Have limits changed, or have I mis-remembered?

[TMHeimer]

And it is the changes that should motivate folks to re certify every two years, not just the loss of skills during that time. If you are going to try and save someone's life, using modern best practices is kinda nice.

Hard to disagree. Motivation is important--I know from being a teacher. But to be honest, it's frustrating to go to 4 different CPR courses where the written test was done either by the class orally, or ignored altogether. And to see folks taking it just because it's a requirement of their law firm employer, etc. I feel reviewing my manuals daily keeps me better prepared to help someone than taking another course every 2 years that anyone can pass (and all do) by just CPRing the dummy for 5 minutes and learning of minor changes that probably don't change things much from the early 70s --when my wife at age 16 saved someone as a lifeguard. As you provided me with them, it is probably quite easy to find correct changes like these without going through the routine of another course.
The only reason I feel I am capable of providing oxygen is because I got the shop owner years ago to go over the steps of putting the thing together and I wrote them down. I review them once weekly and they are memorized, as I don't own a $700 O2 kit. Doing this once in Rescue Course and again once in DM course would mean nothing to me.
As I said, I don't disagree with you. Of course taking a course every 2 years certainly can't hurt. It just has been a 4 time frustrating experience for me (4 different instructors).
Something I thought of years ago was maybe requiring a written CPR test more frequently for dive pros. Like every year or so. Then again, you can get into whether dive pros, or even non pros should be required to re-certify their status after a certain period. I know an instructor or DM who goes inactive can do something to regain teaching status, and pay the membership and insurance up to date and away you go--but I don't think it's a big task.
If you don't go inactive, you pay your fees and remain a pro--no re-certifying. Yes, as with school teachers, PADI provides some updates every year, much like teacher inservice days. So as an instructor or DM you can teach/assist one or 2 courses a year (or even none), do basically nothing else, and remain certified.

 

[NAM001]

Dive OPs can set any rules they want from their boats. I have AOW because some of the Keys OPs wanted an AOW for "advanced" dives that I wanted to do. They would also allow OW divers to hire a guide, bring a log book & make their case, or go out with them on a "non-advanced" dive so they could assess their skills. All reasonable requests, IMHO. The AOW is an easy/documented method of assuring you've been below 60 ft. at least once. If I was a jaded dive traveler, I could think it was just CYA. I prefer to believe my dive op of choice cares that their customer, has an enjoyable, safe experience. I opted for AOW because I don't like "hassle" when I dive travel. In my experience, it's rarely asked for but why pi$$ in the wind. Plus I had a good AOW instructor and it was a beneficial, enjoyable experience. YMMV.

I agree with you in regard of having one to comply with dive ops. I would do the same and encourage others to do the same. the question still stands that if you can go to 130 ft the REC limit then what does an AOW or deep cert to add to that. If nothing then people have no reason to do further training. the other issue is that who is the designated level to sign off experience dives to meet the legal aspect of will not go deeper than 60 ft until you get further training or experience in those dives. Im asking this from a legal stand point. IE how does a boat say that the divers with OW's have the legit experience to do deep dives that exceed their "RECOMMENDED limits". that issue is not a factor if you have a separate certification. so with out a AOW or DEEP CERT. HOW CAN YOU PROVE you are qualified to do those dives. HOw can a boat prove the diver was qualified to do the dive. I would be one thing if you had a log entry saying you have done those dives in the company of an instructor who is qualified to say you are capable of doing them. A simple instructor name sig and an agency inst # should satisfy that requirement. But when the discussion of doing that comes up instructors are not so willing to sign off on those dives because it implies they were in a training condition. Now the training limits comes into play.... I asked an instructor to do that once and they wanted 50-100 dollars to observe a wreck dive in exchange for the log entry signature. they wanted the same for deep dive and required 3 observations to get the sign off. take the class and it would be cheaper and you go to 70 feet to get the sig. STILL NO OBSERVATION THAT YOU CAN FUNCTION AT 100+ FEET. other than lawyer talk there is no corrolation in the limits and its associated subsequent behaviors. It really seems to boil down to having an entryt livel cert and from that point on you self identify s a seep diver.

 

[TMHeimer]

I agree with you in regard of having one to comply with dive ops. I would do the same and encourage others to do the same. the question still stands that if you can go to 130 ft the REC limit then what does an AOW or deep cert to add to that. If nothing then people have no reason to do further training. the other issue is that who is the designated level to sign off experience dives to meet the legal aspect of will not go deeper than 60 ft until you get further training or experience in those dives. Im asking this from a legal stand point. IE how does a boat say that the divers with OW's have the legit experience to do deep dives that exceed their "RECOMMENDED limits". that issue is not a factor if you have a separate certification. so with out a AOW or DEEP CERT. HOW CAN YOU PROVE you are qualified to do those dives. HOw can a boat prove the diver was qualified to do the dive. I would be one thing if you had a log entry saying you have done those dives in the company of an instructor who is qualified to say you are capable of doing them. A simple instructor name sig and an agency inst # should satisfy that requirement. But when the discussion of doing that comes up instructors are not so willing to sign off on those dives because it implies they were in a training condition. Now the training limits comes into play.... I asked an instructor to do that once and they wanted 50-100 dollars to observe a wreck dive in exchange for the log entry signature. they wanted the same for deep dive and required 3 observations to get the sign off. take the class and it would be cheaper and you go to 70 feet to get the sig. STILL NO OBSERVATION THAT YOU CAN FUNCTION AT 100+ FEET. other than lawyer talk there is no corrolation in the limits and its associated subsequent behaviors. It really seems to boil down to having an entryt livel cert and from that point on you self identify s a seep diver.

