DIR: questions and answers

[gcbryan]

This board is fairly civil and should be able to handle direct questions/comments/answers regarding DIR without becoming a flame war.

I don't look at the subject as being us vs them. When something becomes such a hot topic it's like race relations...nothing improves because real questions or comments that people have are held back because they'll be called a racist.

I like much of what DIR has brought to us or has brought to our attention. I'm not that into joining most any group just because of group dynamic's. That doesn't mean I don't play well with others, I just don't want others to speak for me.

Here are some of the questions and comments I have regarding DIR. If some of the more thoughtful, well spoken DIR adherents care to comment that would be appreciated. Others should feel free to post their comments or questions as well.

Why address recreational diving as a "belief system" rather than just dealing with each issue that comes up with objectivity?

Why the need for the group mentality? Why all the pat answers instead of your own answers...air is for tires, I didn't know what I didn't know, computers rot your brain, etc.?

Why contort logic to fit a belief...must disable a computer because to not do so would cause one to not pay attention to the dive?

Why mandate a long hose just because it's easier to practice with? This wasn't the original reason for it at all. It's nice to have or not to have.

I've looked at most of the DIR practices and even though many are controversial as implemented today there is no controversy in their original function. The reason for no computer is that there were no computers for technical diving, the long hose was to pass gas to a buddy thorough a cave restriction, everyone has to be on the same page in a technical diving scenario just like the military, commercial diving, etc.

Logic is getting contorted when you say don't dive with a pony bottle. Your buddy is your pony bottle...unless you are diving doubles then your buddy and your doubles are your redundancy. Don't dive with a pony bottle but if you do sling it....don't do something but if you do I have a belief system for that as well!

Practice for drill team precision for recreational diving. This is like training a soldier for duty in Iraq by sending him to school for drill team skills. The skills needed in combat are different than those used in a parade.

These are the most common questions/thoughts that I've had over the years regarding DIR.

[mattwave]

6 years ago, I would have had a lot to say, it seemed the term had one definition. Sometime it seems it has 50 different ones, most of time I think it's lost in translation, but I guess you are supposed to Do It Right?

[Sergeant Pepper]

I thought the DIR threads were supposed to begin on Friday.

[gcbryan]

I thought the DIR threads were supposed to begin on Friday.

I thought about that but couldn't wait!

[Joshua Smith]

OK, just a quick interjection here: after yesterday's friction on this board, I'm in no mood to put out any more fires. DIR has, on occasion, caused considerable internet controversy. All it's going to take is ONE inflamatory post in this thread, and I will delete it without hesitation. If that happens, please feel free to bring it up at a later time, preferably NOT the day after a bunch of stupid drama. I believe strongly in freedom of speach, but we all know you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater......



edit: spelling

[CaptnJack]

Why address recreational diving as a "belief system" rather than just dealing with each issue that comes up with objectivity?.

I think this is just your outside perspective. Most of the DIR divers I know put ALOT (sometimes to excess) thought it what they are doing and/or why.

Why the need for the group mentality? Why all the pat answers instead of your own answers...air is for tires, I didn't know what I didn't know, computers rot your brain, etc.?

I agree these types of answers are trite. I avoid them.

Why contort logic to fit a belief...must disable a computer because to not do so would cause one to not pay attention to the dive?

For recreational dives computers are fine. For deco dives, most of us do not do profiles which are compatible with computers and in the event of lost gas or something like that computers are often not able to cope the same way. Also you'd need to have the whole team using the same exact computer - tough in an international organization.

Why mandate a long hose just because it's easier to practice with? This wasn't the original reason for it at all. It's nice to have or not to have.

Its just way easier to share gas with a longer hose. You always donate from your mouth regardless of the environment so to be consistent across environments you use a long hose. Consistent gear, consistent response, same training, crosses all diving situations. No rethinking depending on what setup you wore today for which environment.

Logic is getting contorted when you say don't dive with a pony bottle. Your buddy is your pony bottle...unless you are diving doubles then your buddy and your doubles are your redundancy. Don't dive with a pony bottle but if you do sling it....don't do something but if you do I have a belief system for that as well!

