Please explain DIR to me...

[RichLockyer]

1. Where is the breaking point with DIR? What I mean is if you don't want a seven foot hose on my second stage, does this make me out of compliance? A shorter hose for OW makes more sense to me, and I don't want to wrap anything around my neck.

The 7-footer is not a big deal to use. Some who have not used it will say things like "it'll get tangled up" or "it'll strangle you"... I was one of those people
It is a little more of a hassle when donning in-water, but it's not a big deal. It's not "wrapped around your neck"... it passes across your chest, behind your head, and comes in from the right side of your face, same way as a conventional rig.
That said, photos of George's open water, single-tank rig do show a 40" hose on his primary. It is routed under the right arm pit and into your mouth (even when NOT using a 7-foot hose, you still always breathe and donate the longest hose). The 5-foot hose really is useless... it routes like a 40", but goes behind the neck like the 7-footer.
I like the 7-footer... gives my buddy more room and we are more comfortable surfacing during an air-share situation.

2. What if you dive without a buddy? Or your buddy is not close to you or is out of DIR compliance? Does this mean that you shouldn't dive because you are not under DIR standards?

A big part of DIR is the unified team concept. "Same day-Same ocean" buddy diving is not DIR. Solo diving is absolutely not DIR... your buddy is a key piece of backup equipment. He is your backup air supply (especially if you are diving singles). He is your backup bottom timer. He is your backup compass. He is your backup dive computer (your primary is the one between your ears). He is your backup set of eyes and ears.

I have always relied more upon myself than my buddy. I would hate to have an OOA incident but have always dove with air a short emergency ascent away. I am sure this flies in the face of DIR (although I could be wrong).

A self-reliant buddy is a good buddy, as he will be most capable of assisting you if YOU require assistance.

3. What about dive computers? I CAN dive without them because I know tables and can do equations when I have to, but why should I? Square profiles are cool and all, but I would rather have more time on the bottom gained through my computer. And if I lose the computer I can always abort the dive and stop diving. Is this a drastic departure from DIR?

http://www.baue.org/library/bakerscomputers.html
You really don't gain much in the way of bottom time, when compared to a properly planned multilevel dive. One of my recent dives pushed my Vyper to the edge of deco from about the 10th minute on... it was a 65 minute dive, max depth 107ft. My average depth was 56ft, so my total runtime of 65 minutes (which included a 7-minute hang at 15ft) was comparable to a table dive.

One of the big things that Americans have a problem with is fear of deco. PADI and NAUI teach us that it is to be avoided. In Europe, basic deco training is included with OW. Every dive is a deco dive... sometimes your deco stop is a 33ft/min ascent, and sometimes it is a 5-hour progressive run.
Lose the abject fear of decompression and learn how to work with it safely and you will realize that the dive computer does little for you.

I do use the Vyper as a computer, but I'm not fully DIR, nor is my buddy. Still, there are very few other people that I would dive with.

 

[scubascudadoo]

I would tell you to read the DIRF book and look at the thought processes JJ and company went through to create DIR. Look at the problems they tried to solve, look at how they solved them. Look at the videos and the skill level they've achieved.

Then look at your own diving, look at the same problems, look at your own skills. Try to think your problems through. You might end up coming to the same conclusions. You might not. In any case I urge you to put the same amount of thought and planning into your own diving.

If you were my buddy and I were trying to convince you to take the class, I'd ask you to watch me in the water. I'd do S-drills with you and share air. I'd get close to the bottom and show you how my finning and trim keep me from disturbing the bottom. I'd show you how I don't need to hold a line to ascend in open water (well, I'm still working on some of this stuff, but you get the idea ). I'd ask you "what if" questions to get you thinking about your own diving, then give you my own answers and why I'd do it that way. I'd ask you to read the book again.

If you end up thinking that the DIR guys are onto something, I'd urge you to take the class and see what you think. If it's just not for you, that's cool. I'll dive with you anyway.

All the skills you have mentioned above I aready have mastered. I'm not attacking because I have several friends who along with me agree with the DIR approach to diving. I'm currently a DMC with PADI and as such believe that there are two things you need to do it improve as a diver. Experience and training.

As far as I have read from this thread and others there are alot of pros for the DIR approach that could be also used in REC diving when not really in the DIR gear so to speak.

I personal would like to take the course to better my own techniques when doing "fun diving". When with students I unforunatley am stuck using "PADI" approved gear and approach although I would willing purchase the necassary DIR gear. To be honest I like the stream lining of gear and carrying only the ness stuff.

