No Agency Bashing
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ส.ค. 2024
- after a chat with a follower... I cant stand this.
Like my merch?
Check out the shop: teespring.com/de/stores/ise-m...
Training:
is-expl.com
Mail to: achim@is-expl.com
The Book:
in German: www.amazon.de/Recreational-Di...
in English: www.amazon.de/-/en/Achim-R-Sc...
Please support me on Patreon and help me to create more content: / innerspace_explorers
Social Media:
Facebook: / innerspaceexplorers
Instagram: / innerspace_explorers
If you want to send me something:
Achim Schlöffel
c/o InnerSpace Explorers
Obere Dorfstrasse 16
83539 Pfaffing
Germany
Mail: achim@is-expl.com
My other channel in case you are interested :):
/ american_runabouts - กีฬา
Developing religious faith in agencies is beyond being rational, and is a symbol of being immature. I'll take GUE as an example (sorry GUE sounds like I'm bashing you). I always find it a bit hard to interact with newly GUE-trained divers, a large proportion of whom believe that other agencies are trash after taking their fundamental courses. On the other hand, when diving with more senior GUE divers, I always find them very reasonable and knowledgeable and don't bash other agencies as much as newly certified GUE divers.
I see the 'our agency is special' narrative as a business strategy. I hear about agency standards more from junior divers and always hear 'use your own judgment' from more senior divers. I think that concludes the story.
I’m so glad you said this. I see it being used as a lazy path to elitism. If your success is limited by the instructor or agency, you will be a bad diver regardless of the environment you are in. Well said!
Agree 💯 Not only is it unnecessary it likely turns new divers off. Folks, we want to make diving more accessible and welcoming.
In a parallel universe we have manufacturer A that produces and cerifies (for scuba) regulators that 50% of the times they explode bellow 2 meters, and 1% they are really good. Then a manufacturer B produces really good regulators with only 0.0001% exploding bellow 2 meters and 99.9999% they are really goood. Most divers spend their money to buy regulators from A due to popularity, and some were lucky enough to find out that B exist and they got theirs from there.
Then there is this video titled "No Manufacturer Bashing", explaining how the customers of A shouldn't complain about the services they paid for and never received as advertised from manufacturer A, because once Achim got this awesome regulator from manufacturer A breathing perfectly at 100 meters, and it's the regulator that matters.
As if negative customer feedback is not a positive force that improves services in all markets (not sure why we should exclude the diving industry). As if, as divers, we souldn't accept this premise for regulators, but somehow we should turn a bllind eye when the product is training.
-----
This channel has great content. I happen to disagree with this specific video.
While I understand where you're coming from and I partially agree, we should still hold PADI accountable to some extent. Yes, bad instructors are to blame, but why are there so many in PADI and so few in ISE/GUE/etc.? Because agencies have trickle-down effects. If you don't have standards in the highest positions, and only care about money, this is the inevitable outcome. On the flip side, I will say that for all the bad instructors and divers PADI produces, their low level of entry are probably the only reason many of us are divers today.
Eventually everyone in the scuba industry needs each other. The more people dive the more accessible tools and products become. Dive shops and brands cannot survive without the masses and instructors are useless witbout students to teach. We just need to respect each other, whether recreational or full blown tech.
As an instructor not in the dive industry but in heavy vehicle, first aid, working at heights, it is very frustrating to hear people bashing any training provider, as usually they have not taken the time to provide any sort of feedback on their experience of the training provided, feed back to an instructor of any dicipline is the gold whereby they refine their craft so to speak, it is in the feedback from students where the value add comes and can be delivered to the next round of students, and so on and so on,. this requires the instrcutor have have some sense of humility to be able to accept feedback also, and not just the positive feedback, failures are where the most growth is, Thankyou Achim for opening such an important discussionn point
Well said my Padi instructor told me at the end of my open water that this is not the end of my education but the start,and I have learned so much from other divers good and bad and I have not a clue who they were with.
And I have just started my assistant instructor course and will carry his ethics with me
That's what I always tell people who ask me for advice: it's not the agency, it's the people. You can have a fantastic team for a specific agency in one country/area, and a not-so-good team for the same agency somewhere else.
👌amen to this, finally it's been said loud out👏👏👏
This is true everywhere in life but I'd think that it is also true that some agencies more than others reward specifically high numbers of certifications rather than investing in any kind of quality assurance.
What is disturbing me a little is the way these OWD courses are being advertised and sold. They are saying that you get your cert and you will be capable to go diving safely with a buddy who has the same OWD as you. This is a lie.
