PADI's 100' Max AOW Depth Limit
Scubagator
Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck, night
etc.
General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South Florida
is that it sucks...
I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
SMC
RDecker388
Gator,
It's certainly going to make things a bit more challenging here in NC
where our typical first dive is in the 110' to 130' range. No more just putting
your AOW students on a standard full-day charter! We'll either have to set-up
special charters for the AOW students (aka no more AOW courses for one or two,
we'll have to do group programs only) or get lucky enough to catch a boat
scheduled for inshore diving only.
I wouldn't go as far as saying "it sucks," but it sure is going to cause us
some problems!
Bob D.
Director of Training, Olympus Dive Center
Morehead City, NC
www.olympusdiving.com
Ed Newberg
Scubagator wrote:
>
> Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
>
> As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
> Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck, night
> etc.
>
> General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South Florida
> is that it sucks...
>
> I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
>
Has PADI changed their max sport diving limit from 130' to 100'?
If not we now have a situation where PADI instructors are
forbidden to train students to the depth they certify them for.
Seems stupid.
Whaddaya wanna bet this is a precursor to a new course? Once
there's enough squawking, PADI will introduce their new course,
"More Advanced, We Really Mean It This Time, Open Water."
Best answer? Tell PADI to go pound silt.
Ed
--
"Only wimps die of natural causes."
=============================================
The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily
reflect those of my corporate masters. Yet.
Reply by email to:
g.edward...@lmco.com
Ed Newberg
RDecker388 wrote:
>
>
> It's certainly going to make things a bit more challenging here in NC
> where our typical first dive is in the 110' to 130' range.
Oh, I can see the pre-dive briefing now:
"Okay, you guys doing the Advanced class will need to stop
and hang on the line at 100' for the entire dive. You
folks who are OW certified and not taking Advanced can,
of course, continue down to the wreck."
I imagine this will present you with some marketing
challenges.
Lee Bell
Scubagator wrote:
>
> Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard... As of the last Undersea
> Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater Dives can be no
> deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck, night
> etc. General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here
> in South Florida is that it sucks... I'm curious as to what the rest
> of you have to say.
I presume PADI has a basis for SUGGESTING that their Advanced Open Water
Divers should not dive below 100 fsw. Before I would comment on their
OPINION, I'd have to know more about that basis.
Aside from wondering why they make such a SUGGESTION, I have little
reason to think about PADI's OPINION. Except for their active
instructors and Dive Masters and shop owners, those professionally
associated with PADI, the agency has no legal, moral or other right to
dictate anything to anyone. They are a certification agency, not an
authorized enforcement agency. While I might consider their opinions
and even modify my behavior based on them, I would no more allow them to
dictate my dive profile than I would allow someone in this group to
dictate it.
Lee
Steve Francoeur
Scubagator wrote:
>
> Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
>
> As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
> Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck, night
> etc.
>
> General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South Florida
> is that it sucks...
>
> I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
>
Does anyone else here see the stupidity of a certain agency certifiying
AOW students to dive to 130', but refusing to train them at that depth?
When flying commercial airlines, I certainly feel better knowing that my
pilots actually have flown 747s before, and are not the product of a
training program that certifies them to fly jets after a few hours in a
simulator. The same logic (i.e., people should be trained under
realistic conditions) would seem to apply to divers, shouldn't it?
Steve
P152697
Lee Bell wrote:
>Aside from wondering why they make such a SUGGESTION, I have little
>reason to think about PADI's OPINION. Except for their active
>instructors and Dive Masters and shop owners, those professionally
>associated with PADI, the agency has no legal, moral or other right to
>dictate anything to anyone. They are a certification agency, not an
>authorized enforcement agency.
So, whats your point? There was absolutely nothing said about ANYONE adhering
to these standards other than PADI instructors during AOW TRAINING. Sheeesh,
get a grip Lee.
Phil (Wash St.)
Charlie Gibbs
In article <3533D53B...@ix.netcom.com> lee...@ix.netcom.com
(Lee Bell) writes:
>Scubagator wrote:
>
>> Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard... As of the last
>> Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
>> Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...
>> deep, wreck, night etc. General consensus of the instructors
>> that I have spoke to here in South Florida is that it sucks...
>> I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
>
>I presume PADI has a basis for SUGGESTING that their Advanced Open
>Water Divers should not dive below 100 fsw. Before I would comment
>on their OPINION, I'd have to know more about that basis.
The way I read it (a few years back now), the suggested maximum
depths were 60' for Open Water divers, 100' for AOW, and 130' with
the Deep Diver specialty.
So there I was diving off a boat in my dry suit, photographing
and IDing animals at 140 feet - throw in a rescue course and
I guess I have Master Diver qualifications, even though I only
have an AOW card. But I spent the money for those other cards
on dive trips instead... :-)
--
cgi...@sky.bus.com (Charlie Gibbs)
Remove the first period after the "at" sign to reply.
Philip B. Malter
Scubagator wrote:
>
> Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
>
> As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
> etc.
>
> General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South Florida
> is that it sucks...
>
> I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
>
Gator,
I checked this out with some of the guys at the PADI national office.
They explained that the primary reason for the proposed change was to
coordinate their depth guidelines with the Spare Air 100' matrix so
that those using Spare Air would always have a comfortable margin of
safety to offset potential panic induced matrix violations.
phil
Chuck Hopf
I must have missed the smiley face on that one.
DOBSON JW wrote in message
<199804150209...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>>So there I was diving off a boat in my dry suit, photographing
>>and IDing animals at 140 feet - throw in a rescue course and
>>I guess I have Master Diver qualifications, even though I only
>>have an AOW card. But I spent the money for those other cards
>>on dive trips instead... :-)
>
professionally
>developed and delivered instruction.
>Jon Dobson
>
scubagirl
I agree that it sucks. Most people are going to dive deeper that that
anyways, they are already trying to get further training, let's do it the
first time.
I would prefer to see a MINIMUM depth standard set! I was told 70' and
deeper is considered *deep* - does diving to 70' mean you are going to be
comfortable diving at 100'+? I was taking students to 110'-115' on their
AOW deep dives - now I am told I can take them to 70' and sign them off as
Advanced. Doesn't make sense to me.....60' is a lot of water, whereas 10'
(at that depth!) makes a small difference.....
Just my thoughts......
Kenna
ke...@sprint.ca
www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/4652
Scubagator wrote in message
<199804141939...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
->Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
->As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced
Openwater
->Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck,
night
->etc.
->General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South
Florida
->is that it sucks...
->I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
scubagirl
The *basis* is simply that the Advanced course dives are supposed to be the
same as the first dive of the respective specialty course. In the Deep
Diver course, the first dive allows divers to go to 100 feet - thus the
Advanced standards needed to be changed to fall into line accordingly.
Which, of course, brings up the question how many divers pursue further
training for these types of dives versus those that *just do it*, so to
speak......
Lee Bell wrote in message <3533D53B...@ix.netcom.com>...
KybrSose
Ed,
>Advanced class will need to stop
>and hang on the line at 100' for the entire dive. You
>folks who are OW certified and not taking Advanced can,
>of course, continue down
OW students are supposed to stop at 60 fsw. Thats the max depth of their cert.
My understanding is that the new max sport depth is now 100' , in accord with
their new AOW policy.
You are correct in another post where you call this stupidity. Obivously no one
is going to collar you for a deep dive, although the newbie is well advised to
go slow.
I would guess the new change is a precursor to a tech division. PADI never sat
on its laurels, and thats where the money is.
Cheers,
Al Marvelli aka Kybr...@aol.com
Steve Olson
100 foot dive "limit?" Sounds like more of the favorite american past-
time these days -- whining. A national epidemic.
DOBSON JW
RET Photo
Maybe PADI is trying to set "limits" on new lawsuits...several years back a
Newbie diver sued PADI over the dive tables..seems that this newbie Got bent
doing a dive..he claimed that he was diving well within the Table Limits...But
if you watched the program, adn did the calculations, you would of seen that he
Not only dived deeper than recommended(110 FSW, 60 FSW was the current
recommended max depht for a newbie at the time), he also Pushed the time
limits.
By setting 100 FSW as their new limit...they effectly wash their hands of any
suits of divers getting the Bends...Oh Yes I know
You Can Still get Bent on Dives shalloweer than 100 Feet, takes a little longer
that's all...
George
Black Market scuba gear...hmmmm. Could be a ground floor opportunity?
--
Remove NoSpam from my email to reply
Barney <curr...@home.com> wrote in article
<3535c0d1...@news.concentric.net>...
> In message <199804141939...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
> Scubagator, graced us all with:
>
> >Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
> >
> >As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced
Openwater
> >Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck,
night
> >etc.
> >
> >General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South
Florida
> >is that it sucks...
> >
> >I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
>
> Is PADI paying the salaries of the Depth Police?
>
> What follows shouldn't be read by anyone without a sense of humor
> (except for the hyena boyz).
>
> You all do know that PADI is involved in more than just the
> acquisition of a firmer financial position in the dive industry. They
> ARE indeed the major proponent for Government regulation of the Dive
> Industry. Their goal is to create a new branch of government and
> establish positions for which only their officers are qualified to
> hold.
>
> They plan to each make a fortune from your tax dollars (as well as all
> the poor slobs who aren't subscribers to this NG). The most telling
> evidence of the progression in this conspiracy is their success in
> establishing an insurance program for diving professionals. You'll
> know that the whip is coming down, when an insurance card becomes a
> requirement for getting an air fill.
