And apparently he decided that he could prevent his long guages from getting caught on anything, by walking upright on the bottom....
So is the BC part of the problem...or just the way he configured it? Thoughts?
Almost by definition it has to be how he configured it, else just changing the BC would (by definition) fix the problem and that would then be naught but that DIR anathema, "an equipment solution to a skill problem."
Not only is his console not clipped onto his BCD to avoid dangling, he has not properly routed the hose through the BCD's upper-left hose channel, which would take away a lot of extra length. Of course, I would suggest that he transitioned to a wrist mounted computer/SPG gauge configuration and attach his octo somewhere in his upper body triangle if a neck bungee was out of the question...
If his protocol is to surrender the primary, the location of the secondary is his option and the "triangle" becomes irrelevant. In fact, "hinding" it a bit might be a good choice so as to focus his buddy's attention on the primary.
One who is unsafe in one environment (deeper, reduced vis) are might be relatively reasonable in another (shallow, clear, etc). In OW, ill dive with almost anyone. As the complexity of the dive increases, the number of folks who I'll do that dive with subsequently decreases.
I think 'don't dive with unsafe divers' is a pretty sound recommendation.
Agreed, the question is how to access the "unsafe diver." The branding of everyone whose equipment differs in any way, regardless of their skill and ability, as an "unsafe diver" kind of goes to the root of this discussion.
Dan ... first off, you're addressing this as a DIR issue. It's not ... and addressing it as such only creates the very misimpression of DIR that so many are describing here.
This is NOT a DIR issue at all ... it's an issue of improperly using the equipment the person is wearing.
A BCD that "allows" a tank too low describes pretty much any BCD that uses a single tank strap ... and, if improperly adjusted, can also occur with the dual-strap BCD.
ANY BCD can be adjusted for proper trim or balance. It doesn't have to be a BP/W. The latter offers several advantages to the diver who is going to be considering dives appropriate to its use ... even in a recreational setting. But suggesting that the BCD is responsible for a person's bad trim is essentially saying you think people should use equipment to solve a skills problem.
The problem doesn't lie with the gear choice ... it lies with how the gear is being used. And it very well (and more likely) lies with the fact that this person ... who has grown accustomed to moving while in a vertical orientation his whole life ... was never taught how to move any other way. Neither of those problems is endemic to the choice of gear. Nor would a different BCD choice necessarily improve that person's posture ... if that's how he's used to moving, he'll simply make whatever adjustments are required to keep moving that way.
The problem must be resolved by finding and addressing the root causes ... not blaming it on the gear ...
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
Exactly, it is a skill problem. Other gear might force him into a slightly better mold, but he's still going to be a problem diver, even if outfitted in all Halcyon, Atomic and ScubaPro (all in black, of course).
There's a quote in the movie 'Step Into Liquid' that I think is perfectly applicable here... "Who's the best surfer (diver) in the world? The one having the most fun."
Fun may, or may not, be the goal. Sometimes I dive for fun, often I do not and my goal is to complete a piece of work while minimized the hazard.
...
And you've misunderstood holistic. It is holistic in that it encompasses the gear, the procedures, the diver's own preparation (fitness, experience, etc), and the whole team doing the particular dive. It does not claim to be perfectly *universal* and apply to every recreational dive and diver possible, which is a different concept entirely, and a pretty stupid idea to try to take on.
You express the issue far better than anyone else has so far. Enough DIR divers embody the, "stupid idea," to create a less than favorable view of anything that smacks of DIR in the eyes of many non-DIR divers.
"Unsafe divers" is a nebulous term. I wouldn't do a deep dive with someone who was diving a tank that wouldn't allow them to keep safe gas reserves for the planned dive. I wouldn't go diving with someone who had habits like the photographer we met in Indonesia, who would stay down until his tank was EMPTY and then come up on his DM's gas (the resort assigned him a personal DM for this reason). Unsafe diving is often a product of attitude, rather than skill; new divers with really poor skills are often attentive and careful, and less "unsafe" than cocky people with better technique.
I would, and have gone diving with people like Dan describes. How do people improve, if no one with more experience will help them? Not only that, but the Wednesday dives that were the genesis of this thread in the first place . . . are FOR this purpose!
And no, you don't have to change to a GUE gear configuration to solve weight and balance problems. But if you do, the problems are solved in the process, which is a nice side effect of the gear, and is the reason why that type of setup is very popular here in the PNW, even among people who haven't even heard of GUE. A lot of other problems go away at the same time, which is one of the reasons we do tend to be evangelistic about our gear! It is not the only way to dive comfortably or well, but it's an awfully easy one. Or, as the shop owner Bob was talking about once told me, "DIR is just such a SIMPLE way to dive."
While I agree that outfitting a diver with gear that, for example, "forces" them into a stable horizontal attitude can often make them APPEAR to be a better diver than they are, as I noted earlier, that is just an equipment solution for a skill problem.
Man, I had this long post wrote up for a reply to this and my computer shutdown. Uh well. My brain hurts from reading this thread anyway.
Who cares?! Plain and simple. Who gives a flying rat's butthole? DIR is a sound philosophy. It is a holistic approach towards diving that makes sense! The gear configuration is well thought out and has a reason behind each piece. It works! So do many other styles. People on both side of the argument need to chill out. Funny thing is most of the whining in this thread is from non-DIR divers who simply want to bash it. If you don't like it, don't freggin do it.
When new divers are referred to me to help mentor them, I hand them my copy of "Doing It Right; The Fundamentals of Better Diving". That copy has got some miles on it! I tell them to read it. It will help them understand why I pick things the way I do, and why I dive the way I do. Do I say, "If you don't dive this way you are going to DIE!" Nope.
OK, so who is the first to scream, "BUT BUT BUT, your avatar shows sidemount! You are not DIR!"
The issue is not what people dive with, or without, it is the idea (almost invented by the DIR faction) that, "If you don't dive this way you are going to DIE!" Glad to hear that you do not share that attitude.
With all due respect TSandM, I do not believe that simply swapping to a dir gear configuration will solve weight and balance configuration problems. It very well might possibly help them, but time must still be taken to figure out the proper balance and weighting regardless of the bcd type being used. For instance, if someone is wearing their tank to low with a jacket, they can still wear it too low with a bp/w. Will dual straps help, probably but a lot of jackets have them and given half a chance, there's still a lot of us that can still mount a tank too low. Doing a different gear config will probably help if for no other reason than it will usually make a diver be more concious of what their doing and how they are doing it. If just swapping gear would solve bouyancy, balance and weighting problems then it would put a lot of gear manufacturers out of business.
One of my students, many years ago, did a bunch of work in our tow tank to study BC drag, while that is not directly apropos, we did notice (though not study directly) some stability differences between designs. At the time (this is just before the phaseout of horsecollars) one of the things that many manufacturers were striving for was a BC design that permitted a diver carrying about eight pints of air, to have as little problem as possible in maintaining, without a minimum of effort, any combination of pitch, roll and yaw. ScubaPro, at the time, was heavily advertising how their triple-doughnut design fulfilled this criterion. We did notice that the BC that most closely resembled today's BP/W the Watergill At-Pack had a significant tendency to push a diver into a horizontal plane (thus minimizing cross-section dependent drag. BTW: the flapping of the wing material added a lot of drag). This tendency was also noticed by many divers and was used as a, "sales kill" (e.g., it will only float you face up at the surface). So, in any case, I think the answer to the question of will, "simply swapping to a dir gear configuration will solve weight and balance configuration problems?" is YES, in part, it will.
I have seen plenty of divers that look like that fresh out of OW class.
We've all seen lots of divers long out of their OW class that look the same.