No, they claim you can safely dive in similar conditions as you were trained.
So for most vacation divers that is warm water, low current, extreme visibility and supervised by at least a guide / DM.
And yes, after 10-15 dives you should be able to safely dive (more or less) in known territory and favourable conditions - like a shore dive or a quarry where you dived before, unattended with a similarly qualified diver.
Are you prepared for EVERYTHING at that point? No. You won't even be prepared for everything after 1000 dives.
@@kevinallen4445 except the supervision part... according to the standards they must be able to "to dive autonomously
with an equally- or more-qualifed buddy..."
Practically most DCs don't allow them to dive without a guide. And for a good reason.
Great video, what I would add is that it's possibly not always the instructors fault if a student has a bad experience during the class. It could be also on the student due to false expectations, bad attitude or if diving just isn't for them.
Thanks. People repeat what they hear. And are dogmatic to what THEY have been taught. Yes, I have been forced to adopt new methods of thought over the years. I still enjoy being perverse and diving a horse collar and Cousteau-Gagnan regulator at times. But I don’t use an 8 compartment mandatory decompression obligation with a simple depth gauge and bottom timer any longer.
Diving physics and physiology is a dynamic discipline. And I find myself challenging “agency bashers” left and right. Unfortunately, most are long time Instructors.
One has to challenge oneself on a constant basis and review changes as they come along. WRSTC and ISO set the MINIMUM standards for an autonomous OWD.
Do I disagree as what those minimum standards should be? Yep. Do I challenge various boards of agencies and things? Yep. Do I always get what I want? Seldom, if ever.
I can only try and model the standards as I believe they should be, which exceeds any agency’s minimum standards. “Why do you carry a pony bottle?” Good question. Do you have twenty minutes for me to discuss it with you?…
Hi Achim, while I fully agree the instructor is key, I think there are some inconsistencies in your points. The agency should held accountable for the quality of their instructors. Some agencies obviously care less than others…
It’s not the agency it’s the instructor , I got certs from other agencies the material is great
I think it's mostly people with immature mindsets. While I don't believe that agency is blameless because there are systematic issues... I think all agencies have systematic issues that need to be called out.
If you talk to enough divers, particularly tech divers from diverse agencies, you will know that they all suck or have ways of doing things that you don't agree with.
Agencies are also subject to their own momentum, and change can take a while to implement as a result. I took a PADI Open Water class 30+ years ago, and at that time we did our skills on our knees and so forth. That appears to have changed in the years since. I see new classes now with everyone neutral and in trim from day 1. I think part of the problem is that reputation can also be slow to reflect a new reality. PADI is huge in terms of number of certified divers owing to the recreational market. Statistically, they're going to have the greatest share of the worst divers just because they own that much of the bell curve. Technical agencies are no different, just with smaller populations. There will always be excellent instructors and less than excellent instructors.
Very well said Achim
I think the PADI hate come more from the corporate greed rather than the quality of their standards. I got pretty pissed off when I found that they wanted $30 extra to get access to the e-card on top of what was paid for the physical card. The e-card would not cost them anything, they already have the app, they already have the data base. Is that interface so difficult to develop as the require that much money per user?. This was a few years ago. Apparently they changed it now so that you get the e-card by default and you have to pay extra for the physical card........without changing the price of the course 🙃
I'm going to disagree. I have plastic from all over as well including GUE. It's not the instructor. It's the money. Something like GUE is much more expensive because so much more time is spent refining the skill and no guarantee of passing at that. With how much time it would take to perfect neutral bouancy in a new diver for instance, the other skills for basic open water would never get done. Many four letter agencies can't charge enough and have to set a lower bar for skills that are good enough just to make someone safe. Teaching scuba is not a profit center. Hence an entire section of divers are good enough to enjoy the underwater world. So sehe ich das.
The agencies are book sellers. They are in the business of creating content their local representative tries to sell you
I agree that the instructor is key. However, I wouldn’t consider the agencies and their standards as irrelevant. The ISO-standards just define minimum requirements. My training was mainly with CMAS and TDI. I also became an Open Water instructor with a well respected US agency. The instructor was competent and engaged. The program, however, was in terms of diving and apnoe skills significantly less challenging than my CMAS*** training. It just included a single 20m dive with gas donation in instructor development and the same dive in instructor evaluation. I got my specialty instructor ratings for deep, wreck, etc. by showing a couple of corresponding dives and paying the fee. All was well within the agency’s standards. These, like with all US agencies, stipulate that 40m dives for the deep diver specialty, need to be conducted in no-stop-time. I consider this as unsafe and almost pointless due to the short resulting bottom times. I taught students more, but technically speaking, violated the standards.
