View Full Version : old advanced diver practical assesment
rogersides
16-06-2004, 09:20
Hi All,
Can anyone tell me what is required for the rescue assesment in the old advanced diver syllabus?
thanks,
Roger
Mike Halligan
16-06-2004, 11:21
Can anyone tell me what is required for the rescue assesment in the old advanced diver syllabus?
Roger,
From memory, it falls into two distinct parts -
1. Conduct a rescue,
by CBL from 20m to 6m, stabilisation at surface and short tow with AV. No increase in knowledge or skill since DL, just increased experience of depth. Hence all that changes is starting depth.
2. Manage a rescue,
by a scenario using 6 divers and typical resources (RIB, VHF, O2, 1st Aid). This is the acid test of PRM so should provide opportunity to assess all that was in PRM.
The overall Instructor brief is in the Silver Manual, on I think the final page of AD.
Hope this helps,
Mike
nick kay
16-06-2004, 14:41
:=Can anyone tell me what is required for the rescue assesment in the old advanced diver syllabus?
Roger,
From memory, it falls into two distinct parts -
1. Conduct a rescue,
by CBL from 20m to 6m
>>>Plus a 3minute "hover" at 6m<<<
stabilisation at surface and short tow with AV. No increase in knowledge or skill since DL
>>>Othe rthan you need to be able to hold the casualty for a 3min stop at 6m<<<
, just increased experience of depth. Hence all that changes is starting depth.
nick kay
16-06-2004, 14:43
Don't forget, that the "old" AD must be completed by August 2004 (not sure whether that is "by end of" or "before start of")
Otherwise, you have to do the whole of the new A
AND do the stuff in the new DL that you didn't do in the "old" DL...
Otherwise, you have to do the whole of the new A
AND do the stuff in the new DL that you didn't do in the "old" DL...
Not 100% true, you will get credits for the lessons you did in old AD against new AD.
Lindsey Doyle
16-06-2004, 17:04
Could you please tell me where have you got that information from? I've heard nothing since the new DTP was published & at the next DOC they said "no time limit" for finishing off courses already started, if branch happy to continue.
Thanks, Lindsey.
(As a DO and NQI, I would have expected to have been informed?)
Don't forget, that the "old" AD must be completed by August 2004 (not sure whether that is "by end of" or "before start of")
Otherwise, you have to do the whole of the new A
AND do the stuff in the new DL that you didn't do in the "old" DL...
Mike Halligan
16-06-2004, 18:05
:=:=Can anyone tell me what is required for the rescue assesment in the old advanced diver syllabus?
:=
:=Roger,
:=
:=From memory, it falls into two distinct parts -
:=
:=1. Conduct a rescue,
:=by CBL from 20m to 6m
>>>Plus a 3minute "hover" at 6m<<<
stabilisation at surface and short tow with AV. No increase in knowledge or skill since DL
>>>Othe rthan you need to be able to hold the casualty for a 3min stop at 6m<<<
, just increased experience of depth. Hence all that changes is starting depth.
:=
Not quite, Nick, you are making a dramatic change.
You suggest a 3 min stop at 6 mtr, which doesn't appear in my (1/95) copy of the silver manual. Where and when did this originate? (I have not been made aware, as A/DO, TO and/or active OWI since 1998, of this variation to our instructions.)
Mike
Mike Halligan
16-06-2004, 18:12
Could you please tell me where have you got that information from? I've heard nothing since the new DTP was published & at the next DOC they said "no time limit" for finishing off courses already started, if branch happy to continue.
Thanks, Lindsey.
(As a DO and NQI, I would have expected to have been informed?)
Hi, Lindsey,
I did hear dark rumblings during January about an indeterminate date in September, but that was from 12,000 miles away. IIRC, my attention was drawn by my chairman's enthusiasm in offering Instructor resource to Region and claims there was no problem in-Branch. (Nothing could be further from the truth.)
