Diver Training: How much is enough?

[RTee]

What I retained from my older days is much more time and exercises of all kind in the water that made me more comfortable

Buddy breathing...I did my fair share to the point that it became second nature. I will respectfully disagree with your useless exercise connotation though. What I retained from that exercise is that it did force two or more individuals to think beyond their own little person and to work as a team to be able to accomplish a task. It also reinforced the importance of your buddy in the absence of equipment redundancy and showed you that if fact the sh.. hit the fan you were not all doomed and gloomed.

What should be the end product? I personally think it is to be able to possess all the necessary skills and knowledge to plan and conduct dives in conditions similar to or better than the training environment, independently, as part of a two member dive team, . By independently I mean unsupervised. If a person prefers to dive only under the watchful eyes of a DM, I will respect that, but it still should not constitute the end product in itself.

Just because I'm generally p###$$ed off about life right now, I'll respond.
b. No, the standards have not "been lowered" but they have certainly been changed over the years and thank God. What may have been important to teach 43 years ago may well be totally irrelevant now (buddy breathing anyone? heh, heh, heh!)

d. The OP did ask an interesting question thatis similar to one I asked in the Instructor-to-Instructor forum. What is the goal of scuba (or for that matter, any other) instruction? Is the goal to create a "finished product" capable of doing it all OR is the goal to create a person who understands the basics and has the humility/maturity to know how little she knows? For me, the goal is the latter -- others may have a different goal and that is fine, but I contend that doesn't make my goal "lower" or wrong, just different.

 

[raftingtigger]

Against my standard practice I'm going to chime in without having read the entire thread - so if this is a duplicate...

Part of the issue may not be the actual skills trained, but ensuring the student diver understands the reason behind the skill or procedure. To use the disappearing buddy example: All student divers are taught to dive in buddy pairs/groups. I'm sure the reasoning behind the policy is discussed briefly, but do they really understand why the recommendation is there? Do they really understand the risks of diving alone? Do they know how to help their buddy? Another example is gas management: every student diver is taught some method (may be as simple as surface with xxx). How many of these student divers really understand that OOA or LOA is the most common triggering factor in dive accidents? Do they believe that even if they go OOA that they can just pop to the surface...?

Another reason why they may not demonstrate competent skills is a bandwidth problem. Get them out of the benign instructional setting and they may no longer have the mental bandwidth to realized or correct a problem. This gets worse if they task load themselves (bringing a camera, etc). Again this can come down to does the student understand why they should progress in dive complexity in a controlled manner?

How many new or prospective divers do a good risk assessment of diving before signing up. In deciding to pursue solo diving this was probably my most important area to consider (and yes I am pursuing this).

It's not so much as to whether new divers are being taught the requisite skills, but are they being ingrained with the requisite attitude? My guess is no they aren't in many of the courses - especially the compressed ones.

 

[Searcaigh]

I would like to see for once at a dive site all of the divers swimming in a horizontal position instead of vertical.

It appears to be normal at many places where there is a large teaching school, the majority of divers are all seen to be swimming in a vertical position with no buoyancy control and underwater sandstorms all over the place.

IMHO these divers are processed instead of being taught the basic skills and demonstrate that they can apply them properly before being certified.

 

[waterpirate]

I used to belive that the standards were watered down, I have revised that thinking. They are not watered down, they have just become proggressive. The path to greatness is still there, it just allows the punter to stop where they want vs. being " good to go" right out of the gate.

Those of us that were unfortunate to recieve their initial c card from a disfunctional, angry old navy guy in the early 80's or similar, were expected to after getting your " scuba diver " card, be prepared for low vis dives to 130 fsw with bailout deco knowledge if needed.

New divers are given the choice to make it fun and stop their training on a reef in 25 fsw, or advance up the chain to ccr on 10/50. The path is just different.

As to the original question, I believe a diver should be trained at least one level beyond the level that they do the most diving.