As another comment the Jet Fins or Turtles depending on feet size. "Small feet myself" are the ultimate fins. Easy control in the water, ability to back fin, and the strong forward motion with minaml move movement.

I live in Toronto and is there a DIR instructor in the area that anyone knows about. I'd like to talk with one ... One-on-0ne.

Thanks
MB

 

[jonnythan]

1. Where is the breaking point with DIR? What I mean is if you don't want a seven foot hose on my second stage, does this make me out of compliance? A shorter hose for OW makes more sense to me, and I don't want to wrap anything around my neck.

Basically if you do anything contrary to the guidelines, you're no longer DIR. Whether you use zip ties or cave line to attach backup lights isn't all that big a deal unless you're doing serious diving, but any major gear changes (ie, no 7 foot hose, or a substandard wing, or adding a pull dump) will be an issue. This goes right back to having it as a whole system and removing any one part will break things. Think of it like a car engine. It will still run OK if you have a blue oil dipstick, but if you try to toss in a transmission from a '97 Neon into a '04 Camry things just won't work.

2. What if you dive without a buddy? Or your buddy is not close to you or is out of DIR compliance? Does this mean that you shouldn't dive because you are not under DIR standards? I have always relied more upon myself than my buddy. I would hate to have an OOA incident but have always dove with air a short emergency ascent away. I am sure this flies in the face of DIR (although I could be wrong). What are the thoughts about that? I have no desire to dive in caves or any enclosed environment (although the cave scenes in the movie were awesome, thank goodness there are video cameras so that I can watch those scenes). So I am having a hard time considering this aspect of it.

An absolute requirement of doing it right is to dive with a buddy. There are no two ways about it. The essence of DIR is to make the dive as safe and streamlined as possible.. and diving without a buddy increases the risk to your life significantly, so it's out. Period. There are DIR divers who dive solo.. but when they're solo, they're not DIR.

3. What about dive computers? I CAN dive without them because I know tables and can do equations when I have to, but why should I? Square profiles are cool and all, but I would rather have more time on the bottom gained through my computer. And if I lose the computer I can always abort the dive and stop diving. Is this a drastic departure from DIR?

One of the things hammered into your head in the Fundamentals class is situational awareness. You get taught to take 5 minute snapshots of your dive. This allows you to do on the fly NDL calculations, but more importantly, keeps your brain working and forces you to be constantly aware of your remaining tank pressure, your surroundings, your depth, your dive time, etc. A computer makes it too easy to bypass this step. Having the ability to have good situational awareness and do those on the fly calculations with just bottom time and depth information is necessary if you ever follow DIR into the tech diving world, so you never follow the deco advice of a computer - you go by your plan. (disclaimer: i'm obviously not a tech diver)

 

[sauga]

Now not trying to induce flaming or trolling, but a while back I read somewhere about diving with twins, and using them both as seperate, redundant air supplies and diving with a sling bottle for your air supply. It brought back memories of Phil Hartman the Anal Retentive Chef and Anal Retentive Carpenter from SNL. I can see the Anal Retentive Diver...

Seriously though, DIR has its place and practitioners. I'm not one myself, but I can see myself migrating in that direction. Part of the problem seems to be the cost of admission. Lets face it, diving in itself isn't too expensive once you have the gear, but the initial plunge can be a 'spensive one. Most of us start out with our PADI, NAUI, SDI, etc. class that focuses on the the basics and most LDS focus on the same. Then, somewhere down the road, you hear of DIR, you look into it and say, "Wow, this is interesting", but then you read on about how in order to attend a DIR-F class you will need to bring all this gear, some of it you may have, much of it you don't. And without the foresight of training, you're forced to take your LDS's opinion on faith or post questions on forums like "Which BP-Wing combination won't make my butt look too large whilst doing the frog kick..."It does begin to sound almost cult-ish. And then, some of the techiques like the long reg line and the octo on the short bungie, although it makes sense, many who were trained otherwise see it as foreign and therefore suspect.

So, yeah, I'm saying DIR seems somewhat anal retentive, but I've been accused of being that before...

 

[darkpup]

Then, somewhere down the road, you hear of DIR, you look into it and say, "Wow, this is interesting", but then you read on about how in order to attend a DIR-F class you will need to bring all this gear, some of it you may have, much of it you don't.

