Cannot find a reason for AOW certification

[boulderjohn]

For purely recreational diving I don't bother to work out my bottom time before my first dive of the day. I jump in and follow my computer/gas limits. If either has a problem I just ascend.

This is a quote of the original post. There is no mention of drift diving.

You apparently missed my explanation in which I placed the dive in a class of dives that are in a category of dives some people call "all usable." It does not matter whether it was a drift dive or any other such dive in which the diver does not have to get to a specific point to ascend. Here is where I wrote that:

It explains the difference between three major types of dive plans: rule of thirds, rule of halves, and all usable. A drift dive is just one example of an all usable dive--any dive where the diver is free to ascend to the surface at any point upon reaching an agreed upon PSI, time, or other turning point (like NDL). It could be a drift dive. It could be visiting a small wreck. It could be a lot of things common dives in diving. They are the simplest dives possible, and they have been covered in OW classes for years.

What questions are you referring to?

Here they are:

So you consider going one direction until a specific PSI and then turning around a plan, but you do not consider going in one direction (like on a drift dive) until a certain PSI and then ascending to be a plan? Can you explain the difference?

Alos, what do you think was in the planning but not included in the post?

No. Basically, what you mentioned in a previous post. The buddy team plans the dive to see if both computers agree with what the plan is. So no diver needs to cut the first dive short or jeopardize a latter dive. I am sure you have dove off of a commercial boat that needs to keep a schedule. You have some leeway over when to splash but if you wait to long the DM may not let you dive because they do not want to wait for you.

It is unusual for there to be more than a few minutes difference.

I do not understand your attitude on this. A dive computer is arguably the most complicated piece of equipment that a diver takes with them. In my 25+ years of diving I have seen them break, flood, and give off erroneous readings. Another problem is user error. I have seen people dive with the computer set to the wrong mix. I had a person once try to convince me that their Ai computer actually analyzes the mix in the cylinder and computes the NDL based on that. Is it really that difficult for the buddies to get together and plan the dives beforehand and say ok dive 1 is 30 minutes at 65 ft , we wait 60 and do a second dive for 30 minutes at 45 ft? Also shouldn't the buddies plan not to reach the NDL limits? The was a thread recently where a diver accidentally passed the NDL and decided it would be wise to ascend slowly. When doing so the computer started giving him ridiculously long safety stop info.[/QUOTE]Different dives have different planning needs. I will now describe two dives I have done within the last month to illustrate.

Dive #1--Chatfield Reservoir, Colorado. The maximum depth of the water was 21 feet. I was diving with someone to help them get used to his new equipment. We dived until we accomplished our goals. We knew we would never get near either NDLs or running low on air, so the instruments we carried were superfluous. We did not do anything resembling dive planning.

Dive #2--Rock Lake, New Mexico. We descended on a line to the bottom at 275 feet, where I tied off a large spool to the descent line. As planned, my buddy led us north using his compass, while I let out line so we could find our way back. I turned the dive just before my spool ran out of line because it was time to return to the ascent line so that we could ascend at our pre-planned time. I removed the spool line at precisely our planned ascent time, and we started up. At 190 feet, we stopped as planned to switch from the gas in our doubles (trimix with a lot of helium) to our deep deco gas (a mix of 21% O2 and 35% He). At 70 feet we switched to a mix of 50% O2. At 20 feet we switched to 100% O2. We each carried two computers, all with the same algorithm. We had carefully pre-planned the dive using our SAC rates to make sure we had plenty of each of the 4 different gases we used on the dive to cover not only the expected needs but any problems that might arise. We knew what kinds of of decompression stops we would probably be taking as we ascended, but we actually followed our computers for those stops. My computers and my buddy's computers disagreed by roughly two minutes by the time we were done, and we followed the most conservative one so that we would stay together on ascent.​

Most dives fall in between those two extremes. Before each dive, you have to decide what level of planning is necessary to remain safe, depending upon the logistics of the dive and the skill and experience of the divers doing it. What is essential for one dive may not even be necessary on another.

