Graduated license???

[ArcticDiver]

I have to wonder how closely you really are looking at the data. I've aregued this a lot already on this board so I'll try to keep it short with only a couple points.

First, aside from medical issues what does the DAN report suggest is the leading cause of accidents?...When buoyuancy control problems are reported in such a huge percentage of dives that result in injury (as an example). Poor skills.

How many near misses do we see that don't make the books because no one went to the chamber or died? I've been in cold quarries and seen half a dozen free flows in a weekend and as many or more uncontrolled ascents do to the free flows and other causes. Even if no one dies, it's by luck rather than design. I've been on recreational trips on the great lakes where a little wind and less than flat seas caused every one on the boat to have some problem that cause them to abort the dive shortly after entering the water. My wife and I were the only ones to get in a dive but ended up cutting them short because no one else showed up on the wreck causing us to think there might be problems topside so we headed up.

It's true that the world wide death toll isn't large enough to really draw attention. However take a look at the number of accidents in specific locations. Divers diving the least bit challanging locations without supervision don't seem to fare so well.

The fact is that even some one with no training at all can likely dive and survive it. However, this is not, IMO, evidence to the quality of training. I dived for years without any formal training and never had a problem. This whole c-card thing is a scam if you ask me. Yet an awful lot of "trained" divers survive near misses by luck and without the supervision provided to most divers, I think they would certainly be dropping like flies. The current system relies heavily on supervision. Even if it's not in-water supervision so much of the diving is at resorts and the dives are canned. They're prepicked and preplanned and by nature partially compensate for many of the training deficiencies.

I know of great lakes charters that always take divers to a shallow barge where they can bounce off the top of it without ruining the site to try to get people dialed in before going to a real wreck. They KNOW that the majority of the divers that come to them can't dive worth a darn. Based on the results they'll decide where to go next. They see it day in and day out. True the result isn't usually fatalities but MANY MANY ruined and totally messed up trips. So...every one gets a checkout dive even if they don't realize it. It's funny I saw a dive on a 75 ft lake michigan wreck...a dive shop with a bunch of AOW divers. Within 5 minutes there were divers poping to the surface everyplace. LOL what a fiasco.

Even tech charters I know won't take you out unless they know you personally or by reputation.

No one that I know with any experience trusts the "system" c-cards or log books. Hence threads like this. There is a problem and people out there doing it see it and find ways to deal with it dispite the so-called lack of an overwealming death toll which is the lamest excuse Ive ever heard. How many deaths do some of you need to convince you that something is wrong. The nature of most of the deaths are enough to tell me there's something wrong.

My own solution, after battleing this stuff for a long time, has been to get out of the business. I don't go near some of the quarries where my heart is in my stomach the whole time watching people strugle, get hurt and having to move out of the way for ambulances all the time. I don't go on those rec charters any more. It isn't fun, it's just aggrivating and nerve wracking. I generally dive with people I know in places where PADI is not "the way the world learns to dive." If I am going to dive with some one I don't know...either personally or by reputation, it will most certainly be a very easy little more than a pool dive and I don't give a darn what kind of card they have because cards can be baught anyplace.

So again, end the baby sitting so the ball lands in the right court. Let the "expert" clean up their own mess for a change. As some one tried to point out earlier, you can fix a broken machine by adding parts. You need to fix the broken part.

This doesn't mean that the system is "broken" and needs to be fixed. The current system very clearly and decisively certifies people to dive in the same conditions under which they were certified, and no others. I haven't looked at all the paperwork that all agencies have the graduating student sign. But all that I have looked at are very clear on this point.

Most divers I have met are keenly aware of what they do and do not know. At the same time there are way too many "professionals" who look to their profit margin first and who require unnecessary "checkout" dives. Also there are other professionals and certified divers that encourage a diver to exceed his ability.

But the net result of all this is still a safe diving community. The accident/incident rate as reported by DAN is remarkably low for an active sport. But no matter how the DAN statistics are parsed this is a safe diving community.

If someone has actual, real data that contravenes this information they owe the diving community the benefit of disclosing it in a useable and understandable form. Lacking such information I can only assume that anyone who thinks the current system is defective to the point it needs to have major changes has some agenda other than just safety.

 

[MikeFerrara]

But the net result of all this is still a safe diving community. The accident/incident rate as reported by DAN is remarkably low for an active sport. But no matter how the DAN statistics are parsed this is a safe diving community.

If someone has actual, real data that contravenes this information they owe the diving community the benefit of disclosing it in a useable and understandable form. Lacking such information I can only assume that anyone who thinks the current system is defective to the point it needs to have major changes has some agenda other than just safety.