Actually, we were able to rent our gear for the class. BP & Wing, regulators with 5' to 7' hoses (depending on use of a light cannister or not), HID light, gauges, and flippers. It cost the same as it would have cost to rent the usual gear seen at a PADI OW course for a weekend.

I have to admit though, after diving the BP & Wing setup, it was tough going back to a jacket style BC. The weighting and trim was way off in the BC, and after the DIR-F class, we decided to buy our own gear. The cost for us was on par with buying our own non-DIR gear, but I definitely understand how the cost of gear can make diving DIR a bit more daunting.

Since getting the gear though, I've gone from maybe 20 dives over 16 years (certified PADI OW in 1986) to roughly 75 dives in 4 months since taking the DIR-F course. I'm not sure if that's due to the gear/DIR-F course, or the fact that my wife feels safer in the water since she also took the class.

So, yeah, I'm saying DIR seems somewhat anal retentive, but I've been accused of being that before...

Yep, diving DIR can often seem like we're definitely anal retentive. With our gear checks, dive plan checks, gas planning, and safety drills, if you were coming from a PADI perspective, you'd think we were going through a pre flight check on a fighter plane. DIR is just another way of looking at diving with the primary focus on having more fun. To accomplish that goal, we focus on safety, situational awareness, and buddy skills. It definitely seems anal retentive when you start diving DIR, but it has really made our diving a lot more fun.

~ Jason

 

[headhunter]

So, yeah, I'm saying DIR seems somewhat anal retentive, but I've been accused of being that before...

Does "anal retentive" have a hyphen in it (anal-retentive)?

I just couldn't help myself.

I think that spending money on your DIR gear is the same process that one goes through when first learning to dive. It can be a daunting process, however, I find the DIR gear is a bit less expensive overall.

If you're "on the fence", then I would agree that it makes sense to just rent the gear while making your decision.

I'm not on the fence and have decided that as I get back into diving after a long hiatus, that I may as well get restarted with the gear that I plan on using from here on out. For me, it's almost like taking a step back in time to the gear that I originally started with. So I'm in the process of getting the last few items together. I had to replace much of my old gear from the mid '80s anyway.

Speaking of old gear, I was cleaning out my garage last week and found my old Darrel Allen Bug Diver 400 light. It's a bit like attaching a car headlight to a 12 volt battery. I think I'll keep it either for posterity or as an anchor.

Christian

 

[grazie42]

Ok...a while back someone asked for specific questions about DIR...

Do you have to use the same exposure suit/gear for all dives?
I dived with a couple of DIR divers this weekend and they were pretty much soaked before they put on their drysuits, after the doubles came on they were pretty much soaking the deck of the boat...
I have pretty much all the gear they had (drysuit, doubles etc) but I´d never use it for a simple 80-100 feet rec dive. Would that be required to be truly DIR?

 

[JimC]

You can dive DIR in a shorty and a single.

The real question is:
Is the exposure suit suitible for the environment?

Ofcours after that you have to ask yourself:
Am I relying on the boyancy of my drysuit, ei; heavy steel doubles?


What is required for DIR on a simple recreational dive to 80 feet. In an AL80, whatever keeps you warm.

 

[WJL]

....I have pretty much all the gear they had (drysuit, doubles etc) but I´d never use it for a simple 80-100 feet rec dive. Would that be required to be truly DIR?

If you are diving 100 feet on an Al80, how much usable gas do you have, leaving an allowance for an air-sharing emergency at depth, making all your stops, and ascending no faster than 30 feet per minute? Do the calculation yourself, using any reasonable assumptions you like about SAC rates and time to square away the emergency before starting the ascent. You will find that the "usable" gas in that Al80 gives you a surprisingly short bottom time. It's something you might want to think about. Yes, you can make the dive, and thousands of similar dives are made every day. But for most of these dives, the only gas planning is to expect that nothing will go wrong.

One of the things GUE teaches in DIR Fundamentals to actually plan, in a systematic and sensible way, how much gas you need to do a dive safely, taking into account not just your gas needs, but your team's needs. There is a reason that DIR divers are using doubles on a simple 80 - 100 foot rec dive. The reason is not that they want to look like hard cases. Or at least that's not supposed to be the real reason.

 

[jonnythan]

BTW, another good reason for using doubles on a "simple" rec dive (ignoring the 100 foot thing) is practice.

Nothing wrong with getting more familiar with equipment you plan on using on more serious dives.. and no reason to switch to something unfamiliar (single tank) for a 100 foot dive.