What is, and what isn't DIR?

[seasnake]

Wow, Thats a new one. Does your buddy have you thinking you cant wear that rig while teaching? Just wear the damn thing!
I don't see how it violates PADI standards.
What, If one of your studenst show up with a BP/wing your gonna tell him he can't wear it cause your not qualified to teach him how to use it. Thats BS!

That's not my buddy, that's my training agency. Their policies clearly state I have to be configured in the same gear as I am teaching my students. For instance, since the basic course requires teaching to use a snorkel, I have to stick a snorkel on my gear when I teach the class, even though I wouldn't normally have one. Makes sense ... how can I teach with credibility a system I've never been officially trained to use? If a student showed up in backplate and harness ...? Interesting . . . never happened before but I think I'd commend them ... Again, I wouldn't be able to give them any special instruction on using the rig though. I have to teach to the standard I am certified for.

I am a NAUI instructor (and not a NAUI TECH instructor) ... don't know what the PADI standards say ... I'll leave PADI bashing for another thread ... TOTALLY KIDDING!!!!!

Your buddy is violating rule number one when he dives with you j/k

I know! ha ha .... That's why I have to protect his name! lol We'll just refer to him as "DIVER X" . . .

It is a reliable air supply, But it's not independant if it has a manifold.

I think he was referring to sidemount, wich is safer if diving solo in tight caves.

The manifold has an isolator between the tanks. I can breathe the full air supply from either reg, even if one post is shut off, or I can close the isolator and use the tanks independantly.

[BamaCaveDiver]

The manifold has an isolator between the tanks. I can breathe the full air supply from either reg, even if one post is shut off, or I can close the isolator and use the tanks independantly.

Manifolds are reliable, but much more efficient when used in a team configuration. You do not typically close the isolator valve unless you have a problem, and even then you do not have a truly independent system. In an independent rig you do not have to worry about a total loss of gas resulting from any single point of failure. If you are going to dive it closed, why not just dive true independents cylinders to satrt with and avoid the extra points of failure (not to mention not having a projection that can be damaged and still result in a total loss of all available gas supplies)? Every setup has its pros and cons and some are better suited to certain situations than others. The thing that really makes me laugh is when I read questions asking whether a setup is DIR or not, when the more appropriate question would be what are the merits and disadvantages of such a setup.

[seasnake]

Yes, the only reason I can see to close the isolator would be in an emergency situation ... then again, I'm not "officially" trained in the use of the manifold .. .

the more appropriate question would be what are the merits and disadvantages of such a setup.

I think this is an excellent point. In my personal experience with DIR, they are not open to discussing merits of other setups? (Except among themselves, because I've noticed they make adjustments in their official procedures and gear config from time to time as they come up with what they feel are better ways). My impression is it's more of a "Our way or the highway" kinda thing. Or maybe "Our way or the funeral home". And for me, on the lighter side of diving (open water perfect conditions stuff), I think the gap between traditional system and "better" way is pretty small. One example that comes to mind is the DIR emphasis on streamlining and body position. Chuck a tourist off the boat in 85F water temp, 100' viz 30fsw, relatively calm, no current, where he might swim as much as 50' away from the boat while poking around the reef ... is he really going to notice the extra drag of his less than ideally routed hoses? Then they will say "teach 'em right from the beginning!" and I suppose there is something to be said for that. But those divers may never go beyond that once a year vacation diving. Does he have great risk of dying because his hoses stick out too far? Probably not as big a concern as the fact that he is out of shape. I am not rambling ...

[amtrosie]

I think this is an excellent point. In my personal experience with DIR, they are not open to discussing merits of other setups? (Except among themselves, because I've noticed they make adjustments in their official procedures and gear config from time to time as they come up with what they feel are better ways). My impression is it's more of a "Our way or the highway" kinda thing. Or maybe "Our way or the funeral home". And for me, on the lighter side of diving (open water perfect conditions stuff), I think the gap between traditional system and "better" way is pretty small. One example that comes to mind is the DIR emphasis on streamlining and body position. Chuck a tourist off the boat in 85F water temp, 100' viz 30fsw, relatively calm, no current, where he might swim as much as 50' away from the boat while poking around the reef ... is he really going to notice the extra drag of his less than ideally routed hoses? Then they will say "teach 'em right from the beginning!" and I suppose there is something to be said for that. But those divers may never go beyond that once a year vacation diving. Does he have great risk of dying because his hoses stick out too far? Probably not as big a concern as the fact that he is out of shape. I am not rambling ... [/QUOTE]



One of the things that is not being considered is simply if the training of body trim, weighting, etc. is incorporated, the preservation of the reef system or other underwater ecology has a much better chance of surviving and flourishing in the aftermath of a diver's visit. Another consideration is the diver is far more proficient and hence far safer if they adhere to the general philosophy of DIR.


What is being lost in this discussion is the basic philosophy of having the SAFEST diver in the water. Does gear play a factor? yes. Does the ability of the diver to maneuver within the water column improve? yes! Why is it that individuals insist on being guarenteed the right to dive, even though they are not prepared (physically, mentally, etc). The best conditions can change radically in a very short period of time, are the divers capable to handle the new adverse conditions, with a safe dive being the result?


Why is the focus of this discussion on a specific gear configuration? DIR encompasses far more than this one area. DIR is ALL ABOUT having the safest diver being safe. Where the philosophy was developed is irrelevant. But lest the board start protesting that their gear requirerments are not that of the WKPP or other GUE sponsered explorations, I ask these questions: 1. Where did the BC derive it's existance? 2. where did the SPG come from? 3. Where did the safe second or octopus regulator originate? The answer to this and many of the other questions relating to gear is simply.....CAVE DIVERS. These pioneers did more than explore passages, they developed a far safer diver and their gear. Stop trying to throw out the baby (diver) with the bath water!!

