Observations during gf's cert. class

[cloudflint]

When i did it in 2007 we where each given an alladin pro that we wore on our pillar valve! I believe it was in case any of us had an accident they could use the computer as evidence and for any chamber crews and stuff. Though the instructors never really told us what they where or how to work them, they just said "here strap this to your tank".

We where expected to use an analog depth gauge and a watch+tables for doing all our dives. Though it may have been to do with the fact that there was no pool so we did all the training in drysuits jumping off the pontoon or walking down the local slip. Gosh i feel like an old granddad telling young whipper-snappers how it was in the good old days even though its only been 3 years.

I remember one guy had a depth timer on his watch that automatically counted his dive time digitally. We all thought he was a bit of a show-off with his futuristic gadgetry

I don't think the eRDP was ever mentioned at all, i only know of it because i saw a wee advert for it on the wall of a dive shop.

 

[scubadiver888]

A 5.5 student to instructor ratio seemed a bit high for BOW. The pool also seemed too crowded with people bouncing into each other. Maybe I was just spoiled by my small classes.

I'm guessing 5.5 is really 11 students and two instructors. In the confined water portion they can have 10:1 but in open water they can have 8:1. If there is an instructor and certified assistant the ratio is 14:2 confined water and 12:2 open water.

I wonder if your gf was really getting taught by an instructor and a DM. That would mean a 12:2 ratio, or less.

And I would have given my left arm for a 5.5 to one student/instructor ratio. My certification class had 22 people in it with 2 instructors. I was extremely apprehensive and scared during certification, and my instructor basically kicked me out of his group because he had too many other people to deal with. Had it not been for a kick a** divemaster, I would never have gotten certified.

Hmm, really should have been two classes. One instructor and one DM would handle 12 students in open water. This leaves you with 10 more students. One instructor would handle 8 students in the open water portion. So there should have been a DM helping the second instructor as well.

Since I became a DM and have access to the PADI procedures and policies I'm realizing I've been seeing a lot of questionable behaviour.

 

[drrich2]

They also spend too much time in that book (and especially the DVD) trying to sell you more PADI courses.

I understand where you're coming from regarding commercial interest and marketing, but there is a practical aspect here, too.

On this forum, many have a sentiment that basic OW recreational scuba training has been 'dumbed down' to least common denominator diving (basically, demonstrating at least marginal competence doing basic, fairly shallow dives in excellent conditions such as warm tropical Caribbean high-vis., low current waters), producing divers lacking competence and confidence (or worse, over-estimating their ability and underestimating the dangers of real world diving).

Now, not all instructors (including those of mainstream agencies such as PADI, SSI, etc...) teach that way or turn out students of that low a caliber, and the student's ability, effort and drive are also at issue. Some people criticize agencies they think 'enable' poor instructors to do so, though. Some PADI instructors turn out fine OW divers, do check-out dives in much harsher conditions, etc...

Bottom Line: a number of people on the forum consider the 'graduating class' of OW divers from some of the mainstream agencies 'lacking.' Whether and to what extent this is true has been hashed to death on other threads, so let's not derail into it here.

If you ascribe to that theory, or don't but believe additional training is worthwhile and valuable, then encouraging people to pursue AOW, Deep Diver, etc..., seems wise. It drives home the idea there's more to learn, additional training before pushing your current limits is good, and while we congratulate you on your cert., you don't know it all or even all you want (& maybe need) to know.

So while the marketing may grate on your nerves, it may lead to more people getting better (via additional) training.

Richard.

 

[Sask Diver]

My daughter was recently (Oct) certified through PADI and they were taught to use the tables but the instructor did tell her that it would no longer be taught after 2010.

I was not taught tables when I took my open water last January, they had us learn on the ERDP saying tables were not required anymore.
I think a total of 30 minutes of the class was spent on learning to use it, and then of course on our open water dives.
Although I do plan on buying a computer by next spring I did go and buy the dive tables to learn on my own.

 

[Blackwood]

I'm not saying they need to understand how RGBM or Buhlmann gets the numbers it comes up with. It's like anything else, you don't need to know the exact mathematics and theory to understand the overall concept. I can explain the key points of my field of research in half an hour, or I can give you a semester long course on how exactly you arrive at those results. Just a little understanding can go a long way. But if you just strap a computer on their wrist and tell them don't let this number go to 0 then the computer could be using astrology for all they know.

Yup, and my point is that using tables as it seems they're usually taught (I.e - "slide your finger over and down. Flip it over and read the number in the box. These are the limits. Don't exceed them.") amounts to the same.

At least, that's how my open water went. We learned how to use the tables. We didn't learn about tables. I personally learned more about useful decompression theory by using a computer which, unlike a table, works in real time. Truly reacting to my profile.

These days I use neither. Go figure.

 

[spectrum]

I have no problem with the use of 63 CF cylinders. Way too often the heft of the gear scares novices away, Let them start comfortable as the skill and enthusiasm builds they'll adapt to larger cylinders or turn out to breathe like birds and get out with more air than you.

