Just to relate something I had a chance to witness that's interesting. I was
doing a dive with a buddy, who dives only singles and recreational depths,
and we were scootering. He has a SS scooter, and normally I run my scooter
on 5 or 6 (it a really hot wound Gavin clone) when I dive with the SS
scooters, as several of my buddies dive them (4 of them). But this was the
first time diving with him using his scooter. I always try to move him in
the right direction to DIR, and his is getting there with his gear, some of
it (regs fins hoses, lights). Any way he was using bungee wings, a weight
belt/suspenders, with a extra pouch, and was weighted to heavy with ankle
weights. I had to turn my scooter down to 1 and still wait for him, it was
terrible.

That night I really got after him, so he bought a halcyon pioneer wing, got
rid of the weight belt/ suspenders pouch thing, and intergraded the weights
on the harness of his backplate, and lost the 5# single tank adaptor
(because of the wing design) and ankle weights. The next day we dove again,
he was flatter in the water by a big difference more and I was running my
scooter on 5 or 6 again. For you that scooter know that's a huge difference,
I wouldn't have thought it would make that much difference unless I saw it
first hand, as I was DIR rigged before my scooter.

What difference do you think that would make swimming as well? Just thought
I would pass something that was interesting along to others that may be
wondering if DIR ing it would be worth it.

Paul Komrowski

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Charlie Roberson [mailto:charlie@gu*.co*]
Sent:	Friday, September 20, 2002 5:40 PM
To:	Quest
Subject:	Re: Rookie questions

Scott,

You are correct that Andrew's statement...

<< Diving is diving. Shallow, deep, tech or cave - you always dive the
same
configuration, use the same skills and practice the same way.  You need to
follow one method of diving and dealing with the emergencies... >>

...is one of the basic axioms of the DIR diving and teaching philosophy.  I
believe that what you are advocating contradicts this fundamental tenant of
DIR.  This is why it is not called Doing it Technical or Doing it Cave or
some other specific term.  It is called Doing it Right.  Unfortunately,
many people who claim to be DIR believe as you do and only apply DIR in
specific situations.  DIR is a holistic approach to diving that is designed
to make diving safer and more fun for ALL divers.  How is it that OW divers
don't warrant improved buoyancy, trim, and streamlining?  Why should
beginning divers not have access to solid and reliable information about
real diving?

You correctly point out that many activities require entry level experience
before progressing.  This is why no one is advocating taking new divers to
300' or scooter diving 5000' in a cave or...well, you get the
point.  However, many new divers can and do significantly benefit from
DIR.  Your post fails to identify any specific DIR recommendations (other
than the long hose) that you find disagreeable for OW diving.  What
specifically do you disagree with?  Is that the only issue?

Will the non-DIR OW diver survive?  Certainly...they do everyday.  Can
their experience in the water be safer and more enjoyable.  I believe
so.  Perhaps this industry would not experience the drop out rate it does
if divers were better prepared with equipment and training that fostered a
lifetime of adventure in the underwater realm.

I have purposefully ignored your request to reply privately.  Your post has
made your points publicly and therefore warrants a public counter.