>
> I see local dive shops becoming a thing of the past. The
> proliferation of mail order dealers spells their doom. PADI execs are
> going to quietly demand action by the government for the protection of
> the nation's human resources, and they will step right in to fill the
> bill.
>
> Gone, will be the dive pros of today, lest they start a rebellion.
> Gone will be the days where one could maintain their private dive
> logs. Tech rigs will fade to a distant, sweet memory, and all access
> points to overhead environments will be strictly controlled.
> Everything will be controlled, as everything must.
>
> The only option to begin your path to becoming a government approved
> diver will be through Professor Harris' dive classes at UM (yeah, he's
> part of the great conspiracy, too). The only tanks to be allowed for
> recreational use will be manufactured by Luxfer (since you really
> don't need protection from Catalina).
>
> Woe to those who have ever seen the light in a Barney post ... and woe
> to the e-Net marauder, blatantly threatened just today. All hail the
> hyena boyz (who will certainly be grandfathered from new government
> directives) ... and all hail those who can prove they twit-filtered
> Barney.
>
> Now, go forth ... and dig a great hole. Bury your dive gear beside
> your guns. PADI is coming, too.
> --
> Barnacle Barney
> Life is a tragedy for those who feel
> and a comedy for those who think
> 'Chinese fortune cookie'
>
RDecker388
>Oh, I can see the pre-dive briefing now:
>
>and hang on the line at 100' for the entire dive. You
>folks who are OW certified and not taking Advanced can,
Hahahahahahahahahah....gaaaaaasssssspppppp....Hahahahahahahahahahahah
ahahaha!
Such a vivid, yet woefully misguided imagination<g>
RDecker388
>You all do know that PADI is involved in more than just the
>acquisition of a firmer financial position in the dive industry. They
Been watching too much TV again Barney? The "X-Files" are only make
believe you know! <VBG>
RDecker388
>Has PADI changed their max sport diving limit from 130' to 100'?
>If not we now have a situation where PADI instructors are
>forbidden to train students to the depth they certify them for.
Well actually Ed, PADI has always quoted a 100' recommended depth limit for AOW
divers, with 130' as the "absolute" recommended depth limit for divers "with
training beyond AOW."
Seems they simply set the course standards to match their recommendations.
Still makes it a bit inconvienent for folks teaching in some locations.
Fishbre396
In article <199804141939...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
scuba...@aol.com (Scubagator) writes:
>Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
>
>As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
>Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck,
>night
>etc.
>
>General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South
>Florida
>is that it sucks...
>
>I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
What happened to the old 130' standard??? (Not that the extra 30 feet make any
difference.) I "thought" that Dive Industry (including all agencies) was
abiding by the 130' standard.
I can understand why PADI (with so many "once a year") divers is changing . . .
but then, they should also change their certifications to designate "once in a
while," "part-time" and "full time" divers. (Just a thought . .. )
Fishbre396
In article <199804142000...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
rdeck...@aol.com (RDecker388) writes:
> It's certainly going to make things a bit more challenging here in NC
>where our typical first dive is in the 110' to 130' range. No more just
>putting
>your AOW students on a standard full-day charter! We'll either have to
>set-up
>special charters for the AOW students (aka no more AOW courses for one or
>two,
>we'll have to do group programs only) or get lucky enough to catch a boat
>scheduled for inshore diving only.
>
> I wouldn't go as far as saying "it sucks," but it sure is going to cause
>us
>some problems!
Not only will it cost you more, but it will cost the consumer more! Bummer!
Fishbre396
In article <3533C4...@CanTheSpam.com>, Ed Newberg
<G_Edward...@CanTheSpam.com> writes:
> It's certainly going to make things a bit more challenging here in NC
>> where our typical first dive is in the 110' to 130' range.
>
>Oh, I can see the pre-dive briefing now:
>
>"Okay, you guys doing the Advanced class will need to stop
>and hang on the line at 100' for the entire dive. You
>folks who are OW certified and not taking Advanced can,
>of course, continue down to the wreck."
>
>I imagine this will present you with some marketing
>challenges.
I can see those who are only able to go to 100' getting very upset . . .after
all, they are paying the same price per dive, as those who are actually getting
to see the wreck at 130 (or deeper) feet. Hmmmm, makes me happy that I have
many dives (including deep) under my belt . . . but will experience matter any
more?
Fishbre396
In article <199804142234...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, p15...@aol.com
(P152697) writes:
>So, whats your point? There was absolutely nothing said about ANYONE
>adhering
>to these standards other than PADI instructors during AOW TRAINING.
>Sheeesh,
>get a grip Lee.
>
>
Phill, you're right, no one said that anyone other than PADI "indstructors"
(does that include their DM's???) need to adhear to those standards . .. but,
my understanding is that this is the latest "SPORT DIVER STANDARD." I think
it's awful . . . but That's my opinion
Fishbre396
In article <6h1106$1j7u$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>, NLL...@prodigy.com
(Steve Olson) writes:
>100 foot dive "limit?" Sounds like more of the favorite american past-
>time these days -- whining. A national epidemic.
>
>
HUH? You're trying to be funny? Whining? No, I don't think so . . . too
many great dive sites are below the 100 foot limit (even in fresh water.)
Fishbre396
In article <199804150303...@ladder03.news.aol.com>, retp...@aol.com
(RET Photo) writes:
>Maybe PADI is trying to set "limits" on new lawsuits...several years back a
>Newbie diver sued PADI over the dive tables..seems that this newbie Got bent
>doing a dive..he claimed that he was diving well within the Table
>Limits...But
>if you watched the program, adn did the calculations, you would of seen that
>he
>Not only dived deeper than recommended(110 FSW, 60 FSW was the current
>recommended max depht for a newbie at the time), he also Pushed the time
>limits.
>
>
Why should anyone be surprised about the law suit??? That's how lawyers and
insurance companies make their money!
Fishbre396
>By setting 100 FSW as their new limit...they effectly wash their hands of any
>suits of divers getting the Bends...Oh Yes I know
>You Can Still get Bent on Dives shalloweer than 100 Feet, takes a little
>longer
>that's all...
That's a false statement. One CAN get BENT in water's shallower than 100 feet
and it doesn't necessarily take longer . . . it can take LESS time. Please
provide stats and proof to defend your statement.
Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu
Regarding "PADI's 100' Max AOW Depth Limit", scuba...@aol.com wrote:
>
>Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...Dives can be no deeper then 100'
>General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South Florida
>is that it sucks...
I disagree, and applaud PADI for finally recognizing that newly
certified divers with fewer than 10 dives have no business being
deeper than 100'. The current fascination with deep diving that seems
to have a stranglehold on the industry needs to be done away with,
and this is certainly a step in the right direction.
-JimG
--
Jim Greenlee (j...@cc.gatech.edu) Trolling, trolling, trolling
Instructor, College of Computing To keep those postings scrolling
Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA 30332 I almost lost control and, Replied!
SHARKTAG1
>Phill, you're right, no one said that anyone other than PADI "indstructors"
>(does that include their DM's???) need to adhear to those standards . ..
>but,
>my understanding is that this is the latest "SPORT DIVER STANDARD." I think
>it's awful . . . but That's my opinion
and just to throw my two cents in here. When one agency changes its standards,
for the norm, so does the others. And the other thing to think about is here in
California boats go were the instructors need them to go. So you go out on a
dive boat and the anchor gets dropped in 50ft and the boat is sitting in 80ft.
I for one love deep diving but, if this is what PADI wants I guess I have to
teach that way.
Fishbre396
In article <199804150422...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
rdeck...@aol.com (RDecker388) writes:
>
>Well actually Ed, PADI has always quoted a 100' recommended depth limit for
>AOW
>divers, with 130' as the "absolute" recommended depth limit for divers "with
>training beyond AOW."
What about divers who are only OW certified (PADI) but they have over 100 dives
and most of the dives are to over 100 feet??? What then? (We're talking
certified in past years 1970-95 or earlier???)
Fishbre396
>I disagree, and applaud PADI for finally recognizing that newly
>certified divers with fewer than 10 dives have no business being
>deeper than 100'. The current fascination with deep diving that seems
>to have a stranglehold on the industry needs to be done away with,
>and this is certainly a step in the right direction.
>
>
But, Jim, one can get bent at depths less than 10 feet . .
RET Photo
>That's a false statement. One CAN get BENT in water's shallower than 100
>and it doesn't necessarily take longer . . . it can take LESS time.
>provide stats and proof to defend your statement.<BR>
>
If You can get bent doing a dive to 100 feet faster than a dive to 130 Feet I
for one don't want to be diving with YOU! The Tables themselves are all the
Stats and Proof I need...
Chris Stenton
P152697 wrote:
>
> Lee Bell wrote:
> >Aside from wondering why they make such a SUGGESTION, I have little
> >reason to think about PADI's OPINION. Except for their active
> >instructors and Dive Masters and shop owners, those professionally
> >associated with PADI, the agency has no legal, moral or other right to
> >dictate anything to anyone. They are a certification agency, not an
> >authorized enforcement agency.
>
> So, whats your point? There was absolutely nothing said about ANYONE adhering
> to these standards other than PADI instructors during AOW TRAINING. Sheeesh,
> get a grip Lee.
