Cannot find a reason for AOW certification

[boulderjohn]

I thought I would take a minute to correct some of the misconceptions in this thread.

When I started diving many years ago, I don't think there was an AOW certification level. That concept came along later. I don't think I was even aware of the AOW cert until I became a PADI diver in the early 90's.

The Advanced certification level was created in the mid 1960s by the Los Angeles County program with the primary purpose of exposing divers to a variety of dive experiences in the hope that it would help with the high scuba dropout rate. NAUI followed suit shortly thereafter. PADI added it still later.

Although the names differ slightly, pretty much all major agencies have an advanced certification that is roughly at the same level as the others. As stated above, the advanced certification was not created originally by PADI, and they they have not put in other levels in the roughly 50 years since they added AOW. PADI does not impose rules such as this on operators. Dive operators set those rules in coordination with their insurance companies, and they accept the advanced certifications of all agencies when they do.

'm not saying it can't or won't happen but my interpretation of PADI's statement concerning OW certification is that as you gain more experience you are no longer "limited" to the OW suggested limitations. IOW, once you dive past 60 feet (with a qualified dive buddy) you are no longer limited to 60 feet. I think it's fairly clear that PADI's limits are only suggestions, and certainly not some kind of law. To me your wife's 500+ dives are far more meaningful than an "advanced" C-Card belonging to someone with 25 dives or whatever.

That is correct. PADI's statement is that you need to dive within the limits of your "training and experience." You are expected to use good judgment to determine if your growing experience is adequate to a planned advanced dive.

It might be better to look outside PADI, at one of the tech diving agencies.

PADI teaches technical diving as well.

AOW is a PADI specific qualification.

As I wrote above, pretty much all major agencies have an advanced certification level, with only slight variation in the name.

 

[pnwbred]

Like others have said, you need it for specific types of dives or locations.

For example, I just got my AOW cert. I had to get it so I was able to dive the Titan 1 missile silo in WA. Just did this dive this past weekend..... soo fun!!!! 8/12

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Its more of a PADI tax. If you want to dive with PADI charters then you have to Put Another Dollar In. Lets hope they don't decide to add a few more levels, AOW to 75', Super AOW to 90 and Jumbo AOW to 110'.

Not true. My AOW card was issued by the YMCA, which predated PADI by a number of years.

I have my own views on this class ... mostly that it could be a very beneficial class if taught properly, but due to the fact that most people are pushed into it directly out of OW it's mostly superficial and serves more as an "experience" than an actual class.

I taught for NAUI for a dozen years. Their version of pretty much the same class is called "Advanced Scuba Diver". I remember when I got the instructor's handbook, going through the material my first thought was "I can't charge people money for this ... it's basically a review of what they were supposed to have learned in OW". With the exception of a Search and Recovery section ... which is very well done ... the class handbook was basically useless. So I wrote my own material, and taught the class based on that. My take on the class is that most people take it because they want to be certified for deeper depths ... so let's focus the class on teaching skills that strengthen the diver's abilities to plan and execute deeper dives. These skills include dive planning, buddy skills, gas planning, and navigation. Now, one can argue that these are skills that are useful for ANY dive ... and that would be a true argument. However, the deeper one goes the greater the potential risks if something should go wrong ... and one of the most significant parts of any dive class is learning how to mitigate risks. Running out of (or low on) gas is far more serious in terms of consequences if you're at 100 feet than it is at 40 feet. You've pretty much eliminated the option of doing a CESA at that depth (yeah, I know ... the chest thumpers will show up any time now, but most "normal" divers can't do one from 100 feet without killing themselves before they hit the surface). So learning how NOT to run out of (or low on) gas becomes increasingly important.

My view is that OW does a pretty good job of teaching you what you should do ... and a pretty poor job of teaching you how to do it. AOW is the class where I emphasized the how ... how to plan a dive so that you both know what to expect ... how to be a good dive buddy ... how to make sure before you get in the water that you're carrying adequate breathing gas and reserves for the dive plan ... how to find your way out and back again without getting lost. Sure, there were some other skills thrown in there as well ... refining buoyancy techniques, adding propulsion techniques like frog, helicopter and back kicks, learning how to maintain your buoyancy while focusing on other tasks such as navigation, improving your awareness skills (primarily by training yourself to look from side to side more often than you're used to doing), and other exercises that were meant to strengthen the skills you were introduced to in OW class. This is, to my concern, the benefit of a well-taught AOW class. It's not the "experience" class that gets frequently taught that adds value ... it's taking the basic skills from OW to the next level, and learning how to integrate them in a way that adds to your safety margins ... and therefore allows you to pursue more aggressive dives without significantly increasing your risks.