All agency's are at minimum ISO standards right? I think agencies are just different flavors..
👍
Respectfully disagree here. An agencies job is not just to print texts but also to develop standards that do not permit incompetent divers to graduate. A lot of times, written standards do not require students to do skills neutral, or demonstrate task loaded buoyancy etc. This means that even if the instructor is teaching up to standards the end product is a failure. A lot of agencies have good standards but do a poor job in enforcing them. So when you have a lot of incompetent divers who are certified and they hold the card from a particular agency, then the agency should pick up SOME blame! Instead, we dump it all on the instructors. The question still remains, if there are bad instructors, why have the agencies not identified and gotten rid of them?
Definitely not here to please you but a slight bash has to be here.
My instructor (Padi) told me that padi has a resort diver certificate. Which you get if u r chinese and only dive in a pool at the hotel.
I mean im fine with the majority of the things padi does. I am mostly trained by padi myself. But jesus fucking christ. Thats just a rip-off
As a FFESSM/CMAS I get criticized a lot because we are trained to dive at 60m deep with 21% air.
Everytime I can hear people not only bashing on the agency but on the country, but I don't mind.
I am CMAS educated as well, but I don't think diving to 60m with 21% air is safe, while you can dive to about 56.6 meters with a PO2 of 1.4 I think that it is pressuring at bit to be honest (I am aware that the PO2 limit was higher a few years back). Furthermore, everybody's tolerance can be a bit different, when it come to nitrogen partial pressure, while an experienced diver may have developed some higher tolerance to being "Narced", I wouldn't recommend people going much deeper than 35-40 meters on basic air, unless very familiar with the effects.
But I do agree, that the whole agency bashing probably has gone a bit too far, while it is usually just friendly banter, some people do seem to take it very seriously what agency you are from. Especially since maintaining and developing your level of skills is much more important.
@@1985rbaek agreed on the safety point of view. It is trough these critics that I started thinking outside the CMAS box, and now I don't do it that much. I used to go at 60 with randoms, this is even more dangerous.
Randoms aren't there for you if you have an issue at 60, took me a lot of discussion with SSI/PADI/TDI to realise it.
I can also talk about the negativity I felt from the CMAS community on the subject, almost a bit posh in a way, rejecting the critic.
We are trained to see how sensible we are about the narcosis, and since the whole agency is telling you it is ok to be "narced" I encounter way to many CMAS divers inviting me to dive bellow 60m with 21%. Some of these divers have a god view on themself, they are untouchable and you shouldn't be criticized..
Today I'm a TDI cave diver and I think that sharing knowledge is the most important, and accepting a different point of view can bring you a lot to your experience and safety as a diver.
In which country is this? CMAS Switzerland does not teach air dives deeper than 40m.
@@DroPsyDro For me it is Denmark.
However national rules do differ a little bit, when it comes to depths. Diving for air is usually 40m by most agencies, however the Danish divers association (also under CMAS) had the limit for 50 meters for people taking the CMAS*** certification, as it followed the British BSAC limits. Recently (as of last year) it has been discussed to move it to 40 meter, but people do have that on their CMAS** certifications here. It is still in a state of flux, and as far as I know, it still up to the instructor to decide.
The main issue is not the oxygen toxicity (which should be set at 1.4 partial pressure, old CMAS it was 1.8, and US navy diver manual says 2.0). It is the Nitrogen narcosis that is the issue. There is a good article on that: "Moving in extreme environments: inert gas narcosis and underwater activities" - doi: 10.1186/s13728-014-0020-7 that is freely available on what to expect at different depths. It seems that the limit for 50m was set because it was there people might experience hallucinations, but this is just speculation on my part.
That's how it is in France. FFESSM is the French part of CMAS. It was the same in Poland, the change occurred about 20-30 years ago. Currently in my KDP/CMAS we have a limit of 50 meters when diving in air - this is the recommendation, a P3 (***) can do it. P2 (**) is 40 meters. And this is rather the standard in most CMAS federations in the world nowadays. However, France is the original, it all started there;), they follow the traditional path - very rightly in times of today's decline in standards and requirements during training. However, I am still old P3 diver with qualifications up to 60 meters, and Polish CMAS divers still cannot forgive KDP these 10 meters shallower. :) By the way. It will be controversial. Experience shows that air is not nitrox 21 :). The human body tolerates 1.6 ppO2 and more on air better than on "warmer" nitrox.:)