Who Determines What DIR Is

[Michael Guerrero]

So it looks like I'm going to start down the cave training path and one of my instructors is emphasizing DIR. I've done a little reading on DIR, but I haven't participated in a training program that claimed to teach DIR diving/principles (at least I don't remember reading it in my TDI AN/DP classes).

So who determines what DIR really is? I know GUE has its system and I assume UTD does too. I don't know about IANTD or TDI, but if more than one agency claims to teach DIR, who is right and where do they get the authority to make such a claim?

As an example, who says what gases are "standard". If different training agencies differ on their system, can they still make the DIR claim because they have a system, standard, and philosophy that all their divers follow?

DIR seems more like a philosophy of standardization across configurations, procedures, and approach to diving while embracing Hogarthian minimalism. So if our DIR differs, which one of us is actually "Doing It Right"?

Thanks,

Mike

 

[tbone1004]

Technically, Jarrod Jablonski gets to decide what DIR officially is. UTD was formed when Andrew Georgitsis who was the training director for GUE separated and founded UTD, but technically GUE is the original. The same group of people also own Halcyon which charges the DIR Blue H Tax. I don't believe any other agency teaches "DIR".

The WKPP was the original body that DIR was stemmed from and the standardization is based off of the last 20+ years of those divers figuring out what worked, what didn't work, and what compromises were worth making *i.e. standardized gas mixes, obviously those are almost never the "perfect mix" for each dive, but they make math easy, and simplify everything*.

So, technically the one person who has ultimate authority on what DIR is currently is Jarrod Jablonski as founder of GUE, despite no longer using the term. He can make changes to that philosophy although I don't believe you will ever see any major changes to the current system. They are adding sidemount which was a hilarious effort about 4-5 years and was a truly laughable failure on their part due to their rig decisions, but the new Halcyon rig is actually pretty good and they are working on a sidemount course. This will be interesting to see how they implement the backmount rules because many of them cannot be transferred to sidemount.

 

[TSandM]

"DIR" is really not used any more.

There is the GUE system of diving, emphasizing standardization, strong skills, and a team approach. There is the UTD system, which has attempted to take that standardization across gear platforms, using a specific rebreather and sidemount apparatus. Where they differ from other technical agencies is that you will get the same gear setup and the same procedures and protocols from any GUE or UTD instructor that you engage, whereas with other agencies, there is more latitude for the instructor to decide or allow deviations. In addition, GUE has published standards for evaluation of the skills, so that you have a very clear idea of the way you will be evaluated.

For technical diving, it's often a good idea to figure out who you want to dive WITH, and then get the training that makes you compatible with that group.

 

[boulderjohn]

While GUE has said it no longer uses the term DIR, I believe UTD still does use the term. It was very much in use when I was with UTD, at least. The fact that they don't agree on certain aspects of it are problematic, of course.

IMO, it would be great if the term and all its baggage were to die away. If there is no "pope" of DIR deciding what makes the grade and what does not, then that means that nothing can change, no matter what improvements are made to dive equipment and methodologies outside of the system. In the year 2278, someone will still be clinging to ideas and equipment from 1995, screaming out that they are the last person who is truly doing it right. With the term totally disavowed, GUE will be free to evolve its methods and equipment as it wishes, as will UTD, NAUI, TDI, PADI, and everyone else.

 

[rlynch]

No pope of DIR..anymore anyway..
but if anyone "owns" it.. its the wkpp.. which is small, inclusive and modernizing as needs dictate.

If you like the style of diving (team, safety, planning, etc...) then i'd probably start diving with GUE folks and then decide from there.
it's a mind set...

FYI GUE does not use the term DIR anymore and is moving to other configurations as they become "known" and proven, its slow to change for good reasons and frankly it changes to fit the needs of the dives not the fads or the tech roller coaster.

my 2 cents....

FYI.. no side mount class that i know of anyway underway.. really no point for 90% of the demographic they reach as its true value is limited (which is low cave situations where back mount cannot fit, i.e cave 2+ ). rebreather (JJ) yes is well underway and is a Tech 2 pre-req course just like the RB80 which makes sense given the use, bottle requirements, gas, etc.

 

[tbone1004]

Rob, the sidemount course is getting written, slowly, but it's getting done, there have been a couple major speedbumps in their road. I know the DIR term isn't being used anymore, but the essence of what it is is still essentially controlled by GUE. UTD has taken a different path, and if they're still using the term, then I guess it belongs to them now, but the purest form of it still resides with GUE.

 

[rlynch]

tbone - i have heard nada on side mount other than some sr instructor tests (they use it when needed, usually 10k back in the cave), and no test classes after a small trial. i'm open to it but we shall see. I need to do a SM course since some of my students are diving that way and frankly i need to know more about it... under a dif agency at present.

 

[TSandM]

GUE has been slow to move to different gear configurations, and there is an extremely good reason why. Standardizing the gear to backmounted doubles, with an isolation manifold and long hose, creates a gear configuration which is suitable for the VAST majority of the diving that is out there to do. You may think sidemount is neat or would be fun; GUE says it's more important to put a team in the water which shares deep familiarity with everyone's equipment and how it will be used. You may want to use a CCR because it reduces your gas costs or makes your pictures better. GUE says it's a tool to be used in settings where project logistics are unmanageable without it, or where bubbles create site destruction.

GUE, as an organization, is conservative. Their system works -- it works for recreational diving, and for technical and cave diving, and for a huge spectrum of exploration and project dives. Where dives are truly over the edge, they are now accepting other tools.

Most of us will never do those dives. If you are doing dives within the envelope of where the system works (99% of us) you will find a well-developed and well-proven system that integrates divers, equipment and gear into a unit that maximizes capability. And you will find it working anywhere you feel motivated to dive. Stand in the garage door at Zero G with a hangdog look . . . in a half hour, you will be headed for the end of the line at Jailhouse, because you got your C2 a couple of trips ago, and two strangers knew what that meant and took you with them.

One of the most wonderful things about the GUE system is the degree of trust extended to people who were previously unknown. I've seen it work again and again.

 

[tbone1004]

hey, I never said it was a bad thing. The original DIR philosophy is spectacular. I'm still not nor will ever be a fan of the 1 piece harness because I physically can not use one. With one fitted properly I can't get out of it at the surface and if I walk around with a single 80 on my back for more than about 30 seconds it cuts off circulation to both of my arms. I need a chest strap, and when I dive a backplate I have the DR Deluxe Harness. It works very well, and despite not being a single piece of webbing, for ****s and giggles I put it on an instron and the standard webbing has a 4500lb tensile strength, the sewn ring had one of 4150ish. Not enough that I'm going to care but that is a physical limitation that causes me to have to differentiate slightly from the norm. There are a few other things that I don't agree with for noncave diving, but it's standardized for cave diving so can't fault that though I will never understand SPG to left hip instead of left shoulder

Easy answer to the op still remains that if what people think of DIR is going to change, that change has to go through JJ as long as he is head of GUE, and then it will be whomever else is leading that group, and as I said, you won't see many changes to the philosophy because it has been standardized for a reason and it works.

 

[lv2dive]

Maybe I can help...SPGs are attached to hoses and there is a always a possibility an oring will go or something similar. I know someone personally who was out of the water for weeks (perhaps months) when theirs went and messed with their ear something fierce. I think (not sure) they were diving sidemount but the issue is the same.

Once clipping and clipping the SOG is burned into muscle memory it takes no time or effort at all and removes that risk.

....though I will never understand SPG to left hip instead of left shoulder