Connecting transmitter pod to 1st stage

[JonnyDiver]

Yep, I inserted the spool restrictor between the hose and pod, then screwed the hose directly into the HP on my 1st stage.

 

[BlueTrin]

I use a HP hose as well on my transmitter.

I had a minor leak and had to change the o-ring on the spool. But if the HP hose leaks after the first stage connection, it will leak fairly slowly since the HP hose flow is restricted (when you install your HP hose you should be able to see that there is only a tiny hole on the first stage side.

 

[divinh]

Can I get this clarified, as a newbie transmitter user...

first stage HP port -> HP hose -> HP spool -> transmitter

In another thread, I think someone mentioned adding a swivel, so...

first stage HP port -> HP hose -> HP spool -> swivel -> transmitter

Am I understanding this right?

 

[Mike1967]

HP port -> transmitter

If you really want to use a hose the spool is the swivel.

 

[divinh]

HP port -> transmitter

If you really want to use a hose the spool is the swivel.

Thanks! That wasn't quite clear to me. From reviews on DGX, the air spool is used to stop leaks at the SPG swivel?

 

[Mike1967]

the air spool is used to stop leaks at the SPG swivel?

Correct, the same swivel is there when you screw on the transmitter.

 

[BlueTrin]

Can I get this clarified, as a newbie transmitter user...

first stage HP port -> HP hose -> HP spool -> transmitter

In another thread, I think someone mentioned adding a swivel, so...

first stage HP port -> HP hose -> HP spool -> swivel -> transmitter

Am I understanding this right?

I am using the first config.

I am not 100% but I think in this particular context HP hose spool/swivel are just different terminology to designate the same object.

 

[Mike1967]

I am not 100% but I think in this particular context HP hose spool/swivel are just different terminology to designate the same object.

Yup, the transmitter replaces the SPG and everything else is the same.

 

[lexvil]

I just screw it into the first, I don’t like it swing around on the end of a hose but I have tried it and for me it seemed like I could more easily damage it on the hose, I’m rarely in a position where anyone else will handle my gear.

 

[markmud]

No, not really, although this being SB, some will have (strong) opinions as to why not.


I have a 6" hose on all my and my wife's reg sets (approx 10 sets) for the very reason you suggest, and or to prevent damage if the kit is knocked etc

We additionally have a QD (quick disconnect) between the hose and Transmitter (tx)

This allows the convenience of being easily able to swap tx between reg sets as required, or diving the reg set without tx installed (for instance if I'm confined water teaching I don't need my tx fitted and using its battery)

For air travel we prefer to keep our tx with the computers and regs in the dive bags

Having the tx further away reduce signal drop outs on some brands

Some will argue that there is an addition failure point with the addition O ring. I find that risk negligible
Depending on your diving the tx protruding out further may present a risk of entanglement.

One should weigh up the pros and cons and decide what is best for you personally

Hi @JonnyDiver198 ,

@Diving Dubai has detailed his preferred set-up for transmitters on previous threads. I followed his advice and used a 6" HP hose and HP spool. I did not use the quick disconnect though.

I really like it. DD has given good advice here IMHO.

The extra attachment point provides an additional risk that really is negligible. If it does leak, it is an easy fix.

I recommend using the 6" hose with/without the QD fitting.

cheers,
m