I'm not sure what you're asking here? Doubles are only partial redundancy. For deeper dives and/or overhead dives outside of easy reach of the surface you need need the resources of a team. A pony bottle is not a substitute for all the other redundancy that a team provides. Slinging a pony bottle is a kludge to continue to offer recommendations to someone set on a pony bottle.

Practice for drill team precision for recreational diving. This is like training a soldier for duty in Iraq by sending him to school for drill team skills. The skills needed in combat are different than those used in a parade.

This is a new phenomenon. It seems to have arisen due to the high cost, difficult scheduling and potential to "not pass" GUE classes. The drill team concept is actually the worst thing anyone can do to their diving. GUE definately doesn't want robots mindlessly going through a pat routine. So its a quirk of the beginning DIR diver, not the experienced. (they still practice, just not like a drill team).

Hope some of these explanations help.
Richard

[gcbryan]

Thanks Richard, those are thoughtful responses.

On related note I've just started to notice that when you respond to a post there is a button with the option to "ignore" but it doesn't appear when others post. Is this just an option in the control panel that you've enabled that maybe others haven't? I just noticed this today.

Gray

[dsteding]

On related note I've just started to notice that when you respond to a post there is a button with the option to "ignore" but it doesn't appear when others post. Is this just an option in the control panel that you've enabled that maybe others haven't? I just noticed this today.

Everyone has it except for the mods.

[gcbryan]

On related note I've just started to notice that when you respond to a post there is a button with the option to "ignore" but it doesn't appear when others post. Is this just an option in the control panel that you've enabled that maybe others haven't? I just noticed this today.

Everyone has it except for the mods.

I just never noticed I guess. Just looking on this page I see that Matt doesn't have it and isn't listed as a mod. I don't see it on my own posts but I guess that's because they're my posts.

I need to be more observant I guess!

[John Rawlings]

Everyone has it except for the mods.

Not so. There are quite a few people that don't have it....for unknown reasons at this point. Refer to this thread for a discussion about this:

http://www.nwdiveclub.com/viewtopic.php ... highlight=

Plus, with the exception of Nailer99, (the BIG BWANA), there ARE no more Mods.

- John

[gcbryan]

Logic is getting contorted when you say don't dive with a pony bottle. Your buddy is your pony bottle...unless you are diving doubles then your buddy and your doubles are your redundancy. Don't dive with a pony bottle but if you do sling it....don't do something but if you do I have a belief system for that as well!

I'm not sure what you're asking here? Doubles are only partial redundancy. For deeper dives and/or overhead dives outside of easy reach of the surface you need need the resources of a team. A pony bottle is not a substitute for all the other redundancy that a team provides. Slinging a pony bottle is a kludge to continue to offer recommendations to someone set on a pony bottle.


Richard

Not that it's all that important but what I was getting at here in part was that when diving singles your buddy must be your only redundancy (no pony allowed) but when diving doubles part of the reason is redundancy. That's not logical. If you can be a good buddy with doubles logically you should be able to be a good buddy diving singles even while slinging a pony.

[gcbryan]

I think I'm seeing that various internet DIR posters may be having a greater impact on public perception than perhaps the way most DIR divers feel. Thanks Richard your responses make more sense to me.

Some of the disconnect for me has not been a problem with DIR divers standardizing what they do among themselves but when mainly on the internet they post and try to convince everyone else that anything different is wrong rather than just not DIR.

It makes sense to me for a DIR diver not to sling a pony when diving singles within a DIR group. It doesn't make logical common sense to me for that person to be so adament about another group of single divers not slinging ponies if that is there standard approach.

[CaptnJack]

Logic is getting contorted when you say don't dive with a pony bottle. Your buddy is your pony bottle...unless you are diving doubles then your buddy and your doubles are your redundancy. Don't dive with a pony bottle but if you do sling it....don't do something but if you do I have a belief system for that as well!

I'm not sure what you're asking here? Doubles are only partial redundancy. For deeper dives and/or overhead dives outside of easy reach of the surface you need need the resources of a team. A pony bottle is not a substitute for all the other redundancy that a team provides. Slinging a pony bottle is a kludge to continue to offer recommendations to someone set on a pony bottle.