Good Diving,
Charlie



At 12:30 PM 9/20/2002 -0400, ScottBonis@ao*.co* wrote:
>Hi Andrew,
>
>It's nice to hear from you and I really do appreciate your taking the time
to
>express your opinions.  I also understand that this is the Quest list and
>therefore dedicated to the DIR philosophy (which I also support).  And as I
>have said many times in the past, for technical diving, I have not found
>anything supported by DIR that I believe to be improper or unsafe.  I have
>discussed various things with Trey (some of which we agreed upon and some
of
>which we disagreed upon), both in person and on the net, and have always
>found him to be forthright and open in his explanation of the "whys" behind
>the rules he has developed.  I have found no disagreement with his really
>rather insightful reasoning.
>
>However I personally find it difficult to support a few of the DIR
>recommended equipment details when applied to the teaching of new open
water
>recreational divers who have no intention whatsoever of ever really doing
any
>advanced recreational diving or technical diving.
>
>I need also to say here that I am expressing my own personal opinions and
>have not verified or really care whether or not they agree with the
>requirements of the various dive certification organizations for which I
>teach.
>
>In considering your comments carefully, I believe they also are both well
>thought out and reasonable.  However, I think I have identified the
>underlying disagreement that we seem to have.  I believe it arises from one
>of your basic concepts that, as you say ...
>
><< Diving is diving. Shallow, deep, tech or cave - you always dive the
same
>configuration, use the same skills and practice the same way.
>You need to follow one method of diving and dealing with the emergencies...
>>
>
>I need to indicate clearly that I completely, absolutely, and
unequivocally,
>disagree with this statement, which I understand is one of the basic axioms
>of your diving and teaching philosophy.  I do not believe, in many cases,
>that the most desirable equipment, diving style, or emergency procedures to
>be used for shallow recreational reef diving (particularly by new open
water
>divers), are necessarily the same ones that are most applicable for
technical
>diving or even possibly the best to be used by experienced advanced
>recreational divers.  And rather than discussing various details of our
>teaching techniques, I believe that this difference in approach to diving
and
>teaching has led to our disagreements in detailed methods.
>
>I believe it would be fruitless for us to discuss approaches to
recreational
>diving until this basic difference is resolved.  You see, I have no major
>objection to the DIR approach to technical diving, but I do have difficulty
>accepting some of the recommendations for shallow recreational diving,
>particularly for new open water divers who have no desire to progress to
>advanced forms of diving.
>
>You say << ... If you learned it right from the start (Law of primacy)
you
>will have it learnt it right from the get go and you will not have to
unlearn
>it later. It will be ingrained ... >>
>
>While I need to agree that generally, this is a good idea, I could draw
many
>examples from other activities where the skills required to be learned
>initially, need to be altered somewhat for more advanced training.  I would
>not want to consider taking helicopter flight training without first
>completing fixed wing training (and receiving some reasonable amount of
time
>in the air).  I would not want to consider driving an 18 wheeler without
>first experiencing many hours behind the wheel of an automobile.  I would
not
>want to teach someone parallel skiing before they had completely mastered
>snow plow turns and stops.  How about trying to master the skills needed to
>control gas retention/release and buoyancy when using a rebreather before
>becoming completely comfortable under water on open circuit scuba.  Or the
>training that a child receives on a tricycle or with training wheels,
before
>ever graduating to a two wheeler.  And I'm sure there are many other
>examples, but I think you can get the idea.  Sometimes it is desirable to
>learn something one way in order to safely obtain enough experience to then
>appreciate a more desirable advanced technique later on.
>
>You also say << You teach and dive the same configuration all the time.
>(There is nothing worse than seeing an instructor wear and teach one method
>and then go diving using another. The one he dives is of course the one he
>prefers :) ) >>
>
>You're absolutely right about << The one he dives is of course the one he
>prefers :) >>.  I'm afraid I violate this rule also.  When I go fun diving,
>it is for fun, not to impress any other divers or students.  For example, I
>virtually never wear a snorkel when fun diving (not even in a cave ...
really
>!!!), but I am required to do so by several agencies when teaching open
water
>diving.  I realistically wonder if there are any other open water
instructors
>on the Quest list that might occasionally also do this.
>
>Also, as far as my personal non-cave or non-trimix fun diving is concerned,
>for the last year I have gone almost exclusively to the use of a single
>"Monofin" for open water recreational diving.  But you can bet that it'll
be
>a while before I even consider using "Flipper" (the name my wife Karen has
>given to the fin), with new open water diving students.  BTW, I plan to be
in
>the pool at DEMA next month, for a half hour on a couple of afternoons,
>helping to demonstrate the new fin.  It would be nice to be able to meet
some
>of the other folks on this list.  So stop by and say "Hi."
>
>One other item that I feel I did not make clear enough in my previous
>message, led to your comment of << Sounds awful and confusing. Blowing
air
in
>my face, three foot...no.. four foot hose - well which is it. Only when you
>teach. Scott come on. <AG> >>
>
>I use a four ft. octopus hose when I initially teach regulator retrieval
and
>mask removal exercises.  I do this because of the technique I choose to use
>for having a student do these exercises for the first couple of times at
>depth.  I face the student from directly in front and hold onto his or her
BC
>or harness strap near the shoulder, with one fist.  I have found that when
>doing this under water, the student is more comfortable in performing the
>exercises.  And if I also hold my octopus hose (near the reg.) in the same
>hand but have it so the student feels my octopus rubbing on his or her
