Diver Training: How much is enough?

[Peter Guy]

Yes indeed, "Why is this so difficult to comprehend?" And the "this" is that "Standards" do say (at least for the one agency I know somewhat well -- and it appears for all other agencies too) that the student is to "plan the dive." Gee, think of that -- a "general standard" that applies to all conditions!

Does the "standard" (at least in PADIland) specifically state, "Plan the dive concerning, surf, depth, temperature, time, current, salinity, tidal exchange and any other pertinent item" -- No. Does it state, "Plan the dive...." -- Yes. A conscientious instructor will make sure that the relevant items are included, per the general Standard of dive planning. Having general standards that apply world wide make so much more sense than having only ad hoc "standards" -- ad hoc standards are, in fact, no "standards" at all.

Does that make sense? If so, "Why is this so difficult to comprehend?"

 

[drrich2]

Different diving localities present different risks. What is commonly found in one area isn't in another. If the goal is to teach a Student to dive with the conditions present locally, the measure of the training presented must provide for this. "The Standard" needed to be attained changes as the diving environment changes.

Bold emphasis mine. Since not all students will dive locally (and particularly not without further training, whether formal or via mentoring), many will dive in mild tropical vacation sites, and a certification is valid pretty much worldwide, not just locally, does it not make good sense to give the cert. to people who meet the minimum standards (thus they can go tag along on those cruise ship dive excursions or spend a week in Bonaire), warn them about the adversity of local conditions, encourage them to get further training/mastery before diving locally independently, then let them decide for themselves, now that they can make an informed decision?

People aren't being certified to dive locally; they're being certified to dive globally, with the caveat that's to be in conditions they're competent to handle.

As for demonstrating competence in the environment they trained in, if they can demonstrate adequate mastery of the skills required during OW checkout dives in that environment, they met the current need. If they're still not capable enough to head back out to shore dive it independently as newly trained buddy pairs, warn them. But why withhold the OW card, unless it's to overrule somebody's free will?

Richard.

P.S.: I'm glad more rigorous training is available for those who need/wish it. I take it the genesis of this thread was rooted in the belief all rec. dive training should be so, though, when local conditions aren't mild tropical.

 

[NAM001]

When i learned to drive in the mid west. I learned to drive on interstates, in snow and good roads, You learned to be alert for slow moving vehicles. If you cant handle a driving environment (fog) then get off the road for the benifit of yourself and others. We did not get taught mountain driving or sandy beach driving or concentration skills when surrounded by 1000 watts of stereo. I suspect California drivers ed is structured a little different. Yet my mid west license is good to drive in claifornia where there are mountains and such i was not trained to drive in. But then thier LA drivers probably cant relate to farmer's and tractors sharing the roads either. I wonder how long a driving course would be if all courses were forced to include driving in areas heavily populated with horse and buggies and dog sleds, and taxi drivers and air ports and smoke free zones and the list gos on and on.

 

[drrich2]

Nearly all drivers drive locally, and the likelihood of a mishap causing grievous harm to others (not just one's self) is high. When they travel, they avoid substantially harsher driving environments.

Many divers don't dive locally, and while a buddy can drown trying to save you, and your death can be troublesome for others also, I think the prime danger of bad diving is to yourself. Many divers do the majority of their diving in foreign places.

There is overlap, but there are limits.

Richard.

 

[boulderjohn]

John wrote

John, I believe you are wrong with what you wrote when you used "allowed" (as highlighted). My reading of the PADI standards is that we are not "allowed" to do those things but, to the contrary, are "required" to do those things. For example, when I teach an Open Water class (and yes, we ARE talking about basic open water in this thread -- or at least it started out that way -- NOT about diving the Doria!) I must discuss the Puget Sound tides and why some days/times are more appropriate than others.

My bad. What you wrote is actually what I meant.

