I was diving with a couple of trainee DMs a few months back at Crap 'n' Rainy. I would have had approximately 40 logged dives at the time and they were both on about 50. They wanted to do 4 short dives on 2 fills because they were trying to get their 60 dives to get signed off. I had dived with one lad previously but not the other. When we met on the car park, he began quizzing me with a load of really patronising questions. Every diver should check up on a new buddy's experience but he was just coming across as a t**t. He asked to see my log book so I did the same. He seemed puzzled as to why a lowly rescue diver would want to question his experience but handed it over. A quick scan revealed he had never been out of Capernwray and a lot of his dives were very short. He suggested he did a dive briefing and go through the procedures for taking out a couple of inexperienced divers on a guided dive. The dive plan was jump in, bimble around the left hand side from the entry point. When we got to 120 bar, we would surface, float about for a while and drop down on the other side. He had us do a buddy check together and then began his own check by manhandling me and tugging on my kit. In the water, he was constantly checking my air but didn't seem to want to tell me his. We ended up surfacing with him on 80 bar and us two on 140. When he decided to surface, we were in view of a shot line; I tried to point it out but he want straight for a free ascent. He completely ignored me and left me to do a safety stop on my own in mid-water with poor vis and only my depth gauge/computer as reference. At the surface I felt I needed to take control and we had a little chat. We checked his kit to see if there were any signs he was leaking air from anywhere. We agreed we would ascend on a blob if a shot line was unavailable (neither of the two trainee DMs had ever launched one). We had an hour's SI and swapped our cylinders. Back in the water it was exactly the same. He signalled to go up at 120 bar. I signalled to stay put as I unclipped my DSMB. I noticed the other lad was knelt on the bottom watching me but no sign of the other lad. I signalled 'where is your buddy' and he pointed to the surface. Back at the car park, we were filling log books in. I read out the information from my computer and the first dive was 16 minutes. As I said that, they grinned and said '20 minutes'. It was clear that one of them is not ready to take on the responsibility of leading inexperienced divers. I don't particularly like their plan of doing 2 dives without leaving the water in between. A logged dive will normally comprise assembling kit and doing buddy checks, as well as the actual time underwater. IMO, if they are going to cheat like this, they may as well just fabricate dives in their logbooks as they are not gaining any useful experience.
Feckin hell Dave, wait till Big Si reads that. And you know what, he'll be spot on with what I can only guess he will say about it. I'd give that dive shop a wide berth and come dive with a responsible team of errrrm idjits. Seriously, have a read of Rule 1. I know you didn't know it at the time but would you dive with them again? Would you like to be taught by them in the few months it will take them to become instructors? Would you like to be a green eyed new student being taught by them? I'd be having words in their shell like telling them exactly what I thought. I do it now and again
The dive shop isn't really an issue - I wasn't paying them to be taken diving; I just heard the two lads were diving at the weekend so I tagged along. I understand one of them has been signed off now but the one who was the biggest problem still has work to do. They are very good when it comes to putting in extra time with the less able students. I would have to say I would dive with them both again. The lad who has now passed seems sensible enough and unlike the other lad, he didn't repeat the same mistakes on the second dive. I would want to dive with him at an inland dive site to check him out before doing anything more challenging. The other chap I would happily dive with in a group, where I know there is somebody else looking out for me. I certainly wouldn't dive as just a pair with him. I read Garth's piece on the rules of DIR (I have always been a dedicated follower of rule 6 ) and rule 1 makes total sense. I do not think he is a dangerous diver due to his attitude, it is down to his inexperience. Inexperienced divers are all dangerous but unless someone dives with them, they always will be. The air-pig is planning to be an instructor and it really does scare me. The reason I shared this story is that it shows how irrelevant the number of logged dives are when you just count numbers. I am still logging dives because as they are a requirement of all agencies to progress to the sort of courses I want to do, but I do like to keep them for my own records. This is my take on it too. The other two lads logged their dives as 20 minutes. I logged mine as 16 minutes and included a detailed description of the dive. I felt I gained some useful experience from the dive as I was having to think about looking after myself and a lot about what my buddies were doing. I think PADI need to re-assess how they gauge experience levels of people who wish to become professionals. I have nothing against logging short dives, as I said above, but maybe they need to set a minimum amount of bottom time as well as evidence of diving in certain conditions. I have been looking at the BSAC dive leader course requirements; amongst the various lessons and OW sessions, they require 20 dives meeting at least 5 of the following: Planned deco dive with 5 minutes or more planned deco Navigation dive with multiple direction changes for a minimum of 30 minutes Low visibility dive (1.5-3 metres) Night dive Wreck dive (tidal waters, shot line) Drift dive (1 - 1.5 kn) Wall dive (near vertical with deep water below) At least 6 from a boat At least 8 with the student as dive leader At least 10 extension diving greater depth than training dives Looking at the above list, I don't think either of them have met the requirements for many, appart from probably 2 and maybe 8. If PADI set their DM certification requirements to something like above Standards would improve IMO, but fewer people able to sign up for the course also equals less cash...