I have actually seen the square-root of diddly-squat, so am working blind toward 30 September for INPUT (SDCs, demo's, etc.). Not a snowflake's chance of completing assessments, so not trying.
Another whizzo means of encouraging the membership to sling their hooks, perhaps?
Heyho!
Mike ;-)
:=Don't forget, that the "old" AD must be completed by August 2004 (not sure whether that is "by end of" or "before start of")
:=
:=Otherwise, you have to do the whole of the new A
:=
:=AND do the stuff in the new DL that you didn't do in the "old" DL...
Steve Walker
16-06-2004, 20:13
:=Could you please tell me where have you got that information from? I've heard nothing since the new DTP was published & at the next DOC they said "no time limit" for finishing off courses already started, if branch happy to continue.
>
It would be news to me, and, I suspect to my DO too as he has not said anything to me about an August 04 deadline and he knows I'm doing the final bits (Rescue Asst. & Theory Exam) over the next few months. Nor does my Adv Inst friend at work know anything about a deadline for the old course.
Also, AFAIK, there's no limit on gettin to OWI via the old CI+OWIC+12 hours logged instruction, so why would there be a limit on the old AD completion ?
John Williams
16-06-2004, 21:19
:=:=Could you please tell me where have you got that information from? I've heard nothing since the new DTP was published & at the next DOC they said "no time limit" for finishing off courses already started, if branch happy to continue.
>
It would be news to me, and, I suspect to my DO too as he has not said anything to me about an August 04 deadline and he knows I'm doing the final bits (Rescue Asst. & Theory Exam) over the next few months. Nor does my Adv Inst friend at work know anything about a deadline for the old course.
Also, AFAIK, there's no limit on gettin to OWI via the old CI+OWIC+12 hours logged instruction, so why would there be a limit on the old AD completion ?
Don't forget to keep reminding your DO about this Steve - I know he's busy with other projects and would not want to forget.
John
David J Smith
16-06-2004, 22:38
Could you please tell me where have you got that information from? I've heard nothing since the new DTP was published & at the next DOC they said "no time limit" for finishing off courses already started, if branch happy to continue.
Thanks, Lindsey.
(As a DO and NQI, I would have expected to have been informed?)
:=Don't forget, that the "old" AD must be completed by August 2004 (not sure whether that is "by end of" or "before start of")
:=
:=Otherwise, you have to do the whole of the new A
:=
:=AND do the stuff in the new DL that you didn't do in the "old" DL...
I think it came from the technical department at BSAC HQ. May be worth a call, or maybe some input onto here from HQ?
I thought the point of 'no time limit' was to allow people to complete the grade they were on and then move to the new system at a suitable point. In fact to quote "As with any update to a training system, it will take some time for complete transition on to the new system. For this reason the BSAC have decided that, where divers have partially completed training for a particular grade, there is no time limit for the balance of the training for that grade to be completed before transitioning to the new scheme."
The new DTP has been in for quite a while now, almost two years, more than enough time to allow people to complete the grade they are on, surely ?
nick kay
17-06-2004, 07:57
Not quite, Nick, you are making a dramatic change.
You suggest a 3 min stop at 6 mtr, which doesn't appear in my (1/95) copy of the silver manual. Where and when did this originate? (I have not been made aware, as A/DO, TO and/or active OWI since 1998, of this variation to our instructions.)
Hi Mike
I need to check this - apologies was recapping what I was made to do for my "old" AD. If its not in the syllabus, then someone at our club erroneously included it.
nick kay
17-06-2004, 08:02
Was told this by our regional SDC organiser and separately by the DO of a local club
Theres logic in the time limit, as the rest of the DTP, OD, SD, DL feed the "new" AD.
Was told this by our regional SDC organiser and separately by the DO of a local club
Theres logic in the time limit, as the rest of the DTP, OD, SD, DL feed the "new" AD.
