To DIR or not DIR: that is the question?

[JP]

thougth it was time we had a new issue to chew over.

Whats the view on DIR...and I'm not just talking about kit and configuration, although I'm interested to hear thoughts on that too.  The whole package seems to be the bone of contention.  I hope this will shed some light on opinions around YD on this highly interesting subject.

I'm not gonna say too much yet, want to get the thing rolling. :argue:

[Dominic]

I'm of the opinion you should fully understand all the DIR concepts, and then make an informed decision what parts of it to use and what to ignore.

I would have grave reservations about diving with someone whose sole reason for doing something the DIR way was that it WAS the DIR way. Every piece of equipment I own is where it is because I decided it was where it should go, not because GI3 said it was where it should go.

I occasionally get mistaken for DIR diver by people who think they know all about it, but I can think of half a dozen stroke things off the top of my head which should instantly proclaim me as a card-carrying stroke..

[Tim Ingmire]

I've just posted something similar elsewhere.

Before I move onto twins, wings and other things I would really like a view of DIR and any other systems / methodologies / philosophies out there.  And, as Dom have already said, then make an informed decision about my next purchases and kit config.

eg.  I Never intend to do cave diving so would a full DIR set-up be necessary?  Maybe a naive question but one that instantly spring to mind.

From what I've seen a lot of the DIR concepts seem to make sense but, with my level of ignorance, this doesn't mean much.

Are there similarly structured alternatives to DIR/DIS?

[Hobby]

Lordy, this could be fun.

We have had similar "debates" before here which have been interesting. Maybe worth a read.

Personally, I, like many others I beleive like much about the DIR system/philosophy. However, I liked many of those "factors" that constitute DIR and used them before it came along here.

I refer to things such as redundancy, minimalism for want of a better word, a greater understanding of kit/environment and, importantly, self-sufficiency.

I have been very lucky in many respects. I've been exposed (steady!) to many different divers, configs etc. such as CDG, military, Police divers and Commercial applications. I remember back to the early 80's when some people began to challenge the system (which here was really BSAC) in various ways, e.g. by advocating redundancy(ponies/independents etc.) over Octopus rigs, and demanding relevant training for those going into Over-Head environments etc.

At the time much of this was treated with derision, incident statistics however proved the need for better training etc. and slowly things began to change.

Many of these "improvements" were taken from looking at the afore-mentioned configs: in particular the CDG's use of proper redundancy, line work etc.

DIR came along, I don't know the exact mechanisms of it's introduction into the UK, but one can see how its adoption in the US mirrors that of here.

Here is a system developed the hard way; known to work in considerably more hostile conditions (caves really), so why cannot this be applied to open water use?

Further development also came about as "tech" diving development increased too. Much as "over here".

Recently, well, over the last couple of decades, UK diving has had a massive influx of US influence. PADI was certainly the major factor and in many ways (no offence intended here) much of it was not suitable for UK diving as it was.

Given the demand for better training etc. by a great proportion of divers, either trained the PADI or (revised BSAC) way, DIR makes great sense. It meets the need for diver training above teaching one to dive.

The problems: many people decry DIR because many of its components, as we've seen, are not new. So what? They never claimed they were. It appears to be the attitude of many that it's "Our way or the Wrong way" that gets peoples' goat.

This said, many of the people viewed as being near the top of the DIR advocacy/thinking do not appear to have this attitude; both here and in the US.

George Irvine's famous rants aside, many DIR people accept/do not claim that it is the "be all and end all" for all diving.

This is seen, as an acceptance by some, that a "true DIR" config would certainly not be best suited to some UK sump conditions.

It has to be said also, that there will be a proportion to whatever extent of DIR divers, possibly coming from recreational diving backgrounds, that know nothing of other configs/practices and indeed much of the development behind (not of) their own system.

Thankfully, many are keen to learn all they can, even in the face of those who may claim that it isn't "right".

Good, safe system, there isn't many. It's also more widely known now than others and is easier(?) to get info/instruction on than others, which again are very applicable to their individual requirements.

Attitude of "some" does leave much to be desired however, not because others may be different, but sadly because they are not aware. Many things are decried by supposed DIR divers, only on the basis of what they've picked up, not through actual experience/instruction.....but because it's not how we do it?

Hobby.

