DIR-F Changes [Archive]

GearHead

June 9th, 2003, 01:21 PM

<yaaaaaaaaaaawn>

Sorry for that, it's Monday morning, and I'm still feeling pretty beat-up from the class over the weekend. Bwerb, Nurseshark and I completed DIR-F over the weekend and speaking for myself, it was an awesome class. I probably wouldn't feel so tired if it wasn't for the unusual weather that UnclePug talked about in another thread. On Saturday, the temps were in the mid-90s and that's not a fun outdoor-classroom environment when there's no shade, and you spend part of it in drysuits.

And, this is just my opinion, but latex neckseals and raging sunburn are not a good combination. ;)

I don't plan on giving a detailed report since that's ground that has been pretty well covered here. If there are any questions, though, I'll be happy to respond.

What I think is worth addressing pass/fail nature of the course and other changes.

In a nutshell, if you have what our instructor would characterize as "Life Threatening Buoyancy" - you're not passing the class. Beyond that, she didn't explain in detail any other attributes that would give you an "F" for the class. There were 5 students in our class with a large range of experience, and we all passed. I think that showing a "passable" skill level, a desire to improve, and solid concentration and understanding during lectures and planning will go a long way into ensuring you'll pass.

Every diver in the class improved hugely between the first dive and the last - and I'm not just talking about skills either - buddy awareness, dive planning, plan formulation and execution, etc.. I'm sure that's an important factor in whether you pass or not.

Our instructor, Sonya Tittle, did a GREAT job of tailoring the class based on each of our goals, and shockingly never ran low on energy in spite of the detailed lectures and discussions. Oh, and did I mention that the vis was between 5 and 7 feet for the entire class? It's pretty amazing that she was able to keep a handle on two dive teams and a videographer in those conditions. I'm not exaggerating, by the way, the plankton/algae bloom was one of the worst I've seen in Puget Sound. Now, if we'd done the dives in 80 fsw, it would have been a different story but . . . I digress.

The other difference I wanted to bring up was the fact that "Ratio Deco" aka "GUE Multilevel on-the-fly dive planning" has been put on the shelf and is no longer a topic being taught in Fundamentals. Even if you ask "pretty please with sugar on it", you're not getting the formula. Sonya explained why in detail, but the bottom line is that it's too much liability on the instructor and GUE. Instead, what they're emphasizing is diving "computer smart" instead of "computer dumb". They want you to understand what a good profile is, and why it is good. I was satisfied with the deco theory covered in the class.

Well, it looks like I wrote a bit of a report anyway. :rolleyes:

To confirm what a number of others have said, it was the best money I've spent on instruction in a LONG time, and I'm not just talking dive instruction.

Man, as tired as I am right now, I want to get back in the water! :D

ckharlan66

June 9th, 2003, 01:26 PM

I appreciate it because I am headed to spend the weekend with MHK on Friday and I think Sonya will be here too so it was nice to get a heads up.

Thanks.

Chad

herman

June 9th, 2003, 01:28 PM

Thanks for the report, I have the class in 3 weeks.

Big-t-2538

June 9th, 2003, 01:32 PM

GearHead -

Thanks for the report...I'm looking forward to class on Friday....

Chad-
Well, it appears as though it is going to be an eventful weekend. If you have any practical joke Ideas you don't fee comfortable pulling...pm me, and I'll see what can be arranged....

Seriously though, Ber loaned me her book so I can be familiar with its cover before Friday. Looking farward to an exciting dive weekend

-T

sheck33

June 9th, 2003, 01:54 PM

Just wanted to add to Gearhead's report that i very much enjoyed doing the class with all of them. Great learning experience :)

and yea, sunburn and neckseal's dont mix :goofy:

as i said before, i encourage everyone who is serious about diving to at least consider taking this class :)

i cant wait for my 104's to come in :D

bwerb

June 9th, 2003, 03:04 PM

I am SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO bagged! I can't believe how much energy this course takes...both mental and physical. Nurseshark and I look like Zombies today.

I echo everything that Gearhead and Sheck33 said, especially the part about sunburn and neck seals...I get into work today and the first comment is...whoa, what happened to your neck...:D

Sonya Tittle and Mike (videographer) were tremendous. It is absolutely amazing that they could get great video in such incredibly bad conditions.

One point I would like to add to the discussion is that regarding the "internet DIR divers." The people from GUE and the DIR divers we met were nothing but 100% open, helpful, knowlegeable and eager to talk about any and all issues. They met each of us exactly where we were at...showed us where the bar was and then encouraged us not only to strive for the bar but also gave us the tools and techniques to make this a possibility. There was absolutely no belittling or "George says" crap.

I would agree that this was the best dive training money I have ever spent! I'd recommend it to absolutely anyone. The situational awareness and team dynamics discussions along with gas management alone were well worth the price.

Yes, you now must do the course in a BP/Wings but...after having tried them for the first time on Friday, I cannot say enough good about them and how much they really do make a difference in your control underwater. (Anyone want to buy two nearly new Raiders?).

If you are thinking about the course, go for it, you will not regret it at all.

Braunbehrens

June 9th, 2003, 04:37 PM

Thanks for the reports, guys! I'm always amazed how much energy the instructors have in these classes.

I have yet to hear from someone who didn't think the gueF class was great.

NetDoc

June 9th, 2003, 04:45 PM

computer dumb vs computer smart??? This sounds like an interesting development.

runvus4

June 9th, 2003, 04:53 PM

Braunbehrens, I think you should modify that statement to yet to hear from anyeone who has TAKEN the DIRF class who didn't think it was great.. :)

I too would be interested into exactly what they mean by computer smart/computer dumb.

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 04:57 PM

Sorry, I can't help myself...

It sounds like they changed their mind about telling divers at that level that they shouldn't use a computer.

GearHead

June 9th, 2003, 05:01 PM

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
Sorry, I can't help myself...

It sounds like they changed their mind about telling divers at that level that they shouldn't use a computer.

You're exactly right, Mike. The CRYB mantra is no longer being chanted by GUE, and I'll bet you can guess why . . . . Liability. You have to consider the lowest common denominator when giving them mentally challenging concepts and tools, because when the ideas get misunderstood and misused, people get hurt. They apparently decided that DIR-F wasn't the proper environment for teaching their "deco on the fly" methodology, though it apparently is still part of the curriculum higher up.

I'll post later about "computer smart/dumb"

bwerb

June 9th, 2003, 05:12 PM

One of the things I think is kinda cool about GUE right now is that they are truly in the active process of refining their courses and are making changes to the curiculum based on real world experience. I'll let Rick talk about the "computer smart/computer dumb" later but suffice it to say, their appears to be a true recognition that decompression theory and practice goes hand in hand with training. At the "recreational level" NDL diving, teaching full-on NDL ratios on the fly is a bit like putting the cart before the horse. Until decompression is taught and the student has a real understanding of what is going on, teaching advanced deco techniques and memonics is totally open to complete misuse and misunderstanding. I got the impression (MY OPINION) that GUE wants to ensure that the training is conducted only when the students have a complete understanding of what decompression is all about.

The gas management, Rock Bottom, and Rule of 3rds/halves etc. was great at the DIRF level...I learned TONS!

GearHead

June 9th, 2003, 07:19 PM

NetDoc once bubbled...
computer dumb vs computer smart??? This sounds like an interesting development.

Rather than go into detail, I'll just throw out 2 hypothetical Recreational Diving Scenarios. Please note, this is just my take on computer diving which really hasn't changed from before I took the class:

________________
An example of Computer Dumb
"Hey, my CPU says I'm near the NDL, I don't have much air left, I better boogie on up to my 'safety stop' at 15 feet. After that's done, I can inflate my BC and pop to the surface. Later, when my CPU is 'back in the green', I'll do a shore dive and just make sure I don't 'get into the red' for that one."

