PADI AOW vs SSI deep diver qualifications

[KenGordon]

Do you know of any standards from any agency for deep or nitrox courses that allow for taking an untrained student into penetration wrecks with 15m to an opening, while being on wrecks "29-32"m down, with just a 12l tank, likely exceeding the 1.4 MOD for the nitrox being used?? While I'm not an instructor, I can't believe that would be acceptable to any agency. Not being trained in wreck penetration yet diving in a wreck, stirring up silt, and having less than 3ft of visibility, not even being able to see his instructor? That's "to standards" for some agency??

You must have missed me saying “some”. For example it was stated that being next to the hull of a wreck such that it was overhead was a “standards violation” really? He could swim off sideways into free water by my (possibly incorrect) understanding.

By throwing rocks at the OP nobody is learning anything. We don’t know the actual site or likely conditions. If you asked me to describe a cenote dive vs a cave dive I wouldn’t be able to tell you the difference from my very limited experience inside a cenote. It would probably sound just like a cave dive. Maybe that is what is happening here.

 

[tursiops]

Maybe it needs to be said that a training dive is not graded as 50% within standards or 95% within standards. it is either 100% within standards or it is not within standards. The problems and jeopardy caused by 50% or 95% will vary, but either way the training was not within standards.

 

[jlcnuke]

You must have missed me saying “some”. For example it was stated that being next to the hull of a wreck such that it was overhead was a “standards violation” really? He could swim off sideways into free water by my (possibly incorrect) understanding.

By throwing rocks at the OP nobody is learning anything. We don’t know the actual site or likely conditions. If you asked me to describe a cenote dive vs a cave dive I wouldn’t be able to tell you the difference from my very limited experience inside a cenote. It would probably sound just like a cave dive. Maybe that is what is happening here.

Sorry, I guess I missed it because I didn't see any mention of the extreme likelihood that many things were against standards, even if some things didn't violate standards. However, I think the important thing is that the OP, while he may have felt okay about the dive and he seems to have enjoyed it, should be aware that his instructor from all appearances took him on a dangerous dive with inadequate training and almost certainly violated a number of training standards designed to ensure the dives are conducted safely. That's a sign of an irresponsible instructor that appears to be a danger to their students.

I have no problem with what the OP did, though I'd have been happier if OP had recognized that the dives were beyond his training and experience and thumbed them instead. In fact, I don't think I've seen anyone criticize the OP themselves, though I may have missed something there as well. What I do see is a bunch of criticism towards the way the instructor conducted the training in what appears to be a reckless and dangerous manner that should be reported. That, based on the information I've read, seems justified.

 

[Storker]

I'd have been happier if OP had recognized that the dives were beyond his training and experience and thumbed them instead.

And the probability of that happening is... pretty close to zero, given the power and experience imbalance between a student and an instructor.

Very far from how the world ought to be, but (IMO) quite realistic nonetheless. I believe that it takes an exceptionally assertive student to thumb a dive that their instructor is guiding them into.

 

[jlcnuke]

And the probability of that happening is... pretty close to zero, given the power and experience imbalance between a student and an instructor.

Very far from how the world ought to be, but (IMO) quite realistic nonetheless. I believe that it takes an exceptionally assertive student to thumb a dive that their instructor is guiding them into.

I agree it's unlikely in most newer students, that's why I had no problem with what they did despite that. I think the more experience, and training, that you get, the easier it is to recognize situations you aren't prepared for and the more willing you are to thumb a dive.

 

[KenGordon]

Maybe it needs to be said that a training dive is not graded as 50% within standards or 95% within standards. it is either 100% within standards or it is not within standards. The problems and jeopardy caused by 50% or 95% will vary, but either way the training was not within standards.

So by this measure

“We swam very close to the seabed along wrecks where the inclined hulls were above us, this was to practice buoyancy in an overhead environment.”

means the dive was 100% outside of standards and all that business of squeezing through tight hatches and inside the wreck is still just 100% outside of “standards”?

Is it dangerous to swim next to a hull? What about into the hold of a boat which is on it’s side?

