Depth requirements and instructing

[mat]

Hi all

Just looking for a general view on what looks like an anomaly.

The new DL and AD qualifications require diving to 25m and 30m respectively. You need to pass DL to gain any instructor grade higher than Assistant.

Over the weekend I was talking to a mate who has a medical condition. The local UKSDMC doctor is quite happy for him to dive but has imposed a 20m depth restriction. Because of this limit he spends a lot of time diving around the less experienced and I think it is only a matter of time before he wants to instruct.

Now I can't think of a lesson that requires diving past 20m. Certainly not at SD, which is the maximum grade this guy can hold. But he will never be able to get an instructor grade higher than ADI because he can not qualify as DL.

There is a final twist. What happens to a qualified Instructor if they have a depth restriction imposed in later years? Should they be made to hand back their ticket as they could no longer attain the required qualifications?

So what do you think. Is it right, fair and in the interests of the BSAC that someone with a medically imposed depth restriction is;
1. Prevented from attaining a DL grade
2. Prevented from gaining instructor qualification higher than assistant.
3. Allowed to carry on teaching although they could no longer attain the qualifications required?

Comments anyone?

Regards
MattS

[Richie771]

Valid points.

I have always found a call to HQ - Or your Regional Coach are a good starting Point.

There are reasons why the new DTP imposes Depth Experiance - The obvious being

1) Decompression Practice
2) Air Requirements
3) Shot Lines
4) DSMB Deployment
5) Wider Diving Knowledge - Hard to teach about Narcs Etc if not experienced yourself.

Etc.....

It would be hard to take seriously an Instructor who did not have experience with the above & More - However you will always have exceptions - and i'm sure your friend falls into that categry.

Again A call to HQ / Regional Coach should assist him.

[BSACHQ]

Dear Matt,
You have raised some interesting points in your posting and I hope we can clarify some aspects that you have stated. The BSAC does not force divers to go to depths that they are unable to achieve for a number of personal reasons. The organisation would also not deliberately restrict a member from fulfilling their full potential within those personal limits.

The new diver training programme does suggest that depth experience should be obtained by potential dive leaders. This is to give those dive leaders the ability to lead dives for the more experienced diver, up to depths of 50m.

Since this is a requirement of the training programme it is only the NDO who can sanction any amendments to the qualifications and this is a possibility if a medical limitation is imposed. As such the award would be given under the guidelines of our 'Support Levels and Qualifications for Divers with Disabilities'. The NDO would need to be provided with all relevant information in order to make such a decision.

On the otherhand the medical information may in fact include not only depth restrictions but advice as to whether the member is medically restricted in becoming an instructor.

So to answer your points 1 & 2, it very much depends on the medical advice and limitations imposed as to whether the NDO can amend the qualification and award the DL grade. If the DL grade is awarded by the NDO, then the DL would need to abide by the restrictions used in the judgement. This assumes that the advice does not include further restrictions that could limit the person becoming an instructor.

An already qualified instructor would also need to take into consideration the full medical advice given. If it is just a depth restriction then this qualified instructor would be allowed to continue instructing within those depth limits. If the medical advice includes other restrictions then these may ultimately prevent the instructor from continuing to instruct.

An instructor is responsible for the safety of their students and must be medically and physically fit to fulfil this role. The medical advice may include some aspect that prevents the instructor continuing to satisfy those requirements and responsibilities.

It is extremely difficult to give a clear cut answer to situations that are not clearly defined and each case needs to be considered on its own merits.

I hope this reply shows you there is a broader scope to the situations you selected and that there is no single answer to such circumstances.

Alistair Reynolds
BSAC Technical Manager

[David J Smith]

Valid points.

I have always found a call to HQ - Or your Regional Coach are a good starting Point.

There are reasons why the new DTP imposes Depth Experiance - The obvious being

1) Decompression Practice
2) Air Requirements
3) Shot Lines
4) DSMB Deployment
5) Wider Diving Knowledge - Hard to teach about Narcs Etc if not experienced yourself.

Etc.....

It would be hard to take seriously an Instructor who did not have experience with the above & More - However you will always have exceptions - and i'm sure your friend falls into that categry.

Again A call to HQ / Regional Coach should assist him.

It's also difficult to take seriously an instructor who has a girl's name for a surname !!!!!!

In all seriousness Richie can you email me so I can give you the gen for the OD course at the special place !!!!!!!!!



Its Clare for anyone who's interested !!

[Richie771]

Check Your Inbox Smith!!

I understand you are not going to be there - That's proparbly a good thing.