Richard

Not that it's all that important but what I was getting at here in part was that when diving singles your buddy must be your only redundancy (no pony allowed) but when diving doubles part of the reason is redundancy. That's not logical. If you can be a good buddy with doubles logically you should be able to be a good buddy diving singles even while slinging a pony.

Ok I understand the question/confusion better now.

The premise is more along the lines of: shallow, non-overhead dives don't require any additional gas redundancy that a buddy does not already provide. Since rock bottom (or minimum gas, or whatever they call it now) handles the extra gas needed for 2 divers to ascend stressed. If one diver were to bring a pony and go OOA you are now in a situation where he/she is not relying on the team and maybe choosing to ascend idependently. So you don't need the extra gear and it can actually break up the consistency of emergency response across environments. I know kinda a weak logical argument but it comes down to:
1) redundancy is handled by the buddy
2) the gear is complicated and difficult to standardize
3) going to a pony in a recreational OOA is a distinctly different response than going to a teammate (which is consistent with Tech and Cave diving)
4) If you are OOA you want your teammate to be helping you (e.g. continue to ascend at a safe rate, time the deco, calm you down, etc.) Just when you hit maximum stress is not a good time to rocket up alone on a small pony.

Doubles are a different issue. Doubles are carried because you need more gas. There being three ways to rig that additional gas: independents (or sidemount), simple straight cross bar, manifold.

Of those 3 choices independents are require excessively complicated gas management which if you screw up your OOA buddy may be further challenged by needing to buddy breath. Not the prefered solution unless the cave actually requires sidemount and you build the team around that need.

Straight cross bars provide no redundancy for blown neck orings or burst disks. Manifolds provide a means to isolate and their loan drawback is an increased risk of screwed up filling. "Surface" risks and or additional dry side planning are always chosen in DIR over gear which must be managed differently (or is more complicated OW).

Hope this clarifies a bit. Really DIR is not needed for recreational diving. It works but many of the concepts are reverse engineered from cave diving with many stages and bottles. So if you have a single AL80 all the concepts are still there, but they are not so obviously needed.

[dsteding]

Richard's last point is a good one, remember, as taught by GUE and its split-offs this is a top-down system, which does lead to technical diving if you take it that far. Gray, much of the questions you pose seem to be DIR in a recreational setting, and I agree some of the pieces may not be readily obvious or seemingly needed in that context.

Because DIR involves risk comprehension and reduction, it tends to eschew complex or unnecessary equipment, as Richard has pointed out. The pony bottle as an example: on recreational dives it simply isn't needed, a combination of decent buddy skills and appropriate planning will cover ALL of the scenarios in which one may otherwise need a pony. So, if you have that combination of skills and planning understood, you don't need it. Because it adds complexity, it is left on the shore.

This point is an important one, because to a certain extent the DIR system isn't pick-and-choose, which probably answers your question about people swallowing all the kool-aid and not just sampling, so to speak. At the recreational level some things may not be absolutely needed, but I have choosen to dive this way because it makes diving with both my regular buddies AND some complete strangers a very low stress affair. On that note, we again see the theme of minimizing risk, by having standardized gear and procedures I can minimize the stress associated with not being on the same page with your dive buddy-and as anyone can attest if they've had a buddy swim away from them, that stress can be real.

Gray, I'd also agree that much of this is colored negatively by the internet--my old "perceptions of DIR" thread on this board covered that in detail. In my experience, what I've run into is divers that seem a lot like you are (at least from our limited meetings around Cove 2 and on the internet): namely, thinking, careful, questioning, divers.

On a final note, I think much of the internet BS could be minimized if the questions asked were not "is this DIR" but "why is this DIR."

[CaptnJack]

It makes sense to me for a DIR diver not to sling a pony when diving singles within a DIR group. It doesn't make logical common sense to me for that person to be so adament about another group of single divers not slinging ponies if that is there standard approach.

I recommend people sling ponys under an arm (if they feel they need one after discussing their limitations) for one reason...

