opinions on DIR diving

[MikeFerrara]

I guess I don't find this subject as tiering as some do so I'll comment again. It's hard to be Against something that works. Much of DIR (what I know of it) is, or should, be common sense. Some of it is the same or a varient of what cave divers have been doing for a long time. It seems much of my training and the training I provide my students tends to agree with DIR. I don't YET have any of the DIR/GUE texts but I am having a hard time finding many significant differences between the DIR rules and those of NACD or NSS-CDS. Yes, I know that those agencies don't insist on a Hogarthian config but they certainly encourage it and some instructors do insist. I think we are incredibly close to DIR but we don't call it DIR. Why? Because we are not GUE or WKPP. DIR is their word. I can not tell my students I am teaching them DIR. I certainly can't advertise anything as such, not even if I adopt all of it to absolute perfection. The only way I could would be to cross over to yet onother agency. So from a practical stanpoint I will continue to learn all I can where, when and from whom I can. I will do my best to pass that knowlege and the desire to obtain it on to my students. However I don't think I will ever refer to it as DIR. What would be fun is a discussion of substance. Why don't we talk about specific differences between the DIR philosophies and those of NACD?

 

[Uncle Pug]

Originally posted by caverkevin
Everyone else-I know some pleople will choose not to, just because.... What I am looking for is some comments and reasons why not to go the dir way, I don't, maybe from people that don't dive DIR.

Kevin... I wasn't paying attention when I stumbled into the ring last night...

I hadn't noticed the forum you posted in:
General Technical discussions...

That narrows things down nicely... and if you look at the answers of those who do not want to adopt DIR you will find that so far they are not technical divers and their reasoning reflects that.

Is your question really: Why wouldn't a technical diver adopt DIR?

 

[Divesherpa]

Sidemount!!

 

[Uncle Pug]

Originally posted by Divesherpa
Sidemount!!

Shoot Sherp...
You are just too easy...
One cast and I had you...

 

[MikeFerrara]

Don't stop there. Can a sidemount diver be DIR? Should we leave all those little neat caves unexplored?

 

[Divesherpa]

No-mount!!
Solo!!
Pressure guage not mounted where it's convenient for viewing.
Bottles not always marked.
ETC...

 

[Fetch]

Originally posted by sumguy
The reason I have not adopted DIR...
As I understand it, DIR preaches minimalism, if that's the right word. Simplify everything, don't over-complicate things.

1) Reduce points of failure
2) Reduce task loading
3) Increase your diving skills

Pretty much everything DIR can be summed into those three points. It seems that most friction comes between DIR advocates, who think GUE/WKPP/GI are the best at determining what to do to maximize those 3 points, and DIR detractors who feel they or others might have insight that is equally valid.

But, they also say to use a long hose (I can't remember if it's 7' or 9'). I'm sure this reccommendation came from the need for divers who are sharing air to swim through a narrow cave single file. Makes sense. But, to say you need a hose that long on an open water rec dive, seems to be a contradiction. IMO, 4' to 5' is long enough for open water, especially in a kelp forest, where you don't want to get too far from your ooa buddy. Anything longer increases the risk of entanglement.

DIR is a 7' hose in caves, and a 5' hose in open water. And if you want to stay with your buddy, nothing prevents you from linking arms in an OOA situation, as PADI teaches.

Also, DIR leaves no room for solo diving, pony bottles, and integrated lp inflator/2nd stages. I admit, I haven't read anything from GUE, and if I'm wrong about DIR's tenets, feel free to set me straight. If I was doing the type of diving the WKPP crowd is, I'm sure I would adopt more of the DIR philosophy. But, I don't think it's the best system for every type of diving, and I doubt if it was originally designed to be.

You are correct, DIR does not leave room for any of those things.

Solo diving: proven dangerous, time and again.
Pony bottles: DIR specs doubles /w manifold
LP inf/2nd: This seems to be part of their reduction philosphy.

As always, just my own two pennies. Answering why I haven't adopted DIR.

Since that was the original point of the thread, the reason I haven't adopted DIR is that I'm STILL in the process of getting gear for a Hogarthian setup, and STILL trying to get enough (recommended) dives to take the DIR-F class

Jeff

 

[Bob3]

The current DIR configuration is too rigid & confining, so myself & a couple other nasty lads are working up an alternate NEW configuration that utilizes surface air supply.
We've replaced all the cheap silver duct tape on our umbilicals with top of the line Tyco® brand Nuclear Grade BLACK tape for starters.
(see: http://www.scubadiving.com/members/gearreviews.php?s=154 )

We've also switched over to a longer hose (300') because the standard 150 footers seemed to be a little too short.
The new paint on the hats is almost dry, too, but I must admit that I did fall off the wagon slightly & used some Midnight Blue instead of black...

 

[Uncle Pug]

Originally posted by Bob3
Tyco® brand Nuclear Grade BLACK tape.

Bob, this is just the ticket for all those Ranger owners who want to dive doubles!!!

Shoot... it would even help them diving singles

 

[roakey]

Originally posted by Uncle Pug
Bob, this is just the ticket for all those Ranger owners who want to dive doubles!!!

Don't laugh. Before an ice dive a couple years ago I have a Halcyon buckle on an Argon strap explode on me because of the cold. I did the dive with one strap and a lot of duct tape!

Roak