________________
An example of Computer Smart
"Well, as per my dive-plan, I'm back at the ascent line with XXXX psi left in my tank. Based on my dive depth and time so far, my CPU confirms that I'm within the NDL, as expected. I'll start my gradual ascent according to my plan, inlcuding a few specific stops, confirming with the CPU that my asc.rate stays well below 30fpm. That should manage my off-gassing nicely." I'll plan my surface interval and next dive on the boatride back with the computer's "Plan" mode.
________________

You see what I'm saying?

NetDoc

June 9th, 2003, 07:43 PM

it's just re-emphasizing the concept of planning your dive and diving your plan, and using your computer as the tool that it is. It takes sentience to plan safely and no computer has that yet. :tease:

GearHead

June 9th, 2003, 07:47 PM

NetDoc once bubbled...
it's just re-emphasizing the concept of planning your dive and diving your plan, and using your computer as the tool that it is. It takes sentience to plan safely and no computer has that yet. :tease:

Is that all that you got out of my example? Maybe I didn't write it well enough.

NetDoc

June 9th, 2003, 07:59 PM

that I plan my dives more thoroughly than most. I don't just jump into the water and wait to see which expires first... my air or NDL. When we were diving with the Wreckmaniacs, the least amount of gas I surfaced with was 1600psi, and ONLY because I donated my long hose to a diver who was low on air. Rather than him consider blowing off his deep stops or safety stops, I donated while he had 400 psi left just to be sure. Most of the time I came up with 2000 or more. I never went into a required deco obligation and I kept a close eye out on the class.

Many tech divers equate a computer user to a diver less likely to plan their dives properly. The RYB syndrome as you called it. Planning your dive correctly is not a function of whether you use a computer, but rather how you were trained to dive. If your instructor required you to plan in detail and emphasized it enough then you will continue to do so. While my initial instructor was the pits in this regard, studying the profiles stored on my computer really helped me to revolutionize the way I dive. I now plan my dive before I hit the water... what-a-concept!

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 08:15 PM

I think a computer could be a useful tool but I don't think there are many that are designed to be. I dive with a computer because that's what I have and I need to know how deep I am and for how long. The problem is The NDL is in huge numbers and the depth and time are in little tiny numbers. Also, I wouldn't think of decompressing according to the thing. I think I'll get a bottom timmer so my aging eyes can see how deep I am.

Most computers seem to be designed with the diver who doesn't want to be bothered with detailes in mind. They give you beeps and colors rather than useful information. They are designed for exactly the kind of divers our training is producing.

Uncle Pug

June 9th, 2003, 08:18 PM

NetDoc once bubbled...
that I plan my dives more thoroughly than most.

Most of the time I came up with 2000 or more.
You took too much gas for the dive planned! ;)

Uncle Pug

June 9th, 2003, 08:22 PM

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
They are designed for exactly the kind of divers our training is producing.
...it looks like GUE might be planning to produce those kind of divers too.

BTW... CstillRYB.

GearHead

June 9th, 2003, 08:23 PM

No, Pete, you pretty succinctly understood the whole Planning part of my example in your first response. What I think you overlooked was the ascent rate and profile shape difference implied by the examples.

I would hope, as an instructor, that you chewed the Wreckmaniac who needed to ascend on your gas, or at least taught them how to not be in that pickle the next time they dive.

And Mike, if for nothing else, the "stopwatch" functionality of the Suuntos in Gauge mode is a beautiful thing on the way up! :D And the Vyper/Vytec line has HUGE numbers for weary eyes like yours. ;)

NetDoc once bubbled...
that I plan my dives more thoroughly than most. I don't just jump into the water and wait to see which expires first... my air or NDL. When we were diving with the Wreckmaniacs, the least amount of gas I surfaced with was 1600psi, and ONLY because I donated my long hose to a diver who was low on air. Rather than him consider blowing off his deep stops or safety stops, I donated while he had 400 psi left just to be sure. Most of the time I came up with 2000 or more. I never went into a required deco obligation and I kept a close eye out on the class.

Many tech divers equate a computer user to a diver less likely to plan their dives properly. The RYB syndrome as you called it. Planning your dive correctly is not a function of whether you use a computer, but rather how you were trained to dive. If your instructor required you to plan in detail and emphasized it enough then you will continue to do so. While my initial instructor was the pits in this regard, studying the profiles stored on my computer really helped me to revolutionize the way I dive. I now plan my dive before I hit the water... what-a-concept!

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 08:32 PM

GearHead once bubbled...

And Mike, if for nothing else, the "stopwatch" functionality of the Suuntos in Gauge mode is a beautiful thing on the way up! :D And the Vyper/Vytec line has HUGE numbers for weary eyes like yours. ;)

hehe, keep it up bud.

I don't need a stop watch just time in minutes. If seconds count we're all going to get killed doing this.

And...my eyes are not weary! they're fuzzy. But only up close. You know? within 10 or 15 feet.

chrpai

June 9th, 2003, 08:42 PM

GearHead once bubbled...

Rather than go into detail, I'll just throw out 2 hypothetical Recreational Diving Scenarios. Please note, this is just my take on computer diving which really hasn't changed from before I took the class:

I'll plan my surface interval and next dive on the boatride back with the computer's "Plan" mode. [/I]

Too bad most computers can't do that though. I know my Suunto Mosquito can't do a "what if" my S.I. was xxx then what would my NDL be for 60'? It'll tell me my NDL for 60' *now* but if I want to know when it will be XX I'll just have to wait until it is.

NetDoc

June 9th, 2003, 08:44 PM

as an instructor, I ALWAYS carry way too much gas. My SAC is sufficiently low and I prefer to dive with my steel 120s. Life is good.

As for "chewing"... he knew where he erred and we discussed it. �Chewing� is counter productive for most intelligent people.

As for overlooking the ascent rate/profile... no, I saw that. That should always be a part of your plan. This is not unique to DIR-F by any means. IOW... just because they are "doing it right" does not mean everyone else is doing it wrong. Deeper profiles merit deep stops and longer safety stops. They might even require a decompression obligation! These should NEVER be left to chance. Not planning your dive will almost always succeed in having a diver "shave" his stop time and increase his ascent rate.

BTW, what diver claims to have coined the phrase "Plan your dive, and dive your plan!"??? You probably won't like the answer.

davethomas

June 9th, 2003, 08:54 PM

So now DIR is teaching the use of computers, I love it.
They finaly come around to doing what everyone else has been doing for some time.

Uncle Pug even responds with a tone of support...what happend to "computers will rote your brain" pug?

There is no doubt that a DIR-F class is a good one, they are building on skills introduced in an average open water class.
boyancy control, buddy awareness, proper ascent rates, dive planning with the use of computers.

soon they will be coming out with tables as well, ya hoo.

it also sounds like everyone passes the class now.

I think that showing a "passable" skill level, a desire to improve, and solid concentration and understanding during lectures and planning will go a long way into ensuring you'll pass.

it seems that GUE is becoming more main stream and starting to adopt some of the proven techniques of other agencies

I can't wait to watch all the back peddling from the DIR crowd when GUE comes out with their open water / begginer course designed to train the masses.

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 09:01 PM

NetDoc once bubbled...
BTW, what diver claims to have coined the phrase "Plan your dive, and dive your plan!"??? You probably won't like the answer.

Yes dive trivia!!!

That would be Hal Watts.

NetDoc

June 9th, 2003, 09:06 PM

:tease:

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 09:06 PM

davethomas once bubbled...

it also sounds like everyone passes the class now.

it seems that GUE is becoming more main stream and starting to adopt some of the proven techniques of other agencies

I can't wait to watch all the back peddling from the DIR crowd when GUE comes out with their open water / begginer course designed to train the masses.

And I heard that nobody passes the first time!

Did the bar come down? hehe, I know the'll catch up in tech 1. Sounds familiar to me.

O-ring

June 9th, 2003, 09:11 PM

MikeFerrara once bubbled...