 

[boulderjohn]

Is it really that difficult for the buddies to get together and plan the dives beforehand and say ok dive 1 is 30 minutes at 65 ft , we wait 60 and do a second dive for 30 minutes at 45 ft?

It is not difficult to do that, but it many cases it is not necessary, and it can be very limiting. It is especially not useful on a dive in which you really can't know all of that for sure.

Limiting: Are you telling me that if you are doing a simple dive along a reef, and you find some something really interesting near the end of the planned dive, you will abort the dive and head to the surface, even if you have plenty of gas and are not near NDL, because you have reached your pre-planned bottom time? A few years ago I was with a group of people heading out to do a planned dive of about 80 feet in Hawai'i, but as we descended to our planned dive spot, we saw a manta ray in the distance. We headed over to it and ended up watching a cleaner wrasse station at work on the manta ray at about 100 feet. The ray left, and we were about to do the same, when an eagle ray came in and replaced it. We watched for a while until a look at our computers suggested that we ascend. As we were ascending, at about 60 feet we spied a rare event--a helmet conch about to attack a decorator urchin. We stopped and saw the actual attack, as the conch pulled itself over the urchin. We then ascended and played around at the top of the reef until our gas ran low. We then surfaced from one of the best recreational reef dives I have ever had, a dive that would have been impossible had we followed the strict planning guidelines you espouse for all dives.

Can't Know: I do a lot of recreational-level wreck diving in Florida. I enjoy exploring the ins and outs of the wrecks, looking for critters that are hiding out inside. I know the maximum depth possible before I splash, but I don't know exactly what my teammate and I are going to do. We almost never go all the way to the bottom, so we can't plan a maximum depth. The wrecks are multi-level, so we are not going to be at any one depth for any pre-planned amount of time. No, we are going to go where events lead us, starting at our deepest point and heading to the shallowest. It may be 50 feet from the deepest point to the point we have reached before we begin our ascent to the surface. How do we know ahead of time how much time we will be at each depth?

Now, I also do wrecks at the technical level, and there the planning is a little more precise, but it is still not nearly as precise as you suggest. I will not know exactly how much time I will spend at each level of a multi-level wreck dive.

 

[Steveed]

There isn't much to an OW class, so I shortly thereafter threw down another 500 USD for the AOW. It was useful. I had maybe 10-15 dives at the time, and I benefited from the extension of the OW class. Fun with navigation, night dive, lift bag, boat dive, and a deep dive, with an instructor.

I can't speak to the benefit to an experienced diver. I'd like to get more training at this point... I hear the Rescue Diver is worthwhile.

 

[dmaziuk]

The metric system just loops me every time. I know it's superior. 18m doesn't sound very deep.

It isn't, my better half blew right past it on our very first dive after getting OW cards. IIRC it was somewhat closer to 25 when she stopped to consider she wasn't advanced enough.

 

[Duffy1]

I got my basic certification in 1975 and recently got my AOW and I was surprised with how much the sport has changed and how much stronger the emphasis has become on SAFETY. When I was first certified I too (like some of you who have posted here) was unaware of the danger that could potentially take my life. The AOW certification increases your awareness and could save your life (and I recently purchased a dive computer). I might add that dive shops will not allow you to go on a dive that has a depth of more than 60 feet with a basic/OW certification so if you live or travel to the Florida Keys and want to dive on the USS Duane a Coast Guard cutter - 320 feet long at 121 feet - and it is a cool dive - well, you are out of luck.

 

[wildbill9]

We wanted to dive the Speigal but were told at 1st you needed AOW, I was the only one certified at that level, all divers had 25 plus years experience, we dove often together and many times below 60 ft. I discussed the Speigal with the captain and our desire to dive it the next day. We talked about when we had last diver, where we dove and diving in general. He must have watched us as we checked each other's gear, talked about the dive plan, listened as we reviewed signals if we needed to call the dive. When we returned after the dive he said he had called the dive shop and they had no problem with us taking a dive on the Speigal. Until I joined scuba board I never heard of or knows of a depth limitation associated with only having ow certification. When we were certified we were just that, certified as divers. As our experience and comfort level increased so did our depth. The 60 ft limitation sounds like a bunch of crap
Invented to raise money. I still do not see anywhere in my training book (which I still have from 1977) any depth limitation.

