It is with all of my classes... at every level.
I never questioned that. My point is that you teach for an Agency that allows you as the Instructor to insure that the students are trained to a level you are satisfied with. Like you stated
".Unfortunately, time, depth, gas, skills, training and physical limitations are rarely discussed with OW students as a systematic way to evaluate a dive scenario." I believe that this
should be taught by every Instructor and a requirement for every training agency.
---------- Post Merged at 06:47 AM ---------- Previous Post was at 05:39 AM ----------
There are benifits to having the certifications easier than they were. ...More divers gives the industry more of a political voice, it allows for more dive ops to stay in business, more dive resorts, more money for developement of gear, more options for gear. ..
This was the exact reason why the training standards were lowered in the first-place. So manufacturers could increase sales and the industry develop... I'm sorry, but I don't think that increasing profits is a good enough reason to lower diver training standards.
In the PADI system divers are told their limits for their certs.
You
really believe that this is the case???
Now all of this takes into account the safety factor, doesn't matter how many people we get in the scuba life if they are getting hurt or dying. But we are not seeing that the present system is worse or better than the old system in a safety sense.
Any statistic that compares diving accidents today with those of the past is misleading. There are more people involved in SCUBA today than 40 years ago, so it can be expected that more diving accidents will occur. This is not a reflection on the quality of training given, rather that you can't relate training quality to these numbers.
To me, it's a matter of common sense. Would you prefer to dive with a non-swimmer or a strong swimmer with good watermanship ability? Would you prefer that your buddy be rescue qualified or non-rescue qualified? Do you feel that you as an Instructor can't increase diver safety by doubling your training? Would you expect your student to have an increase or a decrease in ability after this training? Are you really suggesting that an increased amount of training wouldn't increase diver safety?
How many accidents would their be today if divers had no buoyancy compensation? No SPG (just a 'J-valve')? No dive computers? My point is that a diver isn't necessarily 'as safe' because they can
rely on technical advances to substitute for the fact that they don't have the physical ability or confidence to dive without them...
I've been diving for 48 years and have made my living as a commercial diver. If there is one thing that I've learned, its that anything mechanical will fail (its just a matter of time). This is in-light of everything that can be done regarding proper maintenance and good planning. The underwater environment is a hazardous one. Man is not intended to breath underwater. It has been my experience that when an emergency occurs, it is my training and the training and quick action of others that can make a difference. Even after everything is done that's humanly possible, I still may die.
I don't believe in tempting fate. I have seen the differences in the caliber of divers trained today. Believe me, the is differences are many. Diver's today are less safe than they use to be. Diver retention had dropped. As far as I'm concerned (and there are other Instructors on this Board who also feel this way), standards should be increased for many of todays' diving instructional programs. The focus on "making it easier" on the student by lowering watermanship requirements, removal of diver rescue (submerged) and the lack of focus on gas management and planning, just doesn't cut it.