Attitudes Toward DIR Divers

[Lorenzoid]

I kind of agree with @Eric Sedletzky on this. PADI is good at what they do: teach the world to dive. If a diver wants something more or something different, it's out there.

 

[boulderjohn]

I kind of agree with @Eric Sedletzky on this. PADI is good at what they do: teach the world to dive. If a diver wants something more or something different, it's out there.

Until a few years ago, Extreme Exposure, the home of GUE, used PADI for pretty much all its OW instruction. It still offers some PADI classes.

 

[Wibble]

I kind of agree with @Eric Sedletzky on this. PADI is good at what they do: teach the world to dive. If a diver wants something more or something different, it's out there.

Teach the world to dive... within strict constraints.

When you know nothing, you don't know how different things are between benign warm, clear, good weather conditions and diving in more challenging waters requiring a lot more self reliance.

Being fluffed up by the OW/AOW instructors "you will be qualified to dive anywhere" gives a false sense of safety.

 

[jadairiii]

It was UTD. There was no instructor evaluation process.

Good to clarify. I believe a lot of people, when DIR is discussed, they assume GUE.

What does this mean?

When I began my DIR training, I was told that "we don't hold your hand the way PADI does." What does that mean, I wondered. Here is what it meant.

• No explanation of how to do a particular skill.
• No demonstration of how to do a particular skill.
• Assessment on your ability to do the particular skill.
• Mirthful mocking of your failure on the assessment of the particular skill.

Should have taken a GUE class.....

 

[Allen-1]

I kind of agree with @Eric Sedletzky on this. PADI is good at what they do: teach the world to dive. If a diver wants something more or something different, it's out there.

Plus one on this.

I'm a "recreational" diver; the education/training I received from PADI, (AOW/Nitrox), has equipped me with the necessary training to do the diving I currently want to. The process was fairly straightforward, affordable, and sufficient for my needs.

If I choose at some point in the future to go more "technical", I'll seek out the training. Until then, I've got lots to see underwater, and more practice needed on the stuff I've been taught.

 

[crofrog]

Yes.
(a) The swimming requirements (surface and u/w) are on the extreme side; (e) right out of OW training is not likely, or necessary; (h) min decompression is not a recreational skill, it is prep for advanced training; (k) (l) cave skill, not a new OW diver; (n) not with a single tank; (o) too narrow....; (p) two kicks would be good for a new diver.

Before the rebuttals below, let's make sure we have a shared understanding of unreasonable, adj, beyond the limits of acceptability or fairness.

a) swimming 300yd in 14 minutes basically requires 1:10 laps in a 25yd pool. If you are fit enough to work at moderate intensity for the entire you can meet that swimming requirement.

A reasonable base of fitness is important for safety in the water. The PADI standard is either 200yard, or 300yd (mask fin snorkel) with no time limit and a 10 minute float. The less fit you are the easier the float is...

e) that's unfortunate, maintaining +/- 2.5 of a target depth should be easily attainable for divers you are trained neutrally buoyant and not over weighted.

(h) sure, that's a GUEism, replace that with 30ft/min to the safety stop and maintain the depth at the safety stop

(n) the valve drill in single take is able to touch the valve. considering people make mistakes and enter the water with the valve not open a non-zero number of times it's an important skill.

(o) sure replace that with "PADI equipment standards or whatever"

(P) only because the instructor is lazy, how hard is it to teach the flutter, mod flutter, frog and mod frog?

And no, divers are not dropping like flies because they are not GUE trained.

I'm not asserting that. I'm asserting that "legacy" dive agencies routinely allow their instructors to violate their own standards and that quality of instruction of classes being taught under their moniker varies tremendously from what I'm assuming is quiet good, to very poor. This puts the onerous on the student who literally knows nothing about diving to some how research and understand what is "good." This is an unreasonable position for them to be in. Additionally most dive shops turn into echo chambers, where people who know nothing about diving, are taught by the instructors who then blindly regurgitate what was taught, and leave good reviews without any basis for what is good.

If someone leaves a 5 star review on a pizza place, it's pretty safe to assume they've eaten a bunch of pizza before, but that is not the case with a dive shop for OW.

 

[tursiops]

Before the rebuttals below, let's make sure we have a shared understanding of unreasonable, adj, beyond the limits of acceptability or fairness.

a) swimming 300yd in 14 minutes basically requires 1:10 laps in a 25yd pool. If you are fit enough to work at moderate intensity for the entire you can meet that swimming requirement.

A reasonable base of fitness is important for safety in the water. The PADI standard is either 200yard, or 300yd (mask fin snorkel) with no time limit and a 10 minute float. The less fit you are the easier the float is...

e) that's unfortunate, maintaining +/- 2.5 of a target depth should be easily attainable for divers you are trained neutrally buoyant and not over weighted.

(h) sure, that's a GUEism, replace that with 30ft/min to the safety stop and maintain the depth at the safety stop

(n) the valve drill in single take is able to touch the valve. considering people make mistakes and enter the water with the valve not open a non-zero number of times it's an important skill.

(o) sure replace that with "PADI equipment standards or whatever"

(P) only because the instructor is lazy, how hard is it to teach the flutter, mod flutter, frog and mod frog?

You asked. I answered. Why the rebuttal? Must everything be an argument? That is tiresome.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Teach the world to dive... within strict constraints.

When you know nothing, you don't know how different things are between benign warm, clear, good weather conditions and diving in more challenging waters requiring a lot more self reliance.

Being fluffed up by the OW/AOW instructors "you will be qualified to dive anywhere" gives a false sense of safety.

When I got certified through PADI, we did our check out dives in 52 degree water in the Pacific Ocean in Northern California. The vis was about 2 or 3 meters, there was surge back and forth and we needed stay off the bottom otherwise we would have been picking urchin spines out of our knees. The entry /exit was over a rocky beach so we had to be ultra careful not to slip on slimy rocks getting in and out.
Everyone did their skills as outlined in the manual, no shortcuts. Everybody passed.
When we were done we were able to plan and conduct a dive on our own with another certified diver without being assisted by an instructor or divemaster. We were trained to dive in the conditions we were certified in.
I don’t know how much more you want than that?
Sorry it wasn’t GUE or BSAC or some other super hero agency because where I live we have PADI, SSI, or if you go through Sonoma State University then it’s NAUI.

 

[crofrog]

I kind of agree with @Eric Sedletzky on this. PADI is good at what they do: teach the world to dive. If a diver wants something more or something different, it's out there.

I don't disagree. The GUE training isn't for everyone, as I asserted earlier, but that doesn't mean the current training is of consistent quality or adequate.

You asked. I answered. Why the rebuttal? Must everything be an argument? That is tiresome.

because this is discourse (n. written or spoken communication or debate) on a forum (n. a meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged) .

 

[tursiops]

because this is discourse (n. written or spoken communication or debate) on a forum (n. a meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged) .

LOL.