Gareth
GUE Instructor
Hope you guys don't mind as I'm not a frequent poster here, but I have a day at home and was browsing so thought I'd chip in.
Imagine a line. At one end, you have complete specialisation. At the other end, you have complete standardisation. There are pros and cons of adopting either extreme. For example, I used to know a navy diver that checked external hulls of ships for explosives. He dived a rebreather which apparently weighed a ton, costs an order of magnitude above the most expensive civilian available unit, required hours of maintenance after each use. It would appear to be utterly useless. Except that it's very, very good at being next to explosives and not making them go bang. No electronic leakage, no magnetic field, and a bunch of other stuff he probably couldn't tell me about and I wouldn't understand anyway. It's perfectly specialised. In fact, it's designed to do nothing else. It's a great example of specialisation. This specialised equipment is superb at doing 1 critical job but basically useless if you tried to apply it to any other jobs.
That's one end of the line. At the other end of the line is a single cylinder with one regulator coming off it, hanging off you with a piece of string. You could in theory dive this piece of equipment anywhere, in any scenario. It wouldn't actually be ideal for anything. It would be downright dangerous on some dives. There's no SPG, there's only one regulator. If you are deep there's not enough gas and sooner or later you will want to put a BCD on it. However, you can argue it's the perfect standardisation. any cylinder will do, and any reg. It works in EVERY situation, even if the reality is the vast majority of people won't use outside a "having a giggle" situation on holiday somewhere warm. There's very little to go wrong, it's light, and almost foolproof to set up.
So there's your line. At one end the perfect specialisation. Awesome at one thing, and unusable at almost everything else. At the other end of the line you have perfect standardised gear. Crap at everything, but at least usable at everything. Now look at the GUE configuration. The configuration was designed with cave diving in mind, so began life largely specialised towards cave diving. However, over the years it has slowly evolved, becoming more of a compromise. If we were being brutally honest, the GUE configuration is not perfectly in the middle of that imaginary line, it's skewed towards specialisation, but it's not all the way there. So by definition it's a compromise that works in every situation but is not really perfect for any of them. Therein lies the rub. At some point, you have to make a choice. Do I feel it is safer to tailor my equipment to each situation I might encounter, becoming a fan of specialisation, so that my equipment is ideally suited for the diving environment I have elected to dive in, or do I feel there is more safety in familiarity, comfort and in well practiced drills. GUE simply believe the latter.
If you have a specialisation mindset, it's easy to pick holes in the GUE configuration. It's a compromise. Some UK wreck dives require boiler suits to keep the oil off you. Some UK cave dives require thick boots and side mounted cylinders. Dive off Dover in the UK and you MUST take a very large heavy reel with you. These are scenarios where the GUE configuration works, but is not optimised. However, to criticise the configuration in this manner is to miss the point. As a GUE diver, I accept that I am diving a compromise. I accept that the benefits to myself and my team being completely familiar with each other's configuration, and being well drilled in practicing emergency drills with the same equipment, outweigh the benefits of specialising equipment for each dive. I could imagine the type of diving I do, and sit down with a computer and write a list of the perfect configuration for each dive. None of them would be the GUE configuration. They would all be different. Perfect for one thing, less than ideal for everything else. I would hate it. I'd have to stay familiar with several different configurations, and remember during the dive what configuration I was using. It would be easy to see how, in a panic, I might get confused and do the wrong thing. that scenario is ridiculous. So in reality, just about all recreational and technical sports divers compromise. They use the same computer on every dive. They use the same fins. The same drysuit, etc etc. So if the vast majority of divers compromise, there are obvious safety benefits to get everyone to use the same compromise.
Now you need to look at why GUE exists. GUE is basically a global club of divers, any of whom can turn up and go diving with other members of the club, and know they are completely familiar with all the equipment that they might hire or be given to use. They are completely familiar with the equipment that the people they are diving will use. So many incidents occur in diving due to confusion and panic under stress that the benefits of familiarity and comfort with equipment should be self explanatory. This global “club” welcomes anyone and everyone. It’s not exclusive, or elitist. We don’t think we are better or worse than anyone else. However, like all clubs, there are club rules. GUE’s club rules are the GUE standards. To call yourself a “GUE diver” all you have to do is dive within the club rules. If you want to rebel against the rules, or refuse to adhere to them, fine. It’s a big world and there are lots of other clubs to be members of. So in calling myself a GUE diver I agree to dive within the GUE standards, and adhere to a standardised configuration of equipment. I accept that this might be a compromise. I accept that this means I can’t tweak the configuration to suit my individual needs because that defeats the point of standardisation. I accept there are some elements that might not be optimised for my diving. By the way, in that regard, GUE are not nearly as prescriptive as some people might think. However, for the sake of argument, let’s look at some of the specific examples raised in this thread.
