Diver Rescue

[DevonDiver]

I find that it's easy to rectify this.

In the appropriate OW dives, I just hit them again and again with skills such as OOA ascent, cramp release. Once they've done them a few times static and achieved the right 'standard' of skill - then I wait until the tour portion of the dive. During the tour, I keep watching them. If/when, I see them lose focus and/or buddy awareness...then I'll throw in some OOA situations.

They soon wake up....and get a real appreciation of the need to stay vigilant and close.

 

[DCBC]

On balance... I'd say that buddy skills (accident prevention) were far more important than rescue skills (accident resolution).

OW course hits the mark in addressing that priority. .

I agree and I would certainly hope so, or no certifications should be issued.

...I wouldn't start teaching rescue skills until I felt the buddy skills were ingrained and effective.

Again I agree. Where we seem to disagree, is if this should be effectively done within the confines of an OW program. This may be difficult if you teach a 3 day program; I don't know. In my course, there is ample time.

I suppose what I take away from this survey, is that the vast majority of divers believe that these skills should be taught before the Rescue Course. Certainly many training agencies feel this way as well and include some (or all) of the rescue skills described into their OW requirements. It is doable and had been a part of the initial diver training program for the last 45 years that I can attest to. I do understand however, that if a training program is run in half the time, that something has to be cut from the program. Unfortunately sometimes these programs are cut too much for my liking, but that's just my opinion. Suffice it to say that the survey speaks for itself... It is what it is.

 

[DevonDiver]

The alternative, would be to recognise that the baseline components of the PADI OW & AOW courses do not provide a sufficient skill set for unsupervised diving activities. Therefore, restricting anyone below Rescue Qualification from diving without a DM or instructor, or even possibly with a 'supervising buddy' of sufficient experience?

I've always felt that Rescue Diver, was the level where a someone could really call themselves a complete 'diver'. I educate students that it should be the minimum goal and, where possible, get students onto the course asap. In the past, I have encouraged this by offering combo courses, that encompass OW, AOW and Rescue. It's not a sales ploy. It's 9 training dives, followed by Rescue. A robust training course, that takes less that 2 weeks and provides a igh standard finished 'product'.

 

[DCBC]

The alternative, would be to recognise that the baseline components of the PADI OW & AOW courses do not provide a sufficient skill set for unsupervised diving activities. Therefore, restricting anyone below Rescue Qualification from diving without a DM or instructor, or even possibly with a 'supervising buddy' of sufficient experience?

I've always felt that Rescue Diver, was the level where a someone could really call themselves a complete 'diver'. I educate students that it should be the minimum goal and, where possible, get students onto the course asap. In the past, I have encouraged this by offering combo courses, that encompass OW, AOW and Rescue. It's not a sales ploy. It's 9 training dives, followed by Rescue. A robust training course, that takes less that 2 weeks and provides a igh standard finished 'product'.

I totally support this concept!!! Unfortunately as far as PADI is concerned, the vast majority of divers are being "certified" and told that their initial certification prepares them to "dive independently." These divers have not been trained in the concepts of rescue that we have discussed.

 

[DevonDiver]

Agreed.

In holiday destinations, where the majority of the PADI market exists, this is fine, as very few divers would ever dive without a Divemaster as a guide. However, in home locations, it is much more common for newly certified divers to actually dive independantly.

I think it is fair that the OW course is sufficient for this, but not ideal. I qualified as a diver in the UK...and my first dives were with a buddy from my OW course, unsupervised in an ice cold, silty quarry. When I remember back, I can recall how unknowledgeable I was at the time. Had an incident occured, my reaction would have been far from optimum.

I still feel however that, assuming sound buddy skills and correct diving practices, if the rules are followed, then the actual statistical risk of incident to OW divers is so low that specific rescue training (beyond that already covered on the OW course) is not vital. It would be beneficial... but is not vital.

A summary of my feelings is:

1) OW course presents sufficent training for low-risk independant diving.2) Formal rescue skills training would further reduce that risk.
3) Prevention is better than cure...and the OW course adequately addresses that.
4) Rescue skills are not statistically vital for unsupervised diving, but are undeniably beneficial.
5) AOW course fails to provide development of rescue capability.
6) Rescue course should be identified as a standardised 'end-point' within the modular diving system.

 

[DCBC]

In holiday destinations, where the majority of the PADI market exists, this is fine, as very few divers would ever dive without a Divemaster as a guide. However, in home locations, it is much more common for newly certified divers to actually dive independantly.

Regardless of the location, PADI certifies every OW diver to dive independently in the same conditions (or better) than those experienced during their training program.

I think it is fair that the OW course is sufficient for this, but not ideal.

I see a flaw in any training program that neglects the area of diver rescue discussed.

I still feel however that, assuming sound buddy skills and correct diving practices, if the rules are followed, then the actual statistical risk of incident to OW divers is so low that specific rescue training (beyond that already covered on the OW course) is not vital. It would be beneficial... but is not vital.