And before I get jumped on again for mentioning the agency I taught for, let me just point out that any instructor from any agency can emphasize these things completely within the framework of their agency's standard curriculum ... if they choose to. The whole point is that a class is only as good as how it gets taught, and the benefit you derive from it depends both on the instructor's approach to teaching and your determination to learn from it.

But to the OP's point ... if you have to ask whether it's worth taking, it's probably not. We don't all have to follow the same path to gain those skills ... with sufficient practice and a decent mentor you can achieve the same skills without the need to get the plastic ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Gareth J]

PADI teaches technical diving as well.


As I wrote above, pretty much all major agencies have an advanced certification level, with only slight variation in the name.

I am aware that PADI has tech courses as well. However, they are more likely to require you to have completed a specific set of PADI qualifications, and are less likely to look at the experience and skills you currently have.

Changing agencies is more likely to allow you to present diving skill and experience as an entry justification for a 'technical course' with the new agency / instructor.

PADI AOW is hardly an advanced qualification, whilst it as its value to recently qualified divers, it is probably a waste for anyone with any significant practical diving experience. Rescue Diver however is an excellent course and one I would heartily recommend, one that is actually worthy of repeating after completing.
One of the issues for the OP was both to gain a qualification which allows them to dive deeper than their existing OW qualification (on paper), and to get some value from it. Unfortunately, if they have been diving for a reasonable period, most of the elements in the AOW qualification will hardly enhance their knowledge, skills or experience.

Staying within a qualifying agency tends to force you to follow their specified progression. Moving agencies, especially those that set the pass criteria heavily in favour of demonstrated skill is more likely to allow you to carry experience and skills onto a course that by the book you are not qualified for.

Gareth

 

[boulderjohn]

I am aware that PADI has tech courses as well. However, they are more likely to require you to have completed a specific set of PADI qualifications, and are less likely to look at the experience and skills you currently have.

Is that a guess? If so, it is incorrect. You can cross over to PADI tech from any agency. They have a chart showing at what level you cross over from depending upon your certification level in the other agencies. For beginning tech, all you need is the equivalent level of certification as is required for PADI courses.

Staying within a qualifying agency tends to force you to follow their specified progression. Moving agencies, especially those that set the pass criteria heavily in favour of demonstrated skill is more likely to allow you to carry experience and skills onto a course that by the book you are not qualified for.

What is the disadvantage to following a well planned training sequence rather than jumping around? Which agencies do not set the pass criteria in favor of demonstrated skill? I am pretty sure all agencies require that divers demonstrate skills in order to be certified.

 

[Gareth J]

Boulder John


The biggest problem with divers who have a wealth of practical experience over many years but a qualification that does not reflect this, is that to then gain another qualification that takes into account the experience they have with their original agency is normally very difficult. The whole structure of the agency is to make you take a series of progressive qualifications. Those with a wealth of years of diving often don't gain any benefit from these 'stepping stone' qualifications.

Changing agencies, especially to those that are outside the mainstream often allows you to get a credit for your knowledge and experience rather follow a series of stepping stone qualifications.

I started with PADI - then went through all the diving qualifications with BSAC - then back to PADI for DM. I also have a number of technical qualifications, mainly because none of the mainstream agencies promoted technical diving (including the BSAC and PADI) at the time I was interested.

Moving outside your agency also opens your mind to new approaches and techniques.

One of the negatives of the modern world, is that it appears to promote pieces of paper over knowledge experience and expertise. I have had the privilege to dive with a number of fantastic divers who have very basic on paper qualifications, but are excellent, knowledgable and skilled divers, often doing extremely interesting and adventurous diving. I have also had the misfortune to dive with superbly on paper qualified divers who seem to lack skill, knowledge, and any kind of survival instinct, the one skill they appear to be a master of, is a multitude of new methods of making my survival a questionable issue.

The approach of a progressive series of qualifications, to allow new divers to progress their experience, knowledge, and skill in a safe progressive manor is to be encouraged. Having been an instructor for many years, it is a path I support. But it does not suit the issue we where discussing. I would be disappointed to have a student go through the motions of a series of lessons and skills just to gain a qualification. I want students to leave their time with me having learnt something, or at least feel they have benefitted from their time with me. If I am really luck, they will also have expanded my skills and knowledge.



Gareth

 

[rgdiver1]

I thought I would take a minute to correct some of the misconceptions in this thread.
The Advanced certification level was created in the mid 1960s by the Los Angeles County program with the primary purpose of exposing divers to a variety of dive experiences in the hope that it would help with the high scuba dropout rate. NAUI followed suit shortly thereafter. PADI added it still later.

