AOW? Joke? Meaningless?

[stuartv]

However, I will not dive past 75 feet. Ever. So that means no AOW.

AOW only requires one dive to 61' to meet the AOW standards.

However, if you get 40 dives in your log book and find an SDI shop, you should be able to take SDI Rescue without having AOW.

 

[BFRedrocks]

This thread shows exactly why subjective words, such as "advanced," are just that, subjective. A dive shop should be able to recognize the minimum requirements for a PADI AOW card versus SDI, NAUI, etc, and take that into consideration. I have had experiences with dive shops where they wanted to see my AOW card simply to show them that I have dived deeper than 60 feet (whether that's 61 or 101 doesn't matter to them), and according to PADI standards, I am certified to do dives deeper than 60 feet, which to them could just be a CYA liability concern.

As for whether it's a "joke" course, well, that kind of depends on the instructor (as folks have pointed out), true, but also on WHEN you take it. I would think that someone doing AOW for dives 5-9 would get a heck of a lot more out of the course than the person who waits until dive 100 after already completing numerous deep, wreck, boat, night, etc dives during that time.

If you needed to sit at the bottom and watch the SPG for that, then you failed to read (and/or comprehend) your OW manual and should've failed the OW class. Also your middle school physics. As for gas planning, where did you get your SAC/RMV? Or do you mean you planned your gas after your dive?

I'm pretty sure they didn't NEED to do it to understand the theory behind it, but rather it was to actually see it happening at that depth. I'm sure folks can see videos showing that red isn't red at 100 feet, but to see it for yourself may provide some sort of validity for some folks.

 

[Basking Ridge Diver]

However, I will not dive past 75 feet. Ever. So that means no AOW.

Just curious - would you dive to 74.5 feet? What is magical about 75 - curious not looking to flame.

 

[boulderjohn]

We are all constantly learning, at least I hope so. How you get that learning varies. How fast you learn that varies. For example, a very active SB participant ihas (according to another thread) amassed 35 dives in the few months that he has been diving, and he has been able in that time to achieve a level of understanding such that he is able to teach those of us with hundreds and thousands of dives all the stuff we have somehow missed or misunderstood in the many years we have been diving. Those of us who have open minds and are always willing to learn are blessed to have a prodigy who has already learned everything there is to know about diving correct us with such absolute and unshakeable certainty. I am grateful to be in such a presence so I can extend my knowledge.

 

[stuartv]

We are all constantly learning, at least I hope so. How you get that learning varies. How fast you learn that varies. For example, a very active SB participant ihas (according to another thread) amassed 35 dives in the few months that he has been diving, and he has been able in that time to achieve a level of understanding such that he is able to teach those of us with hundreds and thousands of dives all the stuff we have somehow missed or misunderstood in the many years we have been diving. Those of us who have open minds and are always willing to learn are blessed to have a prodigy who has already learned everything there is to know about diving correct us with such absolute and unshakeable certainty. I am grateful to be in such a presence so I can extend my knowledge.

LOL! Sweet! I need to meet this guy! Maybe I can learn something from him. LMAO!! :-D

 

[blinkswiler]

I did my aow right after ow. Even though I'm comfortable in the water I wanted 5 more closely supervised dives before venturing out on my own. Now as an instructor, I still feel the same way. While some are naturals, others need closer supervision at the start. It's all about safety. Your new friend will likely be a safer/better diver for it. As for the certification, it is an independent verification of what your dive skills were once. Anyone can claim x dives or doctor a log book. But the c-card says someone thinks you did something right once.

 

[dmaziuk]

I'm sure folks can see videos showing that red isn't red at 100 feet, but to see it for yourself may provide some sort of validity for some folks.

To me the fun part about red is how much the brain can compensate for it. Also for silt and backscatter. Every time I look at the pix post-dive and especially when I try to colour-correct them I wish the camera could do that.

 

[tursiops]

And despite PADI saying it isn't required, every shop I see requires AOW to do rescue, so that is closed off to me as well.

Now that is just silly. AOW is NOT a requirement for PADI Rescue. Adventure Diver, one of which must be Underwater Nav, is required. Call PADI and give them the names of all those shops that won't give you a Rescue class. Assuming, of course, you've met the actual requirements.