>
Um but when you go for your 35m guided wreck dive and you flash your AOW
card will the DM now say sorry I can't take you below 30m as I am
insured through PADI? This is somewhat important in the UK as the vast
majority of wrecks are in 30-40m of water!
Chris
Dave Roberts
Fishbre396 wrote:
>
> What happened to the old 130' standard??? (Not that the extra 30 feet make any
> difference.)
Eh? Are you sure about that? I'd say there's a lot of difference
between
30m and 40m. Obviously if you're a deep diver on Trimix, then you're
statement stands, but for a new AOW, that 10m (33ft) is a lot of
difference.
Please note, that I do not agree with this change.
--
Dave Roberts
I still get too many spams, swap the @'s and .'s:-
dave @ roberts . saaconsultants @ com
Ed Newberg
Chris Stenton wrote:
>
>
> Um but when you go for your 35m guided wreck dive and you flash your AOW
> card will the DM now say sorry I can't take you below 30m as I am
> insured through PADI? This is somewhat important in the UK as the vast
> majority of wrecks are in 30-40m of water!
>
> Chris
I understand things are a bit different in the UK, but here in Florida
if a DM said that I'd just happily leave him floating at 100' and
continue
my dive. DMs are hardly necessary for conducting a dive.
Ed
--
"Only wimps die of natural causes."
=============================================
The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily
reflect those of my corporate masters. Yet.
Reply by email to:
g.edward...@lmco.com
Ed Newberg
Philip B. Malter wrote:
>
>
> Gator,
> I checked this out with some of the guys at the PADI national office.
> They explained that the primary reason for the proposed change was to
> coordinate their depth guidelines with the Spare Air 100' matrix so
> that those using Spare Air would always have a comfortable margin of
> safety to offset potential panic induced matrix violations.
> phil
Phil,
It's not really necessary for you to provide both the gasoline
and the match, is it?
:)
Lee Bell
P152697 wrote:
>
> Lee Bell wrote:
> >Aside from wondering why they make such a SUGGESTION, I have little
> >reason to think about PADI's OPINION. Except for their active
> >instructors and Dive Masters and shop owners, those professionally
> >associated with PADI, the agency has no legal, moral or other right
> to dictate anything to anyone. They are a certification agency, not
> an authorized enforcement agency.
> So, whats your point? There was absolutely nothing said about ANYONE
> adhering to these standards other than PADI instructors during AOW
> TRAINING. Sheeesh, get a grip Lee.
The question asked what I thought. I responded. What's your point?
Lee
Ed Newberg
Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu wrote:
>
>
> I disagree, and applaud PADI for finally recognizing that newly
> certified divers with fewer than 10 dives have no business being
> deeper than 100'. The current fascination with deep diving that seems
> to have a stranglehold on the industry needs to be done away with,
> and this is certainly a step in the right direction.
>
Jim, I absolutely agree with the philosophy behind your post.
We have entirely too many weekend wonders who are dangers to themselves
and others. I think, though, a better approach would be to require
minimum numbers of dives at each cert level before a diver could
proceed. PADI will still be certifying inexperienced divers as
"Advanced." Let's address the problem and set some experience
requirements.
RDecker388
Fish,
It's a TRAINING standard. It has nothing to do with what one does
outside of a class. Outside of training, the "recommended depth limits" are
exactly that RECOMMENED.
PADI "recommended depth limits:
OW = 60'
AOW = 100'
Overall for recreational diving = 130'
PADI Training Depth Limits:
OW = 60'
AOW = 100'
Deep Diver = 130'
>What about divers who are only OW certified (PADI) but they have over 100
>dives
>and most of the dives are to over 100 feet??? What then? (We're talking
>certified in past years 1970-95 or earlier???)
Shi...@yahoo.com
In article <199804150532...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
fishb...@aol.com (Fishbre396) wrote:
>
> What about divers who are only OW certified (PADI) but they have over 100 dives
> and most of the dives are to over 100 feet??? What then? (We're talking
> certified in past years 1970-95 or earlier???)
Sounds like an open door invitation to get some BSAC Clubs going in the USA.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Lee Bell
Fishbre396 wrote:
> I can see those who are only able to go to 100' getting very upset.
> After all, they are paying the same price per dive, as those who are
> actually getting to see the wreck at 130 (or deeper) feet.
This may get quite interesting. I've never quite understood the
application of PADI's limits, whether the 60 foot open water or the new
100 foot advanced open water. Most of the dive charters I've been on
have been through PADI affiliated shops. Almost all have done deep
dives greater than the 60 foot open water limit. I can say with
certainty that there were open water divers on those boats, that nobody
told them to hold the line at 60 feet and that the open water divers
were right there with the rest of us at 110-120 feet (typical depth for
local wrecks). I have been a few trips which were supposed to be
restricted to advanced divers only, but I really wonder if they really
were restricted.
Someone else said that the suspect PADI will soon have another
certification level to cover dives below 100 feet. If I had to bet,
that's where I'd put my money. I expect an announcement of the new
specialty any day now.
Lee
John Mills
Scubagator wrote:
>
> Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
>
> As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
> Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck, night
> etc.
>
Does that mean another C-card and a bit more money spent to go beyond
130'?
What's the new regulation/requirement for deeper than 100'?
Have to agree, though, didn't do much in the way of deep diving to get a
AOW card.
John.
Lee Bell
scubagirl wrote:
>
> The *basis* is simply that the Advanced course dives are supposed to
> be the same as the first dive of the respective specialty course. In
> the Deep Diver course, the first dive allows divers to go to 100 feet
> - thus the Advanced standards needed to be changed to fall into line
> accordingly.
I think this is incorrect. I'm sure it's not enough information on the
basis.
The PADI open water course does its first dive at 30-40 feet as I
recall. Later dives (not on the same day) are done deeper. If 100 feet
is the deepest dive in the PADI AOW course, then this might be their
reasoning. I presume that the first AOW dive is not the deepest AOW
dive.
Even if that is their reasoning, there needs to be more information on
why 100 fsw is the limit they chose. "Because that's how we train" is
not a reason.
PADI is not the only agency which has shifted from 130 fsw limit. As I
recall, SSI does not recommend dives to 130 feet either. I forget what
their suggested limit is, but it's less than 130 feet. In their case, I
believe the revised maximum recommended depth is based on doppler
testing for micro bubbles in the blood stream.
The Cayman Watersports Association (may have the name wrong, but you
know who I mean) sets their limit at 110 feet and most Cayman dive
operators set it at 90-100 feet on most dives.
> Which, of course, brings up the question how many divers pursue
> further training for these types of dives versus those that *just do
> it*, so to speak......
No matter what limits, or suggested limits, the agencies set, divers
outside of a monitored environment are going to make their own decisions
on how deep, how long and under what conditions they dive. It's that
way now and will continue to be that way in the future. Unfortunately,
too many make that decision based on where the bottom is rather than on
what they are knowledgeable enough and competent enough to do safely.
Lee
RDecker388
Fish,
>Not only will it cost you more, but it will cost the consumer more! Bummer!
It won't cost me anymore or any less. The change simply restricts choice
of sites and on boats carrying 17 to 24 other divers, the "needs" of one
student is not likely to take precedent.
Some scenarios:
A dive center books 12 spots on our boat that holds 18. Among to
remaining 6 spaces I book 2 AOW students. The group leader wants to visit a
broken/flattened wreck laying at a depth of 110'. We're faced with telling
thegroup "NO we have AOW students on board and they can't go that deep,"
potentially creating 12 to14 disgruntled customers or telling the AOW students
"sorry, you won't be able to make the first dive AND you'll have to come back
another day for another charter so we can finish your dives."
2 divers want to enroll in an AOW class, to accomodate them I must get them
on an inshore charter becuase of the depths. Unfortunately, we don't have an
inshore trip scheduled and not enough divers wanting one to run a boat. The
students can A) pay the difference to make up for the lack of numbers for the
charter. B) Not take the class they desire. Neither option is exactly good for
customer relations.
Regards,
Tom Roberts
Hmmm anybody want to take another look at NAUI and their differences. :-)
Pay Another Dive Instuctor
Tom Roberts
RDecker388 wrote in message
<199804151235...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>Fish,
>
> It's a TRAINING standard. It has nothing to do with what one does
>outside of a class. Outside of training, the "recommended depth limits"
are
>exactly that RECOMMENED.
>
>PADI "recommended depth limits:
>
>OW = 60'
>AOW = 100'
>Overall for recreational diving = 130'
>
>PADI Training Depth Limits:
>
Lee Bell
Chris Stenton wrote:
> Um but when you go for your 35m guided wreck dive and you flash your
> AOW card will the DM now say sorry I can't take you below 30m as I am
> insured through PADI? This is somewhat important in the UK as the vast
> majority of wrecks are in 30-40m of water!
This is a good question. We'll have to see how things shake out. Under
current "rules", I have not noticed anyone limiting PADI open water
divers to the 60 foot limit for that certification. It will be
interesting to see if the 100 foot limit will be different. At worse,
PADI affiliated charters will stop going to wrecks in more than 100 fsw.
I doubt, however, that this will actually happen, particularly in a
county where BSAC is such a common diving organization. Any charter who
declines to visit deeper wrecks is likely to lose a lot of business to
those who continue to visit them.