No misconception that I originally became a scuba diver in the 1960's through the YMCA, and I don't think an advanced certification was offered by them at the time. Instead my class was several weeks long, and the instructor was an ex-military diver. The students could and did wash out if the instructor didn't think you had what it takes. Those who completed the class were very thoroughly trained compared to typical OW diver training today. It wasn't until I became a PADI Divemaster many years later that I experienced training even close to my original YMCA diver training. (Actually the divemaster stuff was pretty easy by comparison.)

 

[FinnMom]

When I was looking at getting certified in the US, it looked like doing AOWD wasn't much more expensive than doing 5 dives and (as I recall) cheaper than booking 5 guided dives. 5 dives for AOWD would be pretty much 5 guided dives, so what the heck: might as well enjoy the dives and maybe even learn a thing or 2 while doing so.

Eventually I did CMAS**, but my daughter did AOWD. Like our CMAS** classes, it was a good theory review and a very good focus on what you need to consider when diving deeper, as well as how to make gas consumption/requirements calculations for a deeper dive. I esp. like the homework where they had to consider the gas requirements if their buddy pair were 1min from the planned beginning of asent (both divers have used 1/3 of their gas) from 100' when one diver completely lost their gas. The story said that both divers consumption rates rose 10%, and took an additional 3min.s to get squared away and calmed down, ready to begin a shared asent. How well will the 1 diver's remaining gas suffice for both divers to make all necessary + recommended stops on their way to the surface? That's a good one for educating attitude: you don't just need enough gas to make your planned dive, you need enough to make the dive you hope you never have.
My daughter's AOWD classes also had some fun and useful instruction (for those to whom it was new) or review for those to whom skills were not new: using a DSMB, navigating, correct trim and bouyancy, recovering an unresponsive diver, various kicks (even tried to get them back-finning). It was a fun and worthwhile class. They had a good group too, all 4 students were active divers with more than 30 dives. I was more than happy with what we got for the price of the AOWD class.

Our club and the 2 Egyptian liveaboard companies w/ which we have dived do require advanced certs (and did check them) for trips where the diving will be below 20m.

 

[GlennL]

Why not? Why the seeming negative attitude about it?

I did 4 full specialties that I wanted to do. More, actually. Including Rescue. After I had those and 50 dives logged, I asked my shop about it and they put in my MSD, printed the card, and gave it to me. It didn't cost me anything (beyond the cost of the specialty courses that I wanted to do regardless). What's the problem? Why make a remark that makes it sound like getting an MSD means there's something wrong with me?

If you know what MSD means, then I can just show you my card and you know I've had a certain amount of training and experience. Why is that bad? It's easier for me than showing you a log and a stack of other cards?

Finally, someone who doesn't have something bad to say about MSD. I actually just mailed in my application Saturday. But I have have people telling me that I am a tool and its just plastic.

Anyway. Take AOW or not. People are lawsuit happy. Period. Everything is all about CYA (cover your @$$). So if you don't want to get it don't get it, but don't get butt hurt if a dive op denies you a dive because they are trying to protect their business.

 

[JamesBon92007]

No misconception that I originally became a scuba diver in the 1960's through the YMCA, and I don't think an advanced certification was offered by them at the time. Instead my class was several weeks long, and the instructor was an ex-military diver. The students could and did wash out if the instructor didn't think you had what it takes. Those who completed the class were very thoroughly trained compared to typical OW diver training today. It wasn't until I became a PADI Divemaster many years later that I experienced training even close to my original YMCA diver training. (Actually the divemaster stuff was pretty easy by comparison.)

At least NAUI acknowledged my previous training (also from the 60s) and experience when I asked for a C-Card with updated terminology. I was expecting something along the lines of AOW or ASD (advanced scuba diver) but they sent me a Master Diver card. Somehow I suspect that at least part of our training back then was still more involved than what you might get in a half-dozen or so modern courses combined, but some advances have been made in proven techniques and, of course, some of the equipment is a lot better. But does my "advanced" certification get me on dive boats that I might not otherwise be allowed on? I'm not really sure. So few dive ops have asked to see my card that it's not really conclusive. And as I've said before, most dive ops seem to be more interested in when was my last dive and how likely am I to die while diving due to medical conditions. They let me do a 90' wall/drift dive when my old C-Card said "Scuba Diver" on it.

I take back what I said earlier: I did inquire about some local dives and they did specify certification levels required for various dives. I just didn't think about it because, after all, I'm a Master Diver which makes me qualified to do anything and everything, even if I know nothing about it

Recently my girlfriend took a PADI OW course but I think she received more thorough training than what you might normally get but that was the instructor's choice to go beyond the minimum requirements of PADI. And, of course, he knew I was watching the whole time