And I heard that nobody passes the first time!

Did the bar come down? hehe, I know the'll catch up in tech 1. Sounds familiar to me.
IMHO, it was unpassable before... Either the bar came down or the definition of successfully demonstrating a skill isn't what it was. Either way, I don't think it makes the class any worse than it was, just different.

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 09:19 PM

NetDoc once bubbled...
:tease:

I cheated.

BTW, I have a diving text titled "Basic and Advanced Skin and Scuba Diving Manual" by Hal Watts Dated 1970

the book is typed and in a stapled folder.

You wouldn't believe the skills that are called for in this book.

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 09:25 PM

O-ring once bubbled...

IMHO, it was unpassable before... Either the bar came down or the definition of successfully demonstrating a skill isn't what it was. Either way, I don't think it makes the class any worse than it was, just different.

That's how it always starts. People don't like to fail. they won't come back.

I don't doubt that it's a good class but we'll see if they tell divers not to dive or not to cave or tech dive. That cave 1 video (that I just got to see) wasn't so impressive. The one with the link on th board.

GUE is dealing with the same people that the rest of us are. Or at least they will be if they want to keep all these new instructors and the new DIR shops busy.

davethomas

June 9th, 2003, 09:34 PM

where is the link to the cave video

Braunbehrens

June 9th, 2003, 10:01 PM

If GUE now teaches computer smart vs. computer dumb in the DIR F class it's probably because they feel they don't have time to get into the more advanced stuff. Nonetheless, I'm convinced that the goal is still to do away with the computer.

To be honest, I don't care. I'll be the last guy decrying the computer crutch if that's what it takes. Computers are no good, learn to dive without them. Be it GUE, DIR or not!

Dryglove

June 9th, 2003, 10:09 PM

davethomas once bubbled...
where is the link to the cave video

http://www.trigital.tv/florida/cave-kabel.asf

or

http://www.scubadiving.com/talk/read.php?f=1&i=510680&t=510680

bwerb

June 9th, 2003, 10:10 PM

I think some stuff is falling between the cracks here. It is impossible to distill hours of instruction and learning into a few posts. I think I'll shut-up now as I can see that I'm doing a terrible job expressing what I learned.

The only thing I wanted to get across was that it was a great course and a valuable learning experience.

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 10:17 PM

Braunbehrens once bubbled...
If GUE now teaches computer smart vs. computer dumb in the DIR F class it's probably because they feel they don't have time to get into the more advanced stuff. Nonetheless, I'm convinced that the goal is still to do away with the computer.

To be honest, I don't care. I'll be the last guy decrying the computer crutch if that's what it takes. Computers are no good, learn to dive without them. Be it GUE, DIR or not!

I like your attitude.

I also think you're right about them not having the time. They could just fail people. they could set higher pre-reqs. They could lengthen the class and charge more. I don't feel bad critiisizing them. I opened my own shop because I couldn't teach for others. Now I'm closing it because I can't teach for my own shop. The presures are the same no matter who owns it.

As they grow and gain instructors and shops they will need more students. Those students aren't going to pay to fail. As they push stuff from the DIRF level they will have to get it in the tech 1 level (like actually showing that they have mastered the skills from DIRF). As they play catch up in tech 1 they'll have to push other stuff to tech 2. Then they'll have top push other stuff right out the window. If they don't they'll be FORCED to go back to having only a couple of instructors on each continent and one or two shops.

As a lone instructor I'll be able to teach how I want to who I want even if it's only one or two a year.

Uncle Pug

June 9th, 2003, 10:33 PM

davethomas once bubbled...
Uncle Pug even responds with a tone of support...what happend to "computers will rote your brain" pug?
You must have missed "CstillRYB"

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 10:38 PM

bwerb once bubbled...
I think some stuff is falling between the cracks here. It is impossible to distill hours of instruction and learning into a few posts. I think I'll shut-up now as I can see that I'm doing a terrible job expressing what I learned.

The only thing I wanted to get across was that it was a great course and a valuable learning experience.

I don't think things are falling between the cracks. I think we know a good deal about what they told you and showed you. The question is...what are the actual performance requirements to get the card. How good does your trim need to be? How good does your finning technique need to be? Awareness? How many inches can your depth very when your mask comes off? Timmed ascents with stop, how precise must it be? Lift bag deployment? you had guys in doubles right? How was their trim, BC and speed doing shutdowns? Before yo get a card.

The DIRF card is the pre-req for tech 1 right?

I have no doubt these guys can dive and are good instructors. My only point is that they will be subjected to the same presures that everyone else is. They MAY go from sending you home to practice and comming back for the card to giving you the card and telling you to go home and practice. That is how the bar is lowered. That is the process.

When I was in the horse business I knew of a trainer that had world champions just about every year. All the people with the best horses went to him. He had good material. He could just turn away the ones who weren't going to make it.

We have heard over and over how 1, DIRF is for anyone at any level and 2, how awful everyone does. Now we hear everyone got a card but nobody knew exactly what was required to get it.

Don't get to upset it's all just conversation to me. I hope I'm wrong.

MikeFerrara

June 9th, 2003, 10:40 PM

Uncle Pug once bubbled...

You must have missed "CstillRYB"

I don't know if computers are to blame for the rotten brains but I'm pretty sure that whatever they did yesterday they are doing today. LOL

GearHead

June 10th, 2003, 12:33 AM

NetDoc once bubbled...
<snip>
As for overlooking the ascent rate/profile... no, I saw that. That should always be a part of your plan. This is not unique to DIR-F by any means. IOW... just because they are "doing it right" does not mean everyone else is doing it wrong. Deeper profiles merit deep stops and longer safety stops. They might even require a decompression obligation! These should NEVER be left to chance. Not planning your dive will almost always succeed in having a diver "shave" his stop time and increase his ascent rate.
<snip>

Nobody ever wrote nor implied that properly using a computer is "unique to DIR-F" whatsoever. I even stated that the example is my take on this issue which was the same before I took the class. I'm sure there are plenty of people that properly use CPUs and have a good basic understanding of deco theory. However, at the same time, I've seen WAY too many examples of divers that are of the opposite variety.

GearHead

June 10th, 2003, 12:48 AM

O-ring once bubbled...

IMHO, it was unpassable before... Either the bar came down or the definition of successfully demonstrating a skill isn't what it was. Either way, I don't think it makes the class any worse than it was, just different.

Good point. But I believe that the bar is still where it was. That is, we're all still reaching for the same bar. But passing the class is not the same as grasping the bar. There have been divers with hundreds of dives under their belt that can't perfectly master the skills in four dives, particularly if they haven't learned them before. It's just not realistic to expect perfection, so they don't. My understanding is that DIR-F is the gateway to other GUE classes - they introduce the skills, they drill you, they make sure you're capable. And yes, perfection is the ultimate goal, but not the definition of success in this class (my take).

runvus4

June 10th, 2003, 12:52 AM

I use a computer and do think that GUE/DIR proponents that totally beat down computer use for diving are somewhat luddite, but I do think that a lot is being made of the computer smart/computer dumb without any actual quotes/facts of what was taught in the class.

I would personally guess that since the DIRf course does not teach the GUE specific dive/deco theory a-la mental calculations that is supposed to be superior to computers, the instructors HAVE to let the students continue to dive and plan their dive with the deco theories and methodologies they currently know. If they don't offer a substitute, they can't very well make students to stop doing what they currently know how to do. Thus if the instructors have to let people use the computers, at least teach them to make the best thing out of a "bad" situation and the outcome is "computer smart".

I personally won't take it as any endorsement of computer use until I hear straight out that computer use is endorsed.

O-ring

June 10th, 2003, 01:09 AM

GearHead once bubbled...