Lee
>
> Chris
Lee Bell
Ed Newberg wrote:
> I understand things are a bit different in the UK, but here in Florida
> if a DM said that I'd just happily leave him floating at 100' and
> continue my dive. DMs are hardly necessary for conducting a dive.
In most of my Florida diving, the DM was not anywhere near me during the
dive. As far as I know, they're not even in the water on many trips.
While I generally play by the rules of the boat I'm on, I'm not anal
about it. If the bottom of a wreck is deeper than 100 feet and I want
to see the bottom of the wreck, I'll pay a lot more attention to what my
computer(s) allow than what the DM says. On the other hand, I don't
flaunt my violation of DM rules either. I respect most DM's and, while
I may not strictly abide by their rules, I'm also unwilling to make
their jobs more difficult by announcing it openly.
The real problem is going to show up when the PADI affiliated charters
decline to visit the deeper sites. You can't get below 100 feet when
the bottom is at 90.
When that happens, you and I will just have to take one of my (our if
you have one too) boats out and visit the sites we like on our own.
This could work to our advantage. The fewer people I have to share a
wreck with, the better I like it.
Lee
Kenneth A. Smith
Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu wrote:
>
> Regarding "PADI's 100' Max AOW Depth Limit", scuba...@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...Dives can be no deeper then 100'
> >General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South Florida
> >is that it sucks...
>
> certified divers with fewer than 10 dives have no business being
> deeper than 100'. The current fascination with deep diving that seems
> to have a stranglehold on the industry needs to be done away with,
> and this is certainly a step in the right direction.
>
Instead of limiting the depth, which is pretty much un-enforceable, why
not just increase the minimum number of dives required to get the AOW
and then make sure he deep dive instruction is focused between 100 and
120 ft (too little table time at 130). SSI required 24 dives inclduing 4
specialty Courses before you could get your advanced cert. Those extra
14 to 20 real dives certainly go a long way to a diver gaining exposure
, experience and a better understanding of themselves within the water
and their gear.
.....this would be PADI taking responsibility......
The fascination will IMO only increase as it is now a banned
activity....and as such, it will then become the object of desire....
How many OW divers have you met that stick to the 60 ft rule and dont
plan on taking AOW. How many resorts or charters will enforce this (like
they "enforce" the OW limit......
Have the angencies take the responsibility to put the proper level of
training in that will ensure a certain percentage of competent divers at
any reasonable depth.
Ken
Dan Volker
Ed Newberg wrote in article <35349F...@CanTheSpam.com>...
>Jim.Gr...@cc.gatech.edu wrote:
>>
>>
>> I disagree, and applaud PADI for finally recognizing that newly
>> certified divers with fewer than 10 dives have no business being
>> deeper than 100'. The current fascination with deep diving that seems
>> to have a stranglehold on the industry needs to be done away with,
>> and this is certainly a step in the right direction.
>>
>
>Jim, I absolutely agree with the philosophy behind your post.
>We have entirely too many weekend wonders who are dangers to themselves
>and others. I think, though, a better approach would be to require
>minimum numbers of dives at each cert level before a diver could
>proceed. PADI will still be certifying inexperienced divers as
>"Advanced." Let's address the problem and set some experience
>requirements.
>
>Ed
Hell, even the "tech agencies" have been insufficiently preparing their
divers for 170 foot deep dives.
As of this moment, there is NO REALLY GOOD agency to train you to dive
deeper than 100 feet deep. TDI is a good agency to send someone you want to
be rid of, and IANTD, while potentially salvageable from an agency
perspective( Mount is "trying to make changes"), is currently responsible
for more dive tragedies than we can begin to count. The root problem is the
quality of the instructor, and with teaching deeper diving, this issue
becomes exponentially more important. While PADI has plenty of instructors
who can teach well to 60 feet, it has far fewer who could teach well to 130
feet. For the higher quality instruction needed to go deeper, a much
smaller agency than even IANTD, would need hand picked instructors, more of
a "Top Gun" approach to its staff. This new agency will be here in about
another month---if they are still on schedule. They will probably strip
PADI and NAUI of some of their best, and certainly train some of their own.
They will teach recreational, cave , and tech. They will NOT be the
cheapest, but they will be the BEST. If you are familiar with Jarrod
Jablonski, he will be central to the creation of this new agency, as will
the "Doing it Right" philosophy, which actually, borrows quite heavily from
PADI, but takes it to the next level.
Regards,
Dan Volker
Mike Sheppard
In article <892617607.715199@michelob>, "scubagirl" <ke...@NO.sprint.ca> wrote:
> The *basis* is simply that the Advanced course dives are supposed to be the
> same as the first dive of the respective specialty course. In the Deep
> Diver course, the first dive allows divers to go to 100 feet - thus the
> Advanced standards needed to be changed to fall into line accordingly.
>
> Which, of course, brings up the question how many divers pursue further
> training for these types of dives versus those that *just do it*, so to
> speak......
>
>
> Lee Bell wrote in message <3533D53B...@ix.netcom.com>...
> >I presume PADI has a basis for SUGGESTING that their Advanced Open Water
> >Divers should not dive below 100 fsw. Before I would comment on their
> >OPINION, I'd have to know more about that basis.
I thought the big limit was 130 fsw.
All these limits are very arbitrary anyhow.
Ed Newberg
RDecker388 wrote:
>
> We're faced with telling
> thegroup "NO we have AOW students on board and they can't go that deep,"
> potentially creating 12 to14 disgruntled customers or telling the AOW students
> "sorry, you won't be able to make the first dive AND you'll have to come back
> another day for another charter so we can finish your dives."
>
I hope you would also refund the charter fees to the 12 or 14 if you
couldn't give them the trip they had booked for. I've dove out of
Beaufort
a couple of times, and I hope to dive up in your area this summer. If I
arrange for the time away from work, make the drive all the way from
Orlando,
pay for lodging, only to be told I can't dive the sites I want because
you have students on the boat, I'm going to be _seriously_ pissed off.
I think your best option might be to make the charter a bit longer. Do
the deep site, then move inshore and do a couple of dives. The AOW
students
could be doing a dive while the group who had been deep is still on
their
SI.
Ed Newberg
Lee Bell wrote:
>
>
> On the other hand, I don't
> flaunt my violation of DM rules either. I respect most DM's and, while
> I may not strictly abide by their rules, I'm also unwilling to make
> their jobs more difficult by announcing it openly.
I absolutely agree. Just do your dive, have fun, and don't poke a
hornet's
nest.
>
> The real problem is going to show up when the PADI affiliated charters
> decline to visit the deeper sites. You can't get below 100 feet when
> the bottom is at 90.
True, but many captains will run "specials" for divers they know and
not worry too much about what dear PADI says, as has been going on for
years and years.
Scott Belles
Don't forget the force fins and a twenty meter hose.
Barney wrote:
> In message <199804141939...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
> Scubagator, graced us all with:
>
> >Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
> >
> >As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
> >Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck, night
> >etc.
> >
> >General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South Florida
> >is that it sucks...
> >
> >I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
>
> Is PADI paying the salaries of the Depth Police?
>
> What follows shouldn't be read by anyone without a sense of humor
> (except for the hyena boyz).
>
> You all do know that PADI is involved in more than just the
> acquisition of a firmer financial position in the dive industry. They
> ARE indeed the major proponent for Government regulation of the Dive
> Industry. Their goal is to create a new branch of government and
> establish positions for which only their officers are qualified to
> hold.
>
> They plan to each make a fortune from your tax dollars (as well as all
> the poor slobs who aren't subscribers to this NG). The most telling
> evidence of the progression in this conspiracy is their success in
> establishing an insurance program for diving professionals. You'll
> know that the whip is coming down, when an insurance card becomes a
> requirement for getting an air fill.
>
> I see local dive shops becoming a thing of the past. The
> proliferation of mail order dealers spells their doom. PADI execs are
> going to quietly demand action by the government for the protection of
> the nation's human resources, and they will step right in to fill the
> bill.
>
> Gone, will be the dive pros of today, lest they start a rebellion.
> Gone will be the days where one could maintain their private dive
> logs. Tech rigs will fade to a distant, sweet memory, and all access
> points to overhead environments will be strictly controlled.
> Everything will be controlled, as everything must.
>
> The only option to begin your path to becoming a government approved
> diver will be through Professor Harris' dive classes at UM (yeah, he's
> part of the great conspiracy, too). The only tanks to be allowed for
> recreational use will be manufactured by Luxfer (since you really
> don't need protection from Catalina).
>
> Woe to those who have ever seen the light in a Barney post ... and woe
> to the e-Net marauder, blatantly threatened just today. All hail the
> hyena boyz (who will certainly be grandfathered from new government
> directives) ... and all hail those who can prove they twit-filtered
> Barney.
>
> Now, go forth ... and dig a great hole. Bury your dive gear beside
> your guns. PADI is coming, too.
> --
> Barnacle Barney
> Life is a tragedy for those who feel
> and a comedy for those who think
> 'Chinese fortune cookie'
Scubagator
ROFL....
SMC
Scubagator
I think this lead to a bit of confusion...
The 100' Limit is for students UNDER INSTRUCTION...
The rest of the time, folks are allowed to do what ever profile they deem
safe...
The reason for discontent in South Florida (and other places from what I have
read) is that most of the "Good Wrecks" are in excess of 100' (Rodeo 25, Capt.