The compass. The standardised way to do it is to have the gauge on the right (which amongst other things means you can control buoyancy with your left hand whilst looking at it). The logical place for the compass is then on the left. It has another benefit in terms of scootering etc which others have raised. However, here is the rub. If you accept that standardisation is a good idea, what massive problem is having the compass on the left causing for you. GUE are not averse to changing things if there are good reasons. So rather than asking GUE to justify why they place the compass on the left, why not explain why it’s such a bad idea. Because it seems to work. What is the argument for not standardising it or changing the standard that outweighs the benefit of having a standard. The key here is the standard. Will the world explode if you put your compass on your right wrist. No. Will the entire team spontaeously combust the moment you slide that compass on your right wrist? No. so why does it matter? It matters because it shows that you haven’t got your head around the benefits of the standard. So my mind would go “what else has he changed”. Now I have to start asking you questions to put my mind at rest. Does he donate gas the same way. Is he actually using the same gas as me? etc etc. the moment I start thinking about these things is the moment I remember why I went GUE in the first place. It’s just very, very easy, and makes you feel very, very safe.
Why no redundant SPG. The moment someone asks my this question I know that the concept of GUE has not yet clicked with them. If the SPG fails I am calling the dive. If I have two SPGs and one of them fails I am calling the dive. Adding a second SPG gives me nothing, and adds more things to go bang. Two SPG’s to me suggests a diver that is worried about protecting their gas source. As a GUE diver, I’m not nearly as fussed about this as other divers might be. This is because I have at least one, and sometimes two, other divers that each have enough gas to get me safely home. We don’t have out of gas emergencies. Because it wouldn’t be an emergency. every diver always has enough gas to get another diver safely to the surface. Always. It’s our golden, unbreakable rule, and it’s like a big comfort blanket around you in the water. I dread running out of gas not because it would be a drama, but because I would never, ever hear the end of it from my friends.
Computers. Let’s say GUE suddenly said “right that’s it, we’re all using computers”. We’d have to standardise, because otherwise it would defeat the entire purpose of GUE. People would not complain that GUE’s choice would not bt their choice. We’d have to worry about the myriad of settings that might differentiate one instance of a computer from another instance of the same computer. All of a sudden you’ve taken your finger off the easy button and raised the need to start asking questions again. I haven’t used a computer underwater for 8 years. I don't use a computer because I don't need one. I have nothing to change gases on when the skipper tells me the plan has changed. I can calculate my no stop time, and where I should put stops in, and for how long, faster than I used to be able to read everything on the two computers I used to use. The system I use is simple, and suits me for short 10 feet bimbles and 4.5 hour decompression dives. This is typically not the case with computers. Most recreational divers do NOT buy them a computer that would be appropriate for a long decompression dive. So they end up replacing it, often multiple times. I certainly did. I bought a Suunto Stinger (cos the instructor had one and I thought it made me look cool). Then I bought a VR3 (because it seemed to be the deco divers tool of choice in the UK at the time). Then I bought another VR3 (redundancy, right). A few months after doing fundies I realised I was just carrying the world’s most expensive wrist weights. I have no problem with computers, I just don't need them. If I ever do a dive I feel that I need one, I will put one on.
So now comes the final point (sorry, guys). It’s already been raised on this thread. “Begin with the end in mind”. GUE’s ethos is that the equipment you train with at the very entry point should be the same as the most demanding technical dive. My backplate has been with me through fundies, Tech1, Tech2, The instructor trainer course, the instructor trainer training course. Shallow bimbles, deep decompression dives. It’s like an old friend. Other agencies do not always prescribe to this ethos. Just last weekend I heard one technical instructor explain to his students on the first day of their introductory training course;
“Right then. Forget everything you have been taught before. Everything will be different now. "
A completely new equipment configuration. A completely new way of calculating dive times. All the emergency drills out the window and relearned. I, personally, and I speak for myself alone, think that’s completely insane. GUE’s approach is that the same out of gas drill you do on your fundamentals course is the same one you would do if something went wrong after a 6 hour dive. The equipment is the same - you just strap on a few more cylinders to the same backplate, harness and regs. It scales up from day 1. the argument that “well I will never go scooter diving, or decompression diving” always makes me smile. I personally was never going to get involved with Nitrox, Trimix, wreck penetration, recreational instruction. I was never going to be a GUE isntructor, or an Instructor Trainer. I was never going to launch myself into becoming a Tech1 instructor. I was never going to dive under ice or inside a cave. At the time, such things were unthinkable. Yet they happened. The point is that you don’t know now which direction your diving is going to take. GUE’s argument is to start with an equipment configuration that will support you through whichever twists and turns your diving career will take.