Trying to specify what is "statistically vital" in an OW program, is dependent upon if one of your students becomes a statistic over something that was easily preventable. If a diver requires assistance and their buddy can't help them and the diver dies, that's not a statistic that I want to face. Especially if all I had to do was extend my program a few hours and teach that diver how to look after their buddy. To me, this is what I would consider "vital," regardless of who is quoting the statistics.

A summary of my feelings is:

1) OW course presents sufficent training for low-risk independant diving.
2) Formal rescue skills training would further reduce that risk.
3) Prevention is better than cure...and the OW course adequately addresses that.
4) Rescue skills are not statistically vital for unsupervised diving, but are undeniably beneficial.
5) AOW course fails to provide development of rescue capability.
6) Rescue course should be identified as a standardised 'end-point' within the modular diving system.

A summary of mine:

1) Basic rescue skills (as described) are necessary for any diver to be a contributing member of a buddy team and should be required before a diver is certified to dive independently.
2) Advanced rescue skills would further reduce risk.
3) Prevention is better than a cure... but steps must be taken to ensure that basic rescue skills are taught. Like sharing air, prevention in-itself has proven to be insufficient and the diver must be taught what to do in case of an emergency.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

And if those skills are included they need to be done on checkouts as well as in the pool. Even with 4 dives it is easy enough to have one of those be an unconscious diver ascent to surface. If these skills have been properly taught they are no more difficult than a mask clear. And if you have buddy teams do them they are even simpler. I don't allow anyone but myself to be the victim for these types of scenarios. In AOW when doing so called "advanced dives" rescue skills are absolutely essential where getting into difficulty faster and with more serious consequences is a very real possibility.

It is for this very reason that I do not offer things like Fish ID, Boat Diver, Underwater Naturalist, or Altitude dive. These are IMO fluff that some use to get out of doing real work. Altitude? Give me a break. If the dives you are going to be doing are at altitude then every dive is an altitude dive! Include info on altitude during the classroom gas management portion.

All of my AOW dives have specific tasks that demand good buddy skills and communication. The dives I offer are advanced skills, UW Nav, Night/Low Vis, Deep, Search and Recovery or WRECK, AND Buddy Skills and Assist where we do rescue tasks. they are no mask swims, no mask air share swims, no mask air share swim and ascent, support of diver at the surface after loss of buoyancy control, Unconscious diver from depth with rescue tow, and loss of buoyancy control assisted ascent.

None of these skills are beyond the capabilities of the properly trained OW diver. In fact all of them are in my OW course (except the no mask air share swim and ascent) plus panicked diver at the surface. I do break it down into two separate skills for OW.

When choosing a buddy outside of classroom settings I fully expect them to be able to assist me if I should require it. And do so with some degree of competency. If they feel they are unable to do so then I prefer to find someone else to dive with. And if they should have to assist me, they better be able to do it without getting on their knees to do so!

None of these skills requires more than being comfortable in the water, being able to perform basic skills in midwater, knowing their equipment, knowing my gear (buddy check takes care of this), and having a modest degree of confidence in themselves and their training. Again NONE of these is beyond the capability of the average, well-trained open water diver. Unfortunately there are not nearly enough of them (well trained) in relation to the total number of new divers being certified.

 

[DevonDiver]

Regardless of the location, PADI certifies every OW diver to dive independently in the same conditions (or better) than those experienced during their training program.

True. But being 'certified' to do something...and being 'wise' to that same thing are not hand-in-hand.

BSAC certifies it's Ocean Divers to dive independantly. However, within the environment of their club, they are still guided or expected to dive with more experienced (Dive leader?) buddies for their safety and continued development.

In that respect, the 'reality' of PADI's independant OW diver status is a little different.

I would be very interested to see the statistics of who and how PADI OWs dived. I expect the holiday-only divers would rarely dive without supervision. The temperate water divers (N.USA and Europe) probably more so...

I see a flaw in any training program that neglects the area of diver rescue discussed.

Trying to specify what is "statistically vital" in an OW program, is dependent upon if one of your students becomes a statistic over something that was easily preventable.

The Individual Risk per annum, for recreational divers is 1 in 6000. That can be compared to individual risk for joggers at 1 in 7,700. Statistically, no much to separate the risk between recreational divers and joggers...
Figures from DAN 'Common Factors in Diving Accidents' 2010.

Of those divers involved in an incident, there is a strong trend towards more experienced divers. Yes... that's right..... the people most likely to be accident victims are those who are trained in rescue. You can see from the 2009 BSAC report (below) that the overwhelming majority of victims are 'highly trained' sports divers (Rescue Diver equiv), Dive Leaders (DM equiv) and Advanced Divers (no PADI equiv).

If a diver requires assistance and their buddy can't help them and the diver dies, that's not a statistic that I want to face.

That's very emotive and I am positive the sentiment is shared by every instructor.

Most scuba diving deaths are preventable (with the exception of pre-existing medical conditions that manifest dramatically on scuba). However, the key to preventing those deaths....and lowering those statistics.... is not the development of rescue skills, but rather, the development of core diving skills (including buddy awareness).

