- Messages
- 16,407
- Reaction score
- 5,219
- # of dives
- 1000 - 2499
PADI master scuba diver rating
- Thread starter Curtis Dawson
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Seems like you are comparing apples and a basket of apples.
With PADI, the training is modular, paid for by the piece. What you describe is one big amalgamation, but is it really any different? What did you pay for the 10 weeks of class, and 20 dives? With PADI, you pay for OW, AOW, Rescue....a minimum of about 14 dives, to which you could add 3 more dives for Deep, to get you to the 130-foot training level. And all that would take at least 6 diving days (3 dives/day), and maybe 3 partial days of classes. If you took PADI classes, and allowed 20 dives over 10 weeks, you could get some very good training through Rescue, with several specialties added in. No problem at all. So I'm not sure why you are trying to compare 10 weeks of training to a weekend....
By the way, the OW card does NOT have a depth limitation on it....the card is good to 130 feet. What you are missing is the training that does along with deeper dives....AOW trains you to 100 ft, Deep trains you to 130 feet.....but the OW card itself is good to 130 ft and comes with the recommendation to not dive deeper than you've been trained. Does the ACUC train you to 130 ft?
t4e
Contributor
i paid the same as anyone pays for OW PADI
how can you possibly cover in a weekend the stuff we did in 10 weeks? but do you even know the curriculum of ACUC course?
it doesn't train you to 130ft but it definitely trains you better then a weekend crash course and then fork more money have another crash course and call yourself advanced diver capable to go to 130ft
do you see the oddity here?
you're questioning the training i got in my course yet my agency allows me to dive to 130ft only after 20 dives or 10 hours of bottom time vs PADI 2 weekend crash courses and 6 dives with an instructor...woow that is sure making you ready to dive deep
is it? According to PADI its 60 feet, but if that is not true then please explain this
- Messages
- 16,407
- Reaction score
- 5,219
- # of dives
- 1000 - 2499
One of PADI's responses on the Belize thread was that procedures/standards were violated as OW divers were taken to 130' without training or experience. Perhaps the key word here is OR. You can get experience diving deep with a pro, or other experienced diver. You can do this gradually over time. Now you have experience to go to 130' on an OW card only, I guess. Exactly how PADI views this, I admit I don't know. Remember that the 60' and "conditions similar or better than those in which you were certified" are recommendations. This is a grey area, and I am no expert on exactly how these things progress as an OW diver only, nor on how things shake out legally should something happen. 130' is the limit for recreational diving, and I believe it is used by most if not all agencies. I recently read that 130' was not figured out very mathematically, but was just generally agreed upon as narcosis for a lot of people really starts to act up around there, and a few other reasons that make sense. I hear some countries legally enforce depth recommendations, though most don't. Dive ops in the U.S. and area vary on this. On my very first boat dive (which was in the Gulf of Mex.), apparently my OW card was good enough for me to go to 78' according to that dive op, and the blessing of a NAUI instructor (op co-owner) on board who buddied me with an experienced diver. If something had happened to me could I or my wife have sued them? I should say sued them and won?
This may be playing semantics, but OW is an entry level course, so this could, in some circles, be perceived as an intro course.
DSD is not a course, it is an experience
---------- Post added November 11th, 2013 at 09:39 AM ----------
By your analogy, every PADI course is completed over one weekend. Hmmm, not quite right I'm afraid.
After 20 dives or 10 hours bottom time you are, by your agency standards, then certified to 40m. Are there any depth requirements for these 20 dives or am I ok to potter around at 12m for 20 dives, then drop to 40m on my 21st dive and get narced off my face?
Incidentally, as you so put it, others don't know what was involved in your course so are they not in a position to comment. You don't know too much about other courses either. A total of 6 dives does not certify you to 40m with PADI. Try double that as a minimum. Yet, many instructors I work with would not take a fresh AOW without further dives onto a deep course.
Looking at your course curriculum, I fail to see how this would take 10 weeks. Comparing it to the PADI OW syllabus there is some additional theory, some first aid and touching onto rescue skills. Maybe 6 full days with additional days for theory and exams, but 10 weeks????
dfx
Contributor
Well, we're already arguing semantics only, so no problem there :tongue:
Entry level yes, intro no. My point was that an "intro" course, by definition, doesn't earn you a graduation or certification or anything like that. If you graduate (certify) from a course, then it can't be an intro course.
