Do I really need AOW for diving with charters going to sites for depth below 60'?

[ktownhero]

Can I ask why anybody would want to exceed the limit of their training? Like somebody else said above, just because they don't ask you for proof doesn't mean you should take that as a sign it's ok to do it. You could be putting yourself or, worse, a diving buddy at risk by diving beyond the scope of your training. You can't put a cost on proper education, and it isn't like anybody that can afford SCUBA diving should have a problem affording the AOW course...

 

[Gombessa]

Can I ask why anybody would want to exceed the limit of their training?

Perhaps the question should be why anybody would want to exceed the limit of their formal training. A lot of people have made safe, careful well-planned and executed dives well beyond the limits of their diving agency training, under the guidance of skilled mentors, who may very well be instructors not teaching a formal class.

...it isn't like anybody that can afford SCUBA diving should have a problem affording the AOW course...

For some people, maybe it's not a question of affording the course, but whether they would gain enough value in taking it.

Just throwing it out there...

 

[rrweather]

While I don't know the figure (if the figure exists), I do know that most diving accidents are caused by the diver themselves. I know the PADI rescue book says poor judgment is the cause of most accidents. The equipment is more reliable than it has ever been. The opportunity for training is better than ever (more agencies offering more classes). The ocean is still the same. The only variable that hasn't changed is the human being and the decisions they make; hence, diving accidents being caused primarily by bad decisions. In diving, that means diving in conditions without training, improper use or lack of equipment for the situation, or over-confidence.

AOW is designed to teach you the basics of going deeper, navigating, night diving, buoyancy control, etc. so that you can dive in these situations safer. On top of safety, the classes teach you methods to get the most out of a specific dive. An example of this is the wreck specialty. When you are done, you have received training that will hopefully enable to you get more out of a dive (ie limited penetration). Sure, without training you could swim around the same wreck; however, with training, you can get more out of the same dive site. Ultimately, you could learn this from a mentor or without taking a formal class; however, simply not learning it at all should not be a strategy.

The other part that has me confused is your justification of price. The "worthless plastic card" is the cheapest part of taking a class. Depending on the shop, a PIC card is $20 or so. Out of the cost of a class, that is a small percentage. I don't know of anyone that takes classes to collect the cards. In fact, most could probably do without the cards; it's the training that the cards represent that is important. I am not saying that after taking a class, you will be an expert. You are correct in that one navigation class will not make you an expert in navigating. That being said, if you had zero experience using a compass, one class would be much better than no training at all. Even if you are an expert navigator on the surface, I would argue that you will learn something in a navigation class that applies to diving that you didn't know.

It is impossible for any training agency to certify you in something without teaching you first. "As I have seen the video materials they do not offer me anything new. Nav card does not make me a good navigator but hard training does...This is what bothers me about some PADI courses, there are some courses that do not verify your abilities and the card does not mean anything but that you have taken the course, sorta way of liability transferring no more." I am not here to defend PADI but how can PADI verify your knowledge level in something it does not teach you? You can't be judged in your navigation abilities if you are not taught a method of navigating underwater. It would be no different than you getting judged in rescue procedures without being taught rescue procedures. You hint that a course is nothing more than paying the money and receiving the card. You leave out the training that occurs before the instructor submits the paperwork. If you have managed to find an instructor that simply takes your money, goes through the motions of training without verifying your knowledge level, then submits your paperwork, go find a better instructor. I would love to know which PADI courses you feel "do not verify your abilities" but still lead to a card. I've yet to find one.

I'm not trying to get personal, but you come off as extremely confident in your abilities without having received much in the way of training. Maybe you are as good as you believe; however, over-confidence is a frequent cause of dive accidents. You have to be honest with yourself and accept the fact that for most people, additional training beyond OW provides a diver with useful training that better prepares the diver for different situations. Despite your knowledge, I would argue any class will probably teach you something you did not know before the class.

When I was diving in Thailand, the instructors on the boat would ask everyone their certification/training level. They would then group you up based on your answer. Certain sites (wrecks at 80 ft) were not an option for OW divers unless they were taking a class. So in that situation, if asked, you would have to lie about your training and certification. They would then group you up based on this lie, which could put someone else (besides yourself) in danger. They never verified each person's training level (that I know of). Instead, they expected the diver to have integrity.

 

[elan]

rrweather, I do not think you got all my points correctly. The only strict prerequisite for AOW is Deep Diving and Navigation. All the others can be selected. While I would agree that Deep Diving is there for a good purpose I believe that things like navigation is not. Not because it is not important, but because the course does not make you what is displayed on the card. And NO I"m NOT overconfident in my abilities I know that applying my skills in land navigation requires practice which I stated above. I do practice it every time I dive.

If you want another examples of PADI courses that I feel under-verify skills: The main one - OW pretty much. PPB.
I'm sorry but I personally do not see how a brand new OW can jump into a AOW program right away and be a verified AOW. IMHO PADI just devalues their certifications this way.

There are ways of verification, even if PADI has not given you any information. It's all the same - education practices - tests, exams etc. Their courses are nothing new in education. Very simple. Do not want to take the course - fine. Join the team on the dive in low visibility find few points on the bottom at different azimuths , return to your point of departure. Measure the distance etc. Done everything right - perfect, here is your hard earned card. Screwed up - s bad it was a nice dive but see you next time on the test.