We can't really discuss accident rates statistically because we don't know how many active divers there are or how many dives are being done. Therefor we can't call it a rate. It's just raw data. Besides, as far as probability calculations go, the probability of a non spacific diver in the population having an accident has no meaning to the individual because the probability isn't the same for every one. The DAN report does show that divers with little recent experience and/or little training is one of the higher risk groups. So...when we go to a quarry or on a charter that caters to many novice divers and in the midst of some off the boondogles that go on there, what is the probability of an accident? Rapid or uncontrolled ascents and buddy seperations are common but don't always result in injury. Still, where they are common what's the probability that it will? I've seen probably as many as 4 or 5 ambulance runs at the same quarry in a single summer. I used to have the numbers memerized but if I recall, one year there were 9 though I wasn't there for all of them. Not all were serious injuries but the incident was serious enough that EMS was activated. Even here though we don't know how many dives were done although the management should be able to give the number of divers. Either way, there was a significant probability that you'd see an accident if you spent a weekend there. Laguna beach averages more than one fatality/month some years. It's also one of the few places that have diving legeslation. Right?

Whether or not it's a safe community kind of depends on where you are and who your with. When I look at training standards, how I often see training conducted and see the problems divers actually have and even the cause of accidents I see an obvious connection. I can't prove it mathmatically but then again I don't need to. Boat crews and dive site owners are just shoveling some one elses mess.

At one dive site I know your not allowed to go below 80 ft without submitting a "deep dive plan" for approval. Mind you, the last time I talked with the owner who approves the plans, he only had about 20 lifetime dives himself. If these divers can't stay safe without his help they definately have a problem. He's had enough people hurt that he feels he has to take an active roll in manageing their activities. At this particular cold water site many of the problems start with a free flow. Look at how many agencies don't teach free flow management. Of the ones that do, take a look at how they teach it. Combine that with the minimal buoyancy control required for certification and I would absolutely expect to see problems in this area...and we do and often. Sometimes it results in injury or death and sometimes not but on a busy weekend you'll see it happen several times a day. This is one skill area that we can see causes problems but there are others like gas management. Look at what divers are doing in the water and what training standards require and you see how the two go tohgether.

Dispite the actual fatality count, after spending some time in dive training and being intimately familiar with training standards of more than one agency, cleaning up some of this looks like a real no brainer to me.

To disagree with you again, one of the big issues is that these divers really don't know what they don't know. They think they're ready, they've been told they're ready but they have no idea.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Let me give another example...

Around here we've seen a good number of accidents happen on AOW deep dives. Two things here. The first is that you can become a PADI instructor with only one dive below 60 ft...being the one deep dive you had to do in your own AOW class. The other is that a student on his fifth lifetime dive could very well be doing his AOW deep dive in 40 degree water. Put the two together and you could have an instructor doing his first 100 ft dive as a teaching dive (and it could even be his first teaching dive). It's an extreme case bnut standards allow it and I've certainly seen instructor and student at 100 ft clinging to a line for dear life both looking like they need help and have had my own classes interupted by it. you might not see this in the tropics or someplace where every dive is an 80 ft reef dive but around here DM and instructor candidates go to the local shallow quarry and do a million 20 ft dives in a day to get in the required number of dives...and walla...they're an instructor.


Why let an instructor without deep diving experience teach deep? Why let a student that hasn't mastered basic skills shallow dive deep? It's asking for trouble and you'll get it.

You can argue that these standards aren't broke but you'll never convince me and I can't imagine that it could possibly be more broke.

The industry takes full advantage of the fact that no matter how poorly they teach most divers survive it. I dived for several years with no formal training at all. The fact is that if you're comfortable in the water you can just strap on gear, drop to the bottom, walk around a while, climb back up and probably not get hurt. That says nothing about the quality of training. Notice I said "IF" your comfortable in the water. In fact my OW instructopr would let you crawl around on the bottom and my cousin (only an OW diver himself) would rag on you for it. The industry goes way out of their way to attract EVERYONE and some get certified who won't ever be comfortable in the water. These aren't people who would ever think of diving without the missleading advertising.

No, it's broke alright and the only defense ever offered is that there aren't piles of dead divers. ok.

If someone has actual, real data that contravenes this information they owe the diving community the benefit of disclosing it in a useable and understandable form. Lacking such information I can only assume that anyone who thinks the current system is defective to the point it needs to have major changes has some agenda other than just safety.