I love being a GUE diver. I can travel anywhere in the world, throw my kit onto a boat, shake hands with the guy or girl next to me and just go diving, despite the fact we don't share a word of the same language. That dive is just as safe as diving with my best friend because I know everything about them. What pressure they will call the dive on, what gas is in the cylinders, what decompression they will do, how they would manage an out of gas, where they keep their SMB. Some of the best dives I have had are with people whose names I never knew. I spent 45 minutes inside a wreck at 180 feet with a complete stranger last year, someone I had literally shaken hands with five minutes before I jumped in and didn't speak a word of English. The thought of doing that before I become a GUE diver seems laughable to me. But these are MY reasons. At the end of the day, no one becomes a GUE diver by adopting the equipment configuration. The people that do fundamentals and still think its all about the equipment are the ones that then go shouting about GUE like it's some new found religion and wind everyone up. They don't get the point of GUE either. The equipment is simply the gear we throw on to go diving. Being a GUE diver appeals to people for different reasons. Until you find those reasons it's never going to really make sense to you. I sometimes miss going to dive shows and picking up little plastic nick nacks that I could use to formulate an ingenious solution to a problem with my kit. I sometimes miss going to DIY shops and creating home made solutions to problems that only exist because of something else I have jury rigged. I loved finding solutions to equipment problems. It gave me a real buzz. For some people, that sort of fun will outweigh the benefits of standardising and GUE will not be for them. That's fine, there's no right or wrong in diving.
I loved the fact that my equipment was personal to me. I understood it, and I knew I could always rely on myself. One day I found myself in a wreck at 150 feet, wondering how much drowning was going to hurt and whether I should just swap to EAN80, tox and get it over with. That’s when I decided to become a GUE diver. I’d already taken a GUE course. I'd spent the course arguing about why GUE demand I put a torch in a certain hand. Turns out there are more important things to worry about, and more interesting things to look at.
best wishes
Garf
Imagine a line. At one end, you have complete specialisation. At the other end, you have complete standardisation. There are pros and cons of adopting either extreme. For example, I used to know a navy diver that checked external hulls of ships for explosives. He dived a rebreather which apparently weighed a ton, costs an order of magnitude above the most expensive civilian available unit, required hours of maintenance after each use. It would appear to be utterly useless. Except that it's very, very good at being next to explosives and not making them go bang. No electronic leakage, no magnetic field, and a bunch of other stuff he probably couldn't tell me about and I wouldn't understand anyway. It's perfectly specialised. In fact, it's designed to do nothing else. It's a great example of specialisation. This specialised equipment is superb at doing 1 critical job but basically useless if you tried to apply it to any other jobs.
That's one end of the line. At the other end of the line is a single cylinder with one regulator coming off it, hanging off you with a piece of string. You could in theory dive this piece of equipment anywhere, in any scenario. It wouldn't actually be ideal for anything. It would be downright dangerous on some dives. There's no SPG, there's only one regulator. If you are deep there's not enough gas and sooner or later you will want to put a BCD on it. However, you can argue it's the perfect standardisation. any cylinder will do, and any reg. It works in EVERY situation, even if the reality is the vast majority of people won't use outside a "having a giggle" situation on holiday somewhere warm. There's very little to go wrong, it's light, and almost foolproof to set up.
So there's your line. At one end the perfect specialisation. Awesome at one thing, and unusable at almost everything else. At the other end of the line you have perfect standardised gear. Crap at everything, but at least usable at everything. Now look at the GUE configuration. The configuration was designed with cave diving in mind, so began life largely specialised towards cave diving. However, over the years it has slowly evolved, becoming more of a compromise. If we were being brutally honest, the GUE configuration is not perfectly in the middle of that imaginary line, it's skewed towards specialisation, but it's not all the way there. So by definition it's a compromise that works in every situation but is not really perfect for any of them. Therein lies the rub. At some point, you have to make a choice. Do I feel it is safer to tailor my equipment to each situation I might encounter, becoming a fan of specialisation, so that my equipment is ideally suited for the diving environment I have elected to dive in, or do I feel there is more safety in familiarity, comfort and in well practiced drills. GUE simply believe the latter.