 

[NAM001]

I agree and that is the point. The answer to making all right in the universe is to train, to a mastering level, skills for all areas. UNFORTUNATELY skills not used are forgotton or become innefective over time. If i go the PNW i would dive with a local and not by my self or with others that are not familiar with the area, no matter how much or little bottom time i have.. I is just good sence. You cant teach common sence and you cant teach skills and believe that that training will over ride the lack of prudent judgement of the many divers that venture out of thier cofort dive zones. The old addage of it tkes 10% of ones resources to fix 90% of the problems and 90% of resources to fix the 10% is true here also. A oint is reached where the fix to a problem is worse than the problem. To make a course that covers all dive skiill areas for students that 50% or better dive a week a year, and require it as a standard would kill the industry as we know it. A big boost for home cmpressor sales but other than that... scuba graveyard. I also find it hard to believe that the level of concern for poorly trained divers is more humanity than litigation. I think that we would be more successful making a bus that gets 100 mpg.

Nearly all drivers drive locally, and the likelihood of a mishap causing grievous harm to others (not just one's self) is high. When they travel, they avoid substantially harsher driving environments.

Many divers don't dive locally, and while a buddy can drown trying to save you, and your death can be troublesome for others also, I think the prime danger of bad diving is to yourself. Many divers do the majority of their diving in foreign places.

There is overlap, but there are limits.

Richard.

 

[DCBC]

Does that make sense?

Putting a weak, poor, or non-swimmer into questionable water conditions makes no sense to me at all. "Why is that so difficult to comprehend?" If you think it does, I'll leave you to your "PADIland" fantacy.

---------- Post added January 27th, 2013 at 09:08 AM ----------

...If they're still not capable enough to head back out to shore dive it independently as newly trained buddy pairs, warn them. But why withhold the OW card, unless it's to overrule somebody's free will?

Richard, if someone asks me to train them to dive, I assume that the goal is that they can do the activity safely in the local environment (where the training is being conducted). They only get a C-Card when they have proven that they can do so. Overruling someone's free will isn't in the equation (where did that come from?) Are you suggesting that the Student should be certified if they are incapable of diving safely?

 

[drrich2]

What I meant was, for practical purposes, denying a student an OW cert. card denies them diving; shops won't give air fills, charter boats won't take them out, dive quarries won't let them use the facilities, etc...

If the instructor issues the cert. because the minimum general OW course requirements have been met (let's say PADI or SSI is the course), and the instructor doesn't believe the student is ready for independent buddy pair diving in the local oceanic environment, then the instructor can educate the student about that, but the choice is the student's as to what to do. That's what I referred to with freewill.

I've seen a number of threads on ScubaBoard where discussions about certifications bring out opinions that making the requirements to get an OW cert. more rigorous is a way to stop divers deemed unfit from diving. Not saying you said that; it's my interpretation of views I've seen expressed on the forum before. It seems to me this is a big part of why an instructor would withhold the OW card!

No other cert. besides the OW cert. makes as big a difference in what a student is empowered to do. Sure, some charters won't take you on the deeper dives without AOW, or shops give you nitox fills without a nitrox cert., but the OW cert. lets people do so much more than they could without it.

Richard.

P.S.: I expect students should be certified when minimum standards are met, which should demonstrate that they are capable of diving safely somewhere (which may not be local) in the mainstream courses. If you specifically train for the local environment and not with agencies taking that approach, then of course your courses will run differently.

 

[The Chairman]

Putting a weak, poor, or non-swimmer into questionable water conditions makes no sense to me at all.

I just don't see this happening, not even on a small scale. It's a made up problem. Why do people keep bringing up these made up problems? Probably because there are no real problems to rant about.

 

[Zen Diving Inc.]

A couple of semi-famous quotes come to mind after spending so much time reading this thread...

“It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it.” [FONT=georgia, serif]~[/FONT] Joseph Joubert​

“I am very cautious of people who are absolutely right, especially when they are vehemently so.” ~ Michael Palin​