There is no logic there. Anyone who is eligable to be doing the old AD, must already be underway on it and have qualified as DL under the old scheme. The fact that the new DL feeds into the new AD is irrelevant since no-one who completed the new DL would have been eligable to start the old AD
Dave
Could you please tell me where have you got that information from? I've heard nothing since the new DTP was published & at the next DOC they said "no time limit" for finishing off courses already started, if branch happy to continue.
Thanks, Lindsey.
Not heard that the course is being withdrawn but the overlay for the old QRB to allow the Advanced Nitrox SDC as one of the options is going to be, can not remember where I read it, either here or in one of the magazines
Steve Walker
17-06-2004, 10:48
Don't forget to keep reminding your DO about this Steve - I know he's busy with other projects and would not want to forget.
John
Yeah, good idea John, I haven't spoken to my DO in a while, perhaps I should e-mail him today ;)
Cheers
Steve
Steve Walker
17-06-2004, 10:58
The new DTP has been in for quite a while now, almost two years, more than enough time to allow people to complete the grade they are on, surely ?
My $0.02 worth...
Not necessarily, speaking purely from my own POV, I've had the last two bits of AD to complete for about three or four years now, and not being overly concerned about collecting the next badge I've been happy enough to put it on the back-burner while simply getting out and doing more diving. Plus a transition from one branch situation to another has added further complications.
AISI, as long as someone is still keeping up their BSAC membership there's nothing to be gained by forcing the "almost done" old grades out and probably quite a bit to lose.
nick kay
17-06-2004, 11:51
Spoke with Mike Clack at BSAC HQ...
The original intention was to remove the "old" AD after 2 years
However...
This was never actioned, so the link that states "there is no time limit" is correct!
Apologies for any panic I may have caused :-(
Steve Walker
17-06-2004, 16:02
Spoke with Mike Clack at BSAC HQ...
The original intention was to remove the "old" AD after 2 years
However...
This was never actioned, so the link that states "there is no time limit" is correct!
Apologies for any panic I may have caused :-(
Did Mike clarify that question re the 3min stop at 6m with casualty?
I understood (rightly or wrongly) that it was required to end/stabilize the ascent at the ACD but this thread is the first mention I've seen of holding a stop for three mins with the casualty
Mike Halligan
17-06-2004, 17:05
:=You suggest a 3 min stop at 6 mtr, which doesn't appear in my (1/95) copy of the silver manual. Where and when did this originate? (I have not been made aware, as A/DO, TO and/or active OWI since 1998, of this variation to our instructions.)
I need to check this - apologies was recapping what I was made to do for my "old" AD. If its not in the syllabus, then someone at our club erroneously included it.
Hi Nick,
Thanks. If pages AD77/78 endorsed "Issue 1/95" are no longer current (in our parallel universe alongside AD "2002") then I am innocently mistaken, uninformed of a change. So, it would seem, are other contributors.
Perhaps this instance will demonstrate why and to what extent some of us became alarmed that there was to be no amendment summary accompanying revisions to BOH.
Regards,
Mike
nick kay
17-06-2004, 22:31
Sorry, didn't clarify that one with him - was going to ask the instructor who did my AD rescue assessment where he got that one from...
Sorry, didn't clarify that one with him - was going to ask the instructor who did my AD rescue assessment where he got that one from...
The lift is to 6m where the pair break and ascend normally from there. Given the bouncy nature of AD assessments I don't think there is anything malicious in your instructor asking for a 3 min safety stop as part of the normal ascent. The lift is assessed to 'an adequate standard' and you could argue that being able to stop for 3 mins is within an adequate standard for AD.
Personally I would take a view on things. In perfect conditions I would want to see a perfect lift from an AD. In less ideal conditions I would accept something less than perfect.
Regards
Matt
The lift is to 6m where the pair break and ascend normally from there. Given the bouncy nature of AD assessments I don't think there is anything malicious in your instructor asking for a 3 min safety stop as part of the normal ascent. The lift is assessed to 'an adequate standard' and you could argue that being able to stop for 3 mins is within an adequate standard for AD.
