyond the training he received in Open Water.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I don't think it's an issue when people take AOWD right after OWD. Essentially they're just doing an extended OWD course... nothing wrong with that and they're not really qualified to do anything new after the course.

They might not be qualified to go to 100 feet ... but they now have a card that gives way too many of them the idea that they are. Furthermore, that same card gives them access to dive boats that will take them on dives even deeper than that.

I'd be a lot less opposed to the concept of going straight from OW to AOW if they'd remove the deep part of that class and save it for after people get more comfortable with their basic skills. Depth has a tendency to magnify the little problems that should be no big whoop ... but can become so if you experience them at 100 feet and don't handle them calmly.

If anything, it's a plus for some people as they get to do more dives with an instructors that already knows them. I fail to see any downside in doing that.
There is not much to learn in AOWD, it's basically supervised diving and getting a few tipps.

If you want to do more dives with an instructor, it's cheaper to just hire one to take you diving ... without the pretense of a card that gives you access to dives that, while you may have been exposed to you are in no way qualified to be there.

It's an an issue when people take deco/overhead courses too early which that happens all the time and is even promoted by instructors on this board.

On that we agree ... but I don't know of any agency that promotes taking deco/overhead straight out of OW class ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Don't think I ever said that classes are useless and I don't think they are. I am just convinced that they are an introduction to what you need to learn and do not develop fully the skills you need. I would imagine that some tec courses are far more rigerous (cave, trimix, etc.) and do prepair the diver pretty extensively.

What I object to is saying a diver is completely skilled after OW and is an advanced open water diver with 14 dives. That's a disservice to both the diver and the sport.

I agree ... the word "mastery" should be stricken from the OW standards. Nobody "masters" a skill in that class ... they are simply shown how to work toward that goal.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Bennno]

They might not be qualified to go to 100 feet ... but they now have a card that gives way too many of them the idea that they are. Furthermore, that same card gives them access to dive boats that will take them on dives even deeper than that.

I'd be a lot less opposed to the concept of going straight from OW to AOW if they'd remove the deep part of that class and save it for after people get more comfortable with their basic skills. Depth has a tendency to magnify the little problems that should be no big whoop ... but can become so if you experience them at 100 feet and don't handle them calmly.

I'm not sure whether it's still the case but with the SSI OWD you were 'allowed' to go staight to 100' after the course. I agree with what you're saying though.
Used to tell my stundents, that, even though they're allowed to go to 100', they shouldn't until they have more experience.

If you want to do more dives with an instructor, it's cheaper to just hire one to take you diving ... without the pretense of a card that gives you access to dives that, while you may have been exposed to you are in no way qualified to be there.

My old LDS used to have rental gear included in the AOWD so doing the course or getting a guide (plus rental) was pretty much the same price. If it's like that, you might as well just do the course...

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I'm not sure whether it's still the case but with the SSI OWD you were 'allowed' to go staight to 100' after the course. I agree with what you're saying though.
Used to tell my stundents, that, even though they're allowed to go to 100', they shouldn't until they have more experience.

... my YMCA OWD certified me to a depth of 130 feet. My instructor went to great lengths to explain to his students why doing so was a really bad idea ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Bennno]

... but I don't know of any agency that promotes taking deco/overhead straight out of OW class ...

Not right after the class but you only need 30 dives total to get deco training at least with PADI.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Not right after the class but you only need 30 dives total to get deco training at least with PADI.

I do not believe this is correct. What course from PADI can you take that involves deco training with only 30 dives?

 

[Bennno]

I do not believe this is correct. What course from PADI can you take that involves deco training with only 30 dives?

There was a long thread about this a while back and it's OT I guess, but this one says you need 30 dives:
TEC 40

TEC45 only requires 50 dives, which is also very low considering these are total dives including dives during prior classes.

 

[elgoog]

It's not just PADI - TDI AN/DP requires proof of only 25 open water dives.

 

[Jerome O'Neil]

Are you suggesting that anyone is promoting that a diver with any number of dives is an "expert" after they complete the AOW certification with any agency?

Your argument is semantic, focused on what you consider an appropriate amount of experience to call a diver "advanced", because you either misunderstand or misrepresent the word.

How about the word "master," as in "master diver." As in "I'm a certified master diver." Is 50 logged dives enough to be a "master diver?" Because that's what it takes to become *certified* as a master diver.

I don't think it's anyone here that is misrepresenting what those words mean, and it is precisely that which devalues what the certification actually provides.