I would hate to see the trainees subjected to your inexperience as a SADS.

P.S> Bovi had had a quote for a new gearbox for the Rhib you were Cox'n - I think a small donation may be in order!!!

I think the problem is that the Marine Outboard Engine has no Cyclic / Collective controls - Remember I have seen you in a car and a Rhib - You should steer (Pun!!) clear of wheels and stick (Pun!!) to Sticks.

Safe Diving Bud!!!

PPS - This guy is a very competent BSAC AI - (Just a C*%p Cox'n) LOL

[matt]

Hi Alaistair

Thank you for the prompt response. I wasn't expecting it but it is very welcome. To summarise I am very pleased to see that BSAC still has the flexibility to accomodate minorities.

:The organisation would also not deliberately restrict a member from fulfilling their full potential within those personal limits.

OT: Sorry but my own personal soap box. I agree that is what BSAC should be doing. The current policy on O2 and Max PPO deliberately restrict me (a member) from fulfilling my full potential.

The new diver training programme does suggest that depth experience should be obtained by potential dive leaders. This is to give those dive leaders the ability to lead dives for the more experienced diver, up to depths of 50m.

I admit I personally am split on this issue.

I spent much of my time as a SD assisting with Archaeology and marine biology dives. This was never in more than 20m of water, it is hard to accomplish anything useful at greater depths due to time restrictions. Despite being shallow the dives are more demanding than most 50m wreck dives. Certainly you still need Dive Leadership skills, possibly more so.

I am convinced that the DL course is very relevant to deeper diving, but the skills are also relevant to shallow diving in circumstances which demand team working and of course instructing. I do not believe that in isolation the DL course 'qualifies' or provides the experience for deeper diving. The BSAC general guidelines for deep diving are a far better guide and I still follow those reccomendations now for ERD and Trimix dives.

So like I said I am personally split on the decision to make depth attainment a requirement for higher qualification. It may discourage people from training courses they would benefit from, that IMHO is a bad thing.

Since this is a requirement of the training programme it is only the NDO who can sanction any amendments to the qualifications and this is a possibility if a medical limitation is imposed. As such the award would be given under the guidelines of our 'Support Levels and Qualifications for Divers with Disabilities'. The NDO would need to be provided with all relevant information in order to make such a decision.

Not too keen on the 'disability' label. My mate has a blood disorder treated with medication. I don't think he percieves himself as disabled. I certainly would not like to be called disabled just because I wear glasses. However overall I am happy to hear there is a way around.

On the otherhand the medical information may in fact include not only depth restrictions but advice as to whether the member is medically restricted in becoming an instructor.

In this case it does not. As I understand it the restriction is precautionary as the doctor does not want him anywhere near mandatory decompression stops.

So to answer your points 1 & 2, it very much depends on the medical advice and limitations imposed as to whether the NDO can amend the qualification and award the DL grade. If the DL grade is awarded by the NDO, then the DL would need to abide by the restrictions used in the judgement. This assumes that the advice does not include further restrictions that could limit the person becoming an instructor.

That sounds all good and sensible. I note that the procedure is for the trainee to take the DL course and recieve a dispensation only for the depth element.

An already qualified instructor would also need to take into consideration the full medical advice given. If it is just a depth restriction then this qualified instructor would be allowed to continue instructing within those depth limits. If the medical advice includes other restrictions then these may ultimately prevent the instructor from continuing to instruct.

Certainly I was not debateing that a medical restriction which makes instructing untenable should be ignored. The situation I queried is where a medical restriction would preclude a prerequisite qualification but had no connection with the requirements of the position.

An instructor is responsible for the safety of their students and must be medically and physically fit to fulfil this role. The medical advice may include some aspect that prevents the instructor continuing to satisfy those requirements and responsibilities.

How would it be any different to accompanying a dive buddy?

It is extremely difficult to give a clear cut answer to situations that are not clearly defined and each case needs to be considered on its own merits.

I hope this reply shows you there is a broader scope to the situations you selected and that there is no single answer to such circumstances.

Thankyou again Alistair. I always saw BSACs abillity to accommodate the minority as a major strength. I am glad to see that is not being forgotten. Certainly I will be encouraging my friend to attend an IFC next year.

Regards
MattS

[David J Smith]

Check Your Inbox Smith!!

I understand you are not going to be there - That's proparbly a good thing.

I would hate to see the trainees subjected to your inexperience as a SADS.

P.S> Bovi had had a quote for a new gearbox for the Rhib you were Cox'n - I think a small donation may be in order!!!

