Wikipedia article on "Doing It Right"

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

That's as may be ... but it doesn't really address the issues of dive planning in mixed teams. Issues of gas matching, deco schedules and emergency bailout are significantly different with mixed teams than they are when all teams are on the same type of gear ... and I'm not sure any of the potential solutions would fall within what is considered DIR protocols. For example, in the mixed-team dives I've done, each diver carries their own emergency bailout ... which rather violates the whole team resources concept. It works ... but it ain't DIR ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

UTD CCR or SM way of dive is very ... special, with many weakness (to isolate a leak on SM the diver had to unplug some hose connections (QC6 type) ...) but is fully compliant with a DIR backmount diver (same gas even in rebreather (the diluent is the bottom bail-out), LH in the same place ...).
UTD has preserved DIR movements (V drill, LH drills ...) not DIR principles (KISS ...)
 
UTD CCR or SM way of dive is very ... special, with many weakness (to isolate a leak on SM the diver had to unplug some hose connections (QC6 type) ...) but is fully compliant with a DIR backmount diver (same gas even in rebreather (the diluent is the bottom bail-out), LH in the same place ...).
UTD has preserved DIR movements (V drill, LH drills ...) not DIR principles (KISS ...)

This is really a great example of why an "outside" entity like UTD can not be considered in WIKI as actually being DIR...They and many other groups may decide to call themselves trully DIR, but they are not.

Slightly closer to home for you, here is an analogy.

France has every right to define the French language, it's proper pronunciation, dialects allowed, etc. The French made the French language. So you visit parts of Canada, where French is the primary language....Drop a well educated Frenchman in one of these French-Canadian cities, put him in conversations with the locals, and my guess is there is a high likelihood he will be annoyed at the dialect, and what he considers the bastardization of HIS language.

Drop the Frenchman's Counterpart from Madrid, Spain, into Miami, Florida, where there is a dominant population of Spanish speakers of Cuban descent. I have witnessed people from Spain, privately complaining about the bastardization of their language here.

These are 2 examples of something that began as pure, and it "left" the origin point, and changed over time. It may be similar in many ways, but it does not have claim to the definitive or proper use.

DIR will need to be seen the same way. Irvine and Jarrod developed this, Irvine mandated it, and began its global dissemination. There are multiple videos explaining the original concepts and practices, and there are plenty of original WKPP members to question on specifics--people that were part of the original and pure DIR. As Jarrod Jablonski is foremost of these in dealing with present and future DIR, he should be the top reference in this...UTD is less than little Havana in Miami , relatively speaking :)
 
For example, in the mixed-team dives I've done, each diver carries their own emergency bailout ... which rather violates the whole team resources concept. It works ... but it ain't DIR ...
Just recently I've come across a term that I was unfamiliar with - DWW (Doing What Works). I do not know if it was created as a way to contrast or compete against DIR. I've done a couple of Google searches on DWW and have not come across much of anything related to diving. This is where I found it: POD DIVER RADIO 2010. Look for episode 48 at the bottom of the page. Interestingly enough, the next episode is an interview with Bob Sherwood about GUE Fundamentals and I do not think there was a single DIR mention within that interview. The interviewer calls it DIR Fundamentals in the text summary, but all I heard Bob say was GUE Fundamentals. I could be wrong, though. I listen to this stuff on my long commute from/to work. I'm not doing a strict proofing process.

Interview with Larry Green of NACD. Larry talks about the 5 elements of Technical Diving and Doing What Works.
 
This is really a great example of why an "outside" entity like UTD can not be considered in WIKI as actually being DIR...They and many other groups may decide to call themselves trully DIR, but they are not.

Slightly closer to home for you, here is an analogy.

France has every right to define the French language, it's proper pronunciation, dialects allowed, etc. The French made the French language. So you visit parts of Canada, where French is the primary language....Drop a well educated Frenchman in one of these French-Canadian cities, put him in conversations with the locals, and my guess is there is a high likelihood he will be annoyed at the dialect, and what he considers the bastardization of HIS language.

Drop the Frenchman's Counterpart from Madrid, Spain, into Miami, Florida, where there is a dominant population of Spanish speakers of Cuban descent. I have witnessed people from Spain, privately complaining about the bastardization of their language here.

These are 2 examples of something that began as pure, and it "left" the origin point, and changed over time. It may be similar in many ways, but it does not have claim to the definitive or proper use.

DIR will need to be seen the same way. Irvine and Jarrod developed this, Irvine mandated it, and began its global dissemination. There are multiple videos explaining the original concepts and practices, and there are plenty of original WKPP members to question on specifics--people that were part of the original and pure DIR. As Jarrod Jablonski is foremost of these in dealing with present and future DIR, he should be the top reference in this...UTD is less than little Havana in Miami , relatively speaking :)

I am not sure of your point. The Wikipedia article on the French Language has sections for all the places that French is spoken in its various forms. Are you saying that Wikipedia should remove those sections?
 
I am not sure of your point. The Wikipedia article on the French Language has sections for all the places that French is spoken in its various forms. Are you saying that Wikipedia should remove those sections?

I guess there is still interpretation in the anology, but my point was that with French and Spanish, there are the TRUE forms or expressions of the language--that from which the others were derrived.

The issue with DIR is that unlike the languages, part of it's meaning is that it is not meant to be modified beyond the definition held by those who created DIR ( George and Jarrod). Miami-Cuban Spanish is not actually "wrong", it is just not the pure Spanish. It has been "changed"... DIR is not supposed to be changed by outside groups like UTD or by supposed authorities on knowledge such as Wikipedia.
 
UTD has preserved DIR movements (V drill, LH drills ...) not DIR principles (KISS ...)

What does that mean?

Is that akin to a solo diver diving with a long hose?
 
I guess there is still interpretation in the anology, but my point was that with French and Spanish, there are the TRUE forms or expressions of the language--that from which the others were derrived.

The issue with DIR is that unlike the languages, part of it's meaning is that it is not meant to be modified beyond the definition held by those who created DIR ( George and Jarrod). Miami-Cuban Spanish is not actually "wrong", it is just not the pure Spanish. It has been "changed"... DIR is not supposed to be changed by outside groups like UTD or by supposed authorities on knowledge such as Wikipedia.

My personal observation is that GUE gave up on DIR a few years ago. My guess is that it was a realization that they had no way to prevent any Tom, Dick or Harry from coming up with their own definitions of what is or isn't DIR.

I'm not really sure it matters all that much. Or at least, it might not matter that much to new comers like me. I know what to expect from a GUE diver and I know what to expect from a UTD diver.
 
Slightly closer to home for you, here is an analogy.

France has every right to define the French language, it's proper pronunciation, dialects allowed, etc. The French made the French language. So you visit parts of Canada, where French is the primary language....Drop a well educated Frenchman in one of these French-Canadian cities, put him in conversations with the locals, and my guess is there is a high likelihood he will be annoyed at the dialect, and what he considers the bastardization of HIS language.

Drop the Frenchman's Counterpart from Madrid, Spain, into Miami, Florida, where there is a dominant population of Spanish speakers of Cuban descent. I have witnessed people from Spain, privately complaining about the bastardization of their language here.

... or send an Englishman to Alabama ... :shocked2:

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
 
What does that mean?

Is that akin to a solo diver diving with a long hose?

What's wrong with that? :wink:

I have a hard time conceptualizing that UTD sidemount manifold as anything related to DIR ... but then, I'm not an expert on either one of those subjects ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
 
http://cavediveflorida.com/Rum_House.htm

Back
Top Bottom