Ok I will have a go as Si seems to be stuck in the gimp box First this is not having a go at Dave and not in some ways having a go at the Strokes he dived with for that is surly what they were. They were on approx 50 dives and already on there way to being helpers to instructors. I mean come on were not talking about Golf here we are talking about a pastime /sport that if you get it wrong it turns poo coloured very quickly . These two seem to be trying to get to a mystical number dives(60)where there knowledge becomes such that they can help people that are just learning.This in MVHO is Bollocks and not what the agency intended when they set a number of dives needed to become an instructor helper ( DM)
Pete, that was very restrained... Some might say too restrained! Can someone give Si a shake so we can ge a 'proper' response! One of them sounds like a complete liability and the other just sounds like he lacks experience... Which is what'll happen if you can get away with 60 x 20min dives...
Well feck it! My pet hate is toy DM's I fecking hate them! and thats holding back a bit. But before all the DM's start jumping up and down there are some bloody fine DM's but they are all without exception experienced divers, not the fresh out of the box 50 dive types. What is it about diving that makes people who havent done or know feck all about diving to want to become instructors!!!! Walkers dont look at a hill and go I know what I'm going to become a climbing instructor, when you learn to drive a car you dont suddenly go I shall become a trackday instructor. This new breed of DM should be beaten to death with the padi manual they will endeavor to preach from......... and dave name and shame these idiots so others can avoid these muppets. BK
Well Im big, bad and back, just been to centre parcs for the week. That took some reading and im sure its all been said quite nicely, its idiots like that that will end up teaching people to dive in a few months time. It just goes to show why there is so many crap divers out there when we have muppets teaching and looking after students like that, it makes me shudder.
For me the scary thing about this is that on a forum, it's easy to discuss the pro's and con's of ability vs attitude vs experience etc with regard to trainee's like those mentioned above. The problem is, as has already been said, without the proper controls, DM's will continue to "pass" using shortcut tactics to meet what seem to be relatively slack minimum requirements, and the poor paying public have zero idea of the ability (or lack thereof) of these people! I just wish divers would take more consideration of their own ability/knowledge/experience and really self evaluate before choosing to go down the "Pro" route... The newbie paying public have every right to expect that the "professionals" they entrust their training too, and that of their children, should have the relevant levels of expertise, training, attitude and experience to ensure safety. I always find it interesting that even with only a small amount of diving experience, we on the forums seem to understand, and are often extolling the virtues of "picking an instructor" that is good...... but ofcourse for those that need it most, those with zero experience, they have no way of knowing what is/isn't a "good instructor". I wish i had the solution, alas it's just not so simple, but back to the OP.... I think fudging dive logs and running short dives etc to meet minimum requirements is tantamount to fraud, and IMO it should be treated as such..... after all, if they've fudge it to meet it... technically they never actually met the requirements!! And I'd question the mental attitude and suitability for instructing, of anyone that feels fudging requirements is good enough! The result is there is every possibility that this kind of behaviour could end up hurting (or even worse), somebody, and that is a risk too far! If the "trainee" can't see that, IMO, they are persuing the wrong qualification, after all.... student safety should be their PRIMARY concern!!! Just Sayin...
It scared me how quickly I was encouraged to go down that route. Luckily I had a good instructor who laughed and told me to go diving he eventualy did my DM course when he thought I was ready. Im not considering going down the AI route like most I know, I enjoy what diving Im doing and accept that sometimes I may have to put my camera away and focus on other divers even if Im not officialy acting as a DM as its not something you can switch on and off. TBH the DM course is not that hard to pass but being a good DM afterwards takes a lot of hard work how well do I think I am well better than some but not as good as the DM I want to be like, but there is possibly about 300 good quality dives difference between us. It all comes down to the instructor mine would have a fit regarding Mustard Daves experience. As for fudging log books yes I know someone who did that to meet the minimum standards for a liveaboard but the dives they had experienced were far more strenous than anything they did on the livaboard.