Good point. But I believe that the bar is still where it was. That is, we're all still reaching for the same bar. But passing the class is not the same as grasping the bar. There have been divers with hundreds of dives under their belt that can't perfectly master the skills in four dives, particularly if they haven't learned them before. It's just not realistic to expect perfection, so they don't. My understanding is that DIR-F is the gateway to other GUE classes - they introduce the skills, they drill you, they make sure you're capable. And yes, perfection is the ultimate goal, but not the definition of success in this class (my take).

I totally agree with you on the pre-DIRF experience being pretty much irrelevant...we had people from both sides of the spectrum in our class and everybody looked pretty bad :) .

FWIW, I don't remember computers ever being discouraged in our class. I dove with one in my DIRF and I don't remember anyone saying anything to me about it, but who knows...there is so damn much going on in a DIRF class, that I can't imagine having the ratio deco or whatever you want to call it thrown in on top of that. We didn't learn it in DIRF, and frankly, if we had, I would have been too tired to pay attention anyway :D .

Not that GUE is endorsing computers, per se, but I can understand them accepting them...they are used by an overwhelming majority of divers and I sorta like this "computer smart" idea if you choose to use one. Computer smart sure beats computer dumb any day..

sheck33

June 10th, 2003, 01:20 AM

Maybe this is a better example of computer dumb versus smart.

Rescue class: Diver A has to rescue diver B. Diver A wears a computer. The rescue takes place from 40ft after a 10 min bottom time.

computer dumb: diver A is bringing up diver B, who has a serious health problem by now, and diver A stops at 15ft to do a 3 min 'safety stop' because his computer told him so. Meanwhile depriving the victim from oxygen for another 3 min or so.

computer smart: diver A realizes that the 'safety stop' mandated by his computer under these circumstances is a result of liability driven, ridiculous, conservatism built into computers by the manufacturers and he chooses to ignore his computer and gets the victim to the surface

and you know what, i didnt make this up, it actually happened on a rescue class.

need i say more...

Braunbehrens

June 10th, 2003, 01:21 AM

runvus4 once bubbled...
I do think that a lot is being made of the computer smart/computer dumb without any actual quotes/facts of what was taught in the class.

I would personally guess that since the DIRf course does not teach the GUE specific dive/deco theory a-la mental calculations that is supposed to be superior to computers, the instructors HAVE to let the students continue to dive and plan their dive with the deco theories and methodologies they currently know. If they don't offer a substitute, they can't very well make students to stop doing what they currently know how to do. Thus if the instructors have to let people use the computers, at least teach them to make the best thing out of a "bad" situation and the outcome is "computer smart".

I personally won't take it as any endorsement of computer use until I hear straight out that computer use is endorsed.

I think you've hit the nail on the head.

As for the bar being lowered and so on that other people have mentioned...I doubt it. DIR F has always been about showing you what you need to work on, and teaching you the basics.

For example, I can tell you that you should always put your seatbelt on before you put the key in the ignition. However, I'd have to sit in the care with you 20 times to make sure you've incorporated that into your driving routing. DIR-F is where they tell you and show you. The rest is up to you. I think the "fail" part is just for people who can't grasp it or are a complete disaster in the water. Not EVERYONE should scuba dive. Most people can, but not every single human on the planet.

Hey Mike, maybe you'd be happy as a GUE instructor. It sounds like your standards are high enough.

GearHead

June 10th, 2003, 01:40 AM

O-ring once bubbled...

Not that GUE is endorsing computers, per se, but I can understand them accepting them...they are used by an overwhelming majority of divers and I sorta like this "computer smart" idea if you choose to use one. Computer smart sure beats computer dumb any day..

You know what, that's a great point. A good profile is a good profile, whether you're using a CPU or tables. And for the record, that's something Sonya said in class as well.

Charlie99

June 10th, 2003, 05:33 AM

Braunbehrens once bubbled...
I think the "fail" part is just for people who can't grasp it or are a complete disaster in the water.

Hey Mike, maybe you'd be happy as a GUE instructor. It sounds like your standards are high enough. I read Mike's post as a discussion of the problem of mass marketing tech instruction. The question is not whether Mike's standards are high enough for GUE, but whether the evolving GUE standards meet Mike's high bar.

I see GUE as having an identity crisis. Is it a tech agency or something for all divers? The computer issue just puts the spotlight on the question.

SimonN

June 10th, 2003, 07:26 AM

Charlie99 once bubbled...
I see GUE as having an identity crisis. Is it a tech agency or something for all divers?

I don't. I see it is a tech agency evolving into an agency that also teaches in the recreational space and filling in a space that is missing i.e. real diving skills, not fish spotting.

The computer issue just puts the spotlight on the question.

I disagree (again). The sort of person that follows a dive computer blindly is also the sort of person who will screw up diving with tables. Muppets do as muppets do. The real issue of not diving with a computer is to get people to think about what they are doing.

Note: I am not DIR or particularily interested in joining 'the club', but am provisionally booked on to a fundamentals course this year.

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 07:39 AM

GearHead once bubbled...

Good point. But I believe that the bar is still where it was. That is, we're all still reaching for the same bar. But passing the class is not the same as grasping the bar. There have been divers with hundreds of dives under their belt that can't perfectly master the skills in four dives, particularly if they haven't learned them before. It's just not realistic to expect perfection, so they don't. My understanding is that DIR-F is the gateway to other GUE classes - they introduce the skills, they drill you, they make sure you're capable. And yes, perfection is the ultimate goal, but not the definition of success in this class (my take).

Getting the card should mean that you have the bar for that level of training firmly in your hand. If it's a skills based class it isn't over until you have reached a predefined level of proficiency in those skills.

IME, if nobody can get it in four dives they need to do more dives or introduce less material. The fact is that if you can't do a precise ascent then your ascent will be less precise with your mask off or your eyes closed or while managing some other problem. I don't see the sense in going to the second thing that builds on the first before you have mastered the first.

How is this different than saying that new OW divers can't posibly master all this new stuff is 4 nights in the pool and 4 dives, giving them the card and sending them off to practice? That's exactly what has heppened to OW training. And this stuff is far newer to them.

IMO, any training needs to present realistic goals and requirements. The students need to know exactly what they are. Before it's over they need to get there.

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 07:45 AM

Braunbehrens once bubbled...

Hey Mike, maybe you'd be happy as a GUE instructor. It sounds like your standards are high enough.

As an instructor it's an interesting thought. I think some of these guys have some really neat stuff and I've stolen my share of it. I haven't inventing anything.

However, even if I was free to follow Andrew around for a few months (which I'm not), I would be faced with the same students I am now. Having another instructor card in my pocket wouldn't change anything.

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 08:04 AM

Charlie99 once bubbled...
I read Mike's post as a discussion of the problem of mass marketing tech instruction. The question is not whether Mike's standards are high enough for GUE, but whether the evolving GUE standards meet Mike's high bar.

That's just the problem. I can't have the bar where I would like it and pay the rent and sell enough gear to keep the manufacturers happy. I just can't sell it to enough people for enough money. If I was happy with the students I was putting out the world would be great place and I would stay in business.

I see GUE as having an identity crisis. Is it a tech agency or something for all divers? The computer issue just puts the spotlight on the question.

Good point. I don't think most divers want the high bar. If you want a lot of students the bar MUST come down. If your standards are going to be top notch you need to find the few who want to be top notch divers. Oh, and they'll have to be willing to pay for it. Hell if I could get $300 plus expenses for 4 dives with a student I would be halfway there. We have trouble getting $300 for a class that is MUCH longer, involves pool rental, travel, books, air fills and the use of my equipment. Do the math. Once you comprimise on time and cost you're forced to comprimise on content. Nobody, not even GUE can get around this.

sheck33

June 10th, 2003, 10:25 AM

MikeFerrara once bubbled...

