I'm Taking the DIR Plunge

[Drewski]

I am starting the DIR fundies course. I have dove with two GUE trained folks, and they are far superior to to anyone I have dove with before, not to say that non-dir people are not good, but these guys are great.

Advice appreciated

From the "DIR" website concerning "required" equipment:

Tanks/Cylinders: Students may use dual tanks/cylinders connected with a dual outlet isolator manifold, which allows for the use of two first-stages.

Backplate System: A rigid and flat platform, of metal construction with minimal padding, held to a diver by one continuous piece of nylon webbing. This webbing should be adjustable through the plate and should use a buckle to secure the system at the waist. A crotch strap attached to the lower end of this platform and looped through the waistband would prevent the system from riding up a diver's back. A knife should be secured to the waist on the left webbing tab. This webbing should support five D-rings; the first should be placed at the left hip, the second should be placed in line with a diver's right collarbone, the third should be placed in line with the diver's left collarbone, the fourth and fifth should be affixed to the crotch strap to use while scootering or towing/stowing gear. The harness below the diver's arms should have small restrictive bands to allow for the placement of reserve light powered by three in-line c-cell batteries (where necessary). The system should retain a minimalist approach with no unnecessary components.

Buoyancy Compensation Device: A diver's buoyancy compensation device should be back-mounted and minimalist in nature. It should come free of extraneous strings, tabs, or other material. There should be no restrictive bands or "bungee" of any sort affixed to the buoyancy cell. In addition, diver lift should not exceed 50lbs for a single tank and 80lbs for double tanks. Wing size and shape should be appropriate to the cylinder size(s) employed for training.
____________________________________________________

Respectfully, I am curious to know how you think "converting" to this approach will make you a "better" diver? Certainly the principles stated have both value and meaning, not to mention that I've used some of the very same equipment, but it sure seems to me to be a little "packaged" not to mention "narrow."

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm a real advocate of training. BUT, Peter Drucker, Stephen Covey and Tom Peters still make a TON of money telling corporate America all about the next great "thing" year after year. Kind of makes you wonder, what happened to the last great "thing?"

So I guess I'm asking you what is motivating you to spend money on taking this course instead of putting gas in that boat of yours and heading off shore?

I don't know, I've been reading a bunch of posts lately (admitedly I'm new here) and it seems like a bunch of folks treat some of this as a "club." And, unless you are willing to "drink the Koolaid," you ain't doing it right.

So, unless you are planning to stay down for a LONG time, why are you wearing doubles?

 

[CompuDude]

So, unless you are planning to stay down for a LONG time, why are you wearing doubles?

1) I'm planning to stay down a LONG time. Bottom time is the reason we do this sport, isn't it? It's not nearly as interesting-looking sitting in a pile at the beach.
2) Redundancy is important in an overhead environment... such as deep deco diving, deep wreck diving, and cave diving... all of which I'd like to do at some point.
3) Redundancy is also important when considering solo diving.

There are three excellent reasons to consider the move to doubles. And there is no better platform than a bp/w configuration than that. And when moving to a new platform (from, say, regular jacket or even back-inflate BCs), doesn't it make sense to at least consider the choices made by those who have been doing it for a long time, and have made it practically a religion to polish their configuration to perfection? It certainly does for me... and that's why I've been slowly moving towards DIR, and intend to take DIR-F at some point when I feel ready.

 

[Agent 47]

Amen.

I've never had any DIR training, but one thing I've noticed on here is that the naysayers never have any valid technical arguments against the system. It's more like excuses and mudslinging, and so predictable that I could probably tell you what political party each of them belongs to.

Really, when you look at the performance and safety records of DIR groups compared to other tech-oriented groups, there is no need for discussion. The numbers speak for themselves. It's an unfortunate truth in this world that if you're really good at something, a lot of people will hate you. That doesn't mean you're doing something wrong. It means they are.

 

[kidspot]

Respectfully, I am curious to know how you think "converting" to this approach will make you a "better" diver? Certainly the principles stated have both value and meaning, not to mention that I've used some of the very same equipment, but it sure seems to me to be a little "packaged" not to mention "narrow."

I can answer that for myself (sort of) I didn't actually convert from one philosophy of diving (it's more a philosophy, than a style) but I spent 6 months before my OW certification reading everything I could get my hands on about diving, everything from the PADI manuals (OW through DM) as much as I could pour over here on Scubaboard, NAUI manuals, periodicals, and info from the DIR/WKPP "crowd". After reading info from as many different sources as possible DIR just "made sense" to my way of thinking. I liked the team approach to diving, the consistency in approaching skills and patterns (muscle memory) that stayed the same no matter what type of diving you did. Knowing that other divers who ascribe to the DIR philosophy will have similar reactions/expectations during a dive. The "package" and approach to diving seemed to fit what I wanted out of diving.

It has been 2 years and I still am the "lone" DIR hopeful diver on my island (hopefully not for long) and while I enjoy diving with my SB buddies from all over the world when a DIR diver comes here and we dive together it just seems like we're on the same page. I'll never turn down a dive with a diver because they are not "DIR" but I feel safer and have more fun doing challenging dives with DIR divers, not because others are "unsafe" but just because we are looking at diving from a similar perspective.

There's my "story" in a nutshell

I have the greatest respect for divers with more experience than myself (which is a good majority of you out there - lol) and I plan to learn all I can from as many sources as I can, but at this point I still like the DIR philosophy because it just continues to make sense to me...