DandyDon over on SB had a backmounted pony on a single tank. And sight unseen it partially leaked on a deep (recreational) wreck dive. He lost the anchor line. He was narked on air at 120ft. He racked up a deco obligation while swimming tunnel visioned on the bottom looking for the anchor. Found an anchor and started his ascent. Then ran OOG on his main tank. Then drained the half full pony on the ascent.

He finished the ~15mins of deco on the long hose of a tech diver who just happened to be on a different boat diving the same general site.

My "sling a 30 or 40cf" recommendations are based on this and a couple of other similar stories. Not really anything to do with my own DIR inclinations.

Small 13cf or 19cf backmounted ponies are just a really poor choice IMO. Although worse still would be a 13cf pony on one side and a 13cf argon bottle on the other, ack!

[gcbryan]

It makes sense to me for a DIR diver not to sling a pony when diving singles within a DIR group. It doesn't make logical common sense to me for that person to be so adament about another group of single divers not slinging ponies if that is there standard approach.

I recommend people sling ponys under an arm (if they feel they need one after discussing their limitations) for one reason...

DandyDon over on SB had a backmounted pony on a single tank. And sight unseen it partially leaked on a deep (recreational) wreck dive. He lost the anchor line. He was narked on air at 120ft. He racked up a deco obligation while swimming tunnel visioned on the bottom looking for the anchor. Found an anchor and started his ascent. Then ran OOG on his main tank. Then drained the half full pony on the ascent.

He finished the ~15mins of deco on the long hose of a tech diver who just happened to be on a different boat diving the same general site.

My "sling a 30 or 40cf" recommendations are based on this and a couple of other similar stories. Not really anything to do with my own DIR inclinations.

Small 13cf or 19cf backmounted ponies are just a really poor choice IMO. Although worse still would be a 13cf pony on one side and a 13cf argon bottle on the other, ack!

In this particular case in trying to eliminate the sling vs backmount issue I guess I didn't convey my point well. I was conceding slinging (which I now do as well). I meant to convey the point that why should one group of divers who standardize their gear (DIR) have a problem with another group of divers (my buddies) diving together using single tanks along with slung ponies which is our standarized gear.

My buddy is my redundant gas if I need it or if it gets to that but I'll be self-sufficient and go to my pony first. He will do the same. If he requests it he'll get my regulator. If I can initially deal with a problem myself by going to my pony, why not? If 30 cu ft isn't enough (and it should be) then I'll go to him. My main dive buddies all have about the same SAC rate, experience, calmness in the water, 119 cu ft tanks, 30 cu ft or greater ponies, donate primary hoses (just not 7 foot) necklaced backup, etc. It's standardized among my main dive buddies. I'm not going cave diving.

If I'm not diving with my main buddies my way and your way is not standardized in that particular buddy pairing however I would have redundant air in that siituation and you wouldn't. You may choose to simply never dive with anyone who doesn't dive as you do so your system still works. So does mine however and I don't want to limit myself to only my main buddies.

No offense but using stories like Dandy Don as a reason not to use a pony or for any other reason is really a strawman argument. Even when I backmounted a pony I still had a SPG that was where I could see it and I checked it from time to time. Getting that narced on air at 120 fsw is because it was a new environment for him apparently. I dive weekly at night with a small portion of my dive at that depth on air and at least my outward behavior is no different than at any other depth. Getting narced, losing an anchor line, unintentional deco, OOA, you can't really say that this has anything to do with a pony bottle.

By the way, I think the bigger problem in diving isn't really the methodology but rather the diver trying to apply it. Here is a partial quote from a post on another board from a diver that may illustrate my point (with humor):
"And of course when diving deep, Doubles and decco, Is my redundant."

[dsteding]

I meant to convey the point that why should one group of divers who standardize their gear (DIR) have a problem with another group of divers (my buddies) diving together using single tanks along with slung ponies which is our standarized gear.

I think that is a superiority complex you are running up against and not a DIR/non-DIR issue. You see it ALL THE TIME in diving, look at people touting the gear they use as the best, or their way of diving as the best. If I may, this isn't something specific to DIR but something that is generally seen in many activities.

I bet the same individuals would be doing it if they dove split fins or had backmounted ponies, and really believed in those.

