Talk:DIR diving

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject SCUBA, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve Scuba diving-related articles to a feature-quality standard.

Does anyone have any suggestions on how much should be included in this article?

It is kind of crazy JJ doesn't have a page.--70.125.74.77 02:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

A summary, if possible, of standard equipment configurations and skill levels required would be useful. Thayvian (talk) 09:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] External links

Wikipedia is not a link list. This page needs to be cleaned up.

[edit] One mans opinion

This whole article reeks of one persons opinion, I tagged it... thanks Robert Beck (talk) 21:02, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I disagree, the text is a variety of information collected by several people and widely agreed upon at DIR Explorers. I have reverted to the previous version Al star quake (talk) 16:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

"It is suggested by some..." is lazy, annoying and lacks neutrality. FOX News anchors use statements like that all the time to hide bias. If you want to be honest, it is DIR proponents and the GUE and WKPP organizations which suggest that dive training leaves divers relatively unprepared. -- lamont granquist 216.231.47.146 (talk) 08:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History instead of Rationale

The Rationale for GUE is actually that the WKPP needed divers and the other training agencies weren't producing them. So the cave and technical curriculum was setup. Due to the large number of divers showing up unprepared in fundamental skills to the entry level Tech1 and Cave1 courses the Fundamentals course was setup as workshop first and now as a certification course. The historical purpose of the organization is to produce tech2/cave2 divers that would be useful in the WKPP and for the kind of diving that the WKPP does. This historical purpose explains why there are certain standards which are taught in "entry-level" courses like DIRF, which are not choices forced on them by the environment until a diver begins doing cave, technical or scooter diving.

That is all primary before even getting into "DIR diving methodologies focus on improving the basic skills or fundamentals which allows divers to be far more comfortable in the water and have more fun." That isn't the rationale for DIR, that's a benefit of DIR diving.

And actually the history starts with cave diving and people dying and the response to that in terms of creating the hogarthian streamlined equipment config, which led to JJ+Irvine creating the DIR system which put together the equipment and the protocols along with the training added by GUE. Its really about being able to train divers to work together to achieve objectives safely. That leads to a focus on fundamental skills and leads to more enjoyable diving experiences, but those aren't rationales.

And it should probably be mentioned that DIR diving can also trace its lineage back to Sheck Exley's Blueprint for survival and the accident analysis that Sheck did and the rules he proposed, along with things like the long hose configuration. It built on all that and the hogarthian gear configuration and a lot of the earlier history of cave diving.

-- lamont granquist 216.231.47.146 (talk) 08:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)