Aloha, Tim

 

[JimC]

1) I'm planning to stay down a LONG time. Bottom time is the reason we do this sport, isn't it? It's not nearly as interesting-looking sitting in a pile at the beach.
2) Redundancy is important in an overhead environment... such as deep deco diving, deep wreck diving, and cave diving... all of which I'd like to do at some point.
3) Redundancy is also important when considering solo diving.

1) Unless I am shallow or deco diving, I long run out of Time on Nitrox before gas in the can on a single.

2+3) Manifolded doubles aren't really truly redundant. Fine if you have a buddy as they DO cover most common gas loss issues. But I sure wouldn't be diving with single points of failure that will leave me exposed. I know how long it takes for me to shut down the isolator (10-15 seconds) and its not fast enough to get me out of a worst case solo dive.

Anyway, Re: DIR-F its a great course, just don't let them hook you up to a battery during the course. Its super easy to think that DIR is the end all-be all of diving after the course. Don't stop thinking just because someone said something was done a certain way. I took and passed a DIR-F first go, but my diving has evolved beyond where DIR can take me. I can even look back at some of the things taught in the class and see that they could have be done better a different way than was taught.

And this is where all the DIR divers laugh at my helmet and tell me I'm going to die because I have lights on it.

 

[edparris]

Unless I am shallow or deco diving, I long run out of Time on Nitrox before gas in the can on a single.

Wow that must be nice. Check my math here but the way I figure it on an 80ft dive with an AL 80 of 32% you must have a SAC of around 0.39 to hit the 50 minute NDL (NAUI tables). (Assumes reserve of 1 minute to sort problem at depth, 30' per minute ascent, 3 minute safety, 2 buddys each with ~0.4 SAC and no panic (i.e. SAC stays the same during emergency).

I can even look back at some of the things taught in the class and see that they could have be done better a different way than was taught.

Please share this kind of info. Most people I know would love to see a solid well thought out thread on this rather than the 500th discussion about why all things DIR must be black or how cool it would be to see a tank explode.

 

[Henryville]

BTW, my advice, if you are not currently diving doubles, is NOT to take the class in them. Take the class in what you dive. Then practice until the skills you were taught are ingrained and solid -- THEN challenge them with doubles. That's what I've done, and I'm really pleased that I chose that sequence. Moving into doubles has been MUCH easier, I'm sure, because I was really solid in a single tank before.

Weren't you also a nearly brand-new diver when you took fundamentals? Though his profile doesn't say so (will the dive info feature ever work again?) Mike isn't, I've been in the water with him and he has a different starting point.

Your advice might be right for relatively inexperienced divers, but many others don't find the doubles (especially aluminum) to be a big deal: buoyancy control and awareness during task loading are typically much more significant challenges. Admittedly I'm not a small person, but I think doubles have some big scary reputation for being difficult to dive that is largely unwarranted. Where better to get help setting up a balanced rig from the get-go than with an instructor to guide you? Going to a drysuit for a wet diver, for example, is much more challenging, in my opinion.

In addition, I've always thought some of the skills in DIR-F are just stupid in singles, like valve drills. It's great to be able to demonstrate the flexibility to turn on your own valve, but it's much less relevant than the analogous drill in doubles which is building toward managing manifold failures. I think DIR-F is a great place to learn the more complicated skill, again with the supervision of an instructor.

So while we agree on a lot, on this point I'm in another place. But of course it's opinion and ultimately the student has to decide what they're comfortable doing within their own skill and experience sets and respecting their individual physique.

 

[TSandM]

I had 60 dives when I took Fundies, you're right. And I realize, after reading your post, Henryville, that I don't know anything about the OP, so my advice may be off base. I do know that people have taken the class -- in a single tank -- who had hundreds of dives, and advanced certifications (eg. instructors), and have found the class very challenging that way, and have not passed it.

I guess I'd revise what I said to this: Don't make major equipment changes immediately before taking the class. Make sure you've done enough dives in whatever you are going to use that the equipment itself is not going to be a challenge to manage, while you are trying to manage everything else.

 

[JimC]

Wow that must be nice. Check my math here but the way I figure it on an 80ft dive with an AL 80 of 32% you must have a SAC of around 0.39 to hit the 50 minute NDL (NAUI tables). (Assumes reserve of 1 minute to sort problem at depth, 30' per minute ascent, 3 minute safety, 2 buddys each with ~0.4 SAC and no panic (i.e. SAC stays the same during emergency).

Singles come bigger than AL80's.

Please share this kind of info. Most people I know would love to see a solid well thought out thread on this rather than the 500th discussion about why all things DIR must be black or how cool it would be to see a tank explode.

Well here is one, I was shown a frog kick (and most every video I see of one) this way:

Starting from a cocked "free dive" position:
Kick, Recock, glide. The motion of recocking your legs is going to slow down your glide.

I improved my range in a cave by about 30%, over the course of two dives doing this following. Kick, glide, recock.

 

[marusso]

Where better to get help setting up a balanced rig from the get-go than with an instructor to guide you? Going to a drysuit for a wet diver, for example, is much more challenging, in my opinion.

In addition, I've always thought some of the skills in DIR-F are just stupid in singles, like valve drills. It's great to be able to demonstrate the flexibility to turn on your own valve, but it's much less relevant than the analogous drill in doubles which is building toward managing manifold failures. I think DIR-F is a great place to learn the more complicated skill, again with the supervision of an instructor.

Hmm...very good points. That is something I am definately considering now when looking at it again. If I went that route, my backplate/wing would be set up for doubles, hmm....the added redundancy, I think it might work! Of course, I have to try to convince my wife why it would be a good idea to buy more gear. Darn that gear, it's so expensive!