Value of the DIR approach

[cowboyneal]

I think you're all nuts, personally. DIR or not DIR, its all personal choice stuff in my humble opinion. Again, IMHO, no one 'system' or set of rules is better than another: it's the diver that matters, and how they develop their peak diving skills is up to them within their personal choice of all the systems out there. I've dove (dived? diven?) with plenty of good and bad divers DIR and not DIR - I'm still the best diver and instructor I know (save for a few folks I consider my equals in every way), am not at all interested in DIR (or any other system other than the one I developed for myself and others over 30 years of diving) and I certainly DON'T have hose envy either...although I would not dismiss DIR out of hand if someone asked me if they should take it (I would probably respond: what do you know about it and what are you looking to accomplish?). So, to each their own...all the name calling and other nonsense is kind of childish and chickenish...winter must be setting in...SO TAKE A CARIBBEAN TRIP!!!! Ha!

CN

 

[JeffG]

although I would not dismiss DIR out of hand if someone asked me if they should take it

DIR is not something you take. Its something you do.

 

[Adobo]

While I find the whole "BLACK" thing a bit anal along with some of the more IMO silly equipment requirements...

Hopefully your source for DIR equipment requirements is different than your source for associating black and DIR. It would be a shame for you to start forming opinions when you might be getting incorrect information.

 

[Puffer Fish]

If you have the energy, can you explain why every diver should be able do this? And would the training time devoted to parlor tricks be better spent on basic air calcs and kicks? Please pay paticular attention to why EVERY diver needs to have these skills. For instance, a warm water diver does not need to wear 3 fingered mitts.
Serious replies only, please.

Thal's response could be serious (ok, not that likely, but it could), and it points out a real dividing point between standardized approaches and skill set... when is good enough and where does one draw the line?

The other issue, is that of real safety.. do divers, trained in DIR have a far better safety record? There are more than enough and they keep records of this sort of stuff.

Hint: If DIR divers were three times safer, they would be rubbing everyone's noses in it. They are not.

One can argue that they tend to do much more dangerous diving, and as such, if they are about the same as a casual diver, then they are safer. But if that is true, then you have the answer. A standard approach has valuable when condition require a standardized approach. Cattle boat diving in Mexico, it would mean nothing and may actually be a problem.

Many things that seem to be safer, logically should be safer, are not in reality.

Consider ther following:

I doubt there is any recreational sport that has a higher death rate than rebreathers. Base jumping is safe by comparison. Recreational diving is tremendously safer. Why is that, when almost all the people that do it are highly trained, many DIR? Given the people using them, and the attention to known issues, one would expect that they would have the best safety record in the sport, not the worst.

I would suggest that one look at the details of actual results, and not the debate over which one sounds like the right way to do thing.

Although... calling people names is a lot of fun, also.

 

[runamonk]

DIR is not something you take. Its something you do.

Wouldn't it be easier if there was a DIR pill.

You just take your pill and all of a sudden you can do all the skills without practicing.

 

[JeffG]

The other issue, is that of real safety.. do divers, trained in DIR have a far better safety record? There are more than enough and they keep records of this sort of stuff.

Hint: If DIR divers were three times safer, they would be rubbing everyone's noses in it. They are not.

If one looked at the record of the WKPP, they might change their mind on that point.

I doubt there is any recreational sport that has a higher death rate than rebreathers. Base jumping is safe by comparison. Recreational diving is tremendously safer. Why is that, when almost all the people that do it are highly trained, many DIR? Given the people using them, and the attention to known issues, one would expect that they would have the best safety record in the sport, not the worst.

Using a RB isn't DIR, so this point doesn't hit its mark. Sorry.

Although... calling people names is a lot of fun, also.

Yes, it is.

 

[lamont]

Lamont, this is just an offhand observation I made.

I think DIR is a great thing, but the thing that I have noticed in real life dives, is that there are DIR divers out there that you THINK are good divers because they LOOK like good divers. So...it is easy to get in over my head with them. They appear to have it so together, and then something happens, and you realize they don't think outside of their box yet. In my experience, the training has this downside. They think they are so prepared, they are so BUSY with all their tasks, and meanwhile **** is happening and they seem a little too focused on the tasks.

Yup, this is a risk. I've been thinking a lot lately about trying to assess accurately the skills of the divers who are at my level and and the Tech 2 divers who are ahead of us. We definitely have weaknesses which come from simply not having the experience. The Tech 2 divers ahead of us also have those weaknesses and there's a large difference between the newly minted Tech 2's and the guys who have been Tech 2 for years and have decades of diving experience behind them already. There is no way to fix this other than to be aware of it. It still is better than the programs that'll take divers with 100 dives and move them through tech training so fast that they're down at 200+ feet on the doria with less experience than I have.

But the whole point of this is just that total dive count does matter in terms of just generating experience. This isn't unique to DIR or any other program.

I hope that at some point I'll be Tech 2 and Cave 1 or Cave 2 and at that point I'll basically consider myself to have an intermediate skillset, and I'll just need to go out and dive to get experience. The advantage to the training will be having a reasonably well thought out toolbox that can be utilized on a wide variety of diving. If you're running into divers with newly minted Tech 2 cards who think they're the best divers out there, that should set off some alarm bells...

 

[Ben_ca]

That's cus your dive buddies wait until you are out of earshot before talking about you.

ooohhhh you ae so gonna get it next time we dive together

 

[SparticleBrane]

I doubt there is any recreational sport that has a higher death rate than rebreathers. Base jumping is safe by comparison. Recreational diving is tremendously safer. Why is that, when almost all the people that do it are highly trained, many DIR? Given the people using them, and the attention to known issues, one would expect that they would have the best safety record in the sport, not the worst.

The only rebreather that is DIR is the RB80. To dive one of those, you're going to be quite extensively trained. I believe GUE now requires DIRF, Tech 1 and Tech 2 before they'll let you take their rebreather class...?
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I personally don't know of any deaths on the RB80.

 

[dlndavid]

ooohhhh you ae so gonna get it next time we dive together

what is the S word? Scooter?