Dan, Jim Atria, RSB-1, Guy Harvey and others I could spend all day listing).
I now have to stop my students at the deck, go through the narcosis awarness
skills that we do, and then lead them around the top side of the deck/wreck.
IMHO, let the instructor take them up to but not past the 130 fsw limit if they
(students/instructor) feel confident to go there.
I have heard rumors of PADI entering the technical areana, and I feel that
maybe a few of you may be right. This may be the pre-cursor to that area.
I am amazed however at the response, thanks!!
SMC
Robert Wood
Dan Volker wrote:
> This new agency will be here in about
> another month---if they are still on schedule. They will probably strip
> PADI and NAUI of some of their best, and certainly train some of their own.
> They will teach recreational, cave , and tech. They will NOT be the
> cheapest, but they will be the BEST. If you are familiar with Jarrod
> Jablonski, he will be central to the creation of this new agency, as will
> the "Doing it Right" philosophy, which actually, borrows quite heavily from
> PADI, but takes it to the next level.
Do you have more details ?
Who is Jarrod Jablonski? (reveals ignorance here :^)
Without getting into any agency wars, our local "tech teachers"
are Norman and Anne Hughes; both with TDI and both excellent.
[\] Robert Wood
The St. Lawrence river - fresh, warm, visible diving.
mailto:rober...@mitel.com
John Brett
On Wed, 15 Apr 1998 10:55:12 +0100, Chris Stenton <ja...@gnome.co.uk>
wrote:
<snip>
>Um but when you go for your 35m guided wreck dive and you flash your AOW
>card will the DM now say sorry I can't take you below 30m as I am
>insured through PADI?
DM? Who brought a DM along?
As has been pointed out elsewhere, the rules apply to training.
Thereafter, if you want to zip off to the Moldavia (55m) with just an
AOW card, PADI won't particularly care (yes, I know people who've done
it).
> This is somewhat important in the UK as the vast
>majority of wrecks are in 30-40m of water!
NitPick - we have plenty of wrecks deeper than that! The wrecks in the
30-40m range tend to survive the weather better, and are more
diveable.
John Brett
John Brett
On Wed, 15 Apr 1998 13:43:41 GMT, jo...@pixel.co.uk (John Brett)
wrote:
<snip>
>NitPick - we have plenty of wrecks deeper than that! The wrecks in the
>30-40m range tend to survive the weather better
^^^
than those shallower than 30m,
>, and are more diveable.
Doh!
John Brett
P152697
Fishbre wrote:
>What happened to the old 130' standard??? (Not that the extra 30 feet make
>any
>abiding by the 130' standard.
>
>I can understand why PADI (with so many "once a year") divers is changing . .
>.
>but then, they should also change their certifications to designate "once in
>a
>while," "part-time" and "full time" divers. (Just a thought . .. )
Read the post fish. It is for TRAINING ONLY. Take a reading class will ya.
Phil (Wash St.)
MelCzar
In article <199804141939...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
scuba...@aol.com (Scubagator) writes:
>Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck,
>night
>etc.
WOW, Gator, you really started a thread here!! Everyone is kind of freaking
out, but PADI can't, by themselves, set the recreational dive limits. What does
NAUI, YMCA, SSI and the rest think about the new standards? As far as I know,
their AOW limits are still 130'. Is that limit for instructing only? What is
the depth that students are "certified" to? Is there a "grandfather" clause for
the students already AOW certified? Or do they now have the 100' limit?
Melissa
"Life is all about choices. When you cut away all the junk, every situation is
a choice. You choose how you react to situations. You choose how people will
affect your mood. You choose to be in a good mood or bad mood. The bottom line:
It's your choice how you live life."
P152697
Fishbre wrote:
>Phill, you're right, no one said that anyone other than PADI "indstructors"
>(does that include their DM's???) need to adhear to those standards . ..
>but,
>my understanding is that this is the latest "SPORT DIVER STANDARD." I think
>it's awful . . . but That's my opinion
No, it doesn't have anything to do with DM's unless assisting with a class. I
saw nothing in the original post to indicate it meant a new '"sport diver
standard". This may be the case, but just because PADI may change this, it has
nothing to do with the rest of the industry, or with anyone certified. As one
poster said, "are the depth police gonna be there?".
The PADI depth requirements are there for training, and serve a purpose to that
end. After that, they are only guidelines.
One "el" in Phil BTW
Phil (Wash St.)
P152697
Chris Stenton wrote:
>Um but when you go for your 35m guided wreck dive and you flash your AOW
>card will the DM now say sorry I can't take you below 30m as I am
>majority of wrecks are in 30-40m of water!
Very good point. Not being an insurance type I can't answer that other than
saying I don't think it makes alot of difference now. At least on the boats I
have been on. "Open water level" divers seem to go pretty much where everyone
else is, and there again its still a guideline.
The bottom line, I guess, if it was a problem a diver was worried about would
be to do a deep diver, or wreck specialilty. More cost for possibly little
return.
Very good post. I think this is the best question yet in this thread.
Phil (Wash St.)
Jason
>On Wed, 15 Apr 1998 10:55:12 +0100, Chris Stenton <ja...@gnome.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>Um but when you go for your 35m guided wreck dive and you flash your AOW
>>card will the DM now say sorry I can't take you below 30m as I am
>>insured through PADI?
>
>DM? Who brought a DM along?
And more to the point, why are you flashing your card anyway? I can't
remember the last time I was asked for mine. I don't think anywhere do
guided dives to 35m in the UK, do they?
>> This is somewhat important in the UK as the vast
>>majority of wrecks are in 30-40m of water!
>
>NitPick - we have plenty of wrecks deeper than that! The wrecks in the
>30-40m range tend to survive the weather better, and are more
>diveable.
And of course, the Navy don't feel the need to blow the top off the
deeper wrecks either.
Jason
--
See www.volnay.demon.co.uk for trip reports on Spain
the Maldives, Barbados, Gran Canaria and Australia
scubagirl
They already do..... the PADI Deep Diver specialty. See my earlier post.
Kenna
ke...@sprint.ca
www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/4652
Lee Bell wrote in message <3534AAAB...@ix.netcom.com>...
->Someone else said that the suspect PADI will soon have another
->certification level to cover dives below 100 feet. If I had to bet,
->that's where I'd put my money. I expect an announcement of the new
->specialty any day now.
Lee
Charlie Gibbs
In article <6h18nn$3...@examiner.concentric.net> ch...@chopf.com
(Chuck Hopf) writes:
>DOBSON JW wrote in message
><199804150209...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>
>>>So there I was diving off a boat in my dry suit, photographing
>>>and IDing animals at 140 feet - throw in a rescue course and
>>>I guess I have Master Diver qualifications, even though I only
>>>have an AOW card. But I spent the money for those other cards
>>>on dive trips instead... :-)
>>
>>No. no you wouldn't because you never received the benefit of
>>professionally developed and delivered instruction.
So THAT's what PADI stands for!
Professionally developed And Delivered Instruction
^ ^ ^ ^
>I must have missed the smiley face on that one.
Here's one... :-)
Seriously, without downplaying the value of instruction at any time,
I suspect that at some time over the past 8 years and 600 dives I've
picked up a lot beyond my AOW course, even though I've had no further
formal instruction. Nevertheless, I still wouldn't consider getting
into decompression or overhead environments without specialized
training, and I'd get at least some sort of briefing before venturing
into any unfamiliar territory (including warm water).
--
cgi...@sky.bus.com (Charlie Gibbs)
Remove the first period after the "at" sign to reply.
Steve McGough
It already exists - it's called the PADI Deep Diver Specialty
--
Good diving!
Steve McGough
Scuba Shack
Canton, CT USA
Lee Bell wrote in message <3534AAAB...@ix.netcom.com>...
Steve McGough
Relax folks,
It makes sense that the Advanced Open Water Course covers depth's in the
range of 60 to 100 feet.
Then the Deep Diver Specialty covers depth's between 60 and 130.
Kind of a gradual "step up" if you know what I mean?
--
Good diving!
Steve McGough
Scuba Shack
Canton, CT USA
Shi...@yahoo.com wrote in message <6h2eat$ksr$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <199804150532...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
> fishb...@aol.com (Fishbre396) wrote:
>>
>> What about divers who are only OW certified (PADI) but they have over 100
dives
>> and most of the dives are to over 100 feet??? What then? (We're
talking
>> certified in past years 1970-95 or earlier???)
>
>
>Sounds like an open door invitation to get some BSAC Clubs going in the
USA.
>
>
>
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Steve McGough
PADI has NOT limited recreational diving to 100 feet.
It has NOTHING to do with insurance.
This change has NO bearing on how Charters will work.
Some of the dives that we have done for the AOW Deep Core Dive will have to
be now limited. (We can do the Conning Tower on the U-853, but not go to
the sand (130')). I suppose this will pose some problems in other areas -
since the max depth limit for the AOW Deep Core Dive is now 100', it most
likely will cut out some dive sites that were done before during the AOW
course.
MI's and CD's have been bringing up the fact that it is BETTER for divers to
STAIRCASE their depth limits. We've actually been asking for a change for
quite some time. This most recent change was pushed by MI's in one of the
last surveys.
Naturally the AOW course (Deep Core Dive) introduces divers to depths
between 60 and 100 feet - under the supervision of an Instructor.