That's just the problem. I can't have the bar where I would like it and pay the rent and sell enough gear to keep the manufacturers happy. I just can't sell it to enough people for enough money. If I was happy with the students I was putting out the world would be great place and I would stay in business.[B]

Good point. I don't think most divers want the high bar. If you want a lot of students the bar MUST come down. If your standards are going to be top notch you need to find the few who want to be top notch divers. Oh, and they'll have to be willing to pay for it. Hell if I could get $300 plus expenses for 4 dives with a student I would be halfway there. We have trouble getting $300 for a class that is MUCH longer, involves pool rental, travel, books, air fills and the use of my equipment. Do the math. Once you comprimise on time and cost you're forced to comprimise on content. Nobody, not even GUE can get around this.

why would you want lots of students? Make the class a little more expensive and teach the few divres that want to be top notch divers, the rest can go elsewhere......

Uncle Pug

June 10th, 2003, 10:36 AM

sheck33 once bubbled...
the few divres that want to be top notch divers
Top notch divers?

or

The desire to be a top notch diver?

sheck33

June 10th, 2003, 10:56 AM

Uncle Pug once bubbled...

Top notch divers?

or

The desire to be a top notch diver?

probably 'the desire to be top notch divers and working hard to get there' :D

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 10:59 AM

sheck33 once bubbled...

why would you want lots of students? Make the class a little more expensive and teach the few divres that want to be top notch divers, the rest can go elsewhere......

In the case of GUE...the numbers of instructors are growing and the number of DIR shops are growing. These people are going to need to teach classes and sell gear like anybody else. Where are the student going to come from. A PADI OW card is worth about $250 around here and I don't care what kind of diving god is doing the teaching. What do you think a GUE OW class is worth? I'll tell you...$250. If you turn away the masses and only teach the few who seek a higher level of training you won't pay the rent.

You have to do more than charge a little more because if you rase the price by 10% your volume drops by 90%. Now if the volume only dropped by 10% it would be a wash. If the number of student drops that much what do you think that does to equipment sales? Without that you're dead.

Now once I close the shop and get out from under a few thousand in overhead every month I can do what I want. There will then only be two reasons to teach 1, being the fun of teaching a good student who wants to learn and 2, will be money. I mean real money. I'll only teach private or semi-private and a class will not be $250. Of course without thousands of dollars of bills every month It's ok if nobody wants to pay that much. With the shop and the overhead I need everyone who comes through the door BADLY.

The shop must go.

NetDoc

June 10th, 2003, 11:06 AM

for human error?

and diver A stops at 15ft to do a 3 min 'safety stop' because his computer told him so. Meanwhile depriving the victim from oxygen for another 3 min or so.
The computer did not prevent his ascent... he chose to blindly follow instructions (whether by computor or person) and obviously did not understand them completely. Basic training is the issue, and not the use of computers. I have seen divers blow off their safety stop so that they would surface with 500 psi left in their tanks. Do we blame their SPG??? By no means... this is a training issue! Some DM on the boat said you HAD to surface with 500 psi and so they did. No need to get a smarter or dumber spg now is there? A computer is only a tool. It has no sentience to make ANY value judgements... this is and has always been the diver's job.

As for the bar... NAUI allows me to set the bar where I want it, and I like that. Ask any who have dove with my Scuba Ducks, and they will back me up on this. Expect the best and you will get the same.

Uncle Pug

June 10th, 2003, 11:24 AM

will the choice become GUE OW ~or~ DIRf ....

will GUE OW teach to the standard of what is now the DIRf....

will DIRf be a remedial course for those rototillers cranked out by other $90 cert mills....

In any case I will no longer tell folks who want to know how to dive without a computer to take a DIRf.

That alone should make some of you jump for joy! :D

Pez de Diablo

June 10th, 2003, 11:24 AM

dad6b

June 10th, 2003, 11:25 AM

chrpai once bubbled...

Too bad most computers can't do that though. I know my Suunto Mosquito can't do a "what if" my S.I. was xxx then what would my NDL be for 60'? It'll tell me my NDL for 60' *now* but if I want to know when it will be XX I'll just have to wait until it is.

So you didn't make a very wise purchase. If you're going to get a computer to replace your tables you should make sure it can do everything your tables could.

As someone said, computer dumb vs computer smart.

Drew A. Dunn

Uncle Pug

June 10th, 2003, 11:31 AM

Pez de Diablo once bubbled...
I did learn how to dive without a computer, that's what PADI taught me 8 years ago
Mulilevel computerless diving?

sheck33

June 10th, 2003, 11:32 AM

NetDoc once bubbled...
for human error?

The computer did not prevent his ascent... he chose to blindly follow instructions (whether by computor or person) and obviously did not understand them completely. Basic training is the issue, and not the use of computers. I have seen divers blow off their safety stop so that they would surface with 500 psi left in their tanks. Do we blame their SPG??? By no means... this is a training issue! Some DM on the boat said you HAD to surface with 500 psi and so they did. No need to get a smarter or dumber spg now is there? A computer is only a tool. It has no sentience to make ANY value judgements... this is and has always been the diver's job.

As for the bar... NAUI allows me to set the bar where I want it, and I like that. Ask any who have dove with my Scuba Ducks, and they will back me up on this. Expect the best and you will get the same.

I was by no means 'blaming' the computer. Obviously the problem here was a computer dumb diver. I was just trying to give an example of computer dumb versus smart. Computers, and this is not just true in diving, are only as smart as their user.

simple pocket calculators are another good example, most people do not think about the results that appear on the screen.

wreckchick

June 10th, 2003, 11:33 AM

Zen and the Art of Scuba by Uncle Pug

Pez de Diablo

June 10th, 2003, 11:37 AM

Uncle Pug once bubbled...

Mulilevel computerless diving?

We used the wheel

Pez de Diablo

June 10th, 2003, 11:41 AM

biscuit7 once bubbled...
Zen and the Art of Scuba by Uncle Pug

If I had the wisdom and insight on life that UP has shown here on this board I would have one stress free life.

I have never met UP but I bet he has a smile on his face all the time.

chrpai

June 10th, 2003, 11:53 AM

dad6b once bubbled...

So you didn't make a very wise purchase. If you're going to get a computer to replace your tables you should make sure it can do everything your tables could.

As someone said, computer dumb vs computer smart.

Drew A. Dunn

Who ever said I bought a computer to replace my tables? Besides I don't push NDLs and try to get back into the water 15 minutes after my last dive. I have other ways of preplanning my needed SI's for desired profiles. It just can't be done at the last second during the SI which would be dumb to try to do anyways.

I love how all the rec.scuba ****'s try to come in here and stir stuff up.

Braunbehrens

June 10th, 2003, 12:26 PM

MikeFerrara once bubbled...

Getting the card should mean that you have the bar for that level of training firmly in your hand. If it's a skills based class it isn't over until you have reached a predefined level of proficiency in those skills.

The history of the DIR F course might help us understand things a little better.

First, there was just Tech 1. However, most people would fail Tech 1, and have to come back after some skills practice and redo the dives. Eventually, it was decided that Tech 1 should be split into two parts. The first part would be where the students are shown the skills and told which skills still need practice, and the second part would then start from a more solid foundation.

This first part of Tech 1 got split off and was called Fundamentals. So at least historically, the aim of dir F is NOT to have you master the skills, but to have you understand how to execute them properly and which skills you need to work on.

This is probably why dir F was always a no pass no fail class, it was just "showing you the ropes". This is also the reason why you didn't get a card for DIR F.

Things are changing a little, with lots of people benefitting from DIR F without any intention of taking Tech 1. However, I think the basic format of the class has not changed. There is not enough time in that class to teach, practice and test a set of skills this advanced. If that is what you want, then proceed to rec triox or tech 1 or cave 1.

Pez de Diablo once bubbled...

Face facts, computers have there place, just not in a technical aspect.

From discussions with Sonya and other people at the source of this, I am more convinced than ever that DIR means not using a computer.

I don't wish to cause anyone any problems, so let's limit our discussion to what makes sense in diving and what doesn't, not what someone may or may not have said, and how they may or may not have said it.