I cannot see how you could argue that at all. Being able to hold a decompression stop whilst performing a CBL is not even vaguely suggested as being a requirement for the assesment at all. It doesn't say "ascend to 6m, wait for 3 mins and then break" ; there is nothing in there at all which implies it either
Personally I would take a view on things. In perfect conditions I would want to see a perfect lift from an AD. In less ideal conditions I would accept something less than perfect.
I take a view that either the assesment is being done in accordance with the BSAC definition of what is required for a qualification rather than someone's own view on what should be the requirement
Dave
:=The lift is to 6m where the pair break and ascend normally from there. Given the bouncy nature of AD assessments I don't think there is anything malicious in your instructor asking for a 3 min safety stop as part of the normal ascent. The lift is assessed to 'an adequate standard' and you could argue that being able to stop for 3 mins is within an adequate standard for AD.
I cannot see how you could argue that at all. Being able to hold a decompression stop whilst performing a CBL is not even vaguely suggested as being a requirement for the assesment at all.
Who mentioned decompression stops? AD assesssments are completed within No Decompression Limits.
It doesn't say "ascend to 6m, wait for 3 mins and then break" ; there is nothing in there at all which implies it either
Correct, it says 'CBL to 6m, stop, break and ascend *normally*' As far as I am concerned a safety stop is part of a normal ascent from an NDL dive. The candidate is not freed from good buddy practice just because this is an assessment. The dive plan still has to be agreed and if the instructor wants a safety stop the candidate should complete one. I don't see how it is any different from agreeing a 20m max depth or a 50bar reserve, neither of which is specifically mentioned in the AD lesson guide...plan the dive, dive the plan.
:=Personally I would take a view on things. In perfect conditions I would want to see a perfect lift from an AD. In less ideal conditions I would accept something less than perfect.
I take a view that either the assesment is being done in accordance with the BSAC definition of what is required for a qualification rather than someone's own view on what should be the requirement
The BSAC definition of a CBL at AD is exactly the same as at OD. You may be willing to accept the same standard at both levels but personally I regard such an approach as box ticking which I do not engage in. The instructor is required to assess skills to an 'Adequate standard'. I do not believe that the CBL skills displayed by an average OD are adequate for an AD assessment. After all the AD has had the benefit of further practice and refinement during SD and DL training, you would hope they have the hang of it.
Instructors conducting assessments are required to *judge* whether a skill would be effective. I do not believe a shoddy lift performed in perfect conditions is going to be effective in the imperfect conditions an AD is likely to be diving in.
The BSAC way of teaching requires instructors to think when making assessments. I realise some people would like BSAC to spell out an assessment standard similar to a driving test but that is not currently the case. Instructors are personally responsible for judging skills as 'Adequate' and 'Effective' during both teaching and assessment. I happen to think that is a good thing which encourages instructors to be accountable for the standard of skills they accept.
:=
:=:=The lift is to 6m where the pair break and ascend normally from there. Given the bouncy nature of AD assessments I don't think there is anything malicious in your instructor asking for a 3 min safety stop as part of the normal ascent. The lift is assessed to 'an adequate standard' and you could argue that being able to stop for 3 mins is within an adequate standard for AD.
:=I cannot see how you could argue that at all. Being able to hold a decompression stop whilst performing a CBL is not even vaguely suggested as being a requirement for the assesment at all.
Who mentioned decompression stops? AD assesssments are completed within No Decompression Limits.
You did. Maintaining a stop for 3 minutes is a decompression stop. Whether it is mandatory based on the tables/computer is another matter
Correct, it says 'CBL to 6m, stop, break and ascend *normally*' As far as I am concerned a safety stop is part of a normal ascent from an NDL dive. The candidate is not freed from good buddy practice just because this is an assessment. The dive plan still has to be agreed and if the instructor wants a safety stop the candidate should complete one.
Nowhere in the BSAC dive tables use does it mention anything about the use of safety stops. If a diver wants to do one that is up to them. Your post also suggested, imo, that the break would not be until after the stop. There is no justification to me for that at all
I don't see how it is any different from agreeing a 20m max depth or a 50bar reserve, neither of which is specifically mentioned in the AD lesson guide...plan the dive, dive the plan.
