Posted by seahunt on January 15, 2001 at 13:16:11:
Just another thought or two....
One funny thing you have to remember. The idea behind DIR is that
it is a system. Nobody else has really pushed this for diving. There
are no other diving systems. Sure, you can buy a nice integrated
looking system to match some manufacturers ad, but that system is still largely contrived for marketing purposes.
It's sorta like marshal arts. There were lots of ways to fight,
but most of the formal fighting systems were developed by people in
occupied contries. They had to be highly developed systems to allow
the person to do what they normally just could not. Most marshal art
forms include how an unarmed man could attack and defeat an armed
soldier on a horse, because that was what was required. That's a pretty capable system.
So does DIR in any way fit the description of an advanced diving
system? It probably does, but just how capable is it. What does it
offer? Does it give greater capability to the diver? Is an advanced
diving system needed? Those are other questions.
Really, the DIR philosophy and reasoning behind standardized gear
is fairly innovative. The actual effectiveness of the system is still
a bit open to question.
The conformity demanded by the proponents of the DIR system is
somewhat unique. Almost all other sports have extremely rapid
innovation and evolution of gear. That seems a bit less true for
diving than most other sports though. Perhaps the slow evolution and
rare revolution of dive gear may be a result of the fact that the human is the main piece of gear. Aside from gear evolution, that kind of conformity is rather rare in any American culture. It's more like
something you would find (maybe in the military or) in Asia. While
systems that demand conformity of this sort are rather novel, that does not by itself disqualify the system.
.
My final view of DIR for California sport diving was that it
didn't seem appropriate. Specifically, this was for three main reasons.
Their dislike of computers, their placement of gauges on the arms and
their disapproval of using steel tanks in the ocean without a drysuit.
These are things I think are necessary for my diving and desirable for
much of west coast diving. I'll leave the buddy stuff out for the
moment.
My biggest objection though was that it is an inherently
non-adaptable system which seems like an absurd feature of any system
for a number of reasons.
Well, I've already said that that non-adaptability clause is a
feature of the system proponents, not the system. So the question
becomes what could DIR be adapted to in California without the
corrupting infleunce of its proponents. That becomes a question with a
different answer for the different types of diving in California.
The first adaptation would have to be the computer and console.
First off, here I should say that the DIR folks come so close to
the line of dishonesty in promoting their philosophy, that it discredits
them almost as much as their non-adaptability. I refer specifically to
their evasion on so many topics, especially dive computers. It doesn't
fit in their scheme of streamlining or machismo, so they ditch it.
Well, sorry to say, but dive computers are the best innovation for
sport divers since scuba. Anybody that says they should be left behind,
is simply wrong. And don't try to tell me that DIR proponents are not
horribly ambiguous and in the habit of ignoring inconvenient
questions.
The DIR folks keep asking the same question over and over. What do
I need at 400 feet that I don't need at 60 feet. I couldn't say. What I
keep asking, that they keep ignoring, is what do I need at 60 feet
that I might not need at 400 feet. That has an answer. A dive
computer.
This issue, more than guages on the wrist or steel tanks with a
wetsuit, is an area where DIR prejudices and non-adaptability
contribute to an avoidable hazard and a serious loss of convenience.
With that caveat, I will make a description of what DIR might look
like if adapted for west coast sport diving by a reasonable person...
or me.
So this makes the assumption that DIR has some benifits and so
only says what would have to be changed to make DIR appropriate. Then
these specific changes can be looked at for how they would effect the
DIR system. Examination of DIR for its actual effectiveness is left for
elsewhere.
Just consider the addition of a console with SPG, Compass and
computer. DIR folks love to dis consoles, but they aren't as big as
all that, they are not necessarily in the way and they solve many of
the worst problems of DIR on the west coast. You now have a computer
and no guages on the arms. The cost is a tiny amount of streamlining
and they are hard to read on a scooter. As much as DIR folks like
doubles, they should never claim the high road on streamlining.
Scooters on the west coast are as rare as 40 pound ling cod and totally
unneeded for sport diving. Another real advantage of the console is it
is easier for the buddy to check air and nitrogen status of a buddy.
.
I am inclined to stop this essay right here, just to make sure
that my point doesn't get lost in my usual wordiness. Also, it leaves
only one point for the DIR purists to respond to. (Hint, hint don't be
evasive. Answer this somebody.)
A computer and console makes for a significant increase in
SAFETY and convenience (especially for the hunter) at a small cost in
streamlining. Why can this adaptation of DIR not be allowed?
Enjoy, seahunt
PS. Later I'll ask some other questions, but I'll stop here so I have
a chance of getting an answer to this one. If I get no answer to this
I will get testy and noticably more critical...