If you have a specialisation mindset, it's easy to pick holes in the GUE configuration. It's a compromise. Some UK wreck dives require boiler suits to keep the oil off you. Some UK cave dives require thick boots and side mounted cylinders. Dive off Dover in the UK and you MUST take a very large heavy reel with you. These are scenarios where the GUE configuration works, but is not optimised. However, to criticise the configuration in this manner is to miss the point. As a GUE diver, I accept that I am diving a compromise. I accept that the benefits to myself and my team being completely familiar with each other's configuration, and being well drilled in practicing emergency drills with the same equipment, outweigh the benefits of specialising equipment for each dive. I could imagine the type of diving I do, and sit down with a computer and write a list of the perfect configuration for each dive. None of them would be the GUE configuration. They would all be different. Perfect for one thing, less than ideal for everything else. I would hate it. I'd have to stay familiar with several different configurations, and remember during the dive what configuration I was using. It would be easy to see how, in a panic, I might get confused and do the wrong thing. that scenario is ridiculous. So in reality, just about all recreational and technical sports divers compromise. They use the same computer on every dive. They use the same fins. The same drysuit, etc etc. So if the vast majority of divers compromise, there are obvious safety benefits to get everyone to use the same compromise.
Now you need to look at why GUE exists. GUE is basically a global club of divers, any of whom can turn up and go diving with other members of the club, and know they are completely familiar with all the equipment that they might hire or be given to use. They are completely familiar with the equipment that the people they are diving will use. So many incidents occur in diving due to confusion and panic under stress that the benefits of familiarity and comfort with equipment should be self explanatory. This global “club” welcomes anyone and everyone. It’s not exclusive, or elitist. We don’t think we are better or worse than anyone else. However, like all clubs, there are club rules. GUE’s club rules are the GUE standards. To call yourself a “GUE diver” all you have to do is dive within the club rules. If you want to rebel against the rules, or refuse to adhere to them, fine. It’s a big world and there are lots of other clubs to be members of. So in calling myself a GUE diver I agree to dive within the GUE standards, and adhere to a standardised configuration of equipment. I accept that this might be a compromise. I accept that this means I can’t tweak the configuration to suit my individual needs because that defeats the point of standardisation. I accept there are some elements that might not be optimised for my diving. By the way, in that regard, GUE are not nearly as prescriptive as some people might think. However, for the sake of argument, let’s look at some of the specific examples raised in this thread.
The compass. The standardised way to do it is to have the gauge on the right (which amongst other things means you can control buoyancy with your left hand whilst looking at it). The logical place for the compass is then on the left. It has another benefit in terms of scootering etc which others have raised. However, here is the rub. If you accept that standardisation is a good idea, what massive problem is having the compass on the left causing for you. GUE are not averse to changing things if there are good reasons. So rather than asking GUE to justify why they place the compass on the left, why not explain why it’s such a bad idea. Because it seems to work. What is the argument for not standardising it or changing the standard that outweighs the benefit of having a standard. The key here is the standard. Will the world explode if you put your compass on your right wrist. No. Will the entire team spontaeously combust the moment you slide that compass on your right wrist? No. so why does it matter? It matters because it shows that you haven’t got your head around the benefits of the standard. So my mind would go “what else has he changed”. Now I have to start asking you questions to put my mind at rest. Does he donate gas the same way. Is he actually using the same gas as me? etc etc. the moment I start thinking about these things is the moment I remember why I went GUE in the first place. It’s just very, very easy, and makes you feel very, very safe.
Why no redundant SPG. The moment someone asks my this question I know that the concept of GUE has not yet clicked with them. If the SPG fails I am calling the dive. If I have two SPGs and one of them fails I am calling the dive. Adding a second SPG gives me nothing, and adds more things to go bang. Two SPG’s to me suggests a diver that is worried about protecting their gas source. As a GUE diver, I’m not nearly as fussed about this as other divers might be. This is because I have at least one, and sometimes two, other divers that each have enough gas to get me safely home. We don’t have out of gas emergencies. Because it wouldn’t be an emergency. every diver always has enough gas to get another diver safely to the surface. Always. It’s our golden, unbreakable rule, and it’s like a big comfort blanket around you in the water. I dread running out of gas not because it would be a drama, but because I would never, ever hear the end of it from my friends.