As for 59F water, that should not even register as cold if dressed in an appropriate wetsuit and accessories. If they run short of the objectives then add a dive. These are check-out dives, not expeditions.

No more tables.... My biggest concern is developing that sense of basic diving if a computer is not invested in right away. Many divers never need a computer so this would seem to leave a gap. I can make a 30 foot shore dive daily for the rest of my life and not need a computer to manage absorption. Lacking a table background will a diver know when they cross that line?

Pete

 

[RedCash02]

I have no problem with the use of 63 CF cylinders. Way too often the heft of the gear scares novices away, Let them start comfortable as the skill and enthusiasm builds they'll adapt to larger cylinders or turn out to breathe like birds and get out with more air than you.

But if you only train them on these small cylinders the excitement of diving can turn into fear on their very first dive. A lot of people get certified for that big vacation coming up. Suddenly there's no instructor to hold their hands, might be wearing a different level of exposure protection, don't have a chance to get properly weighted, probably using a different kind of rental equipment than they trained on, could be their first boat dive or saltwater, etc. That alone can be enough to ruin the experience and is probably a large part of why so many people never dive after certification.

Why would we possibly want to add another stressor by making them use a larger tank than they've ever handled? The Al 80 is the rental tank in probably 99% of places. I'd even go so far as claiming its just as universal as the dive computer. It's not fun to have a first stage banging you in the back of the head when you look up or kicking it on every stroke. The industry's problem isn't scaring people away during classes, it's keeping people after the class ends.

Ahh if only the world embraced the glory of LP steel.

for 59F water, that should not even register as cold if dressed in an appropriate wetsuit and accessories. If they run short of the objectives then add a dive. These are check-out dives, not expeditions.

Might not be cold, but you'll still be using more air with a 7mm two-piece with 20-40lbs of lead. Plus, a few of the students bought ankle weights because they didn't have good trim. They're not expeditions, but I don't think these dives should be just do the drills and get out. More time in the water is never a bad thing.

Adding another day of diving really isn't feasible since the dive site is hours from the shop. Goes back to the whole keeping up with the shop down the street and not wanting bad reviews on Yelp.

 

[flots am]

I was certified in 2008 and we had to learn the tables. Are they not teaching them any more?

I'm not PADI, but beleive that teaching tables is optional, but not prohibited.

And I would have given my left arm for a 5.5 to one student/instructor ratio. My certification class had 22 people in it with 2 instructors. I was extremely apprehensive and scared during certification, and my instructor basically kicked me out of his group because he had too many other people to deal with. Had it not been for a kick a** divemaster, I would never have gotten certified.

Unfortunately, new divers don't know they could have had a better OW class until it's already too late and they're done with it.

6:1 is more typical in a good class, with 4:1 not too hard to find if you look around and have some patience.

flots.

 

[RedCash02]

I understand where you're coming from regarding commercial interest and marketing, but there is a practical aspect here, too.

On this forum, many have a sentiment that basic OW recreational scuba training has been 'dumbed down' to least common denominator diving (basically, demonstrating at least marginal competence doing basic, fairly shallow dives in excellent conditions such as warm tropical Caribbean high-vis., low current waters), producing divers lacking competence and confidence (or worse, over-estimating their ability and underestimating the dangers of real world diving).

Now, not all instructors (including those of mainstream agencies such as PADI, SSI, etc...) teach that way or turn out students of that low a caliber, and the student's ability, effort and drive are also at issue. Some people criticize agencies they think 'enable' poor instructors to do so, though. Some PADI instructors turn out fine OW divers, do check-out dives in much harsher conditions, etc...

Bottom Line: a number of people on the forum consider the 'graduating class' of OW divers from some of the mainstream agencies 'lacking.' Whether and to what extent this is true has been hashed to death on other threads, so let's not derail into it here.

If you ascribe to that theory, or don't but believe additional training is worthwhile and valuable, then encouraging people to pursue AOW, Deep Diver, etc..., seems wise. It drives home the idea there's more to learn, additional training before pushing your current limits is good, and while we congratulate you on your cert., you don't know it all or even all you want (& maybe need) to know.

So while the marketing may grate on your nerves, it may lead to more people getting better (via additional) training.

Richard.

You're right. There is a beneficial side to the marketing and maybe I'm not the target audience because I hated that stuff since I first opened my PADI book. I should look at the other agencies BOW books, but they're so hard to find now-a-days. It's not so much what they're trying to sell, it's the way they pitch it and integrate it in the course material.

The entire book and dvd just doesn't come off as very professional to me, but that's a topic for some other time.

 

[flots am]

Good point. I still think tables help some people plan dives, but maybe not.

Even if the diver never uses tables again, it's still an awesome tool for teaching the relationship between depth and allowable no-deco time, and with a little extra work, gas consumption and how it relates to depth.

It's really nice to be able to show that a 40' dive can last pretty much until you're bored or cold or low on air, while a 130' dive is over almost immediately.

flots.