Eric

 

[vladimir]

I think this is a very important and informative thread. I personally think many certified open water divers really should be certified as "scuba divers" who are required to dive with a professional. For many certified divers this is the extent of the type of diving they ever want to do. I have posted a blog post on what it means to really know how to dive, and to me it includes being able to independently plan and carry out a safe dive with a buddy. We all know that not every diver reaches that level at the point of certification or even beyond that point. But for the OP to suggest that he is a solo diver because he doesn't want to dive with bozo's creates another issue. When an experienced diver dives with a novice, or novice to them diver, they can make the dive better with a proper discussion and briefing before the dive. I blogged on that too: "What makes a good dive buddy." In the scenario presented, it seems that for different reasons, each of the failed buddy team did not make a good dive buddy. However the OP did show leadership and concerns in retrieving the wayward diver, for which I commend him. Competence, not credentials, make the diver. I know several divers with open water cards that are experienced, competent and comfortable on doing just bout any dive they choose. I know people with advanced cards and beyond who are still "trail ride" divers.
That's fine, if they know their limitations and dive within them. The same is true of knowing you limitations as to who you can put up with diving. Not everyone can handle a newer diver instabuddy.
DivemasterDennis

Fine, if you like, but please call your new certification something other than "Scuba Diver." My YMCA "Scuba Diver" certification okayed me to dive to 130' without supervision, after 8 weeks of training.

How about "Remora Diver"?

 

[DCBC]

...Those of us that were unfortunate to recieve their initial c card from a disfunctional, angry old navy guy in the early 80's or similar, were expected to after getting your " scuba diver " card, be prepared for low vis dives to 130 fsw with bailout deco knowledge if needed.

Sorry that you feel that way Eric. I suppose that I fit the profile of your Instructor, I'm an ex-Navy Diver, taught during this time, but don't think I could be called dysfunctional (?) That of course is a matter of perception and opinion... From what you've mentioned however, I would tend to believe that I would be happy to dive with you. Chances are you would be a good Buddy whom I could depend on. I would suggest that this is directly related to the training you received. I would also hazard to guess that I would feel the same way if I considered any diver that your Instructor certified. Many have expressed that this is no longer the case and I believe that this warrant further discussion. Obviously we want divers out there to be safe. The future of our sport depends on this.

There is no question in my mind that my training program is overkill for someone who wants to blow bubbles in bathtub like conditions and look at the fish in 30 FSW. Not every diver however lives and dives in these locations. For those that do, these conditions are not the only ones in-which they dive. As Tater mentioned in a previous post (and I agree) that the conditions should dictate the training a diver receives and because of this it's reasonable that the curriculum will change as a result of the environment.

From what has been expressed so far, it would appear that initial diver training programs could be improved. Perhaps lowering the standards (like NAUI is in the process of doing to better compete with PADI) may not be the best direction to go in...

 

[Searcaigh]

I was also taught by an ex-RN diver, and feel I am a better diver for that, nothing wrong with a bit of discipline from setting up your gear to abiding by the rules under water .... "ye can't break the laws of physics laddie"

I am pretty sure he would have called for 10 push ups with full kit on if you had left a tank standing with regulator attached.

 

[MSDT476614]

Then they are taken to a pool to practice what they learned and to experience scuba first hand by having skills properly demonstrated. It is here that there is a requirement for basic watermanship. After the required pool sessions, the instructor is not suppose to take a student to OW until they have demonstrated that they can perform the skill (hence a big debate right there with instructors). It is then that they go to OW to be evaluated by the instructor to determine if they are competent enough to be certified (again, a debatable hot topic in itself).

So yes, I would say that the rules of diving are largely ignored when you evaluate another diver.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Overheard at a confined water session (pool): "can't swim? no problem, the aim of diving is to sink, not to swim"

Out of curiosity, wherever you might be from, how many know of certified divers who can't swim?

 

[DCBC]

...Out of curiosity, wherever you might be from, how many know of certified divers who can't swim?

I don't know about non-swimmers (although you don't need to know how to swim to pass the watermanship test set by some agencies), but I've seen quite a number of people whose watermanship skills were very weak and they were obviously dependent upon their BC to keep them from drowning (overweighted and unable to affect required movement).

 

[waterpirate]

@36
I knew that would prompt a response. He was everything I said. I and we who survived recieved initial training that is on par with todays deco procedures intro. Peple failed, young minds were scarred forever, lol, but It made me a better diver right out of the gate. I am thankfull for that.

The path now is just longer and alot less military in its implementation. It also gives people the advantage of stopping their training at the level they desire.

for all the rantings I have posted since 06 about solo diving, the reality is that there is safety in numbers if you are going out on the edge of your comfort zone. The moving target is the comfort zone is different for everybody.
Eric