Dive Planning and air requirements are part of the BSAC DTP however at lower grades
The BSAC definition of a CBL at AD is exactly the same as at OD. You may be willing to accept the same standard at both levels but personally I regard such an approach as box ticking which I do not engage in. The instructor is required to assess skills to an 'Adequate standard'. I do not believe that the CBL skills displayed by an average OD are adequate for an AD assessment. After all the AD has had the benefit of further practice and refinement during SD and DL training, you would hope they have the hang of it.
I do expect the quality of the rescue to be of a higher standard for AD, however I would never add in requirements beyond that proscribed in the DTP
Dave
iainmsmith
23-06-2004, 13:25
:=Correct, it says 'CBL to 6m, stop, break and ascend *normally*' As far as I am concerned a safety stop is part of a normal ascent from an NDL dive. The candidate is not freed from good buddy practice just because this is an assessment. The dive plan still has to be agreed and if the instructor wants a safety stop the candidate should complete one.
Nowhere in the BSAC dive tables use does it mention anything about the use of safety stops.
What do you think the 6m Ascent Check is? (you know, the stop that we're all supposed to do on the way up from a BSAC-tables dive?) Personally, I think anyone trying to plan an AD-level dive on BSAC 88 tables is demonstrating a lack of knowledge of decompression, but would not (could not) fail someone on that basis.
I do think, however, that the instructor is quite entitled to add whatever safety he/she feels is desireable to an assessment dive. There is, after all, nothing wrong with demonstrating good practices at all times, including while assessing someone.
If a diver wants to do one that is up to them.
And if the instructor wants to do one?
FWIW, these days, I almost never do a dive (regardless of number of tanks carried) that doesn't involve a 9m stop, a 6m stop and a 1m/min ascent from 6m to the surface. I would take a very dim view of an AD candidate refusing to take into account his buddy's reasonable desire for increased safety, especially when planning a dive which might potentially involve rapid ascents.
While I agree that a stop mid-CBL is outside the syllabus and should not be assessed, one has to wonder what the problem would be? After all, this is someone now going for the third level of BSAC qualification which permits decompression stop diving. If someone is qualified to such a high level, then they surely ought to be capable of performing all appropriate assistance/rescue techniques in that situation.
Iain
Lindsey Doyle
23-06-2004, 16:05
Surely if anyone involved in the assessment wants to do a safety stop (e.g may be using a Vyper), then fine, but it can be completed AFTER the CBL, surely, as the CBL is to be "broken" & the rescue (tow etc) resumed after a normal ascent from 6m to surface (during which everybody does own ascent)? Just take care the "casualty" & "rescuer" attain neutral buoyancy before breaking contact, as usual!
Philip Smith
23-06-2004, 22:31
While I agree that a stop mid-CBL is outside the syllabus and should not be assessed, one has to wonder what the problem would be? After all, this is someone now going for the third level of BSAC qualification which permits decompression stop diving. If someone is qualified to such a high level, then they surely ought to be capable of performing all appropriate assistance/rescue techniques in that situation.
Possibly, as an exercise, but in situations requiring a CBL, the casualty is likely to be unconscious or sufficiently incapacitated that their best interests would be served by bringing them directly to the surface, even if they are over the no-stop limit.
Philip Smith
What do you think the 6m Ascent Check is? (you know, the stop that we're all supposed to do on the way up from a BSAC-tables dive?) Personally, I think anyone trying to plan an AD-level dive on BSAC 88 tables is demonstrating a lack of knowledge of decompression, but would not (could not) fail someone on that basis.
It is a check to ensure that the plan has been followed and adjustments can then be made as appropriate. I would be worried about anyone that would take 3 minutes to perform such a check
For a BSAC qualification dive, I would expect planning to be performed based on the BSAC standards which do still involve the BSAC-88 tables.