And DSD does include theory and skills practice, so it really is a course, at least partly. In fact some parts of a DSD "experience" can be credited towards an OWD course taken later on (or at least that used to be the case). However, a DSD doesn't earn you any sort of certification.
But the semantic point that's being argued is still invalid even if you substitute "OWD" for "entry level diver". Because that would make AOWD an "advanced entry level diver". Well, what is it now, is it advanced, or is it entry level? It can't be both, or can it?
Because that would make AOWD an "advanced entry level diver". Well, what is it now, is it advanced, or is it entry level? It can't be both, or can it?
Well, seeing as there seems to be general agreement that PADI AOW does, in fact, produce a diver that is an "advanced entry-level diver" I'm not sure what your reasoning is that such a thing is not possible and/or that the current name is inappropriate.
According to Merriam-Webster, the word "advance" means "to go forward; to make progress; to continue in a process of development." It does not include or imply that such an advance is all the way to some high level, but merely represents a development FROM whatever the current state happens to be. The word "Advanced" is the adjective form of the word "advance" and, as you keep ignoring, in the course title "Advanced Open-Water Diver" that adjective modifies the term "open-water" rather than the term "diver."
So, accordingly the course title "Advanced Open-Water Diver" pretty clearly says that the course represents an opportunity to "go forward" from Open Water, or "make progress" from Open Water, or "continue in a process of development" from Open Water.
If the title of the course were "Advanced Diver" I can see where the objection would lie; however that is not the case.
To go back to the math analogy, algebra is fairly simple, entry-level mathematics. So taking a course in "Advanced Algebra" does not make one an "advanced mathematician" by any stretch of the imagination. But a course title of "Advanced Algebra" perfectly conveys that there is a progression from the initial, entry-level algebra class.
dfx
Contributor
Right. But if you have advanced from an entry-level certification, then you have advanced above that entry level. So you're not at that entry level any more, because you have advanced beyond it. Therefore, "advanced entry level" is an oxymoron. Gotta love semantics, don't you?
No argument there, no idea where you think I may have ignored that.
Again, no argument there.
Yes I can agree with that. Sticking with this analogy (which will make the following sound very silly), it would make you an "advanced algebraist", whatever that may be. But that's not really the argument here, or is it? We're talking about advanced algebraists who haven't even mastered the skills presented to them in their first, basic algebra course, because they didn't have to time practice them and put them to use. Your argument is that this is perfectly OK and even to be expected, because after all, algebra is only entry-level mathematics and therefore advanced algebra is still also only entry-level mathematics, totally disregarding the fact that according to what the course has promised you, you should really have advanced your skills by now.
I'm sorry, you can ride the semantics train all you want, but you really can't tell me that it's possible for somebody to be an "advanced X" if they're not even a competent "X" yet. It absolutely doesn't matter what X is. And if there's a course carrying this exact promise, then there's something wrong with the course.
iamrushman
Contributor
LOL...really....not a good read here.
OK, as mentioned earlier, you have to consider the history of the names. Here is the simplified version.
There were once only two levels--diver and instructor. There were no tech certifications, nor were there any of the myriad of other kinds of specialty certifications. When the decision was made to break the diver certification into smaller chunks, the names made sense, with a progression of open water diver, advanced open water diver, and master scuba diver completing the only instructional path in existence. A Master Scuba Diver had taken almost every course that was possible.
As more and more courses became available, the names made less and less sense. PADI has retained the AOW certification title for continuity sake, but the course has actually been called Adventures in Diving for decades.
Once you come up with a title, certified many, many thousands of divers with that title, and that title is established and understood around the world, it is tough to make a change.
There were once only two levels--diver and instructor. There were no tech certifications, nor were there any of the myriad of other kinds of specialty certifications. When the decision was made to break the diver certification into smaller chunks, the names made sense, with a progression of open water diver, advanced open water diver, and master scuba diver completing the only instructional path in existence. A Master Scuba Diver had taken almost every course that was possible.
As more and more courses became available, the names made less and less sense. PADI has retained the AOW certification title for continuity sake, but the course has actually been called Adventures in Diving for decades.
Once you come up with a title, certified many, many thousands of divers with that title, and that title is established and understood around the world, it is tough to make a change.
Similar threads