As quoted in the 2009 BSAC Annual Report:

Especially if all I had to do was extend my program a few hours and teach that diver how to look after their buddy. To me, this is what I would consider "vital," regardless of who is quoting the statistics.

Not sure how much of value you can ingrain into a student during "a few hours"....

I thought we were talking about teaching all the basic rescue skills??

I don't care if an OW course is 4 days or 4 weeks long. I'll always choose to teach them to be good and safe divers....with excellent core skills, buddy awareness and mental attitude focused on safety and conservatism.

I think THAT is more important for their safety than diluting their entry-level course with a sprinkling of rescue skills that they can't fully absorb...

 

[DCBC]

True. But being 'certified' to do something...and being 'wise' to that same thing are not hand-in-hand.

Perhaps being introduced to a skill, demonstrating awareness and ability in the performance of that skill is a step in the right direction and is preferred over not teaching that skill in the first-place.

BSAC certifies it's Ocean Divers to dive independantly.

I'm aware of the BSAC program. BSAC at no time states that Ocean Divers are to dive independently. Specifically: "Experience and confidence will be gained under the guidance of a qualified instructor."

In that respect, the 'reality' of PADI's independant OW diver status is a little different.

Yes, they are certified to be fully capable of diving independently.

I would be very interested to see the statistics of who and how PADI OWs dived. I expect the holiday-only divers would rarely dive without supervision. The temperate water divers (N.USA and Europe) probably more so...

You don't certify someone to dive independently in the hopes that they will have supervision most of the time.

The Individual Risk per annum, for recreational divers is 1 in 6000. That can be compared to individual risk for joggers at 1 in 7,700. Statistically, no much to separate the risk between recreational divers and joggers... Figures from DAN 'Common Factors in Diving Accidents' 2010...

Rather than quote statistics, you might review accidents involving a buddy's failure to attempt an UW rescue and its result (you might even look in SB). Divers die and will continue to do so unnecessarily. Many of these deaths are preventable if the buddy had basic rescue skills. Perhaps this is something that DAN and BSAC should highlight in their next report...

Not sure how much of value you can ingrain into a student during "a few hours"....

Enough to make a difference. At the very least, it provides the diver with the knowledge of the dangers involved and how these may be addressed. They are in a position to make an informed choice. To me, this is preferable than to keep them in the dark and tell them they can take two additional programs so they can know the difference.

I think THAT is more important for their safety than diluting their entry-level course with a sprinkling of rescue skills that they can't fully absorb...

Andy, I think both our positions on this topic have been clearly expressed. Perhaps we might read the opinions of other divers and instructors, as it seems to be fairly clear that waiting for a Rescue Course does not meet the requirements of the vast majority of the divers polled.

 

[DevonDiver]

In which case... why don't the "vast majority of divers" put their money where their mouth is...and do their rescue course immediately following their OW course? Combine the courses back-to-back?

That fulfills the same goal as transfering the rescue skills into an 'extended' open water course...

PADI (and other agencies) allow students to DECIDE when they are ready. They have the option of doing rescue at the initial stage, or delaying it until they feel ready.

Why do you wish to take that choice away from them?

I don't want to sound argumentative, but IF the majority of divers did feel rescue skills were vital at entry-level, then they would chose to get those skills at that point. But they don't..regardless of what your unscientific mini-poll here states.

Perhaps being introduced to a skill, demonstrating awareness and ability in the performance of that skill is a step in the right direction and is preferred over not teaching that skill in the first-place.

That's open to debate. Sometimes a little knowledge is a bad thing. This could certainly be true of introducing, but not fully teaching, rescue skills...

I'm aware of the BSAC program. BSAC at no time states that Ocean Divers are to dive independently. Specifically: "Experience and confidence will be gained under the guidance of a qualified instructor."

The fact is that Ocean diver is an entry-level scuba qualification. Outside of their immediate club environment, those qualified divers are able to dive as they see fit. Other agencies, dive centers and charters will recognise their qualifications as equivalent to Open Water.

You don't certify someone to dive independently in the hopes that they will have supervision most of the time.

I agree! But when considering the necessity and prioritisation of training components (as this thread is doing), it is vital to consider the likely diving circumstances, accident analysis and historical statistics appropriate to that activity.

In this instance, those aspects point towards a negligible need for comprehensive entry-level rescue instruction. It would still be preferable to have that training, but not necessary.

Rather than quote statistics, you might review accidents involving a buddy's failure to attempt an UW rescue and its result (you might even look in SB).

I did. I was reading both the DAN and BSAC reports... which is where my quotations and statistics came from

Both of those reports are considerably more in-depth, comprehensive and accurate than the SB A&I section.

Divers die and will continue to do so unnecessarily. Many of these deaths are preventable if the buddy had basic rescue skills. Perhaps this is something that DAN and BSAC should highlight in their next report...

You can tell DAN and BSAC that....

All that those organisations say at the moment is that most accidents could be prevented by proper adherance to SAFE DIVING PRACTICES. Prevention NOT cure. I agree with that.