While I agree that a stop mid-CBL is outside the syllabus and should not be assessed, one has to wonder what the problem would be? After all, this is someone now going for the third level of BSAC qualification which permits decompression stop diving. If someone is qualified to such a high level, then they surely ought to be capable of performing all appropriate assistance/rescue techniques in that situation.
If it was agreed to do a stop by all parties on a dive before surfacing that is fair enough; personally I don't go in for extraneous stops but I know that some people do. There is no justification for being required to perform the stop whilst in the midst of a CBL. I know that I would be most unlikely to stop during a genuine CBL since I would class getting the casualty to the surface to be far more important than ensuring no missed decompression within the remits of BSAC diving limits
Dave
Mike Halligan
24-06-2004, 11:18
If it was agreed to do a stop by all parties on a dive before surfacing that is fair enough; personally I don't go in for extraneous stops but I know that some people do. There is no justification for being required to perform the stop whilst in the midst of a CBL. I know that I would be most unlikely to stop during a genuine CBL since I would class getting the casualty to the surface to be far more important than ensuring no missed decompression within the remits of BSAC diving limits
Dave,
Thanks for those remarks. I thought (eight days ago!!) I was answering a straight question about the AD =rescue= assessment dive. I had recently assessed two, and was somewhat thrown by apparently authoritative complications that I'd not read anywhere.
Like you, I believe the DO's commission to the assessor is to assess CBLs as simulated rescues, which are therefore to be conducted with due despatch. If they happen to blow out diving again that day for those concerned, then so be it. AD candidates should be big enough to accept that.
If a party elects to slam in extra safety stops then, like you, I'm not going to object but I do want to know first what is being inserted, and why. (Preferably before the day, so that others know what they face)
We elected on this occasion to add a safety stop to the second candidate's lift and then did quite a bit of static AV before the two tows. There, I departed from the rubrik but I don't believe I compromised it. Two worthwhile candidates for AD should IMHO knock off the lift, safe break, safe final ascent, stabilisation and static AV like shelling peas (by definition, they're very close to qualification so shold be good - cf: page AD1, Assessments). They delivered as expected. However, none of that adjustment is relevant to the assessment as prescribed.
It was nearly 3 hours before our OD cover got his splash that day, but he had been warned and wasn't fazed. Since there were two candidates, we chose to do the lift and tow in a quarry and then did the RM offshore the following week.
After all that, it seems no-one can sustain a challenge to the relevant pages of the good old "Silver Manual". Comforting thought.
Mike
It is a check to ensure that the plan has been followed and adjustments can then be made as appropriate. I would be worried about anyone that would take 3 minutes to perform such a check
I would agree with that. However the final ascent at 6m/min is BSACs take on a safety stop. The Doppler research performed by DAN etc in the last 16 years indicates that a 1min final ascent is not particularly effective in decreasing bubble counts immediately after surfacing.
For a BSAC qualification dive, I would expect planning to be performed based on the BSAC standards which do still involve the BSAC-88 tables.
Where exactly do BSAC state that 88s MUST be used for qualification dives? AIUI there is no such requirement. There is a requirement for trainees to be able to plan dives adequately using 88s and I agree that encouraging OD and SD trainees to plan actual dives using 88s is a good way to achieve that, whether a training dive or any other dive. Potentially a candidate for an AD assessment can use whatever planning method or deco table they want but all divers, including the instructor, must agree to the plan during the briefing - same as any other dive.
If it was agreed to do a stop by all parties on a dive before surfacing that is fair enough;
You would hope agreeing a plan would go without saying by AD.
personally I don't go in for extraneous stops but I know that some people do.
Personally I try to encourage a conservative attitude to diving in general. Which includes doing a safety stop on pretty much every dive, including dives where I happen to be instructing. The exception being CBL drills where the instructor manual specifically states a lift to the surface.
There is no justification for being required to perform the stop whilst in the midst of a CBL.
Who claimed there was?