lower
>cheek, the student is even more relaxed.  And a standard 3 ft. hose is just
a
>little too short to do this comfortably while giving the student enough
room
>to do the exercises without any interference from me.  I have found that
for
>many new students for the first time or two that the exercises are done,
>having octopuses around their necks or at their sides, is not as effective
in
>alleviating stress as having my octopus in close proximity.  If I am not
>doing these exercises on a given dive, than a three ft. octopus hose is
just
>fine with me for teaching.  I hope this explains more clearly what I was
>trying to express.  BTW, I was shown this teaching technique by Mike Madden
>many, many moons ago.
>
>In a later portion of your message you state << Please never touch me or
my
>BCD. I am in control and have neutral buoyancy. If you grab my BCD and use
me
>to offset your lack of control, I will not be happy and certainly lose my
>buoyancy. This will cause US to have poor trim and buoyancy. Check out the
>GUE website for proper OOA control of buoyancy.<AG> >>
>
>Here again, I completely agree with you for a technical diver or even
>possibly for an advanced recreational diver.  But I cannot agree with you
for
>a new recreational open water diver.  In my experience, if the new diver is
>OOA, he or she is either in full blown panic or pretty darn close.  And the
>new diver is either going to grab for one of my regs. (primary or octopus,
>whichever the new diver happens to focus on) or, if he or she thinks about
it
>hit the inflator and, swim like hell for the surface.  In my experience, in
>this situation you can forget about the OOA new open water diver having any
>buoyancy control whatsoever.  This I believe is a significant difference
>between a new and an experienced diver.
>
>So my choice is to have the OOA new diver grab me and my reg.  If I have
the
>chance to offer the student my octopus, then great.  If he or she grabs my
>primary, then I can use my octopus.  But in either case, I want the new
diver
>hanging on to me in close, so I can prevent the student from touching his
or
>her inflator and I have a chance to control our combined buoyancy and
>initiate a controlled ascent.  So I would be holding on to the student
also.
>
>If on the other hand, I am the one OOA (given as conservative as I am in a
>teaching situation, kind of difficult for me to imagine, but possible I
>guess), and I decide to approach a new student, I want to hold the student
in
>close while I get his or her octopus.  Then, the same as previous, only one
>of us need touch the inflator to get us heading up in a controlled manner.
>
>So you can see that for my teaching technique, a long hose does not seem to
>be an advantage for shallow recreational diving with new open water divers
>and might possibly even create a potential problem in some unique
situations.
>
>And later in your message you say << ... he did not recieve an
explanation
>that agrues how when he shallow water dives he should use this config but
>when he really dives then he should that config and when he does this that
>and so on. And when he finally graduates out of the newbie ranks, then he
>will have to change everything over to DIR. Because that's the way "I dive
>when I am doing real dives." This just doesn't make sense.
>
>Andrew, I understand your argument but unfortunately, for a great many
>divers, I cannot agree.  I cannot concur with your very statement << ...
when
>he shallow water dives he should use this config but when he really dives
>then he should ... >>  You see, I believe that for many, many students
there
>is no difference between " ... when he shallow dives ..." and "... when he
>really dives ...".  Remember please, I started this message by speaking of
<<
>... new open water recreational divers who have no intention whatsoever of
>ever really doing any advanced recreational diving or technical diving. ...
> >>.  I guess I am disagreeing with your implicit assertion that all divers
>will, or even have any desire to, progress to advanced recreational diving
or
>technical diving.
>
>Consider please, the (I believe majority of) divers who plan on going to
>Cozumel once a year or every other year to look at pretty fish and corals
on
>shallow reefs, and maybe making a few dives during a club outing at the
local
>quarry.  These are some of the ones for whom I am trying to say that some
of
>the disciplines of the DIR system are unnecessary.  And I further believe
>that these are also the ones without whom, we might be unable to support
many
>of the local dive shops.  I believe we need them to support the dive
industry
>financially, and making them comply with stricter requirements (no smoking,
a
>higher level of physical fitness, and various equipment requirements, for
>example) if not necessary for the type of diving they wish to do, will only
>serve to reduce their number in the sport and cause them to pursue skiing,
>mountain biking, bowling, or some other sports.  (Please don't interpret
the
>previous statement to infer that I am supporting smoking, farm animal
>slobbery or drunkenness, or anything of the like.  I am not)
>
>Andrew, as I said previously, I do thank you for explaining your position
in
>a clear and concise manner.  I also appreciate the opportunity for
explaining
>my thoughts on this list.  I look forward to possible exchanges between us
in
>the future, although I understand that while I am retired and teach scuba
>primarily for the love of diving and teaching, you are an extremely busy
>working instructor.  And so have relatively little spare time to continue
>this discussion.
>
>BTW, since I don't believe it is beneficial to answer on this list, each
>respondent who was interested enough to reply to my postings, I hope that
>this message will answer each of them.  And I request that all further
>responses to my postings please be sent to me personally (off list).  I
don't
>mean to slough off any discussions, but I think that this subject has taken
>up enough bandwidth on the Quest list.  Now can we get back to talking
about
>technical diving?
>
>Hey guys, thanks a bunch for the chance to let it all hang out.  :-))
>
>Take care and dive safe,        Scott Bonis
>
>Some weeks it's just not worth the effort to gnaw through the restraints
and
>scramble up out of the pit.
>

GLOBAL UNDERWATER EXPLORERS
Training, Research, & Exploration
phone: 386.454.0820
fax: 386.454.0815
web: www.gue.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]