[Dominic]

</span>

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]Many things are decried by supposed DIR divers,only on the basis of what they've picked up,not through actual experience

<span =''>
Yep - how many times have I seen the following discussion:
DIR - &quot;Bungee wings are stupid.&quot;
'Stroke' - &quot;I use them and they aren't.&quot;
DIR - &quot;Yes they are, because you can't orally inflate them.&quot;
'Stroke' - &quot;Funny, that, I've done it on several occasions.&quot;
DIR - &quot;...&quot;

[Dr Stevil]

Say JP, that's one heck of a can of worms to open, I got a fair bit of stick on another forum for simply mentioning the initials &quot;D-I-R&quot; !
Myself - got my hoses rigged al la DIR, use manifolded twins and apeks regs BUT have a bungied (speelin?) OMS bladder so guess I'm a &quot;stroke&quot; really.

My philosophy (of which there are more things in heaven and earth than I've dreamed of, right Horatio?)is that if you like an idea/concept and it works for you then that's fine.
I learnt on theses boards about DIS (divng it simple), which seems a bit more flexible and a little more to my tastes
Chee-az
Steve
<a href="http://www.dis-uk.org/index1.html

PS" target="_blank">http://www.dis-uk.org/index1.html

PS</a> One of the most relevant comments I heard from someone on this topic was &quot;How can one method be right for everyone?&quot; That was from Graeme Bruce who may be a familiar name to some.

[JP]

wow! and all in a couple of hours! I thought I was just gonna get comments about expensive ditchable weight that doubles as a bright lamp and flappy wings!

As far as mentioning that three letter word (is it a word?) &nbsp;I'm sure we are all big boys and girls here and judging by the craick that goes on noone will take their bat home for comments made.

I have read a lot on the subject in books and web sites and spoken at length with Izz from portland (on yet &nbsp;another blown out 3 day trip to the south)..Although I confess to not having dived the rigs. &nbsp;for that matter and I'll stick my head above the parapet here and admit to still diving a soft back pack (mark 1 transpac and wreck wing). &nbsp;No particular reason for this, I just get on with my rig. Once it's FUBAR, I'll start fresh, but I'm one for spending money when I need to on kit. &nbsp;That said I've dived twin 15's with staged 10 and been perfectly stable and comfortable although a little light on lift I have to admit.

As far as my 2p is worth:

Pro's of DIR as I see it. &nbsp;Logical analysis of risk and solution. &nbsp;this can be applied to all aspects of the method...including the health, team planning and building, and equipment aspect. &nbsp;the steps taken can be justified in relation to this anaylsis. &nbsp;However as already mentioned there is more than one way to skin (or drown) a cat.



Con's: &nbsp;although the same can be said of all succesful training methodologies...single minded approaches, though succesful (just look at PADI) do lead to single minded students...as mentioned above, the 'managment' and guru's of DIR are at the front of the exploration world...they cannot afford to dimiss an idea, or they would not be there for long. &nbsp;Similarly they have to evaluate all aspects of their endevour. &nbsp;What is distilled out is what is promoted as the DIR menthod. &nbsp;Unfortunatley this open minded element is I feel ignored in the teaching/promotion of the method.
To be in a position to pick and choose logically is I my opinion the best way forward. &nbsp;
To dimiss Strokes (taken to mean non DIR in this case) is in my opinion fundamentally against the principles that led to the creation of DIR.

Consequences of this are the them and us camps that have existed in this sport for many years and is bourne out in all the general dive press despite their efforts to stop it.

To grossly over simplify here It is bringing to technical diving what PADI brought to recreational diving in the warm waters of this world(from whence it came). That is not to say that effective and adapted PADI teaching in these waters is not relevant, infact it did me for a few years without incident and is currently bringing my wife up to speed.

Both padi and DIR are thought out comprehensive methods of diving that address specific issues related to the type of diving to be undertaken. &nbsp;Where padi cannot be expanded upon at a technical level...in theory the DIR method can be brought back to recreational and less technical disciplines...but is it totally neccessary? &nbsp;No cos it was not designed for that.

few!

[Andrew]

Sorry to sound thick (i'm new to diving) but what's DIR, i'm enjoying reading the forums so i may be asking more daft questions later :P

(Edited by Andrew at 5:02 pm on Jan. 16, 2003)

[daz]

Hi Andrew,

The only stupid question is the question that is never asked.

DIR is a holistic methodogy of diving and stands for &quot;Do It Right&quot; I am not a DIR affiendo so might misunderstand it but it is covers evrything such as kit configuration, attitude to diving, methods and health and fitness. &nbsp;I believe te general idea is that the system needs to be treated as a whole.

Bob Cooper and Dave Willo seem to be pretty keyed up on DIR and I am sure they will be along to explain DIR correctly.

Cheers Guys,
Darren

[Andrew]

Ah, many thanks