The DIR Team -- Questions
- Thread starter Peter Guy
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
SparticleBrane
Contributor
limeyx
Guest
Teams of 2 make T1 and C1 classes much easier. I imagine that's why I passed
Hey, I had to have three people in both of mine (including some German guy we picked up for the last 2 days
I demand you go back and retake all classes in a team of 3 (or preferrably 4 or more) to prove you are worthy of the cards ...
Hey, I had to have three people in both of mine (including some German guy we picked up for the last 2 days
I demand you go back and retake all classes in a team of 3 (or preferrably 4 or more) to prove you are worthy of the cards ...
That German guy was solid... and the reason you passed :mooner::mooner:Now having to tell his friend not to embolize after freediving down and goofing around with us on German guy's long hose in Carwash was less than happy times
OP
Methinks y'all have missed the import of the issue concerning being 3 abreast. There was NO problem with me (#1 in the middle) doing navigation, keeping track of the team (ambient light negated the effectiveness of Salvo communication) and maintaining the team. The issue that came up was that my "wingman" to my left was upset that he couldn't see the "wingman" to my right -- although at all times he had no problems seeing me (in the middle). The fact that I was #1 was irrelevant -- the problem was that the "wingman" in a 3 person team felt he should be able to see both members rather than just key on the middle person and trust (if that is the right word) the middle teammate to keep track of the other wingman.
So far, as I'm keeping track, the consensus is that the wingman needs to be concerned with tracking the centerman and the centerman is responsible for tracking the wingmen -- but that it is DIR OK for the wingmen NOT to track each other.
(Which, of course, is how I understand single file teams to work.)
An offshoot of this is when ascending/descending -- in a 3 man team, must all three be able to track each other at all times during the ascent/descent, OR would it be OK for one team member NOT to be tracking one member AS LONG AS that team member is tracking the other team member who is tracking the 3rd team member (A tracks B, B tracks C, C tracks A but A does not track C and C does not track B). (Is that clear?)
So far, as I'm keeping track, the consensus is that the wingman needs to be concerned with tracking the centerman and the centerman is responsible for tracking the wingmen -- but that it is DIR OK for the wingmen NOT to track each other.
(Which, of course, is how I understand single file teams to work.)
An offshoot of this is when ascending/descending -- in a 3 man team, must all three be able to track each other at all times during the ascent/descent, OR would it be OK for one team member NOT to be tracking one member AS LONG AS that team member is tracking the other team member who is tracking the 3rd team member (A tracks B, B tracks C, C tracks A but A does not track C and C does not track B). (Is that clear?)
Definately and it should be anticipated when the vis is bad.
I think someone is taking the tracking a bit too far...
When you are line abreast in poor vis (and sometimes that is a good way to go) the people on the sides can't see each other very well. They can't donate to each other very well. The person in the middle is a key communication link. You have to trust their awareness and competency to relay communication. The alternative is to be practically hugging each other, blech. Ditto when linear along a line. #1 can't really communicate back to #3 very effectively and relies on #2 to relay any signals.
I think alot of us around here in the PNW have too many signals. Excess "chatter" UW is confusing. Sometimes its fun or playful, but when the dive gets demanding its confusing. There are really about 3 signals needed, thumb, hold, and "let's go that way now". Less chatter = less relaying = less chance to turn the dive into a game of telephone.
- Messages
- 97,453
- Reaction score
- 98,522
- Location
- On the Fun Side of Trump's Wall
- # of dives
- 2500 - 4999
Peter, wouldn't that really depend on the situation? If you're ascending up a wall, then wing-on-wing makes sense (perhaps). If you're coming up a line, seems to me that the "DIR" solution is for the three buddies to be positioned on the line facing each other. The only condition that would make that less than optimal would be ascending a line in current, in which case you're gonna want to all be facing into the current. In any case, your first option is a pattern that allows all team members to see each other. Your second is to shine your light where all members can see it ... on the line. If that's not an option, then staggering or tightening the formation should make it possible for the wingmen to keep visual track of each other. I'd say that "trust" should only be something you rely on when there are no practical alternatives.
The way I see it, the "DIR" solution would have you analyze your circumstances, prioritize your options, and choose the one that best maintains the integrity of the team.
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
PS - going back and rereading your original entry ... in response to your first question ... yes, I would say that one of the roles of the #1 diver is to direct position to the wing divers as circumstances dictate. Trying to maintain a formation that was agreed to before the dive ... but that is less than optimal due to the conditions of the dive ... just doesn't strike me as a very DIR solution at all.
The way I see it, the "DIR" solution would have you analyze your circumstances, prioritize your options, and choose the one that best maintains the integrity of the team.
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
PS - going back and rereading your original entry ... in response to your first question ... yes, I would say that one of the roles of the #1 diver is to direct position to the wing divers as circumstances dictate. Trying to maintain a formation that was agreed to before the dive ... but that is less than optimal due to the conditions of the dive ... just doesn't strike me as a very DIR solution at all.
JeffG
Contributor
Thank you.
lamont
Contributor
You need to be able to understand which is the middle/pivot diver. If you are in current going up a line and fall into a three-abreast formation then it should be obvious that the middle diver needs to be tracking the other two. If you find yourself in some kind of strange position where only one diver can see the other two due to vertical deltas and its not immediately obvious who is the 'middle' then the team is probably not in good shape (vertical deltas with divers above/below other divers is typicall not good). Generally if you are three abreast, or three in echelon or three in single file, then its obvious that there's a middle diver and it should be obvious what their job is. However, just "well, i can't see diver A, but I'm sure diver B can see them" is not good enough. You need to be sure that diver B knows its their responsibility to be a relay to diver A.
And the middle diver does get a lot of work. In some ways that is the hardest position, because they must be constantly tracking both of the other divers and relaying signals and it is their responsibility to keep the whole team together. The fact that you had a diver on one side who was uncomfortable with the positioning indicates that they didn't really trust you to be relaying signals and watching the other diver.
The separation was also a little bit far. All its takes is a little distraction on the closer diver and the middle diver will turn to them and at that point the separated diver will have some kind of LP inflator runway, shoot to the surface, embolize and die without either of the other two noticing. And the point is not really that 6-8 feet is "too far", in some objective sense, the point is that *you're* not good enough yet at operating as a team for 6-8 feet to be manageable. If the diver who was hanging back would promptly close the distance when distractions occurred and didn't hang back 8 feet away while their two buddies were task loaded it would not be as much of a problem.
And that is probably the issue the other diver really had is that they could see that the team positioning and attitude was lazy. Because it was lazy it heightened their need for vigilance and they wanted to see what was going on with both other divers all the time. You are getting distracted by the feedback that you're getting about the other diver being 'too far away'. The problem isn't something you can measure on a ruler, the problem is how well you were doing staying together as a team.
You have been in class too much
I agree 8ft is perfectly adequate or even closer than necessary when things are going fine. 8ft is often too far when a dive is going major sideways. Just mosying along having #2 and #3 communicating directly should not be required. If things are not going well and they can't communicate much if at all they are too far or the formation needs changing
Similar threads
