Is it possible for me to dive even though I don't know how to swim?

[jefffalcone]

Irregardless of what a course's standards require, to dive, and to be safe about diving, you should be able to swim. There are potential circumstances where not knowing how to swim would create a risk. I am assuming of course that your interest is in obtaining an open water certification.

SSI's current standard for Open Water Diver is either a 200 yard surface swim or a 300 yard surface swim with mask, fins, and snorkel. In addition you must be able to perform a 10 minute survival swim/float without mask, fins, snorkel or any other swimming aid. Standards can vary by agency.

http://www.ssila.com/pdf/SSI_TrainStnd_0706.pdf

Irregardless your views on swimming and diving, irregardless is not a word.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[Oxy]

most of this discussion seems to be the definition of "swimming"
The question was
CAN I GET OW CERTIFICATION EVEN IF I CANNOT SWIM?

The technical answer is NO!
You have to get wet.
If you get wet and don't "swim" it's called a bath.

If you can accomplish the tasks the instructor assigns and complete the course to the satisfaction of the instructor, the answer must be yes!

 

[Oxy]

P.S.
It would help to have a diving buddy that won't point at you and laugh when you dog paddle your laps.

 

[colieolie]

I personally don't understand why you would want to dive if you don't know how to swim. I would be completely freaked out if I tried to dive and didn't know how to. I just wouldn't feel safe...but then again, I don't it when I can't be in control of myself.

 

[PhilEllis]

Somewhat of a hijack, but not exactly.................

We recently had a student in one of our classes that could demonstrate every diving skill with mastery. He had only two problems.......

he could not swim well and he could NOT float for 10 minutes. With full lungs, he would sink directly to the bottom of the pool. Now, he could do the 400 yard mask/snorkel swim. Our instructor even went with him to a private pool session during the week to work on this problem. After an hour of intense work, he still failed to meet these two standards. He simply could not float. Given that he couldn't float, swimming was very difficult.

Non-swimmers should not dive. The safety implications are serious.

Phil Ellis

 

[Oxy]

Somewhat of a hijack, but not exactly.................

We recently had a student in one of our classes that could demonstrate every diving skill with mastery. He had only two problems.......

he could not swim well and he could NOT float for 10 minutes. With full lungs, he would sink directly to the bottom of the pool. Now, he could do the 400 yard mask/snorkel swim. Our instructor even went with him to a private pool session during the week to work on this problem. After an hour of intense work, he still failed to meet these two standards. He simply could not float. Given that he couldn't float, swimming was very difficult.

Non-swimmers should not dive. The safety implications are serious.

Phil Ellis

Exactly! That was me as a kid, I could not float. Well I did but I looked like a plumb bob. Feet straight down with the waterline at my hairline. I assume the instructor denied his cert.

 

[PhilEllis]

Exactly! That was me as a kid, I could not float. Well I did but I looked like a plumb bob. Feet straight down with the waterline at my hairline. I assume the instructor denied his cert.

Unfortunately for him, yes.

Phil Ellis

 

[DivingPrincessE]

I cannot swim. I never learned cause I was skinny (low body mass) and sank.

I'm skinny and I can swim just fine. Being skinny really isn't an excuse for not knowing how to swim There are LOTS of thin people who can swim and float.

 

[Thalassamania]

I'm skinny and I can swim just fine.

Bragging or complaining? Those of us who float better are soooooo jealous.

 

[Hank49]

Irregardless your views on swimming and diving, irregardless is not a word.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Irregardless of the fact that we're hijacking the thread: It is accepted by many as a word.
Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: \ˌir-i-ˈgärd-ləs\
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
nonstandard : regardless
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.