Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Ed: See below: Ed Street wrote: > Hello, > > I've been looking at the DIR setup for awhile now and I have came to the > conclusion that it's not a good setup and to me it seems like a very > dangerous layout for several reasons. > > a) it goes against the majority of diving standards known today. Like how > many total training facilities in the U.S. (yea I'm in the u.s. and don't > give a flip about non-us stuff here) teaches this concept vs. the total > number of facilities that teaches other theories? This is not a con against an idea. We would never have progress if we simply discarded new ideas becuase established facilities don't use the new idea (of course they don't, that's why it is called NEW). > > > b) A lot of the 'experts' seems to rant and rave on those who doesn't follow > them for what seems, to me, like bad business practices. It's like someone > who has a different idea or theory is instantly > hounded/harassed/insulted/belittled/etc.. for having their own thoughts or > ideas about things. One way of looking at this is evolution didn't just > happen, it was a slow gradual step by step and update by update over a long > period of time. What changes/update/revisions has the DIR system undergone? DIR is based on Hogarthian principles, and HAS evolved over long periods of time. There is a good reason for every idea in the DIR system. Personal preference is just that, personal preference. It has evolved over maybe a few 100 dives (if the person involved is an avid diver), and most of those dives will have been in relatively benign circumstances. DIR has been refined through HUNDREDS of dives in many different circumstances. > > > c) Most dive outfits doesn't support the dir layout. Why is this? Is it > because that it's not that good? Is it because that there's to many people > turns up DEAD? Is it because of the above and below statements? It's because it's new. You can't teach an old dog new tricks, you can lead a horse to water, etc. etc. > From > talking to many shops about it and a lot of divers about this subject I > gather that if your looking for machoism, egotistical and the like then DIR > is for you. Scuba equipment is just that, equipment. It's a tool someone > uses to achieve a desired means. You don't use a screw driver to turn a > lug-nut. So why should I use the DIR setup in all cases? From my personal perspective, the most machoism I see is in people defending their personal preference setups, because all they have to bak it up is "I've done it this way alot and I'm good", whereas DIR can be backed up by a whole bunch of people doing a whole bunch of dives. You might not use a screw driver to turn a lug-nut, but you damn well should use the best wrench you can if it's an important nut! The DIR system has been slightly adapted all over for loval environments (cold water is my personal experience with this), but it is adapted along established Hogarthian principles (i.e. KISS). > My theory is it's > just ONE of the many tools out there that can be used but isn't useful in > some cases. If the non-DIR equipment is really that bad then why are they > still being produced? Cigarettes kill you, but they're still being produced. There's a market for non-DIR equipment. No manufacturer's going to pull equipment that sells off the shelves just because there's a better way! > Why are they no regulations to remove the bad crap > and put the good crap in place? I seem to recall this being done with some > tanks recently. Because (thank God!) we have a relatively unregulated sport. The tanks were a slightly higher risk than a "tek" bc. The argument isn't that all other gear out there is DANGEROUS, it's that there is a better way to do things, and if you're pushing the limits, you probably should do it the best way known. > > > D) Isn't one of the rules to not dive with non-DIR divers? It's like if you > don't follow some rigid standards then your instantly a 'stroke'? If you haven't been introduced to a great concept it doesn't make you stupid. If you have been and refuse to look at it again or more in depth - then you're stupid. > So what > about all these people who die while diving the DIR setup? Give us some names Ed. > Does that mean > since they never surfaced they are a 'stroke'? It's like the standards are > so high that it's very very difficult for anyone to maintain at all times > but yet expect everyone to maintain them at all times. This makes no sense. > Human nature dictates that humans are not perfect and makes mistakes all the > time. The higher the standards the more mistakes will be made. Sadly when > these mistakes ARE made it cost the person their life. True. However, it seems that mistakes made in less simple systems tend to snowball a lot faster. Remember that DIR isn't just about gear, it's about a philosophy. Like being in shape. Sure people dive when they're not in shape, but they know that they are increasing their risk. DIR says that to minimize risk you need to be in the best shape you can be. That part of the philosophy may not be hugely important if you're diving to 30 feet on a reef in Cozumel. But then apply it to a 400 foot dive in current in open ocean (or 300 feet in a cave), and it's a lot more important. It's all about knowledgeably assessing and minimizing your risk. > Now in the > recreational community when these mistakes are made alot of the time the > person will survive (depending on a lot of things) This leads to another > thing. Same with all diving. Tech diving naturally includes dives that can have more risk in them if not done properly. This applies to all philosophies. > If you can't dive w/ non-DIR divers and there few and far between in > some areas (like my area) then how the fuck are you expected to do the buddy > system? Or are you expected to do solo and turn your odds up even more of > not coming up alive? Diving solo isn't doing it right. Again, It's all about assessing your risk. Do a dive with a non-DIR diver (it's certainly safer than diving solo), but realize that it would be safer with someone who has thought through all the reasons for DIR. Again, it's not about gear, it's