I think the problem is that the Marine Outboard Engine has no Cyclic / Collective controls - Remember I have seen you in a car and a Rhib - You should steer (Pun!!) clear of wheels and stick (Pun!!) to Sticks.

Safe Diving Bud!!!

PPS - This guy is a very competent BSAC AI - (Just a C*%p Cox'n) LOL





Check your inbox

pps
thats not what my students say !!!! and I only hit the steps once

well one at a time !!!!!

now stop using this page as your personal ads, no-one knows what a sads is anyway !!!!!!

[Andy Nye]

now stop using this page as your personal ads, no-one knows what a sads is anyway !!!!!!

S enior A rmy D ivers S norkeling ?????

;-) Andy

[David J Smith]

now stop using this page as your personal ads, no-one knows what a sads is anyway !!!!!!

S enior A rmy D ivers S norkeling ?????

;-) Andy

[Removed : Forum Moderator - that one went just a tad too far]

[David J Smith]

:=
:=now stop using this page as your personal ads, no-one knows what a sads is anyway !!!!!!
:=
:=S enior A rmy D ivers S norkeling ?????
:=
:=;-) Andy

[Removed : Forum Moderator - that one went just a tad too far]
I take exception to the removal of my message. I am a SADS so I know what it stands for. I am also, coincidentally enough, a member of the forces and as we say, "if you can't take a joke you shouldn't have joined". I was merely replying to Andy's post and hadn't, as a SADS taken exception to his post so I am a little unsure as to why you felt it necessary to remove my reply to his.

As an experienced member of the forces I can tell you that we use a lot of tla?s (three letter abbreviations) and most of them have a couple of meanings. As an experienced diver, of several training agencies, I am aware of at least one other meaning for both BSAC and PADI.

The SADS assessment is a very difficult week and knowing this the joining instructions even include on the prerequisites a sense of humour. I don?t see how someone who, as far as I am aware even attended a SADS assessment can possibly be offended.

If my post was offensive then I apologise, I just find it difficult to see who to, apart from myself and other SADS who use this site (and for the record I know of only one).

I await your reply with interest.


David Smith

AI3379 SADS 1308

[Keith Lawrence(BSAC)]

Hi David

We have a long standing rule on these forums that you can basically say what you like but it will be done in a civilised and polite manner. Looking from the outside I judged your post to be potentially mildly offensive ? it was close and I thought about it a couple of times but on balance I decided to remove it.

Whilst I accept that you are also forces and fully conversant with the acronyms and mannerisms please appreciate that the vast majority of our readers and posters (like me) are not. Such ?in? jokes may be acceptable within your own circles and private emails but they would not be generally acceptable on our public forums. My main problem here (and ultimately the reason why I decided to remove it) is that others seeing your post could infer ?oh, that?s acceptable conduct on the forums? and post similar comments in a different situation and context, it then becomes very difficult for me if I have one set of rules for one set of people and another for everybody else.

So please don?t take offence at my actions and please understand the reasons why I did it, personally I have no problem with forces humour but I have to look at the wider picture and consider the impact on the forums should others take what was effectively a private exchange between friends as acceptable general behaviour and follow suite.

Kind Regards

Keith L

[David J Smith]

Hi David

We have a long standing rule on these forums that you can basically say what you like but it will be done in a civilised and polite manner. Looking from the outside I judged your post to be potentially mildly offensive ? it was close and I thought about it a couple of times but on balance I decided to remove it.

I will ask again, offensive to whom ?


Whilst I accept that you are also forces and fully conversant with the acronyms and mannerisms please appreciate that the vast majority of our readers and posters (like me) are not. Such ?in? jokes may be acceptable within your own circles and private emails but they would not be generally acceptable on our public forums.

As far as I am aware Andy isn't a member of the forces and he certainly isn't in my 'circle of friends'.
(not that I don?t like him you understand, just that we haven?t had a chance to get to ?know? one another yet)

My main problem here (and ultimately the reason why I decided to remove it) is that others seeing your post could infer ?oh, that?s acceptable conduct on the forums? and post similar comments in a different situation and context, it then becomes very difficult for me if I have one set of rules for one set of people and another for everybody else.

Acceptable in what way? In the same way that BSAC members (and non members) have the opportunity to rant and rave and moan about the shortcomings of the BSAC, the council and its DTP on the 'public' forums? I have sat and read some of the threads on here and I have to say (in my opinion, of course, and opinions are like bottoms at the end of the day, everyone has one!) that my post was slightly less of a bad advert for the BSAC than some of them!