The Deep Diver Specialty Course offers continuing education for divers when
diving in the 100 to 130 foot (max) range.
I think it makes sense.
--
Good diving!
Steve McGough
Scuba Shack
Canton, CT USA
<199804150303...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>Maybe PADI is trying to set "limits" on new lawsuits...several years back a
>Newbie diver sued PADI over the dive tables..seems that this newbie Got
bent
>doing a dive..he claimed that he was diving well within the Table
Limits...But
>if you watched the program, adn did the calculations, you would of seen
that he
>Not only dived deeper than recommended(110 FSW, 60 FSW was the current
>recommended max depht for a newbie at the time), he also Pushed the time
>limits.
>
>By setting 100 FSW as their new limit...they effectly wash their hands of
any
>suits of divers getting the Bends...Oh Yes I know
>You Can Still get Bent on Dives shalloweer than 100 Feet, takes a little
longer
>that's all...
scubagirl
I got my information from their training bulletin, which states:
"To maintain consistency between the Advanced Open Water program and the
recommended depth of the first dive of the PADI Deep Diver Specialty,
effective July 1, 1998, the new maximum depth standard for the Core Deep
Dive of the PADI Advanced Open Water Diver program is 30 metres/100 feet.
As with all dives of the PADI Advanced Open Water Diver program, the Core
Deep Dive is designed as an introduction to this specialty area of diving,
Limiting this dive to 30 metres/100 feet reflects this intent.
Subsequently, the PADI Deep Diver Specialty course allows divers to build
upon this knowledge by participating in training dives to depths between 30
metres/100 feet and 40 metres/130 feet."
Lee Bell wrote in message <3534AF44...@ix.netcom.com>...
->I think this is incorrect. I'm sure it's not enough information on the
->basis.
->PADI is not the only agency which has shifted from 130 fsw limit. As I
->recall, SSI does not recommend dives to 130 feet either. I forget what
->their suggested limit is, but it's less than 130 feet. In their case, I
->believe the revised maximum recommended depth is based on doppler
->testing for micro bubbles in the blood stream.
->No matter what limits, or suggested limits, the agencies set, divers
->outside of a monitored environment are going to make their own decisions
->on how deep, how long and under what conditions they dive. It's that
->way now and will continue to be that way in the future. Unfortunately,
->too many make that decision based on where the bottom is rather than on
->what they are knowledgeable enough and competent enough to do safely.
Nathanael Henderson
: But, Jim, one can get bent at depths less than 10 feet . .
Unless something is fundamentally flawed with my understanding of
decompression theory, no you can't. To reliably get bent on shallow dives
I'd think you would have to get near the 10M mark for quite extended
periods.
Nathan Henderson
bob s
doesnt padi suggest:
ow dive to 60'
aow to 110'
only with the deep diver speciality past 100'?
Steve Francoeur wrote:
> Scubagator wrote:
> >
> > Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
> >
> > As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
> > Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck, night
> > etc.
> >
> > General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South Florida
> > is that it sucks...
> >
> > I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
> >
> > SMC
>
> Does anyone else here see the stupidity of a certain agency certifiying
> AOW students to dive to 130', but refusing to train them at that depth?
>
> When flying commercial airlines, I certainly feel better knowing that my
> pilots actually have flown 747s before, and are not the product of a
> training program that certifies them to fly jets after a few hours in a
> simulator. The same logic (i.e., people should be trained under
> realistic conditions) would seem to apply to divers, shouldn't it?
>
> Steve
OnAirat500
>
>Someone else said that the suspect PADI will soon have another
>certification level to cover dives below 100 feet. If I had to bet,
>that's where I'd put my money. I expect an announcement of the new
>specialty any day now.
>
>
I listened to Karl Shreeves (PADI technical development) talking about how this
might be a great way to move PADI into the realm of technical diving. Imagine
that. Instead of teaching people to dive beyond the recognized recreational
limit safely... Just lower the limit...!!!! And teach them what you've been
doing for years.... True PADI philosophy.
And all this at only a meager additional CO$T...
N
RDecker388
>If I
>arrange for the time away from work, make the drive all the way from
>Orlando,
>pay for lodging, only to be told I can't dive the sites I want because
>you have students on the boat, I'm going to be _seriously_ pissed off.
Ed, it was a hypothetical example of why the training standard creates
a problem. You have nothing to worry about, standard charters will continue to
go where the majority of the customers want, conditions permitting.
What it's more likely to do is limit the option of doing AOW course for
one or two vacatoning divers. While we've always set up a group class
schedule, we've also always strived to provide requested courses for our
customers, even if it meant doing the course for only one student. The problem
now is whether a suitable charter will be availble or not.
Regards,
Bob D.
Director of Training, Olympus Dive Center
Morehead City, NC
www.olympusdiving.com
Scuba@cyberdude
'Sounds like time to look closer at the other agencies. PADI may actually
shoot themselves in the foot - for those who haven't already formed that
opinion anyway.
Just dive safely and within your personal limits. If somebody back at the
dive shop wants to check my dive log, he'd better be willing to pay
admission.
Terry Moore
RDecker388 wrote:
>
> Fish,
>
> It's a TRAINING standard. It has nothing to do with what one does
> outside of a class. Outside of training, the "recommended depth limits" are
> exactly that RECOMMENED.
>
> PADI "recommended depth limits:
>
> OW = 60'
> AOW = 100'
> Overall for recreational diving = 130'
>
> PADI Training Depth Limits:
>
> OW = 60'
> AOW = 100'
> Deep Diver = 130'
>
> >What about divers who are only OW certified (PADI) but they have over 100
> >dives
> >and most of the dives are to over 100 feet??? What then? (We're talking
> >certified in past years 1970-95 or earlier???)
>
I might add that OW training to 60 feet does not include DIVE 1 (40ft)
Regards
Terry Moore
AI 156937
--
---
Remove "#" from e-mail address to reply
For the benefit of Spambots everywhere:
webmaster@localhost
abuse@localhost
postmaster@localhost
Stop Internet Spam.
o spam wsu.edu Harmen Thys
scubagirl wrote:
<snip>
> Subsequently, the PADI Deep Diver Specialty course allows divers to build
> upon this knowledge by participating in training dives to depths between 30
> metres/100 feet and 40 metres/130 feet."
How nice: with meters you can go a little deeper than with feet!
(Please use thinking to set your limits on each dive instead of PADI's *training* standards. BTW
does that piece of plastic say so much about what you can, that you can forget about all other
circumstances and further experience?)
Harmen Thys Nieuwenhuis
http://www.cpedu.rug.nl/~N828572/index.html
Dallas McNab
Too Late. Already been there. 120'+. So does this mean since I have done
it I can keep doing it, or do they think I am going to quit. Not. Wife has
OW and has been to 90'. Depth should be based on experience, not level of
cert.
Scubagator wrote in message
<199804141939...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
Matthias Voß
Barney schrieb:
>
>
> Is PADI paying the salaries of the Depth Police?
>
> What follows shouldn't be read by anyone without a sense of humor
> (except for the hyena boyz).
>
> You all do know that PADI is involved in more than just the
> acquisition of a firmer financial position in the dive industry. They
> ARE indeed the major proponent for Government regulation of the Dive
> Industry. Their goal is to create a new branch of government and
> establish positions for which only their officers are qualified to
>
Hallo Barney,
sure you didn´t mix up PADI with Scientology ? Or is it an accepted
fact?
Greetinx
mv
Glawackus
>From: retp...@aol.com (RET Photo)
from fishb...@aol.com :
>>That's a false statement. One CAN get BENT in water's shallower than 100
feet
>>and it doesn't necessarily take longer . . . it can take LESS time.
>>Please
>
>>provide stats and proof to defend your statement.
>If You can get bent doing a dive to 100 feet faster than a dive to 130 Feet I
>for one don't want to be diving with YOU! The Tables themselves are all the
>Stats and Proof I need...
If you spend 25 minutes *at * 100 feet on one dive, and on another dive you
spend 30 minutes with a *max depth* of 130', which dive is more likely to bend
you? Hint: which dive is shorter? Note that I haven't specified *all* the
details; this is a thinking exercise, and you don't have enough information to
reach an answer that must be correct.
Not to be sarcastic, but anyone who can't think this through shouldn't be
using tables, because they require thought. And they shouldn't be using a
computer, because they require thought (or at least some solid understanding).
Oh, hell, maybe they just shoudn't dive.
ps. If you think this through, you should come to the conclusion that
Fishbre396's post is both *true*, and shows signs of clear thought and
understanding; this should be noted by those of you who like to lump all
AOL'ers together.
Steve
The above can be construed as personal opinion in the absence of a reasonable
belief that it was intended as a statement of fact. Or it might just be to
generate discussion.
Lee Bell
RDecker388 wrote:
> Some scenarios:
> A dive center books 12 spots on our boat that holds 18. Among to
> remaining 6 spaces I book 2 AOW students. The group leader wants to
> visit a broken/flattened wreck laying at a depth of 110'. We're faced
> with telling the group "NO we have AOW students on board and they
> can't go that deep," potentially creating 12 to14 disgruntled
> customers or telling the AOW students "sorry, you won't be able to
> make the first dive AND you'll have to come back another day for
> another charter so we can finish your dives."