[CaptnJack]

No offense but using stories like Dandy Don as a reason not to use a pony or for any other reason is really a strawman argument. Even when I backmounted a pony I still had a SPG that was where I could see it and I checked it from time to time. Getting that narced on air at 120 fsw is because it was a new environment for him apparently. I dive weekly at night with a small portion of my dive at that depth on air and at least my outward behavior is no different than at any other depth. Getting narced, losing an anchor line, unintentional deco, OOA, you can't really say that this has anything to do with a pony bottle.

Whoops, no I only meant that saga as a good reason to avoid backmounting. If you want/chose a pony put the valve/reg where you can manipulate it and check the contents. Otherwise you may make decisions relying on the pony and it won't be there when the time comes to use it.

I guess this partially comes from my background/training. We don't swim around with deco bottles turned on. They are charged then turned off until needed. A pony being "on" all the time (worst is with no gauge or a button guage out of sight) is a recreational mindset which can lead to trouble.

I dive weekly at night with a small portion of my dive at that depth on air and at least my outward behavior is no different than at any other depth. Getting narced, losing an anchor line, unintentional deco, OOA, you can't really say that this has anything to do with a pony bottle.

Sorry but I have to disagree here. New or old environment you are impaired at 120ft. You may be so familar with the dive that you can go on "autopilot" just fine and not have any outward narcotic manifestations. But if some new, novel circumstances arises, your judgement is compromised to think your way home. Probably not fatally so.

The DandyDon story just highlights the fact that a semi-compromised mental state can lead people to make erroneous decisions. Even if his pony were full he didn't have enough gas for his deco obligation. But his mental state said "Ah I'm a little low on gas down here. Never fear I still got my pony." There was never an assessment of how much deco he was accumulating, how much time that will take, how much gas that will take, etc. Just reliance on the pony. I'm sure on the surface he would never have tunnel visioned himself into thinking his little pony was a solution to a 15+min deco obligation. But given his impaired mental state he did.

[dsteding]

If I'm not diving with my main buddies my way and your way is not standardized in that particular buddy pairing however I would have redundant air in that siituation and you wouldn't. You may choose to simply never dive with anyone who doesn't dive as you do so your system still works. So does mine however and I don't want to limit myself to only my main buddies.

And, to parse this a bit more, you've evolved a system based on your diving style and the need to mitigate risks associated with that style. I've certainly trimmed some of that risk by using a different approach, but the basic mindset isn't much different (the decisions made in the analysis are).

Mindset is:

Risk? What is it? Is it acceptable? If not, how do I mitigate/can I mitigate it to a level I am comfortable with.

In your case, taking the diving with unknown quantities example, you bring a pony and build some independant redundancy in it. I mitigate the same risk by keeping the dive shallow, and prefer diving in teams of three when I have a new buddy (the third being a known quantity). I'll also not dive with someone if I go out with them and they seem unsafe to me.

The decisional matrix isn't that different, but the value judgements (in terms of acceptable risk) may be.

[CaptnJack]

If I'm not diving with my main buddies my way and your way is not standardized in that particular buddy pairing however I would have redundant air in that siituation and you wouldn't. You may choose to simply never dive with anyone who doesn't dive as you do so your system still works. So does mine however and I don't want to limit myself to only my main buddies.

Well that's certainly one approach.

In the DIR universe we find teams a bit differently. Many DIR divers are highly "wired" and we compare schedules and make travel arrangemnts together. I have regular buddies here, in LA, and for MX. A couple in NoCal too but they have faded recently.

Being standardized in training, gear, discussing experience in an honest way, and doing a couple of intro dives together is generally enough for me to start doing dives close to my limits. I back off for a number of different reasons to tailor the dive (whether recreational, deco, or cave) to the individual or for myself. I don't want anyone over their limits, its not fun.

So I feel like DIR has opened up quite a world of buddy resources that a pony and/or similar gear based fixes would not have.

[gcbryan]

I dive weekly at night with a small portion of my dive at that depth on air and at least my outward behavior is no different than at any other depth. Getting narced, losing an anchor line, unintentional deco, OOA, you can't really say that this has anything to do with a pony bottle.

