"Complete Wreck Diving" (manifold vs independent)

[Soggy]

I am not trying to defend the position that manifold is less safe you claim independants are less safe and I am challenging you to come up with a compelling (and factual) argument to support that. Give me some facts. I have a very open mind about this issue I just have yet to hear anything from the DIR crowd that supports their strong position on it. It is the same mentality that prevents them from using sidemount in a cave when clearly it is a superior setup in many situations.

I have given you several reasons. You just don't like my reasons.

I don't know why you brought DIR into this. I came up with my own reasons why not to do independents independent from anything taught in the DIR crowd. My DIRness (and lack thereof) comes from having thought through the issues and discovered that they happen to mostly follow along the same philosophy as DIR, so let's leave DIR out of this. It doesn't add anything to the discussion.

Ultimately, I don't believe that the procedures or gear configuration with independents is compatible with team diving procedures, or at least the way that I choose to dive within a team. Maybe there are good solutions to some of the issues I have with the configuration.

My biggest problem is that any failure causes you to lose access to half your gas. I see that as a huge problem.

 

[Hoosier]

What is the difference between a sidemount rig. and an independant rig.?

Anyone?

 

[Soggy]

What is the difference between a sidemount rig. and an independant rig.?

Anyone?

Sidemounts are independents, mounted on your side to facilitate penetration into really tight spots. Sidemounters often use the Armadillo harness. Independents are usually mounted on your back just like a normal set of doubles.

 

[wedivebc]

Maybe there are good solutions to some of the issues I have with the configuration.

Nice to hear you say that

My biggest problem is that any failure causes you to lose access to half your gas. I see that as a huge problem.

Lets assume rule of thirds. Also we need to assume independant doubles diver still has buddy with access to his gas if needed Post failure
manifold guy: you shut down one post switch to second reg, buddy is available if gas supply gets low
independant guy: same as above but probably not since he still has 1/3 minimum in reserve


burst disk failure
manifold guy: isolates affected side now has less than 1/2 gas supply due to gas lost while manifold was open

ind guy: switches regs, shuts affected side but still has same redundant gas as before since redundant side not affected.

manifold failure
manifold guy: total loss of gas, notifys buddy does OOG drill

ind guy write on wetnotes to his independant buddy "did you hear something?"

 

[Hoosier]

Sidemounts are independents, mounted on your side to facilitate penetration into really tight spots. Sidemounters often use the Armadillo harness. Independents are usually mounted on your back just like a normal set of doubles.

Good.

So, you can't dive with a sidemount divers?

Just out of curiosity (seriously), DIR doesn't allow a sidemount diving in their way of thinking?

 

[Soggy]

It all comes down to this...

Do you want to optimize for the worst, but very unlikely failure (by adding complexity in hose configuration and procedures) or do you want to optimize for the most likely failure and have a very minute chance of having the worst happen?

Raise your hand if you have ever heard of a manifold failing in the water.

I choose to optimize for the most likely failures without sacrificing anything in the worst case.

Another problem...If I'm sharing gas with my buddy, there is a huge benefit to having the two gas supplies merged. For one thing, if you are donating from the mouth, your buddy is going to be getting the smallest gas supply available when he is likely going to be in the worst situation.

Isolator - simple in both procedure in configuration, optimized for common failures
Independents - more complicated both in procedure and configuration, optimized for worst case

I guess we just have differing philosophies. I clearly see several small and several major problems with an independent configuration where you see advantages. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[Thalassamania]

My biggest problem is that any failure causes you to lose access to half your gas. I see that as a huge problem.

I don’t see it that way, to my way of thinking if anything happens we loose access to ¼ of our remaining gas, the remaining ¾ should get us out of there. Since we’ve thumbed the dive I see the ¼ gas loss as a minor inconvenience.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

 

[Soggy]

So, you can't dive with a sidemount divers?

Can't? Sure, I can. I would not choose to.

Sidemount has a place in a very specific environment. I do not dive in areas where sidemount is required, so there is no reason for anyone diving with me to use sidemount.

Just out of curiosity (seriously), DIR doesn't allow a sidemount diving in their way of thinking?

I don't know if there is a DIR sidemount configuration or not. I'm sure if it became necessary for some specific exploration, it would get developed, but like the RB80, it would only be used when absolutely necessary since there are a lot of compromises that have to be made.

 

[Thalassamania]

Can't? Sure, I can. I would not choose to.

Sidemount has a place in a very specific environment. I do not dive in areas where sidemount is required, so there is no reason for anyone diving with me to use sidemount.



I don't know if there is a DIR sidemount configuration or not. I'm sure if it became necessary for some specific exploration, it would get developed, but like the RB80, it would only be used when absolutely necessary since there are a lot of compromises that have to be made.

DIR Sidemount

 

[daniel f aleman]

The point is that each and every diver have true redundancy of needed gas; redundancy must be PROVEN by emperical evidence; AND, "your buddy" does NOT offer redundancy.

P.E.R.I.O.D