It will be interesting to see if this charter ever gets booked. If PADI
recommends nothing greater than 100 feet for its AOW divers, why would a
PADI affiliated charter book a dive to more. If the PADI affiliated
charter is booked for a dive to more than 100 feet, don't you think PADI
is being a bit hypocricial? Wouldn't this seem to confirm that dollars
of income (cost of extra class/trip to site beyond recommended depth) is
more important to PADI than the safety of it's AOW divers (the supposed
reason for the recommended limit)?
> 2 divers want to enroll in an AOW class, to accomodate them I must get
> them on an inshore charter becuase of the depths. Unfortunately, we
> don't have an inshore trip scheduled and not enough divers wanting one
> to run a boat. The students can A) pay the difference to make up for
> the lack of numbers for the charter. B) Not take the class they
> desire. Neither option is exactly good for customer relations.
Typical of dive agency thinking (no criticism, just recognition). There
is a third option. The PADI shop which offers an AOW course can absorb
the cost of providing what the training they advertise. If there is
extra cost for doing the AOW dives, that's a cost of doing business.
Sometimes it takes money to make money. No shop I know of is going to
give the extra income from a full boat to its customers. Why should a
shop think students should pay extra for one that's less full?
Lee
Lee Bell
Dan Volker wrote:
> As of this moment, there is NO REALLY GOOD agency to train you to dive
> deeper than 100 feet deep. The root problem is the quality of the
> instructor, and with teaching deeper diving, this issue becomes
> exponentially more important. While PADI has plenty of instructors
> who can teach well to 60 feet, it has far fewer who could teach well
> to 130 feet. For the higher quality instruction needed to go deeper, > an agency would need hand picked instructors, more of a "Top Gun"
> approach to its staff.
I've edited Dan's comments above to focus on the points he makes which I
fully agree with. Virtually every one of the more experienced divers in
this group have commented that it's the instructor that counts. As he
often does, Dan's focused on a key issue most of this thread has
ignored. It's still the instructor that counts.
In addition to Dan's comments, I would add that experience counts too.
Any agency which really wants to do a good job of training divers for
deeper dives, whatever "deep" means to them, really needs to require
more than a dozen or so dives before certification.
Lee
Glawackus
>From: Lee Bell <lee...@ix.netcom.com>
>Any agency which really wants to do a good job of training divers for
>deeper dives, whatever "deep" means to them, really needs to require
>more than a dozen or so dives before certification.
FWIW, when I got certified ( NAUI, but the shop also does the PADI thing ),
the shop owner gave me a song and dance about how they think it's really useful
for new divers to go straight into the AOW class upon completion of the OW
course. I forget the exact rationale; maybe something about already being in
learning mode ( is it hard to get back into later?), or maybe building on
knowledge before it's lost (I give that one some validity). Can't say if this
is his personal philosophy (and what the real motivation is), or if this is
perhaps widespread (or even official) agency philosophy. I can say that in
conversations with my instructor, he said that he was thinking of switching to
PADI, because they have a more income oriented approach.
Lee is so right about experience, but here's one example of a shop taking
exactly the opposite approach, and encouraging students to plunge right in
while they have the theory, but limited experience.
f...@leland.stanford.edu
The response to this limitation will be simple. Even more shops will
abandon PADI affiliation and go with another certifying agency like
NAUI or SSI.
A long established shop in my area left PADI when they were told they
could NOT let students into their pool except as specified by PADI.
Eventually PADI won't have any affiliates left.
Jack McGhee
Philip B. Malter wrote:
>
> Scubagator wrote:
> >
> > Looking for opinions on PADI's new standard...
> >
> > As of the last Undersea Journal (1st Quater 98), all PADI Advanced Openwater
> > Dives can be no deeper then 100'. That goes for any dive...deep, wreck, night
> > etc.
> >
> > General consensus of the instructors that I have spoke to here in South Florida
> > is that it sucks...
> >
> > I'm curious as to what the rest of you have to say.
> >
> > SMC
>
> I checked this out with some of the guys at the PADI national office.
> They explained that the primary reason for the proposed change was to
> coordinate their depth guidelines with the Spare Air 100' matrix so
> that those using Spare Air would always have a comfortable margin of
> safety to offset potential panic induced matrix violations.
> phil
Phil,
You're one sick puppy. If you're going to be in the Keys early May I'd
like to buy you a beer.
Another Sick Puppy
Steve McGough
Frank,
This is for training and it makes sense. Max for 100 feet for the AOW Deep
Core Dive.
Max 130 for the Deep Diver Specialty Course.
Many PADI Instructors have been asking for this clarification for years as
it really makes sense to "staircase" depth training to deeper depths if the
people are interested.
It will have little or no effect on Charter Operations unless there is
training taking place on the boat (as noted from some charter operations.)
As for your statement about a long est shop leaving PADI due to the fact
that "they could not let student into their pool except as specified by
PADI" - I don't know exactly what that means but if it means that someone
couldn't teach a WSI Lifeguard Course, or a TDI Rebreather Course or even a
NAUI Open Water Course at the shops pool - that is simply untrue.
Good diving!
Steve McGough
PADI MI 49589
Sherwood Technician
Scuba Shack - Canton, CT USA
www.scubashackct.com
f...@leland.stanford.edu wrote in message <6h81s4$2j8$1...@nntp.Stanford.EDU>...
Fishbre396
In article <6h3gkk$rhv$1...@news.ntplx.net>, "Steve McGough" <SMcGo...@aol.com>
writes:
>Then the Deep Diver Specialty covers depth's between 60 and 130.
>Kind of a gradual "step up" if you know what I mean?
Gees, in the old days, the GRADUAL STEP-UP was do your open water dives in a
quarry . . . get on a plane in a week, fly to Grand Cayman and do the first
dive of the day (to 100 feet) . . . I doubt that things have changed much .
. .
Fishbre396
In article <199804151300...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
rdeck...@aol.com (RDecker388) writes:
> A dive center books 12 spots on our boat that holds 18. Among to
>remaining 6 spaces I book 2 AOW students. The group leader wants to visit a
>broken/flattened wreck laying at a depth of 110'. We're faced with telling
>thegroup "NO we have AOW students on board and they can't go that deep,"
>potentially creating 12 to14 disgruntled customers or telling the AOW
>students
>"sorry, you won't be able to make the first dive AND you'll have to come back
>another day for another charter so we can finish your dives."
>
>
Now, admit the truth . . . you may end up saying "sorry, you won't be able to
make the first dive . . .etc." and those people will bitch and moan . . . and
will end up in the water, and will also dive to over 100 feet!
I encountered this during several dives in GC. There was a family with at
least four "JUNIOR" (certification) divers . . . guess what, they jumped into
the water and ended up lower than 130 feet! (CI limits are also 100 feet . .
.JUNIOR (Certification) is supposed to limit one to 60 or so feet, isn't it???
If they are PAYING they may end up telling the crew how deep they should dive.
Fishbre396
In article <892661697.815083@michelob>, "scubagirl" <ke...@NO.sprint.ca>
writes:
>They already do..... the PADI Deep Diver specialty. See my earlier post.
>
>
I thought they had that specialty for years!?!?
Fishbre396
In article <199804151235...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
rdeck...@aol.com (RDecker388) writes:
>Fish,
>
> It's a TRAINING standard. It has nothing to do with what one does
>outside of a class. Outside of training, the "recommended depth limits" are
>exactly that RECOMMENED.
>
>PADI "recommended depth limits:
>
>OW = 60'
>AOW = 100'
>Overall for recreational diving = 130'
>
>PADI Training Depth Limits:
>
>OW = 60'
>AOW = 100'
>Deep Diver = 130'
>
>>What about divers who are only OW certified (PADI) but they have over 100
>>dives
>>and most of the dives are to over 100 feet??? What then? (We're talking
>>certified in past years 1970-95 or earlier???)
>
>
>Bob D.
>Director of Training, Olympus Dive Center
>Morehead City, NC
>www.olympusdiving.com
>
Ok, so WHY are all of you responding to my id??? Telling ME that these are
training limits. WHY aren't you following the thread of the other's messages
where they are saying that PADI (oops, almost typed that PAID!) has changed
the limits.
Also, please note the SUBJECT line . . . do you see anything about TRAINING
LIMIT mentioned???
NO! It says " PADI's 100' MAX AOW Depth Limit.
Harassment??? "Paula, are you there???"
Fishbre396
In article <3534A271...@ix.netcom.com>, Lee Bell <lee...@ix.netcom.com>
writes:
>> So, whats your point? There was absolutely nothing said about ANYONE
>> adhering to these standards other than PADI instructors during AOW
>> TRAINING. Sheeesh, get a grip Lee.
>
>The question asked what I thought. I responded. What's your point?
>
>Lee
Looks like Phil had another frustrating day at the dock! <G>
Fishbre396
In article <35349E...@nospam.uk>, Dave Roberts
<obscured_...@nospam.uk> writes:
>Eh? Are you sure about that? I'd say there's a lot of difference
>between
>30m and 40m. Obviously if you're a deep diver on Trimix, then you're
>statement stands, but for a new AOW, that 10m (33ft) is a lot of
>difference.
>
>Please note, that I do not agree with this change.
>
>
You don't have to be on TRIMIX to dive to 130 feet, or 178 feet for that
matter. Many have done both on "regular compressed air" without any
problems. IN FACT, there are resorts which feature such dives to certified
divers. (Not necessarly "certified" in DEEP whatever . . .)