Sorry but I have to disagree here. New or old environment you are impaired at 120ft. You may be so familar with the dive that you can go on "autopilot" just fine and not have any outward narcotic manifestations. But if some new, novel circumstances arises, your judgement is compromised to think your way home. Probably not fatally so.

The DandyDon story just highlights the fact that a semi-compromised mental state can lead people to make erroneous decisions. Even if his pony were full he didn't have enough gas for his deco obligation. But his mental state said "Ah I'm a little low on gas down here. Never fear I still got my pony." There was never an assessment of how much deco he was accumulating, how much time that will take, how much gas that will take, etc. Just reliance on the pony. I'm sure on the surface he would never have tunnel visioned himself into thinking his little pony was a solution to a 15+min deco obligation. But given his impaired mental state he did.

I get your point (we disagree here) but Dandy Don had problems when he was up here I believe. In my opinion it's just too much to blame it all on depth/air/pony. I don't have those problems nor do most people I dive with. I'm not making any claims on my superhuman ability to resist narcosis. I'm just not exaggerating it. This is where the belief I was talking about comes in. Those who don't do deeper air always have in my opinion exaggerated stories of how bad it is. Those who use it regularly have stories but they aren't so exaggerated.

I just think some of the arguments aren't on point. Most of the arguments against pony bottles or air at 120 fsw are really arguments against poor judgement or poor gas management. I guess my point is if the same attention is given any system works.

I also understand the tech protocalls but in a rec setting I actually think keeping a pony bottle turned on it the best way to do it. You can't have it both ways. In an emergency you can argue that I will come unglued and need my buddies assistance because I'm not capable of going to my pony bottle but if I do go to it in a emergency argue that it's better if I had to remember to turn it back on. I do understand the logic behind it in a tech setting. My main tank is on all the time as is my pony. I check both SPG's from time to time.

It's human nature I guess but it isn't a valid argument or assumption to believe that one side is the only one who can be careful or thoughtful or have non-routine dives. The argument frequently becomes sure you can handle yourself at Cove 2 but what happens when you're at some place different. As far as I can tell I've personally been to more places in the PNW than many of the Cove 2 DIR proponents. I'm just saying that there is a lot of lecturing of what not to do and what will happen by those who don't have a lot of practical experience to those who in some cases do.It is more of an internet thing though.

[gcbryan]

If I'm not diving with my main buddies my way and your way is not standardized in that particular buddy pairing however I would have redundant air in that siituation and you wouldn't. You may choose to simply never dive with anyone who doesn't dive as you do so your system still works. So does mine however and I don't want to limit myself to only my main buddies.

And, to parse this a bit more, you've evolved a system based on your diving style and the need to mitigate risks associated with that style. I've certainly trimmed some of that risk by using a different approach, but the basic mindset isn't much different (the decisions made in the analysis are).

Mindset is:

Risk? What is it? Is it acceptable? If not, how do I mitigate/can I mitigate it to a level I am comfortable with.

In your case, taking the diving with unknown quantities example, you bring a pony and build some independant redundancy in it. I mitigate the same risk by keeping the dive shallow, and prefer diving in teams of three when I have a new buddy (the third being a known quantity). I'll also not dive with someone if I go out with them and they seem unsafe to me.

The decisional matrix isn't that different, but the value judgements (in terms of acceptable risk) may be.

I don't think even the judgements are all that different just because I have a pony bottle. When I dive with a dangerous diver I don't repeat that experience either even with a pony bottle.

When I dive with someone for the first time I too keep it shallow. The pony bottle doesn't change much except options.

[gcbryan]

If I'm not diving with my main buddies my way and your way is not standardized in that particular buddy pairing however I would have redundant air in that siituation and you wouldn't. You may choose to simply never dive with anyone who doesn't dive as you do so your system still works. So does mine however and I don't want to limit myself to only my main buddies.

Well that's certainly one approach.

In the DIR universe we find teams a bit differently. Many DIR divers are highly "wired" and we compare schedules and make travel arrangemnts together. I have regular buddies here, in LA, and for MX. A couple in NoCal too but they have faded recently.