Computers rot your brain, as UP would say, and that's that. If you haven't figured out how to dive without one, you can do some stuff to improve your profile, but you're still better off learning how to dive without it (and no, I'm not talking "the wheel").

dad6b

June 10th, 2003, 12:46 PM

chrpai once bubbled...

Who ever said I bought a computer to replace my tables? Besides I don't push NDLs and try to get back into the water 15 minutes after my last dive. I have other ways of preplanning my needed SI's for desired profiles. It just can't be done at the last second during the SI which would be dumb to try to do anyways.

argggh, here we go again... Would you please to taking everything so personally?!

When I said "you" in "you didn't make a very wise purchase" I was specifically speaking about you, Chris Painter. The "you" in "If you're going to get a computer to replace your tables you should..." was not specifically you Chris. It was a generic person that might think about getting a computer as a replacement for their tables.

That said, how do you plan your SIs? If you're not using you computer to help why didn't you get a bottom timer? It would have been cheaper.

I love how all the rec.scuba ****'s try to come in here and stir stuff up.

Sorry, I didn't realize this was your forum...

Drew A. Dunn

bwerb

June 10th, 2003, 01:38 PM

Total direction change here...perhaps this should be a new thread...

Since CRYB...when/how should OW/rec students be introduced to "on the fly" planning?

Should they simply stick to tables of various types or decoplanning software to really understand their dives and profiles or alternately should they just learn the shortcuts and mental planning removed from any in-depth analysis of tables and deco theory.

What would you say is the best way to teach this step to remove any type of computer use/dependance from the diving equation?

NetDoc

June 10th, 2003, 01:55 PM

just a dumb diver! The computer played as much a part in him doing his safety stop as tables would have. Both request them.

A computer is an analytical tool. It is nothing more or less. Would you feel that a doctor who spurns MRIs in favor of manual manipulation of the injury is just a "Computer smart doctor"? Or the mechanic who scans the ALDL of a car for error codes is just a "computer dumb mechanic"? Are either throwing away their years of training in favor of the computer? I don't think so! Can the technology assist them in making quick and accurate decisions? Of course!!!

If DIR-F re-enforces (or even introduces) the fine art of dive planning, then GREAT!!! I am all for it. But don't blame computers (or dive fins, or whatever) for insufficient or faulty training. Computers are not a panacea and neither are they the source of these problem. As a group, divers are way too hesitant to invest time and money into additional training. They are happier just throwing gear at training issues.

BTW, Braunbehrens...

That was a very insightful post. It does help to understand the history of a class. Thanks!!!

NetDoc

June 10th, 2003, 01:59 PM

Since CRYB...when/how should OW/rec students be introduced to "on the fly" planning?
Most should never venture to attempt this. Few in this sport are committed to invest the time, money, effort and discipline needed to effect this type of diving safely. But that's just my humble opinion!

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 02:36 PM

This has been really fun with the card issue and all. However, since I don't know GUE's reasoning or plans (JJ didn't check with me on this, LOL) we should recognize the possibility that they haven't lost it yet. IMO, the danger of presure from shops, instructors and the market is always a very real concern. Even though I have nothing to do with GUE and likely never will, and in fact don't agree with them about everything, I would really like to see them stick to their guns. If they get sucked into the same crap as everyone else in this business I won't cut them a bit of slack though because as I understand it part of their very reason for being is to provide an alternative.

Big-t-2538

June 10th, 2003, 02:47 PM

is to get a second opinion of the class by taking it this weekend in KY myself....

I'll let you know what I think...I'm not a big believer in conforming just cause someone said something....I do things because they make sense, and if I don't see a good reason for doing something another way, I'll let you know I have a question.

I have a very good dive buddy who tells me I'm an idiot for spending 325 bucks for a class I don't know what I'm going to be getting out of.....I have another diving friend who is telling me I won't regret my decision.

Who knows...maybe GUE/DIR is or isn't for me. One thing is for sure....I am going to have fun...I mean I'll be making at least 4 dives with some people I know....how can diving be anything other than fun if you're diving with people you know and trust?

This past weekend with the ow class I was with, I had no idea who the students were, but I knew the instructor. the class was a blast and we had a good time. Yeah, it was check-outs, and there were a few things that went wrong, but for the most part, the diving was fun. IT's all about your attitude baby....and believe me, I've got one.

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 02:53 PM

Big-t-2538,

That sounds like a good plan. We had planned on sponsoring three DIRFs this year and I was going to participate in at least one. I don't need someone to get me horizontal or teach me to hover ...but...an educated eye can see rough spots you don't see yourself. That's why most serious athletes and musicians (or whatever) are always in training. It's never perfect and it never will be if you think it is. Often the trainer isn't any where near as good as the one their training except thay have that educated eye and can present a plan for improvement. As to it being a wast of money I think that's more up to you than them.

Uncle Pug

June 10th, 2003, 03:17 PM

bwerb once bubbled...
Since CRYB...when/how should OW/rec students be introduced to "on the fly" planning?
...it seems GUE has made the decision to remove that from the DIRf and I am not second guessing them on it.

The DIRf is primarily about buddy skills, situational awareness, buoyancy control and even gas management... and in my opinion is a great class for any diver.

The computerless diving can (and will be) added later in the Tech class.

That said, it isn't rocket science and doesn't take a math genius to effect.... however the skill sets mentioned above are the focus as they should be.

bwerb

June 10th, 2003, 03:28 PM

Uncle Pug once bubbled...

The computerless diving can (and will be) added later in the Tech class.

I don't have a problem at all with DIRf or what it teaches, it was outstanding and is outstanding as it stands..."on-the-fly" in or not.

My question is more philosophical...If CRYB, but you are not a Tech diver, how should recreational divers be planning their dives? Tables? Decoplanner? the Wheel? a combination of all of them...or ongoing mentorship with someone who can show them "another way"?

I just don't quite get what the "best practice" would be for introducing the "rec" community to an alternative to the computer/tables.

Pez de Diablo

June 10th, 2003, 04:15 PM

Braunbehrens once bubbled...
From discussions with Sonya and other people at the source of this, I am more convinced than ever that DIR means not using a computer.
LOL

DIR in your world means no computers.
DIR in the GUE world now means computers. You go on waving the flag all by yourself, when you get tired, just remember to turn the lights out when you leave.

I do respect that you are not just blindly following a system of diving and that you are sticking to your guns, you don't think they work and you won't ever us a computer.

Uncle Pug

June 10th, 2003, 04:25 PM

bwerb once bubbled...
If CRYB, but you are not a Tech diver, how should recreational divers be planning their dives?
perhaps GUE's move toward computer smart diving is the answer.

Since there is no longer an agency that teaches computer-less multilevel on-the-fly diving to OW students that option at least is off the table.

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 04:32 PM

Do you think any agancy will ever teach it to recreational divers. It could be hard to justify in court. It definately isn't following the direction at the bottom of the dive tables.

I think at the tech level you might pull it off since so much of how a diver treats decompression is up to them. Even using software you can make it say almost anything you want anyway by changing a couple of parameters.

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 04:53 PM

TekDiveGirl once bubbled...
From GUE:

Heh-from George himself....

There is no such thing as "no decompression diving", with or without capital
letters, and there is no use for a dive computer of any kind, and there is
not any kind of dive computer that actually works.

And from another or so...
my fave:

Paul, let me guess: is this some nonsense you read on Scubaboard? You need to quit hanging out in the diving equivalent of a crack house. Rule #2 dude. GUE needs to start slapping gag orders on all their DIR Fundamentals students to prevent this constant game of "telephone".

As for a transition off computers, is that like telling a junky to taper off with methadone instead of quitting cold turkey?

Heh--you guys are funny.