Fishbre396
In article <35349D...@CanTheSpam.com>, Ed Newberg
<G_Edward...@CanTheSpam.com> writes:
>I understand things are a bit different in the UK, but here in Florida
>if a DM said that I'd just happily leave him floating at 100' and
>continue
>my dive. DMs are hardly necessary for conducting a dive.
>
>
Although one CAN do as you suggest (above) the DM's may restrict your diving
the rest of the day (referring to diving via boat - after all, you are ON THEIR
boat and they set the rules.)
Now, if you are "shore diving" or have "your own boat," I suppose you can do
whatever you please. <G>
Fishbre396
In article <3534B282...@ix.netcom.com>, Lee Bell <lee...@ix.netcom.com>
writes:
>In most of my Florida diving, the DM was not anywhere near me during the
>dive. As far as I know, they're not even in the water on many trips.
>While I generally play by the rules of the boat I'm on, I'm not anal
>about it. If the bottom of a wreck is deeper than 100 feet and I want
>to see the bottom of the wreck, I'll pay a lot more attention to what my
>computer(s) allow than what the DM says. On the other hand, I don't
>flaunt my violation of DM rules either. I respect most DM's and, while
>I may not strictly abide by their rules, I'm also unwilling to make
>their jobs more difficult by announcing it openly.
We had to go "below" limits while diving in GC. . . to avoid a current. We
returned to the boat, the DM checked our computers (we were on vacation!) and
said, "YOU went beyond MY set limits!!! You are restricted from diving the
remainder of the day!" This was the first dive of the day.
Luckly, we were the first ones aboard (time, depth) . . . by the time everyone
else came up the DM felt pretty silly yelling at us. . .everyone else went MUCH
DEEPER to avoid the same current! We all dived the remainder of the boat dives
without any problems, but were continually warned about "HITS!"
Fishbre396
In article <199804150915...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, retp...@aol.com
(RET Photo) writes:
>If You can get bent doing a dive to 100 feet faster than a dive to 130 Feet I
>for one don't want to be diving with YOU! The Tables themselves are all the
>Stats and Proof I need...
The STATS are what I'm quoting. The one's I've read (DAN) show that most
recreational divers are bent at depths less than 80 feet! What stats are you
using??? Navy?
Fishbre396
In article <353493B8...@techheadnet.com>, bob s
<szcze...@techheadnet.com> writes:
>aow to 110'
>only with the deep diver speciality past 100'?
Are you really saying that 110 feet is less than 100 feet??? I think not . . .
Fishbre396
In article <6h8rid$l94$1...@news.ntplx.net>, "Steve McGough"
<st...@scubashackct.com> writes:
>Frank,
>This is for training and it makes sense. Max for 100 feet for the AOW Deep
>Core Dive.
Steve, I disagree! First off, I was initially certified OW by PADI . . . a
week later my spouse and I went to Grand Cayman . .. our FIRST DIVE there was
to over 100 feet (yes, it was before GC set their 100 foot limits) This was
not only our very FIRST dive on a boat, after certification, it was the first
time we were ON OUR OWN as far as set-up of equipment, our FIRST time in water
with WAVES! (certification in a quarry doesn't simulate OCEAN - salt water-
diving at all!) FIRST TIME in salt water, FIRST time encountering fish, etc.
So, you're telling me what I already knew . . .my certification wasn't good for
anything! MY TRAINING didn't teach me what I needed to know about the kind of
diving I WAS DOING! (and am still doing!)
My experiences can be verified!
Fishbre396
In article <199804170651...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, glaw...@aol.com
(Glawackus) writes:
>ps. If you think this through, you should come to the conclusion that
>Fishbre396's post is both *true*, and shows signs of clear thought and
>understanding; this should be noted by those of you who like to lump all
>AOL'ers together.
>
>
>
>
Thank you, Steve!
Jim Hazen
To All,
I have been watching and reading this thread with some interest.
First, how many of you are
Instructors? Second, how many of you are PADI Instructors? Finally,
how many of you Instructors (PADI
or not) actually train your AOW students to 130 feet (take them there
and do skills)?
So what is the problem. This is only for PADI Instructors teaching the
Core Deep Dive as part of
the AOW class and for their students. There is a specialty class that
does go to 130 feet (I know Put
Another Dollar In), and each agency has this type of class also.
So.... again what is the problem.
Here, just to help clarify this B.S. I am reciting verbatum from the
bulletin:
"New Maximum Depth Standard for the Advanced Core Deep Dive - To
maintain consistency between the
Advanced Open Water Diver Program and the recommended depth of the first
dive of the PADI Deep Diver
Specialty, effective 1 July 1998, the new maximum depth standard for the
Core Deep Dive of the PADI
Advanced Open Water Diver program is 30 meteres/100 feet. As with all
dives of the PADI Advanced Open
Water Diver program, the Core Deep Dive is designed as an introduction
to this specialty area of
diving. Limiting this dive to 30 meteres/100 feet reflects this
intent. Subsequently, the PADI Deep
Diver Specialty course allows students to build upon knowledge and
experience gained in the Advanced
Open Water Diver course by participating in training dives to depths
between 30 meters/100 feet and
40 meteres/130 feet."
All other dives in the AOW were always set at 100 feet maximum. This
is according to the 1994
revision of the PADI Instructor manual. This is nothing new, they have
just pulled the Deep Dive
in line with the rest of the training standard. Again, from the
manual: "Dive Depth Limits - ...
(original depth for deep dive to 130 feet)... The maximum depth for all
other Core and Elective Dives is
100 feet (30 meteres). At no time shall any dive exceed the limits of
the Recreational Dive Planner...."
So what is the complaint here? Because one agency is trying to set a
standard for its
instructors and its customers/students that will provide a potentially
safer dive training environment.
The AOW class is an experience type class, and the deep dive is a
training/experience dive that is done
in a supervised situation. By limiting the depth to 100 feet the
student is not cheated out of the experience, but the time alloted there
by the tables has more leeway. Also, you are potentially reducing the
risk to the instructor by not getting them saturated and hurt. Again,
makes sense to me. When training an Instructor wants to be sure his
people are safe and he also wants to know he is safe too. Who will help
the Instructor if they have a problem?
I can speak from experience on this one. Yes, I am a PADI Instructor
(hold your tounges people
and let me explain), and I teach here in Southern California. I have
always limited my max. depth on the
Deep dive to 100 feet. I do this for the simple reason that trying to
go to 130 feet does put myself and
my students at greater risk than at 100 feet. Mainly in the areas of
the NDL and air consumption. I
also limit my time at that depth to 10 minutes max., that is half way to
the NDL according to the DSAT RDP. At 130 feet the NDL is 10 minutes,
after that you are in Decompression style diving. I also limit the
minimum air supply to be 1300 psi at depth, and who ever gets there
first dictates when the dive ends and we ascend. I don't know about
you, but I want that extra safety margin built in so that I don't have
to worry about getting one of my people hurt, or myself. THIS IS ALL
TRAINING SAFETY RELATED.
THIS IS PADI ONLY! Quit blowing a gasket over this. As much as you
all complain and bitch n'
moan about PADI's low standards I think this is an example of PADI
taking a pro-active stance for safety
and standards that will provide a safe situation for the students, and
the instructor. Thus, for once
they are raising the standards in favor of safety. Gee that really
makes sense to me.
Blast away people, but for those of you who are instructors and are
safety conscious you will
see the light of what I am rambling on about.
Regards,
Jim Hazen -- Dive Safe
f...@leland.stanford.edu
In <6h8rid$l94$1...@news.ntplx.net>, "Steve McGough" <st...@scubashackct.com> writes:
>Frank,
>This is for training and it makes sense. Max for 100 feet for the AOW Deep
>Core Dive.
>Many PADI Instructors have been asking for this clarification for years as
>it really makes sense to "staircase" depth training to deeper depths if the
>people are interested.
>It will have little or no effect on Charter Operations unless there is
>training taking place on the boat (as noted from some charter operations.)
>As for your statement about a long est shop leaving PADI due to the fact
>that "they could not let student into their pool except as specified by
>PADI" - I don't know exactly what that means but if it means that someone
>couldn't teach a WSI Lifeguard Course, or a TDI Rebreather Course or even a
>NAUI Open Water Course at the shops pool - that is simply untrue.
>Good diving!
>Steve McGough
>PADI MI 49589
>Sherwood Technician
>Scuba Shack - Canton, CT USA
>www.scubashackct.com
>
I don't have the details - what I heard was in a brief conversation with the dive shop staff
as I was paying for some equipment. The point is that there is an increasing perception
that PADI should be read "Put Another Dollar In" and at some point it will be counter
productive and people will to another agency. (I am an (inactive) PADI DM).
There have also been reports of a recent mass mailing to get folks to send PADI money
for an unnecessary magazine. A close friend got one recently - and the impression was that
is was misleading mass marketing.
I was surprised to see a response from someone in the PADI organization. If my impressions
are incorrect you can try to correct them but you should pay attention to the more fundamental
problem of how those impressions are created. Perhaps because they have a basis in reality?
Frank
Steve McGough
Fish,
Ok, we can agree to disagree. I must be reading all of these posts
incorrectly.
Steve
Fishbre396 wrote in message
<199804180130...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...