So please don?t take offence at my actions and please understand the reasons why I did it, personally I have no problem with forces humour but I have to look at the wider picture and consider the impact on the forums should others take what was effectively a private exchange between friends as acceptable general behaviour and follow suite.

He still isn't my friend! The thread started with a reply to a 'friend' of mine and in his reply to the forum he was slightly less than complimentary about my skills behind the wheel of a boat. I, being the 'victim', took it in the manner which it was intended, as I am sure that anyone, military or otherwise would have taken my explanation to Andy of SADS in the same vein.

I would ask why, when it says on the forums index page :
"This on-line forum is intended for the use of BSAC Members to discuss diving related issues. The BSAC will not tolerate its use for making defamatory, abusive or other personally offensive statements and will act in a timely manner to remove such messages."

Did you feel it necessary to remove my post, which was to no one in particular and leave Richies which was directed fairly and squarely at my door ?

perhaps a case of one rule for one and one for another ???


Kind regards

Dave

[Keith Lawrence(BSAC)]

I give up, I?m not wasting any more of my time on this. The vast majority of people accept the need for some forum moderation to try and prevent the personal ding-dong exchanges and flame wars that destroy far to many online forums. I try to stop that happening on here because once it starts it is very difficult to stop. I hate moderating forums because it is a hiding to nothing but the alternative is anarchy. I have =ALWAYS= tried to exercise the extremely limited moderation that I do have to do in a fair and consistent manner.

Here?s you post back ? enjoy.
===================================
now stop using this page as your personal ads, no-one knows what a sads is anyway !!!!!!

S enior A rmy D ivers S norkeling ?????

;-) Andy
S elf A ppointed D iving S nob ???
===================================

Keith L

[Andy Wade]

I give up, I?m not wasting any more of my time on this. The vast majority of people accept the need for some forum moderation to try and prevent the personal ding-dong exchanges and flame wars that destroy far to many online forums. I try to stop that happening on here because once it starts it is very difficult to stop. I hate moderating forums because it is a hiding to nothing but the alternative is anarchy. I have =ALWAYS= tried to exercise the extremely limited moderation that I do have to do in a fair and consistent manner.

Here?s you post back ? enjoy.
===================================
now stop using this page as your personal ads, no-one knows what a sads is anyway !!!!!!

S enior A rmy D ivers S norkeling ?????

;-) Andy
S elf A ppointed D iving S nob ???
===================================


Oh dear.
What a shame this ended up this way... deja vu anyone?
I really feel for you Keith, you're damned if you do moderate, and damned if you don't.
Keep plugging away mate, you do a great job under trying circumstances.

Anyway, for anyone who might still be interested, as no-one in the know has seen fit to enlighten readers of the true meaning of the abbreviation SADS, it means Sub Aqua Dive Supervisor (or Sub-Aqua Diving Supervisor, take your pick).
It is a Forces requirement that all their diving takes place under the supervision of a SADS qualified person.
Nearly went in for it myself once... many years ago. Got demobbed instead.

Anyway, it's on the lists of abbreviations here:

<a href="http://www.diveinstruct.org.uk/terms3.html#S" >http://www.diveinstruct.org.uk/terms3.html#S</a>

Hope this helps.




.

[Andy Nye]

Here?s you post back ? enjoy.
===================================
now stop using this page as your personal ads, no-one knows what a sads is anyway !!!!!!

S enior A rmy D ivers S norkeling ?????

;-) Andy
S elf A ppointed D iving S nob ???
===================================


Never heard it called that one before,

However, i do not get in my high horse from PI$$ TAKING, i can give as good as i get.

I do not the real meaning of SADS.

One of my mates who is a cherry berry from nearby me , did his last year and past,,,,,,,,, how ? i don't know as i thought only 2 things fell out the sky , 1 being seagull cr** and the other , ell , forces people should know ...... ;-)

oh well never mind

Andy

( A N obhead D iver Y eeeeeeeeha )

[Paul Oliver]

Guys

Keith - My total agreement with Andy Wade's comment. You unfortunatly do not know Andy Nye's murkey past.

Dave - There are lots on here who know what a SADS is, my early diving and expeds were very much due to SADS. Even if i did have to give the freeloaders the time off in the first place.

Andy Nye - OK M8

Dive Safe

Paul

[dave covey]

Guys
Dave - There are lots on here who know what a SADS is, my early diving and expeds were very much due to SADS. Even if i did have to give the freeloaders the time off in the first place.

Me too, & ref the Forces sence of Humour;contributors should checkout the exchanges between us 2 from time to time lol

86c