Now there you go ruining a nice conversation by bringing George into it. I understand he doesn't use software or tables either. Since most others on the WKPP seem to use software as a starting poin it doesn't seem like he is telling any one how he has freed himself from all decompression tools. I've read everything I could find and he explains everything very nicely until you get to the shallow stops where he says it should be long enough. I think he also says about equal to your bottom time. If you look at the examples he gives people I don't think you can use what he writes to recreate the schedules he provides as examples.

Aside from that... what is a game of telephone?

What is some nonsense that Paul read on scubaboard?

and last but not least...do you have anything to say or does George do all your talking? Do you even move your lips when he talks?

Braunbehrens

June 10th, 2003, 04:57 PM

DIR = no computer. Take it to the bank.

The fact that in one class they didn't get to cover something doesn't mean all that much. Remember, DIR-F is about teaching many things, and not using the computer isn't the most important one by a long shot.

I'm sure some DIR - F classes will cover it... remember, the classes are taylored to the level of the students. If people show up who have all been diving DIR for a long time and who have taken deco classes from other agencies, it will be a different class than if some OW students show up.

One thing is for sure, a DIR-F class will challenge you, and show you what you need to work at.

For the full story, you need to "complete" the first cycle by taking Tech 1, Cave 1, or Rec Triox.

It's pretty funny how the anti - DIR crowd immediately jumps up and down at the slightest crack in the armor and tries to get a wedge in. Hasn't worked so far. The system is rock solid, works, and the instruction is second to none. Don't believe me? Then how come we have 4 guys who just took the class who feel this way? It NEVER fails.

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 05:13 PM

Braunbehrens once bubbled...
DIR = no computer. Take it to the bank.

The fact that in one class they didn't get to cover something doesn't mean all that much. Remember, DIR-F is about teaching many things, and not using the computer isn't the most important one by a long shot.

No arguement with that but the card issue has the potential of being significant I think

I'm sure some DIR - F classes will cover it... remember, the classes are taylored to the level of the students. If people show up who have all been diving DIR for a long time and who have taken deco classes from other agencies, it will be a different class than if some OW students show up.

One thing is for sure, a DIR-F class will challenge you, and show you what you need to work at.

I have often wonder what happens if they all show up together. Seems to me that presenting a challange one diver might might kill the less skilled diver with him.

For the full story, you need to "complete" the first cycle by taking Tech 1, Cave 1, or Rec Triox.

It's pretty funny how the anti - DIR crowd immediately jumps up and down at the slightest crack in the armor and tries to get a wedge in. Hasn't worked so far. The system is rock solid, works, and the instruction is second to none. Don't believe me? Then how come we have 4 guys who just took the class who feel this way? It NEVER fails.

ok I believe you it's a good class. But lets face it it just wouldn't take that much to impress most recreational divers would it. Speaking for myself...I have heard for so long from so many how nobody ever passes the first time (even though it wasn't pass fail) but they all get cards now. It might not mean anyhing but there is plenty there to think about.

Scubaroo

June 10th, 2003, 05:24 PM

Thread split (http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29305) - this one is for DIR-F changes discussion.

Sorry about the here-one-minute-gone-the-next posts - that took some work.

NetDoc

June 10th, 2003, 05:35 PM

Computers are here to stay. They will only get more dependable and usable. I think trying to use a hammer to put in a scew is just plain wrong. Better to use it for what it was designed for.

That being said... no human brain can accomplish the sampling rate or precision of computation of N2 loading in several tissue compartments at the same time. But, no computer can make the value judgements that keep diving safe either. Using both to accomplish your dive only makes sense.

MikeFerrara

June 10th, 2003, 06:05 PM

NetDoc once bubbled...
That being said... no human brain can accomplish the sampling rate or precision of computation of N2 loading in several tissue compartments at the same time. But, no computer can make the value judgements that keep diving safe either. Using both to accomplish your dive only makes sense.

I'm not sure what good all that precession does when the model is just a guestimate at best. In fact given that we know that bubble mechanics and many other things come into play that the computers really aren't taking into account I'm sure all that sampling speed and precission is just like a dog chasing his tail.

NetDoc

June 10th, 2003, 06:21 PM

I'm sure all that sampling speed and precission is just like a dog chasing his tail.
and I am glad it's my computer chasing it's tail and not me! I will save my limited cognitive abilities for making real decisions, and not for following some tired algorithms.

MarcHall

June 11th, 2003, 01:19 AM

GUE DIR Fundamentals is about training divers in the Fundamental skills of Diving.

To safely dive in 20-40 feet of water requires pretty minimal understanding of deco theory.

Proper ascents are discussed and practiced including developing profiency in performing stops at 30, 20 and 10 feet.

The GUE Recreational deep diving course aka Rec Triox does go into considerable detail regarding deco theory.

DIRF is a prereq to Rec Triox.
Rec Triox is not a prereq to Tech 1.

Personally I do all my diving with a Uwatec Bottom Timer on my right wrist, my backup gauge on my buddy's wrist (their primary) and my brain on.

Marc Hall
svcfish@yahoo.com

jsuw

June 11th, 2003, 04:04 AM

There has been some cross-posting between this list and the Quest list. The messages there prompted me to reply.

First, GUE and DIR support using the computer between your ears at all times. A bottom timer is used during the dives itself, although a PDA or personal computer can be used for dive planning prior to the dive. The main reason for this is so that you do plan and think about your dive, rather than diving whatever profile your dive computer allows.

Bubble mechanics and decompression theory are still not well understood. Every year more is learned. Many of the dive tables and dive computers available now do not reflect current theory. For leading edge information, watch the WKPP.

Second, the comment made in the DIR-Fundamentals course was made in the context of a discussion between the instructor for the course and her students. Outside of the context of the discussion, the meaning is different. The instructor posted to Quest to that effect. Everyone here is getting carried away with something that simply was taken out of context.

The DIR-Fundamentals bar is still high, perhaps higher than ever due to the changes effective June 1. The course is now a certification course (which may earn the participant a certification card), as opposed to a seminar earning a certificate of completion.

I hope this helps clarify things.

Jan Sitchin
PADI/NAUI/ and GUE (DIR Fundamentals) Instructor

wreckchick

June 11th, 2003, 09:47 AM

As an OW diver fresh out of training I was taught to use the tables to plan square profile dives. I was also taught that doing a multi-level profile could extend my bottom time, but I was NOT taught how to properly plan those dives.

I was told by the owner of the LDS that a computer can calculate multi-level profiles on the fly and extend my bottom time since I didn't have the tools to plan them on paper. One could argue that it's a great way to sell a new diver an expensive piece of equipment and that's probably a fair assessment, but the fact remains that it was the only tool available to me to gain the benefit of extended bottom time by doing a multi-level dive. I was going on a big diving trip and I bought a computer.

Now, 2 months after certification, I'm in Belize on a boat with a divemaster and I'm getting a dive briefing. He's telling us that we're going to be doing a multi-level dive, first we drop down to X for X minutes, then we'll poke our way up to X for a little while, etc. He asks if anyone has a computer. My buddy and I do and say so and he says, OK, watch your computer and make sure you don't see anything less that 5-7 minutes of NDL on it, to everyone else he says don't go deeper than me. More or less riding his computer.

Now, I can watch my own NDL on my computer and make sure I don't overstay my allowed bottom time. I can't plan the multi-level dive because I don't have the tools, physical (wheel) or mental (brain). The people without a computer are following the DM on faith that he's not exceeding his computer's NDL and that the profile that they are following is a safe one.

My questions are this: Who's doing a safer dive? Me and my buddy on our computers or the computerless divers? What can I do, or other divers in similar circumstances do, without a computer, to plan and excute a plan like that one?

Rachel

NetDoc

June 11th, 2003, 10:05 AM

What can I do, or other divers in similar circumstances do, without a computer, to plan and excute a plan like that one?
DON'T DO THE DIVE!!!

I call them "Trust Me" dives... where the DM, instructor or other bozo tells you that it's "OK" because -they- know what they are doing. TRUST NO ONE!!! They obviously don't know enough to not let you do a "Trust Me" dive, so don't trust them at all!!!