 

[TMHeimer]

wildbill9, I'm surprised you were allowed to do the dive. I think it's the first time I've read on SB that someone waived their AOW rule. The general opinion seems to be it's not an experience thing but something dive ops do to protect themselves a little legally--"He has AOW, so he's qualified to dive to 100 feet,etc."

 

[scubadada]

We wanted to dive the Speigal but were told at 1st you needed AOW, I was the only one certified at that level, all divers had 25 plus years experience, we dove often together and many times below 60 ft. I discussed the Speigal with the captain and our desire to dive it the next day. We talked about when we had last diver, where we dove and diving in general. He must have watched us as we checked each other's gear, talked about the dive plan, listened as we reviewed signals if we needed to call the dive. When we returned after the dive he said he had called the dive shop and they had no problem with us taking a dive on the Speigal. Until I joined scuba board I never heard of or knows of a depth limitation associated with only having ow certification. When we were certified we were just that, certified as divers. As our experience and comfort level increased so did our depth. The 60 ft limitation sounds like a bunch of crap
Invented to raise money. I still do not see anywhere in my training book (which I still have from 1977) any depth limitation.

wildbill9, I'm surprised you were allowed to do the dive. I think it's the first time I've read on SB that someone waived their AOW rule. The general opinion seems to be it's not an experience thing but something dive ops do to protect themselves a little legally--"He has AOW, so he's qualified to dive to 100 feet,etc."

Many/?most of the operators in Key Largo have an experience option in addition to having AOW. It is often something like a couple of dives to below 80 ft in the last 6 month or so. I would imagine that seeing a logbook with many deeper dives over a relatively long scuba career might do it, like it did in this case.

On the other hand, It's hard to believe that @wildbill9 had never heard of a policy like this for diving the deeper wrecks in the Keys. It could have been addressed up front.

 

[JamesBon92007]

I"m a bit surprised at some of the reactions in this thread. The course that @wildbill9 took could have been a more advanced course that what others may have taken during the same year. The class that I took in 1969 was what might be called a "complete" course and we were told, in a general sort of way, that the recreational limit was 130 feet. This was, no doubt, based upon the US Navy Dive Tables. There was no hint of any limits such as 60 feet nor was there any indication that we were limited to any particular kind of diving, open water or not. It was left up to us. We were presumably trained well enough to know if we needed to acquire more training on our own for such things as cave diving etc. But nobody said we couldn't do it. I personally knew people who tested the 5 ATM ratings of dive watches and reported that they still worked past 165 feet. They had the same level of training as I did.

Fast-forward to 1983. I went through the same type of course with my ex-wife (just to make sure they didn't leave anything out because I had heard rumors of "abbreviated" courses). When I contacted NAUI a few years ago to get a new C-Card that said something besides "Scuba Diver" on it they used the 1983 course to determine my qualifications. They simply added one more word: "Master." They seem to think that the NAUI course I took in 1983 qualified me for that level of certification. It was nearly as intense as my 1969 course. So, depending upon the course that wildbill9 took, he could easily be regarded as AOW or even higher. We were certified as "Scuba Divers" and that was pretty much all-inclusive and definitive. As for the 1969 course, the only records they seem to have are the ones I sent them--pictures of my C-Cards (paper and plastic), the name of the dive shop, the name of the instructor, instructor number, length of course, etc.

Before taking a bunch of extra courses (unless there has been a long hiatus) I would suggest that anyone who took a scuba course in the 60s or 70s contact their certification agency and request a card with updated terminology. You may find that you are already AOW or beyond. But, like I said, this may depend upon the course that you took.

 

[wildbill9]

Mine was just your standard open water class...we had to tread water for 3 minutes with our shoulders out of the water, swim 100 feet under water, remove our gear (all of it) and surface from 60 feet. Everyone does those tests don't they? My original c card didnt have a certification number which is why i finally got a new card, that and it have my high school graduation picture one it....was funny to watch dive masters look at the card, then look at me 30 years later then try to find the card number ( but then i am easily amused)