When is it okay to exceeding training limits?

[boulderjohn]

So I think it is safe to say that we are discussing a slowly moving target, full of weasel words, now largely influenced / controlled by lawyers from a "training" and not a "licensing" agency.

There are no scuba police, but there are insurance agencies...

I think it is safe to say that they are doing everything in their linguistic power to make you believe there is a rule when there is in fact no rule. That should suggest that they think following those non-rules is important.

 

[RJP]

I think it is safe to say that they are doing everything in their linguistic power to make you believe there is a rule when there is in fact no rule.

[video=youtube;b6kgS_AwuH0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6kgS_AwuH0[/video]

 

[SillyQuestions]

I think the key here is exceeding is OK, but ensure you progress gradually with lots of consultation of others.

I have a PADI rescue cert I earnt in Barbados, nothing else, yet I've dived to 80m in the dark and cold English Channel. But to reach this level it's taken me over 12 years of slowly gaining experience and consolidating each new thing. If I'd of done courses I'm sure people dive at my level after 2/3 years of intensive courses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Diving Dubai]

Just remember some dive/ travel Insurance policies state that you are only covered to your certification depth some may have a max depth other than that. The wording of Dan differs in different territories and has been debated on another thread.

Fact: If you end up in a chamber and you DC records a certain depth - you'd better hope your insurance covers that depth or that you have money in the bank or a great credit card limit

 

[Bob DBF]

I guess the secret is that OW certification allows you to dive within recreational limits (130'), and the purpose of an OW class is to prepare you to do this with a buddy and without the need of an instructor or DM.

RSTC
Purpose of OW training
"Open water certification qualifies a certified diver to procure air, equipment, and other services and engage in recreational open water diving without supervision."

With the following quote from PADI, via RJP, used as a depth restriction not only muddies the waters on actual depth restrictions, but also has not trained the diver as to his actual limits.

"As a PADI Open Water Diver, you will be a certified entry-level diver able to rent dive gear, get air fills and dive anywhere in the world in better or similar conditions to those you've trained in."

With some students I've seen, the limit would be about 30' or so in a clear fresh water lake like glass. At that point a dive to 60' would be a real eye opener if they looked at the pressure gauge in their regular time frame.
The major problem, I see, with giving arbitrary and incorrect rules, and training to them, makes the training a joke and gives some divers the impression that all training is a joke, and therefore not necessary at all. At this point they have the only certification necessary for them, and possibly others, to dive (see Father, son die while cave diving in Hernando)

All that being said, I believe a new OW diver should continue his education and expand his limits, with or without an instructor, in a slow deliberate manner. That would be exceeding your personal limits, training limits only apply to instructors and DM's while training students. In my case I was limited to OW training standards while in OW class, even though I had been diving for almost two decades and had experience in what would now be called tech diving.

Aside from the widespread availability of SCUBA training, there are websites with free training materials and older copies of course material from the major agencies sold cheap on the internet to cover the classwork side of things, other divers can mentor you on a formal basis or without them knowing you are learning from them. The best reason for expanding your limits slowly, regardless of which way you train, is that it gives time for you to gather experience, hone your skills, and Murphy can act as a quiz rather than a pass fail test.



Bob
----------------------------------------------------

That's my point, people, by and large, are not taught that diving can be deadly, they are taught how safe it is, and they are not equipped with the skills, taught and trained to the level required to be useful in an emergency.

 

[MrChen]

I'm still trying to figure out what I learned in AOW which made it that much safer for me to go deeper than 60 feet. When I was OW only, my instructor took out on a charter and we dove to 90 ft together.

 

[DivemasterDennis]

stuartv, diving within your personal limits is the key. Competence more than credentials should govern. Clear warm water, no current, 7o foot dives are not nearly as demanding as cold water 20 feet of vis and current. Which one do you think a new diver is more competent to do? My first open water dive after certification was to 79 feet, off Molokini Crater in Maui. No problems. It is always a good idea to gain more training, but also experience and time in the water. Dive within your comfort zone. But constantly expand that zone through more diving, diving with exeperienced buddies, and training.
DivemasterDennis

 

[Lorenzoid]

I'm still trying to figure out what I learned in AOW which made it that much safer for me to go deeper than 60 feet. When I was OW only, my instructor took out on a charter and we dove to 90 ft together.

My guess is that it's just that sort of apparent hypocrisy that prompted the original post. The training agencies tell their students "These limits of your OW certification are written in stone." Then, the light bulb comes on as the newly minted OW diver realizes that there surely was a "wink wink" implicit in those admonitions, since taking them literally and absolutely would mean that the diver could never as a practical matter learn to dive in excess of those limits!

Sometimes, leaving things imperfectly defined is the best route. Lawyers who write contracts know this. But it probably bothers the heck out of perfectionists like software designers who want to leave nothing undefined. If an agency attempted to define things more thoroughly, stating under what circumstances the previously stated "limits" (that we just said are written in stone) can be exceeded, it might only end up being used against them in litigation. Better to just keep it simple and say "these are the limits" and leave it at that. When the light bulb comes on, and the diver realizes that absolute limits make no sense and are even at odds with the idea of training to do more challenging dives, the diver's common sense should prevail.

 

[boulderjohn]

I'm still trying to figure out what I learned in AOW which made it that much safer for me to go deeper than 60 feet. When I was OW only, my instructor took out on a charter and we dove to 90 ft together.

Sometimes the experience is all that is needed.

I agree with those who believe the deep dive AOW curriculum is inadequate, so I add a lot of extra stuff on gas management. I believe that is the key thing to learn, and sometimes just doing the dive provides some of that learning. I once taught the deep dive to some students on the second day of AOW training. I had noted on the first day that one of the divers tended to go through gas rather quickly. We discussed that, and we made preliminary plans based on that first day experience. When we did the actual deep dive to a little less than 100 feet, his breathing got even worse. He used about about 66 cubic feet on our dive. I used about 20 cubic feet. We decided that the main thing he learned about deep dives is that he should not be doing them until things improved in that department.

I recently did the AOW deep dive with a couple who were both a little apprehensive about it. Leading up to it, I saw that they both had excellent air consumption rates, particularly the wife. She, however, was a bit apprehensive about the dive. Once we were down to 90 feet, though, they were both perfectly relaxed. We ended up doing a long, multi-level dive. The husband's SAC rate matched mine, and his wife's was much better. As a result of that dive, they were properly respectful of deep diving, but they were no longer apprehensive. Since then the three of us have had a number of very nice dives in that depth range.

That is why, BTW, I disagree with doing the deep dive to depths like 61 feet, which is permissible under standards. I think you don't know how you will react at deeper depths until you go to deeper depths.

 

[stuartv]

Thank you to everyone for the informative commentary. I haven't posted in this thread lately because I don't have anything to contribute. But, I am still reading it all!