You misunderstood my original post, but I can't imagine how.
"The lift is to 6m where the pair break and ascend normally"
..."a 3 min safety stop as part of the normal ascent."
It seems pretty clear to me, the safety stop is part of the normal ascent, after the break.
I know that I would be most unlikely to stop during a genuine CBL since I would class getting the casualty to the surface to be far more important than ensuring no missed decompression within the remits of BSAC diving limits
Actually not a bad dilemma for an AD to consider. The course emphasises the first rule of rescue - don't risk your own life to save someone elses. With BSAC diving now encompassing Trimix and ERD, an *advanced* dive could involve a decompression schedule which if ommitted may cripple or possibly even kill you. Not a justification for stopping mid CBL during assessment but worthy of discussion in the debrief nonetheless.
You misunderstood my original post, but I can't imagine how.
"The lift is to 6m where the pair break and ascend normally"
..."a 3 min safety stop as part of the normal ascent."
It seems pretty clear to me, the safety stop is part of the normal ascent, after the break.
Quoting from an earlier post
>>>Plus a 3minute "hover" at 6m<<<
stabilisation at surface and short tow with AV. No increase in knowledge or skill since DL
>>>Othe rthan you need to be able to hold the casualty for a 3min stop at 6m<<<
, just increased experience of depth. Hence all that changes is starting depth.
It was explicitly stated here the requirement to hold the casualty for the 3minute stop which is well outside the requirements. Tell me how I misunderstood the statement "Othe rthan you need to be able to hold the casualty for a 3min stop at 6m"
Dave
Just to open this again..my friend has just come back from his advanced instructor course in scotland...and he says "they :) "
ARE planning to put a closure date of THIS year when you can no longer complete the OLD Advanced diver course !
a reply from HQ would be welcome ?
rogersides
06-07-2004, 13:30
I feel that loosing the ability to get some of this qualification 'signed off' by doing SDC's is a bad thing.
One of the reasons for me attending the SDC's on the old sylabus is that it opens an insight into how other clubs work, what they do, what policies they have, how they marshall dives and so on. I can then take the best of what i've learnt back into my own branch, and try to improve or enhance the diving experience of the other branch members.
If advanced diver is run totaly in branch, then the advanced divers of the future will loose out on this valuable learning experience. However, it may make it cheaper/easier for divers to obtain the advanced diver grade, so there are pros and cons to both. Also, in some smaller branches it may be hard to get these lectures as often priority is given to Ocean, sports or DL training.
The level of knowledge between the two courses seems very similar, as the only crossover SDC requirement (old to new) is the advanced lifesaver award.
The old sylabus will eventually become 'no more' with or without an imposed deadline.
I feel that BSAC should provide either guidlines towards what combination of SDC's can be used to sign off the new sylabus' lectures and practicals, or devise new SDC's which cover the aspects covered in each of the lectures. The dive planning and marshalling SDC which i attended recently was excellent and far better than any course that could have been organised with my branch.
From reading through the course notes, it seems that each lecture covers approximatly two SDC's. For example AT4 seems to be a combination of PRM and O2 Admin.
The SDC credit's for the new syllabus may already exist somewhere, but i couldn't find it on the webpage.
Sorry if this has been brought up previously, or at the DOC.
Roger
From reading through the course notes, it seems that each lecture covers approximatly two SDC's. For example AT4 seems to be a combination of PRM and O2 Admin.
I think you will find it is a recap as PRM and O2 admin are covered in depth in the new DL sylabus
michael smith
07-07-2004, 13:04
Hello, we also thought it may be dificult for some branches to offer Advanced Diver training and some divers may prefer to do courses as a regional event. To this end Southern Region are planning to provide elements of the Advanced training next year. I am certain that all other regions will also be providing training as well.
Final details to be sorted. We are thinking of covering the theory lessons and the dive planning session. Remaining elements can either by covered within branches or students can get involved in planning and organising regional expeds.
What interest would there be in regional based advanced diver training?
Regards Mike
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.