about thinking through the reasons we do things. Get a regular dive buddy and talk with him or her about the DIR philosophy and you guys can slowly adapt to a better way. > > > E) I've talked to some divers who felt that the DIR setup was just totally > wrong for them, their person and their lifestyles. They felt that it was > out of place and very hard to adjust to it. Being hard to adjust to doesn't make something wrong. Ask them for details, why is it wrong for them? They have some underlying need to take more risk than is necessary? What is hard to adjust to? Perhaps they're missing something, or don't understand. I hope they'll look a little harder. > I thought diving was all about > the comfort layer that the individual person felt. How is it that we can > dictate how others must dress and what equipment they must use when it's > what WE use that counts the most? It is. The fact is that when you get in the water with someone, there is always a chance they will come to you for help. Giving them help may put you in a risky position. It is therefore in your best interests to make sure that they have minimized their risks. People are naturally more comfortable in situations they are used to and will resist change. No one was perfectly comfortable the day they took their open water. It too time to get used to it. Same with any changes. But if the reasoning behind the changes makes sense, and if many other divers are using the same system comfortably, then maybe they just need to give it more time. > An example, if diver A feels that the > layout they are using is not right gets in the water then they are at a > higher risk of problems. So practice in benign environments like a pool until you feel comfortable. > Not just equipment problems but physical and more > importantly psychological. So say everyone uses the dir setup and one person > in the group doesn't feel right with the layout but they are putting blind > faith in the layout (I see this a lot) and some problem arises, who do you > think you can least trust? Again, you're getting DIR equipment mixed up with DIR philosophy. If that person doesn't feel right with the layout, the should assess the problem, and figure out why they're uncomfortable, then either practice until they are comfortable (hopefully this is what they'd do, understanding the solid reasoning behind the layout) or make a decision to do it there way. This is not an equipment problem you're talking about. The same thing could happen with any other layout (hose-stuffing, steel stages, recreational gear). There is nothing in here that is a problem with the DIR setup. > Say they kept their mouth shut and you don't > even know about their view on this, who then can you trust? If you put your > trust in them they could end up killing you. All because people are putting > peer pressure on non-dir divers to dive the DIR setup, which in my opinion > is totally WRONG. I agree. Put pressure on people to look at the philosophies so they will realize themselves that it's the best way to dive. If they don't realize it's better, then I wouldn't dive with them on any "big" dives. > > F) It would seem to me, from a business standpoint, that if you wanted an > idea to flourish then you would cut out all the negativity/hostility that is > generated towards the non-conforming divers and instead have compassion, > understanding and in a caring manner educate the public as to why it's a > 'superior' method. Good point, but no one here who is negative or hostile is in business. If you look through the archives you'll realize they're hostile because people have asked the same questions as you are (in a pretty hostile voice yourself I might add) thousands of times. > This machoism attitude is depermental to a divers > health. Agreed that it is detrimental, but I think that there's a lot of machoism in diving in general and again this is nothing specific to DIR > There is *NOTHING* under that water that's worth your life and to > me it would seem that diving with any machoistic setup/equipment/person > would just endanger my life. See where this is going? Yeah, I see - let's find the philosophy that minimizes risk and use it to do dives that aren't worth doing in any other setup (because as you say there's nothing down there worth risking your life for). > > > g) I see a lot of needless deaths cause a lot of people try to imitate what > some groups are doing like the WKPP and enter areas, like caves, and later > the morgue is called. The reason they die is the diver feels that they can > handle the task, they see the machoism from these groups and one of the > traditional machoistic viewpoints is "you don't ask for help cause you can > do it" so they do do it and they die because of it. My input here is get > rid of the machoistic front and you'll get alot MORE divers doing your > style. I think you're confusing Tech diving as a whole with DIR. Give us name Ed. > > > You can call me anything you like but that doesn't hide nor stop the fact > that I flat refuse to dive any form of DIY simply because my standards are > to high Then you don't understand it. > and this method, to me, is nothing but an accident waiting to happen > to good people. It tends to lead people astray and promote a psychological > separation from one's well being and the image that one presents. > > Oh and btw, no flames please. These are my viewpoints and if you do feel > you need to flame me then that's your egotistical machoistic approach > feeling threatened. Also flaming is a sign of non-stable and uncertainty on > the flamers part. Ed I hope you don't think this is a flame. I'm trying to rebut all of your points. May I suggest though that your post was sort of a preemptory (minor) flame to begin with? > > > Ed Take another look at the entire philosophy ed, don't get hung up on the equipment until you understand the reasoning behind it. Then if you have a specific problem, throw it out here (civilly) with your proposed improvement, and many people will debate you on it (hopefully civilly too). Ben > > > -- > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'. -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]