• Welcome to ScubaBoard


  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Depth Limits for SSI OW Cert?

Discussion in 'SSI: Scuba Schools International' started by SULLIVAN2049, Mar 15, 2010.

  1. DevonDiver

    DevonDiver N/A

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: Subic Bay, Philippines
    15,396
    8,159
    113
    Glad to see the OP asking this; with a view to checking those recommendations and considering further appropriate training for the potential dive site. It's certainly better than the alternative approach taken some divers...

    Always makes me chuckle when some people graduate from scuba courses, knowing full well what their recommended limitations are.... and then immediately seek consent to break those recommendations.

    The agency spells it out. The instructor spells it out. So why not seek the approval of random, anonymous internet folks to over-ride what has just been taught?? :wink:
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010
  2. Thalassamania

    Thalassamania Diving Polymath ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: On a large pile of smokin' A'a, the most isolated
    22,171
    2,770
    113
    By way of acknowledging bias, I come from a diving community that is, one hand, far more restrictive concerning depth, we start with a restriction of 30 feet; but we also provide a clear and well defined path to deeper diving, all the way down to 190 feet.

    I think that many people have questions about the various limits and recommendations of the recreational diving agencies because they see them for what they are, recommendations more designed the agency's well being than for the diver's well being.
     
  3. DevonDiver

    DevonDiver N/A

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: Subic Bay, Philippines
    15,396
    8,159
    113

    The only benefit for the agency/industry is that those courses are charged for, rather than free or inclusive. Having a progressive system of training, designed to allow a progressive development of diving seems entirely logical.

    How does that actually detract the safety benefit to the student?

    It boils down to the requirement for X training and Y experience, needed to safely complete Zdive.
     
  4. SC_Hoaty

    SC_Hoaty Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 25 - 49
    Location: SC
    5,594
    4,015
    0
    Or is it a recommendation, not a requirement, from the agencies' points of view? The only way the "requirement" is enforced is by the various charter operations, who each have slightly different practices. No charter (shore dive, for example), no "requirement" being enforced.


    By failing to inform them of what they do NOT know about exceeding the "recommendation." As an example, that gas consumption increases with depth.
     
  5. boulderjohn

    boulderjohn Technical Instructor ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Boulder, CO
    25,635
    17,071
    113
    There are agencies that don't teach this? I'm surprised.

    I only know what PADI teaches in this regard. Students are required to calculate the degree to which gas consumption increases with depth on the final exam, so it has to be taught during the course.

    Which agencies do not teach this?
     
  6. SC_Hoaty

    SC_Hoaty Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 25 - 49
    Location: SC
    5,594
    4,015
    0
    Fair question, Boulderjohn - and maybe a poor example on my part. I was not PADI trained, so I'm not sure what knowledge necessary for safe diving below 60 feet is omitted from their OW course, and only provided during AOW. Perhaps you can provide a better example?
     
  7. Thalassamania

    Thalassamania Diving Polymath ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: On a large pile of smokin' A'a, the most isolated
    22,171
    2,770
    113
    You're missing the point, I guess that comes from working in a less litigious experiment.

    As far as a progressive development of diving with respect to depth and conditions, I could not agree more, but I don't really see that from any of the agencies except as what I would consider "lip service."
     
  8. boulderjohn

    boulderjohn Technical Instructor ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Boulder, CO
    25,635
    17,071
    113
    Sorry--can't think of anything, really.

    I think the real bone of contention is that we don't do enough with gas planning in general. At the OW level, students are taught to check with their gauges frequently to make sure they don't run out of air. I wish there were more in the regular course, so I include more in my course--specifically, some guidelines as to when to begin an ascent in terms of remaining air. And, even, though they are supposed to be limited to 60 feet, I include ascents from deeper depths.
     
  9. SC_Hoaty

    SC_Hoaty Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 25 - 49
    Location: SC
    5,594
    4,015
    0
    Sounds like it must be only about money then!

    Can you rationalize why PADI doesn't require additional diving experience beyond OW certification dives before admitting a student to the AOW course? DevonDiver was advocating for combined experience and training before increasing depth.
     
  10. Thalassamania

    Thalassamania Diving Polymath ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: On a large pile of smokin' A'a, the most isolated
    22,171
    2,770
    113
    Here are the issues as I see it:

    1) Gas management is gas management. The concept is the same regardless of depth and all divers should have a good working knowledge of how to plan gas usage for a dive. One ATA or Seven ATA, it's all the same in terms of planning. There just less actual room for error as you get deeper, but I don't see that there should be any permissible error in gas planning regardless of depth.

    2) There is a clear interactive term between conditions and depth. 130 feet in warm, clear, tropical waters is rather different than 100 feet in the North Atlantic or North Pacific.

    3) While there is a clear body of knowledge that all divers should master, experience is a whole 'nother story. Some divers are virtually narc-proof others are in trouble at 60 feet. There seems to be almost universal agreement that slowly increasing depth with each dive is a good approach, but there is no policy anywhere (except through AAUS) that actually addresses how to conduct such dives, the qualifications of proper buddies, etc.
     

Share This Page