Get the training... do the planning and THEN and ONLY THEN should you attempt that (or any) dive. If you can't plan it, don't dive it! Just like that neat looking worm on the bottom... if you can't ID it LEAVE IT ALONE! It might be nothing, but it might be a bristle worm and kill you.

It really doesn't matter whether you use a computer or not. If you let others make your decisions for you, then you are putting yourself in perilous situations. Computers/SPGs/Bottom timers are ONLY instruments... use them and trust them at your discretion. But YOU need to be the one making ALL of the decisions based on the input you get. It's your dive, and YOUR life... choose your options wisely!

wreckchick

June 11th, 2003, 10:15 AM

I just finished my AOW, I still don't know how to use the wheel. I still don't know how to plan multi-level dives on paper. I'm not unique in that respect. The plan I gave in the above example isn't unique. This is a typical Caribbean (and probably elsewhere) kind of dive. Tons of people do that dive, in some form or another, every day in dive destinations around the world.

Short of signing up for the PADI Multi-level Diver Specialty, where is a diver to get the information to avoid the "trust me" dives? Does DIR-F cover it? Do other agencies cover it in their advanced certificates?

There are a whole bunch of people telling me to toss the computer but no one is giving me a way to fill in the knowledge gaps so that plan is feasible!

Help me find a way to fill in the gaps and get the deco theory that's so critical to make that move and I'll consider it. In the meantime, my computer is the one thing that's keeping the dive a "trust something besides the DM" dive.

Rachel

NetDoc

June 11th, 2003, 10:31 AM

and I personally do not have a problem with your computer or you planning multi-level dives on your computer. Just keep your mind open for scenarios that just "don't look right". A computer is just a tool, just like software planners, tables or wheels. The important thing is that you should understand how it comes up with it;s solutions and dive accordingly. Keeping 5-7 minutes of NDL is a tad simplistic, but it will probably work for most of the diving you are likely to do. I would definitely trust your dive computer over a DM ANYDAY!! But... if you can't plan it; DON'T DIVE IT.

Big-t-2538

June 11th, 2003, 10:38 AM

Most computers have a planning function where you can plan multi-level dives right on your computer (mine does...and it's old) You can write this plan down...say on a slate, you can memorize it, wet-notes, something...then when you decide you only want to spend 6 minutes at 70ft as opposed to the planned 10, you know you are still within the tables....

I imagine (since I have never seen the wheel) that if you plan a dive with the wheel, you will get very close to the bottom time you will get by planning with a computer....I know the square dive profiles on a computer are pretty close to my NAUI tables (NAUI's tables a very conservative...especially on subsequent dives)

Plan you dive....dive your plan....if you don't plan, you plan to fail

MikeFerrara

June 11th, 2003, 11:12 AM

biscuit7 once bubbled...
I just finished my AOW, I still don't know how to use the wheel. I still don't know how to plan multi-level dives on paper. I'm not unique in that respect. The plan I gave in the above example isn't unique. This is a typical Caribbean (and probably elsewhere) kind of dive. Tons of people do that dive, in some form or another, every day in dive destinations around the world.

Most instructors don't teach the weel. I don't think it ever really gained popularity. I think it's good to at least look at one if for no other reason that it illustrates what is going on in a multilevel dive at least in the context of that model. I have one you can look at. Multi-level planning is something that can be addressed by an instructor in any class (hint...hint)

Short of signing up for the PADI Multi-level Diver Specialty, where is a diver to get the information to avoid the "trust me" dives? Does DIR-F cover it? Do other agencies cover it in their advanced certificates?

I think dive planning is taken a little too light in most training. It's almost as if it's assumed that you'll be following a guide. On the other hand some instructors make the planning aspects of a dive a priority in any class. Of course a plan doesn't have to be complicated just appropriate.

There are a whole bunch of people telling me to toss the computer but no one is giving me a way to fill in the knowledge gaps so that plan is feasible!

We've talked about this a lot here. Apparantly GUE isn't goind to address compuerless multilevel diving outside of their tech and cave classes. I'm sure they have their reasons. It isn't hard to come up with a way to do it if you really studdy the tables and/or profiles using decompression software. I can't say that I am familiar with exactly what GUE teaches but I have my own ways. Outside of GUE I'm not sure how an instructor can teach any of these methods because they directly conflict with the instructions given for table use. That doesn't mean that it won't work just that a PADI instructor for instance would have nothng to fall back on to justify their methods.

The following is for discussion purposses only.
Just to satisfy your own curiosity on the subject I can think of a couple of things you can do. 1, look at some of Uncle Pugs threads. He has talked about what he does including profiling. 2, It isn't recommended to use most dive table to plan multi-level dives but it's been done. Look at how the table works and see if you can estimate what your RNT and resultant NDL will be moving from a deeper level for a certain time to a shallower level. You will notice a definate pattern. 3, You will also hear divers refering to what they call their profile depth (as apposed to max depth). If you play with some decompression software or even the tables you'll see that you can plan a multi level dive and a single level dive and get the same (or very close) answer using a depth that turns out to be the average depth. IMPORTANT...by average I don't mean the mean of the depths but a weighted average that takes the time at each depth into account. I can show some math to make this clearer if you want.

Going through these excersizes, if nothing else, will help give you a feel for what your computer will say before it says it and some intuition into what you will calculate on the table before you calculate it. Kind of like using estimation when doing math to know if the answer the calculator gives you makes sense. Useful I think even if you stick with the computer.

You might say these methods don't seem very precise. You are right but again if you play with some decompression software you'll see that by running the same dive but setting user setable parameters differently you can get dratically different answers. Which is the right one? So where does the precission come in? In the end you decide. As many point out most tables and computers don't reflect the latest thinking in decompression either. Others point out that what we have works. Not always. Also you are the only one who has a feel for what you shouldn't do (conservatism).

All that said, there are other things to consider like being in control of and aware of what you actually did on the dive. You can't estimate anything if you don't know where you were and for how long. Other things like good ascent procedures, gas management and how you conuct yourself before and after dives.

I don't think there are any secrets but I also don't think there are any short cuts.

I had an interesting conversation once with a GUE trained diver. We were discussing profiling and he used the example of the dive he had just done. He stated his max depth, the overall shape of the dive and what he used as a profile depth. I commented that it didn't seem very precise and that I didn't think using an average depth was valid based on the math of the model. His response was that I could use a deeper profile depth if it made me feel better.

I think and some one please correct me if I'm wrong but one of the resons these guys won't give up the secret is because there isn't one and it's so simple. Yet, if all the pieces arent there a person could really mess up by just jumping in the water without using tables or a computer.

Again all this has been just conversation. I'm not qualified to teach anything other than the accurate use of tables, computers and decompression software as outlined by the agencies I teach through and this isn't it.

I would certainly like to hear comments on my take on all this from the people who were tought to dive this way.

Uncle Pug

June 11th, 2003, 11:36 AM

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
I think and some one please correct me if I'm wrong but one of the resons these guys won't give up the secret is because there isn't one and it's so simple. Yet, if all the pieces arent there a person could really mess up by just jumping in the water without using tables or a computer.
It isn't mysterious nor difficult... but it does involve pieces of a puzzle that many divers are not trained to pay attention to.

For instance.... paying attention to time remaining (the big NDL numbers in the middle of the computer readout) is not the way to do it.

What I have shared here in the past has been to:
1) pique folks interest in computerless diving.
2) encourage them to pay regular attention to time/depth.
3) develop an awareness of how their dive is shaping up in real time.
4) use software to gain an understanding of how intert gas loads and unloads during the dive (GAP is free.)
5) pay attention to buoyancy control and slow ascents.
6) add plenty of shallow time at the end of a dive if possible.
7) use the World's Largest Waterbed.

I have in a few threads shared details... but details without the overall picture and skill sets won't get you there.