Does entry level dive training serve its purpose and how does it compare to other high-risk recreational activities?

Does entry level dive training serve its purpose of producing confident divers?

Following on various discussions about the state of scuba training and in light of the very insightful and comprehensive study by Businessofdiving, I thought of looking at it from a different angle.

Comparing the training requirements for open water certification with that of an ultralight/light sport pilot license, since both are at the bottom of the respective ladders, might hold some lessons. In both cases, an error of judgment, a moment of slipped concentration, an attitude of pushing the limits, or a disregard for basic safety considerations, can cost your life and even that of the person that dives, or flies, with you.

The table below lists the requirements and raises a few questions:

Scuba v Pilot — (Note: The information refers to general scuba training requirements, while the pilot training meets the US FAA standards, which is representative of international standards with some variations).

Why is there such a huge discrepancy in the training requirements between the two disciplines?
How did the scuba industry get to this ‘low’ point. The Business of Diving research points to an industry at crossroads, without a long-term sustainable business model.

I don’t have the answers, but as diver of 18 odd years with 300+ dives (and counting), having dived a bit around the world, and private pilot with 700+ hours, I have experienced the good and bad of both disciplines. I took up diving years after I started flying, so I knew I potentially had the skills, but it took me a long time to become comfortable underwater and I suffered through loads of self-doubt, until I finally realized I was missing a large chunk of practical knowledge. And that was not just from my OW days, the AOW was done by a different dive center in a different country, but with similar results.

I dive because I am infinitely curious about what goes on under water, not just to tick an activity box, but it would have been great if I had better skills when I started. I ‘wasted’ so many initial dives by not being confident and worried I might inconvenience other divers through my lack of skills. And now I see this still happening and I feel infinitely sorry for new divers who have to struggle with the same issues.

I do understand that the various certification operations have different training philosophies, so the argument is generalized, but the statistics show an alarming percentage of customers completing a basic dive course and then never diving again.

It is also not possible to say whether the more intensive pilot training regime leads to fewer incidents/accidents, in comparison to scuba diving, but at least it is backed up by a regulated environment that monitors and adjusts training requirements on a national and international level. This is missing from scuba training, and although it might not necessarily lead to scuba accidents, the industry is shooting itself in the foot by not listening to and understanding what customers want, while it competes with other recreational activities which is sucking away its business.

To quote:

Only about half (50.3%) of new open-water certified divers feel ready to dive with a buddy independently upon course completion, with over one-third (37.1%) feeling unprepared. This lack of readiness is more pronounced among divers who complete their training, both confined and open water portions, in tourist destinations compared to local settings.
The most frequently cited problems include buoyancy control, hovering, and proper trim, with over 50% of respondents reporting issues in these areas. (This is a known issue that has been around for years)
Divers strongly believe that more dives and increased time for skill practice would improve their readiness, and a significant portion (53.0%) is willing to pay more for higher-quality courses.
While a majority of dive instructors (62.8%) acknowledge low quality in industry-wide courses, 75.3% rate their own courses as high, suggesting a disparity in perception.
But… it is also said to be much too easy to become a pro, starting from divemaster. There’s limited experience and knowledge, which results in quality of training far below reasonable standards.

So, to loop back to the recreational pilot training equation. Although different countries have different regulations, and not all flying schools are equal, the basic safety requirements remain the same and all operators are subject to regulatory oversight:

There is no such thing as quick training during the holidays.
Students must pass a series of theoretical tests and undergo a (demanding) practical test, not just some exercises that they will forget in week.
If a student does not complete the course in the mandated number of hours, there has to be supplementary practical training or even rewriting of the theoretical tests to ensure compliance.
The same goes for instructors. Becoming a flight instructor is an intensive course.
A medical test/certificate is required, even on the most basic level.
Recurrent training is mandated by regulation, both for students and instructors.

In conclusion…

We certainly don’t want an overregulated scuba industry, but changes are long overdue.
Any industry has its mediocre operations, but with better structured training and tighter oversight this could be managed and greatly reduced.
Instead of chasing the numbers, dive operators will benefit more from loyal repeat customers, who can introduce friends and family, write positive reviews, and change perceptions, while instructors can look forward to potentially making a living from it.
It will take time to turn around but at least become more sustainable and save the reputation of the industry for the next generation of divers.

Will the warning signs be heeded?

Note: I created the comparison table. It was not taken from any published source, so can be reproduced without reference.