[WarmWaterdiver]

we all can agree that safer divers is the goal of every training agency. we can all further agree that no agency insists on precise gear configurations except GUE. The point of contention is not whether a diver is a safer diver and better buddy because of his DIR training but does he really need the gear in that exact setup?
Secondly, why is it that any diver wishing to take the GUE-Fundamentals course must have all the gear as prescribed in the GUE handbook? I could agree that all equipment must meet specifications for a tech 1 course or tech 2 course but for a fundamentals course?
If this training is superior to that of other agencies, and from the course syllabus it appears to be, why restrict that training only to those who dive with a BP/W and 7 foot hose on a primary second stage with a short hosed octo connected by necklace to the diver? And why exactly is it necessary to only have stiff black non-split fins?
I am contemplating taking the GUE-F course and do not mind springing for a BP/W. I think I will end up liking the BP/W once I get used to it and forget about all the pockets and weight integration features of my jacket style BC. But come on, do I now have to get new hoses for my reg? Throw away those split fins and get the kind that will make Jarrod Jablonski happy?
Please do not consider this a DIR/GUE bashing. It is not intended that way. I wish all agencies spent as much emphasis on buddy OOA training and buoyancy. I doubt if the GUE course is a joke as was my AOW course.

[amtrosie]

Warmwaterdiver,

All very good questions!! I have completed the GUE-Fund. class, and when I approached my instructor regarding some of your very questions. I had read the GUE literature and saw how adamant they were about specific gear. My Instructors response? Come to the class with the gear you have (I had a PB/W). There is NO stipulation for a specific color. New products coming on to the market are usually one color until the manufacturers see the demand for that particular product.

The fins I will address specifically. During my class I was using Mares Quattros, and I loved them. During class I was diving steel 95's and was over-weighted. My instructor asked me to dump my wings and SWIM to the surface (from 12', 4 meter pool bottom). I kicked and kicked and kicked and finally resorted to using my arms and hands to struggle to the surface. My Instructor simply said "your fins were folding over while you were kicking". Why use stiff "old" style fins? Because they work while all others fail. Is all diving that extreme? No, but it only takes one time to rethink my fins. I do not want to be in a situation that requires me to kick hard and not have the fin to support my requirerment.

The fundamentals class is a foundational class. It is meant to provide the diver with the basics for all other diving. If you chose to take other classes (tech or cave) then you have a GOOD start. If you chose to go no further, then you will find yourself a FAR SUPERIOR and accomplished diver. What is the down side of that?

Finally, the class itself. As you indicated, the fundie class is not a joke like a AOW class. I had been diving for years and had already been certified as a full cave diver when I took my Fundie class. That first day in the water was THE WORST day I have ever experienced with a regulator in my mouth. Why? Simple, I was no where near the accomplished diver I thought I was and the "crow" that I ate was bitter. It was all my doing, not a thing that the instructor said, for he said very little. Just said the technique is this, now lets do it. I improved and am a much better diver as a result, Oh yeh, I am safer and much better prepared as well.

[WarmWaterdiver]

Thank you amtrosie for a thorough answer.
This morning, I enrolled in the Feb 23 Fundamentals course at High Springs. I am going off this afternoon to buy a Halyson Eclipse BP/W rig with a Hogarthian harness. A good benefit is that I can try it out in a 16 foot deep pool before buying so I get a free dive.
I have XS Scuba Power fins and hope they are satisfactory.
The thing that kills me is that I will not be allowed to use my SmartCom computer. I hate to give that up for a simple SPG.
I will not have the same problem as you, amtrosie, I know I am not a good diver and if I perform poorly, I will be frustrated but know I have a long way to go.
I hope to get out of this class with skills I now lack and the knowledge to be safer, better and more aware of how to improve.

[BamaCaveDiver]

While I am definitely not DIR (I do consider myself a staunch advocate of the Hogarthian method though from which DIR sprang) there are some merits to the gear configuration they prescribe. The BP/W combo has the advantage of making it easier to maintain a horizontal trim in the water column as opposed to the jacket style BC's. The trade off is that the BP/W will not float you head up at the surface. The BP also aloows you to move weight from your hips up onto your back, again making it easier for most to maintain a more desirable trim in the water column by better focusing your center of gravity. It is not a one size fits all thing, you must still take into consideration the cylinders you will be using as well as your exposure protection. You can get a BP made of very lightweight plastic or AL (typically weighing 2 lbs or less) or you can opt for an SS plate in varying thicknesses that will see the weight range from 6lbs (standard SS plate) to well beyond 10 lbs. The idea is to find the plate that best suits your style of diving. AL cylinders which tend to be bouyant at lower pressures will require a heavier plate as opposed to stell cylinders which typically remain slightly negative to neutral at lower pressures.

Split fins are very inefficient for the wide range of finning techniques one should be able to perform effortlessly. They excell in providing forward thrust with a full flutter kick, but really suck for anything else. Some people have been able to master other finning styles in these, but they are rare exceptions. The manner in which split fins channel thrust also brings to light the issue of stirring up silt and sediments if you are close to the bottom.

Despite the disadvantages some equipment may have, I still advocate that a diver should make use of that which best suits his or her individual needs for the environment in whuch they will be diving. The GUE classes are no different from any other agency's in that the most important factor regarding the quality of the outcome is the instructor, not the agency.