While I've conveyed my observations and concerns with standards directly to agency decision makers, I have niether time, resources or the desire to make a real peer reviewed study of it and present it to the public. I don't feel that I have a responsibility to do anything more than what I've done. How do you figure that I OWE any one anything? I don't have any agenda and don't stand to gain or lose anything either way. I point out to people what I see as holes in standards and the problems I think they cause in an attemp to not lose friends to the bozo practices of the industry. I've even discontinued all my instructor memberships because I can't in good consience be associated with this. So I've even set aside my own rather large investment. I would contend that most of those who defend these standards and practices based on the death toll are the ones with an agenda. PADI (as an example) is a business that exists for the purpose of making money. I could use a job right now so if they or any one else would like help in cleaning up their standards I'd be willing to listen to their offer. If however I'm going to donate time or money it'll more likely be at the church or someplace.

In the meantime, buyer beware.

 

[TeddyDiver]

Well I know the facts as reported by DAN(Divers Alert Network). As far as I know they are public and available to anyone who cares to look. The only caveat, and I believe they disclose that as did I, is the lack of mandatory reporting. So their data base is possibly not complete. However it is large enough valid decisions can be made from it.

The DAN data base is valid for incidents happening to more experienced divers. How many newbie has DAN or any diving insurance?
____________________________

Anyway, if we are not questioning the licenses, the original question pointed out has allready been answered in several messeges. LDS or DO can, and they do in some places, checking and dives to valuate new customers.
If I go to a new divesite, whether or not via DO, I want other divers to know my experience as well as I want to know theirs, and take the first dive easy to check out the place etc. So I don't see the point why some people don't want, or even reject any indication to do this.

 

[TeddyDiver]

Well said, MikeFerrara.
1. C-card demonstrates training.

2. Log book and personal enquiry demonstrates experience.

3. Check out dive demonstrates skill level.

Three simple steps that can greatly reduce risk exposure for everyone involved. In some cases steps one and two can be skipped. Though probably not a good idea for possibly legal or information reasons. If the intent is to have a good safe dive, step three can never be skipped, except in its own performance, the check out dive.

Seconded!
________

Looks like you are having really lot of divers around in some places around there. I haven't seen a single diver except the ones I dive with. Most of the places don't have any connection with a cellular, closest hyberbaric chamber is in Murmansk....

 

[wolf eel]

MikeFerrara Let me give another example...


Why let an instructor without deep diving experience teach deep? Why let a student that hasn't mastered basic skills shallow dive deep? It's asking for trouble and you'll get it.

This to me is the biggest problem we have.

You can argue that these standards aren't broke but you'll never convince me and I can't imagine that it could possibly be more broke.

I agree with this completley. The system is broke very broken to say the least.

The industry takes full advantage of the fact that no matter how poorly they teach most divers survive it.

Very true statment. Also a very bad one. Sad to say money come's before life. But the system in everything is broken.

I've even discontinued all my instructor memberships because I can't in good consience be associated with this.

Thnik about all the cash you are missing out on.

Much closer would be the certification of welders, which involves no government at all. In the US, the welding certification in the private sector is dominated by the American Welding Society. However, there is no dive agency with comparable clout.

In Canada everything we do has a Government stamp on it. To have a regulatory group that tests people would cost loads of cash. And the industry would be hurt in the pocket book. What organization would you use as the test example ? DIR, PADI, ACUC, NAUI. each has it's own rules and ways to dive.

In an ideal world, there would be dive examiners certified by some agency with strict rules to prevent conflict of interest.

This is the only real way to do it. And it would be great. Diving would be safe and the LDS that hires useless instructors to save a buck or two would also be on the radar. It comes down to the instructor, and what is being taught.

 

[wolf eel]

I need to clear up this little bit at the bottom. What I was saying is that the only way is too have a regulatory body that could test everybody. The problem is the cost. That with all the other diving related costs may turn others away. Even though we need it. My last posts kinda says I agree and disagree. It's just the cost to divers. As some group would charge outrages amounts of cash just like WCB for really nothing.


Also what kind of a check out dive could you have ? If you test somebody in calm water and at a shallower depth, you still would not know if they can handle current and deep diving.

 

[pants!]

We *don't* need any regulatory bodies to test divers.

Maybe what we need is a regulatory body to oversee the teaching agencies, or an intervention that breaks the card-issuing part of the agency off of, and in opposition to, the teaching part of the agency.

 

[wolf eel]

pants! We *don't* need any regulatory bodies to test divers.

Maybe what we need is a regulatory body to oversee the teaching agencies, or an intervention that breaks the card-issuing part of the agency off of, and in opposition to, the teaching part of the agency.

Coming from me this is different.
What are you saying ?

Are saying we need a regulatory body to oversee the agencies that give out cert cards ? That would be twice as bad. You would not have a choice about what you will learn at all. As all the angencies will be teaching what the Regulatory body wants and not what they want.

 

[pants!]

No, make the "diver certifier" organization separate from the "diver training" organization. Making the guy who gives you the card and the guy who does your training different people may help.