Computers. Let’s say GUE suddenly said “right that’s it, we’re all using computers”. We’d have to standardise, because otherwise it would defeat the entire purpose of GUE. People would not complain that GUE’s choice would not bt their choice. We’d have to worry about the myriad of settings that might differentiate one instance of a computer from another instance of the same computer. All of a sudden you’ve taken your finger off the easy button and raised the need to start asking questions again. I haven’t used a computer underwater for 8 years. I don't use a computer because I don't need one. I have nothing to change gases on when the skipper tells me the plan has changed. I can calculate my no stop time, and where I should put stops in, and for how long, faster than I used to be able to read everything on the two computers I used to use. The system I use is simple, and suits me for short 10 feet bimbles and 4.5 hour decompression dives. This is typically not the case with computers. Most recreational divers do NOT buy them a computer that would be appropriate for a long decompression dive. So they end up replacing it, often multiple times. I certainly did. I bought a Suunto Stinger (cos the instructor had one and I thought it made me look cool). Then I bought a VR3 (because it seemed to be the deco divers tool of choice in the UK at the time). Then I bought another VR3 (redundancy, right). A few months after doing fundies I realised I was just carrying the world’s most expensive wrist weights. I have no problem with computers, I just don't need them. If I ever do a dive I feel that I need one, I will put one on.
So now comes the final point (sorry, guys). It’s already been raised on this thread. “Begin with the end in mind”. GUE’s ethos is that the equipment you train with at the very entry point should be the same as the most demanding technical dive. My backplate has been with me through fundies, Tech1, Tech2, The instructor trainer course, the instructor trainer training course. Shallow bimbles, deep decompression dives. It’s like an old friend. Other agencies do not always prescribe to this ethos. Just last weekend I heard one technical instructor explain to his students on the first day of their introductory training course;
“Right then. Forget everything you have been taught before. Everything will be different now. "
A completely new equipment configuration. A completely new way of calculating dive times. All the emergency drills out the window and relearned. I, personally, and I speak for myself alone, think that’s completely insane. GUE’s approach is that the same out of gas drill you do on your fundamentals course is the same one you would do if something went wrong after a 6 hour dive. The equipment is the same - you just strap on a few more cylinders to the same backplate, harness and regs. It scales up from day 1. the argument that “well I will never go scooter diving, or decompression diving” always makes me smile. I personally was never going to get involved with Nitrox, Trimix, wreck penetration, recreational instruction. I was never going to be a GUE isntructor, or an Instructor Trainer. I was never going to launch myself into becoming a Tech1 instructor. I was never going to dive under ice or inside a cave. At the time, such things were unthinkable. Yet they happened. The point is that you don’t know now which direction your diving is going to take. GUE’s argument is to start with an equipment configuration that will support you through whichever twists and turns your diving career will take.
I love being a GUE diver. I can travel anywhere in the world, throw my kit onto a boat, shake hands with the guy or girl next to me and just go diving, despite the fact we don't share a word of the same language. That dive is just as safe as diving with my best friend because I know everything about them. What pressure they will call the dive on, what gas is in the cylinders, what decompression they will do, how they would manage an out of gas, where they keep their SMB. Some of the best dives I have had are with people whose names I never knew. I spent 45 minutes inside a wreck at 180 feet with a complete stranger last year, someone I had literally shaken hands with five minutes before I jumped in and didn't speak a word of English. The thought of doing that before I become a GUE diver seems laughable to me. But these are MY reasons. At the end of the day, no one becomes a GUE diver by adopting the equipment configuration. The people that do fundamentals and still think its all about the equipment are the ones that then go shouting about GUE like it's some new found religion and wind everyone up. They don't get the point of GUE either. The equipment is simply the gear we throw on to go diving. Being a GUE diver appeals to people for different reasons. Until you find those reasons it's never going to really make sense to you. I sometimes miss going to dive shows and picking up little plastic nick nacks that I could use to formulate an ingenious solution to a problem with my kit. I sometimes miss going to DIY shops and creating home made solutions to problems that only exist because of something else I have jury rigged. I loved finding solutions to equipment problems. It gave me a real buzz. For some people, that sort of fun will outweigh the benefits of standardising and GUE will not be for them. That's fine, there's no right or wrong in diving.
I loved the fact that my equipment was personal to me. I understood it, and I knew I could always rely on myself. One day I found myself in a wreck at 150 feet, wondering how much drowning was going to hurt and whether I should just swap to EAN80, tox and get it over with. That’s when I decided to become a GUE diver. I’d already taken a GUE course. I'd spent the course arguing about why GUE demand I put a torch in a certain hand. Turns out there are more important things to worry about, and more interesting things to look at.
best wishes
Garf
Last edited:
Thank you for taking the time to write such a thorough explanation, Garf. I'm bookmarking this, it should be a sticky IMHO.
