The thread has evoked some interesting discussion regarding fundamental issues and perceptions about sidemount a) diving, b) dive training, and c) equipment
rambaldi:
if you are diving somewhere where you need to be in SM rather than the preferred BM doubles then you are really going to be needing the toughness. And those should be the only places you should be using SM over BM.
I don’t know if the poster’s intent was to paraphrase what s/he sees as a prevailing sentiment, or was a (perhaps somewhat naïve) personal statement of belief about the place that a sidemount configuration has. But, I don’t disagree that there remains a core of skepticism about sidemount, found among at least some experienced BM doubles divers. I hear it from some of my (BM-only) dive buddies – ‘Why are you wasting time with that SM stuff. BM is good for anything you want to do.’ OK, I can respect that others – generally those who have not tried SM – have different opinions. They are free top dive BM, I am free to dive SM.
I spent the past 4 days diving the NC coast on various wrecks lying in 90 to 170 fsw. I dove BM doubles two days, and SM doubles two days, and both worked just fine. And, I even listened to some of those (good-natured) comments from a few dive buddies on the days I strapped on my SM rig. What I did notice is that, for ME, I do just a bit more station-keeping when diving BM steel cylinders in a wetsuit – specifically minor finning to make sure I don’t roll as the center of weight (the big hunk of steel on my back) seeks its preferred position (under the center of lift). I don’t do any (that I noticed) in SM. I was holding at my 20 ft stop on the last dive yesterday, off the anchor line at the end of my jon line, and realized how incredibly stable I was in the water with my Nomad and steel 100s. There was no body movement that I could notice, no instinctive fin flicking to correct a slight roll, etc. It was fun. That doesn’t mean I am breaking down my remaining BM doubles, just something I noticed.
The struggles for GUE are insightful. GUE’s long-standing emphasis on standardization has produced outstanding results. In contrast, sidemount brings to diving an equally exciting focus on diversity – SM is a DIYer’s paradise, where ‘home-made’ is an appealing term, where modifications to commercial gear are almost the norm, and where ‘tweaking’ reigns supreme. In many ways, SM development right now is the antithesis of standardization. That doesn’t make it bad, and that doesn’t mean GUE is wrong. It is what it is (and I would love for GUE enter the SM training world, just to see what approach they would take.). With almost every new SM market entry, we see some refinement of existing design (and attempts at standardization), but we also see some innovation that may well spur yet more modifications, and tweaking.
As for Halcyon entering the SM market, Lynne hit the nail on the head:
TsandM:
Sidemount is not a fad; it's clearly here to stay, and Halcyon would be remiss to ignore that market.
Halcyon would be foolish, indeed, to ignore the market (not unlike some previously very successful, well-known photographic equipment companies – no longer in business - were foolish to ignore the digital market). Sidemount popularity is growing. Andy said it very well:
DevonDiver:
Sidemount, when not having to be dovetailed into an existing formal philosophical methodology, is quite universal and is proving exceptional popular as such.
I am glad to see Halcyon enter the market. I won’t run out and buy a Contour right now but I want to have a chance to try one (just like I want to have a chance to dive a X-Deep Stealth, for that matter, before I buy one). I agree that the unit seems pricey, and I think I pay a bit of a H tax (I dive some Halcyon gear), but they generally bring good things to the market. So, good on them for coming out with the Contour.