And to eliminate speculations on training and equipment:
NO I'm not saving money on education and training. I took a lot out of courses like Nitrox, PPB (Though I consider PPB is not an effective course as PPB buoyancy requires more training that is given), and Ice Diving (though here most of my knowledge and safety procedures I took from a professional book, but I practiced the skills with the group and I do consider that course the most effective money investment out of all I have taken).

And yes I do pay attention to my equipment, I dive with redundant air source and both my regs are cold water no matter where (unless it's an air trip). In fact while doing PADI ICE diving course I was the only one with redundant air which is unacceptable IMO. The instructor has mentioned that but the guys did not bother with this. I believe PADI does not have strict guidelines regarding this.

 

[Walter]

While I do not agree with all aspects of the various organizations, I do realize that most of the diving requirements exist for safety.

I probably believed such clap trap when I had less than 50 dives logged too. The purpose of the AOW certification is to have you pay money for the card. AOW is, quite frankly, a joke. To get your certification, you are required to make exactly one dive (you can make more, but they are not required) to 60 feet (you can go deeper, but that is also not required). One dive to 60 feet qualifies you for exactly nothing.

Can I ask why anybody would want to exceed the limit of their training? Like somebody else said above, just because they don't ask you for proof doesn't mean you should take that as a sign it's ok to do it. You could be putting yourself or, worse, a diving buddy at risk by diving beyond the scope of your training.

Look at it this way, diver A takes an Open Water class and makes 4 dives to 20 feet. He immediately takes AOW in which he makes 4 more dives to 20 feet plus one "deep" dive to 60 feet. All his dives are in a quarry. Diver B takes an Open Water class in which he makes 4 dives to 60 feet (yes, I know that would violate PADI standards, but assume it was not a PADI class, other agencies allow it). After certification, he dives often with his much more experienced buddy making 4 dives in the 60 - 70 ft range. Continuting to dive, he makes several more dives in the 70 - 80 ft range. As time goes by, he feels comfortable and expands his diving to the 80 - 90 ft range where he makes 6 or 7 dives before making 20 more dives in the 90 - 100 ft range. All his dives are in the ocean where he's dealt with seas and currents.

Both these divers travel to Key Largo where they would like to dive the Duane. The main deck of the Duane sits at approximately 105 feet. Diver A has not dived in 5 months and has only made those 9 dives in his two classes. Diver B was diving yesterday in more challengingconditions than those expected today to a depth of 105 feet. He has logged 47 dives. Some operators would tell diver A he is qualified to make the dive because of the joke of an AOW card he has in his wallet. Most of those same operators would tell diver B he is not qualified to make the dive.

In my opinion, they have it backward. Diver A is clearly not qualified to make the dive and Diver B clearly is qualified.

You could be putting yourself or, worse, a diving buddy at risk by diving beyond the scope of your training.

You could be putting yourself or, worse, a diving buddy at risk by diving beyond the scope of your experience regardless of what card you might have. AOW cards scare me, people act like they actually have meaning. They don't.

AOW is designed to teach you the basics of going deeper, navigating, night diving, buoyancy control, etc. so that you can dive in these situations safer.

Actually, no. AOW is designed to give you one dive in each of five different areas, three of which can be jokes and one of which (deep) has limits (60 ft) that do not require you to actually make a dive in that area (deep) at all.

On top of safety, the classes teach you methods to get the most out of a specific dive. An example of this is the wreck specialty.

One dive on a wreck is not enough to teach you anything about wreck diving except to stay out of wrecks. If you want to learn anything about wrecks, take a wreck class, not AOW. Don't call your one wreck dive in AOW a "wreck specialty," it's nothing of the sort.

 

[Teamcasa]

, sorta way of liability transferring no more.

As others have said, depends on the resort. But don't kid yourself, if they ask, they are only trying to protect themselves.

There are numerous threads where people complain that other so-called advanced divers (regarless of agency) were not up to speed and caused problems.

A dive operation has to balance risk vs income when they decide who can go and where they take divers. I'd guess the more popular the resort, the more restrictive they can become.

Get at least AOW certified - problem solved.

 

[Blackwood]

Given that the Oriskany tower starts at 70, flight deck at 140ish and 214 to the sand, they are being careful.

Then they should ask for a "Mid Water Diver Specialty" instead of AOW

 

[suprasteve]

well I was a "Junior Open Water Diver (must dive with certified adult)" for almost ten years, got it at 12 and didn't think sending the agency another 20 bucks to 'update' my card would make a difference in how I actually dove . I broke that rule many many times if diving with buddies my own age through high school counts... I'd say within reasonable limits (recreational), if you feel experienced enough to do a dive deeper than 60', go for it!

 

[Firefyter]

The best reason for someone taking Advanced - it is a pre-requisite for the course you really should take......

Rescue

Not necessarily. I have Rescue, but never wasted my money on advanced.

 

[Stu S.]

I heard "No" to a 100 foot ocean dive a few years ago. When we certified in 1977 it was one course for 10 weeks and that certified us to 132 feet. Breaking OW into basic and advanced halves happened later. After about 300 dives, some of which were around 150 feet, I was told "No AOW card, no dive". They were pleased to offer me a weekend course that would have cost $400.

It felt like the guy was trying to take something away and then sell it back. I got the AOW certification locally and quickly. All of this was due to "Insurance regulations".