 

[NAM001]

Your arguemetn is not sound. Use the same critereia you used about an aow and apply it to an ow. apples with apples. and yor comment about insurance and cards ... no there would not be a problem because the victom had a tech card and assuming it was not a tech card for 150 ft and the guy dies at 250. also as far as the ins i am refering to is not the operator insurance its the personal life insurance of the diver. regarding your comment on .... I would require would be more than just seeing an AOW card, boats do not even do that, generally speeking. Some do. Either way the card presented has legal standing in that the waiver you sign should say that you are compitant to preforn the dives you have trained for. first the card says what the industry says you are trained for and the waiver covers the operator because he cant tell if the diver is profecient or not. That part is out of hte control of the operator. That is why the diver makes a statement that he is. The operator accepts the divers statement with the understanding that the operator is not at fault if the diver was less than truthfull. As a business the operators have to protect them selves. As far as .... Who here actually thinks a person with 9 dives, one of which was to 61'....... No they are not compitant to do such a dive, for the most part. very few are. (regarding to OW's or vacation divers) When i say OW's i refer to those who have no more skills than an OW basic not the card they carry.

The AOW minimums mean that the student did at least 1 dive to at least 61'. So, assuming more than that is just that - an assumption - and not justified, based on the PADI standards. Similar for assuming they have "some navigation skills". The requirements are that they did 1 U/W Nav dive. Assuming they have "some navigation skills" based on that seems a bit tenuous. Reading the first chapter of a Physics book doesn't mean a person knows "some physics." And I don't see any requirements of AOW to justify an assumption of functional buoyancy and trim.

You could get an AOW card by having 9 dives under your belt, where one dive is to 61', one dive has some U/W Nav component, and the other 3 are about coral reef conservation, fish identification, and being an underwater naturalist.

If you think seeing someone holding that card allows you to make ANY assumptions about the depth or breadth of that diver's knowledge or skills (beyond they did 1 dive to 61' and they saw a compass once), I think, well, that's pretty funny.

But, the funniest thing to me is if it's actually true that insurance companies give a hoot about whether divers have this card when they go out on a boat for a dive that "requires Advanced." If the insurance companies actually believe that having AOW somehow gives them (the insurance company) more protection against claims, I'd say PADI's Marketing Department should all get a bonus! More likely it's just a way for the insurance companies to get out of paying claims - i.e. a loophole they can exploit. "Sorry, Captain Bill. You didn't make sure the dead guy had an AOW card. It doesn't matter that he was a Tech diver with 2000 dives. He didn't have an AOW card, so we're not paying for the lawsuit from his family."

The longer this thread goes, the more I DO think PADI AOW is a joke. I'm not saying that every AOW course out there is a joke. I am SURE that there are instructors out there that actually really teach their AOW students a lot. But, that's beside the point. The point is that the AOW minimum standards are so, umm, "light" that just seeing the card doesn't really - to ME - mean anything more than that they have done at least 9 dives, total, counting their original 4 OW training dives. Ceding someone the title of "Advanced" based on meeting those standards does seem to be kind of a joke - to me.

In other words, if I were running a dive charter boat taking people on dives that I thought should require "Advanced", the credentials I would require would be more than just seeing an AOW card - as the AOW card by itself doesn't mean ANYTHING, in terms of whether someone is competent and capable of doing an "advanced" dive. Maybe they had a great class and ARE capable - but I would have no basis to ASSUME that just because they have the card.

Who here actually thinks a person with 9 dives, one of which was to 61' and all the others were less, one dive for U/W Nav, and 3 dives for coral reef conservation, fish identification, and underwater naturalism, should be ASSUMED to be competent to go out on a boat, in 5' seas in the Atlantic, and dive in a current, to a wreck that is 115' down?

As far as I can tell, that's how things actually are. The dive companies in the Outer Banks just say "requires Advanced" to do exactly what I just described. Go down there and get on a boat. IF they even ask, you can show them your AOW card and you're good to go.

And that is an example, to me, illustrating that AOW is a joke. Maybe even a deadly joke.

 

[high/baric]

To me the fun part about red is how much the brain can compensate for it. Also for silt and backscatter. Every time I look at the pix post-dive and especially when I try to colour-correct them I wish the camera could do that.

But the camera CAN do that, with manual white balance correction! Well, not backscatter, but can't have it all. If you really are struggling with color correcting images, and was not just saying it as an example, look into manual white balance (and of course flash for close-up), perhaps with an added ambient light color filter, it'll change your U/W photography forever.

Sorry for off-topic, carry on!