In Malta there are a good number of wrecks which are probably ok for this sort of dive. The question I am asking is, were they cowboys or is his impression of what was going on not the whole story?

Being a reckless instructor in Malta is a bad plan. You don’t just have the relatives trying to sue.

 

[tursiops]

So by this measure

“We swam very close to the seabed along wrecks where the inclined hulls were above us, this was to practice buoyancy in an overhead environment.”

means the dive was 100% outside of standards and all that business of squeezing through tight hatches and inside the wreck is still just 100% outside of “standards”?

Is it dangerous to swim next to a hull? What about into the hold of a boat which is on it’s side?

In Malta there are a good number of wrecks which are probably ok for this sort of dive. The question I am asking is, were they cowboys or is his impression of what was going on not the whole story?

Being a reckless instructor in Malta is a bad plan. You don’t just have the relatives trying to sue.

LOL. You are hung up on the swimming alongside the wreck. That is minor compared to the penetration stuff. Once he penetrates, and can't see (his words: "Inside the wrecks sometimes when only 1 to 1.5 m apart unless he shone his torch at me I could not even tell where he was."), it is outside standards for a Deep class.

 

[KenGordon]

LOL. You are hung up on the swimming alongside the wreck. That is minor compared to the penetration stuff. Once he penetrates, and can't see (his words: "Inside the wrecks sometimes when only 1 to 1.5 m apart unless he shone his torch at me I could not even tell where he was."), it is outside standards for a Deep class.

Minor? It is completely a non issue, like being expected to wear fins. But it was part of your, and most of the posters on this thread, attack on the OP point by point, like you were trying to say absolutely everything was wrong.

Saying everything was wrong isn’t helping him.

Maybe ask, by “inside” do you mean below a solid deck, with no immediate way out?

 

[jlcnuke]

Minor? It is completely a non issue, like being expected to wear fins. But it was part of your, and most of the posters on this thread, attack on the OP point by point, like you were trying to say absolutely everything was wrong.

Saying everything was wrong isn’t helping him.

Maybe ask, by “inside” do you mean below a solid deck, with no immediate way out?

He's made it pretty clear they were inside:

I could only just fit through some of the holes, they were narrower than me and even with my shoulders drawn in I was rubbing both sides, at the same time I had only a few inches under me and my tank nearly scraping. I bumped and cut my head several times. I had to get my breathing / buoyancy spot on to align with the holes so I could just drift through. One of the wrecks was inclined at about 45 degrees and had hatches of the sort you have to step over the bottom, duck your head and turn sideways to get through even when the ship is at its normal position on the surface. Incline these hatches at 45 degrees, reduce visibility and they are a tricky to get through. I had visions of knocking my primary reg off and flying round like a deflating balloon but it never happened. Even after six dives I had never even scratched my reg but had bumped the tank several times and put a number of scratches in the face of my new dive computer. There were other places where we went into a room or shaft and then used slight positive buoyancy by inhaling to rise through them instead of finning which could stir up silt. As our gas ran down we moved higher up the wreck swimming between and under obstructions on the deck.

.....

We were probably never more than 15m, certainly less than 20m from an exit hole,and mostly less even though they were not always visible or in the same compartment.

Sure, not "everything" on the dive was wrong. Many parts were probably great (nice brief, presumably did a safety stop, probably didn't ascend/descend too quickly, etc), but the big, huge, major thing is that some of the dive WAS clearly wrong. I think everyone can agree on that, right?

 

[KenGordon]

He's made it pretty clear they were inside:

Sure, not "everything" on the dive was wrong. Many parts were probably great (nice brief, presumably did a safety stop, probably didn't ascend/descend too quickly, etc), but the big, huge, major thing is that some of the dive WAS clearly wrong. I think everyone can agree on that, right?

Were all these high risk things happening at once? Was he in low vis 20m from an exit while squeezing through doorways at 45 degrees banging his tank while an inch off the bottom?

Or did he do these things separately?

You see, I can imagine wrecks in Malta he might describe like that but which are not at all scary. I also know that Malta has the most regulated diving in Europe and that losing a student would be extremely bad for the instructor if they were being as reckless as this thread makes out. Diving is taken pretty seriously in Malta.