A lot of good detailed points here that seem to support my view that taking additional training in order to dive deeper is good and quite provable. And about the "fuzziness" about getting/being experienced without further courses.

 

[yle]

I always have to ask the question that if 60 ft is a recommendation and not a limit then why would anyone take AOW and DEEP when there is nothing to gain from it.

A good instructor can always produce a benefit with additional training. The "gain" is what builds the foundation for you to become a better diver, not the plastic card you get or what dive ops allow you to do because of it.

 

[TMHeimer]

A good instructor can always produce a benefit with additional training. The "gain" is what builds the foundation for you to become a better diver, not the plastic card you get or what dive ops allow you to do because of it.

Yes. The recent thread on why take Deep if you took AOW deals with this as well. There are definitely things you learn about 130' vs. 100'.
I took quite a few courses early on--possibly a "card-collector".... Much of the stuff I learned I don't use in my simple daily diving, but all knowledge is good.

 

[NAM001]

A good instructor can always produce a benefit with additional training. The "gain" is what builds the foundation for you to become a better diver, not the plastic card you get or what dive ops allow you to do because of it.

I agree with that totally. but what you speak of is done differently with each instructor to no required standard. the ones that only do the bare minimum do not cut the mustard for anything beyond teh training environment. the only reason IMO that we have so few fatalities in diving is because of those good instructors. the marginal ones produce more problems than solutions. I have asked some instructors why after they finish with an OW student ,,,, they do not go on a dive with them to say 60 or more feet. their answer is along the line of ,, if they do they will not come back for AOW if they think they can now go to 100 ft. It is totally the wrong approach to things. being left under confident is just as bad as being left over confident.

 

[boulderjohn]

I agree with that totally. but what you speak of is done differently with each instructor to no required standard. the ones that only do the bare minimum do not cut the mustard for anything beyond teh training environment. the only reason IMO that we have so few fatalities in diving is because of those good instructors. the marginal ones produce more problems than solutions. I have asked some instructors why after they finish with an OW student ,,,, they do not go on a dive with them to say 60 or more feet. their answer is along the line of ,, if they do they will not come back for AOW if they think they can now go to 100 ft. It is totally the wrong approach to things. being left under confident is just as bad as being left over confident.

Do you ask golf instructors why on Earth they don't offer free lessons for students after they have finished the one they paid for?

How about college professors? After they finish teaching the course for which they are paid, why don't they offer their students free classes?

Those damned scuba instructors! Always wanting to get paid when they work! Why don't they work for free like everyone else?

 

[NAM001]

Do you ask golf instructors why on Earth they don't offer free lessons for students after they have finished the one they paid for?

How about college professors? After they finish teaching the course for which they are paid, why don't they offer their students free classes?

Those damned scuba instructors! Always wanting to get paid when they work! Why don't they work for free like everyone else?

you miss the point john and your view is very much part of the problem.

insturctors will not provide any support in the role of gaining experience the will hold up in a court. do you think that one OW should be a qualified judge if another OW is profecient to go to 100 ft.
no is the correct answer. the instructor factor is a scam for the most part. you have limits that say you are (Ill use teh CYA term) recommended limit of 60 ft unless you get further training which can be documented or experience to do the dive, and there is no way to obtain an adaquate accountable signature that you have that experience from a certified or qualified source,,, instructor with out being screwed int he pocket book. the legitimate experience portion of the RECOMENDATION CAN NOT BE OBTAINED because of the good ol boy system that exists.. your very words support that position,,, I under stand how it works and why it is that way. the end result is you just can not get the sign off with out taking a class. And if you want to be blunt about it ,,,you have padi instructors saying its ok to go to 100 ft with out that so long as the instructor has no responsibility for the OW kid when they have only been to 40 ft and given a card.

The process reeks with ITS A MONEY GAME, and that drives inexperienced divers to skip further training. There is but one valid reason to do that and that is the instructor can not vouch for a divers ability to do a deep dive. and that alone admits that OW does not cover teh needed skills and display of confidence to to those dives.

 

[tursiops]

you miss the point john and your view is very much part of the problem.

insturctors will not provide any support in the role of gaining experience the will hold up in a court. do you think that one OW should be a qualified judge if another OW is profecient to go to 100 ft.
no is the correct answer. the instructor factor is a scam for the most part. you have limits that say you are (Ill use teh CYA term) recommended limit of 60 ft unless you get further training which can be documented or experience to do the dive, and there is no way to obtain an adaquate accountable signature that you have that experience from a certified or qualified source,,, instructor with out being screwed int he pocket book. the legitimate experience portion of the RECOMENDATION CAN NOT BE OBTAINED because of the good ol boy system that exists.. your very words support that position,,, I under stand how it works and why it is that way. the end result is you just can not get the sign off with out taking a class. And if you want to be blunt about it ,,,you have padi instructors saying its ok to go to 100 ft with out that so long as the instructor has no responsibility for the OW kid when they have only been to 40 ft and given a card.

The process reeks with ITS A MONEY GAME, and that drives inexperienced divers to skip further training. There is but one valid reason to do that and that is the instructor can not vouch for a divers ability to do a deep dive. and that alone admits that OW does not cover teh needed skills and display of confidence to to those dives.

Anyone can sign a logbook, it doesn't have to be an instructor. It is easy to document experience.

 

[TMHeimer]

Do you ask golf instructors why on Earth they don't offer free lessons for students after they have finished the one they paid for?

How about college professors? After they finish teaching the course for which they are paid, why don't they offer their students free classes?

Those damned scuba instructors! Always wanting to get paid when they work! Why don't they work for free like everyone else?

I don't think you missed the point and agree with you.