Being standardized in training, gear, discussing experience in an honest way, and doing a couple of intro dives together is generally enough for me to start doing dives close to my limits. I back off for a number of different reasons to tailor the dive (whether recreational, deco, or cave) to the individual or for myself. I don't want anyone over their limits, its not fun.

So I feel like DIR has opened up quite a world of buddy resources that a pony and/or similar gear based fixes would not have.

Therein lies the strength of DIR...good buddy skills are more prevalent. There's never been a question there in my mind.

[LCF]

I think every diver who does more than a few shallow reef dives a year has to answer some questions for himself. The questions relate to acceptable risk, and methods of risk mitigation. Risks include equipment malfunction (which also includes gas loss), narcosis, and buddy problems. Each of us has to come up with ways to manage those problems which are acceptable to us.

I don't have a problem with you carrying a pony bottle. It's not the solution I chose for myself. My solution is more complicated, actually, because it involves diving with adequate gas reserves, trained buddies, and if deep enough, double tanks. My solution requires that I be part of a system; yours may be adequate for you by yourself. I like being part of a system.

The long hose isn't necessary in open water diving, but it's nice. The "donate the primary/bungied backup" approach, to me, has enough things going for it that that's the one I chose to use. In open water, you can use a 5' hose neatly and easily, and some of the friends I dive with do. I use a 7' hose, because it's not a problem for me to manage it, it's comfortable in air-sharing, and shoot, I got this cave bug . . .

Standardized equipment is SO nice. You don't realize how nice it is, until you dive with somebody who doesn't follow the same guidelines, and you have to go through all their stuff and figure out where their weights are and how they come off, where their alternate air source is and how it comes loose, and from a bad experience I had, where their inflator is and HOW IT WORKS. Doing a pre-dive with DIR buddies is quick and efficient, because we don't have to investigate those things.

Standardized procedures and signalling conventions are also nice. In all the places I've gone and dived with new DIR buddies, I've never had to worry about where they will be or how they will signal anything the team needs to know. It's all standardized. I can jump in the water with Tim in Maui, or Kevin in Monterey, or Claudette in Los Angeles, and it's all the same. It makes diving very comfortable.

I haven't even begun to plumb the benefits of the system for cave diving, but I would imagine it will be even stronger and richer there.

I dive with people who aren't DIR, and I don't look down on their choices. As long as somebody has good personal diving skills, which include buoyancy control, control of their trim, the ability not to silt out a dive site, and good communication underwater, they're a good diver. But the dives I do with people who share the same approach I've taken are the most relaxing and reassuring dives.

Oh, and edited to add: DIR divers are taught to use minimum deco. No dive permits a direct ascent. The computers I've used don't necessarily like the table limits I learned, or the minimum deco approach, and they lock up at annoying moments. That's why my computer sits in gauge mode.

And you'll find that a lot of people who have adopted the DIR approach to diving do not regurgitate cant. I've asked many, many questions in classes. "WHY do we do things this way? Why not THAT way?" I've always gotten cogent, polite answers. There are a few places where the answers haven't been compelling (pocket contents, for example) but most of the time, there are good reasons behind the decisions that have been made. Sometimes there were equally good options, but one had to be chosen for the sake of standardization, and that's okay.

[johnbenway]

one of the original problems of the dir adherents was the agression showed to divers that had not bought into the marketing campaign.
it is not as apparent now as in the past, but a good example is nailer99's post. as soon as this thread started he emphatically stated no flaming.
who was going to flame? divers that agreed with you?
as i grew as a diver i realized dir was a self limiting. i knew it was time to move on when a friends son decided to learn to scuba dive and we talked about going out and doing some simple dives for fun. i was nearly ostracized by the local 'shop' as i was diving with a stroke and had no intention of itroducing him to the gue campaign until he felt ready to try something new.
dir/gue has some really great ideas and skills. but it is not the end all. everything including me and mine can be improved on or modified to fit individual skills and abilities.
take what you like, build a skill set that fits you and look at other peoples rigs. if you see something you like try to find out why that diver does that, and see if it works for you. and always always think for yourself
unlike sweat pants, one size does not fit all.