Doubles w/o manifold...

[Soggy]

He simply offered some solutions he felt would improve the design, nice to see he can claim something to be Hogarthian and you jump down his throat, but you can list a link to "dir-diver" and claim it's not specified, and don't bother with DIR vs. GUE vs. whoever, I don't really care.

Ride out on the horse you rode in on, unless you need another suggestion of what to do with it.

Huh? I didn't disagree with his suggestions nor jump down his throat. If Aquamaster feels that way, I apologize.

I do however find it amusing when people claim something very specific to be "Hogarthian." To the best of my knowledge, there is *nothing* specifically specified regarding what is or is not Hogarthian. The only person who can tell you what is Hogarthian is W H Main.

 

[msandler]

A lot of wreck divers (whose environments are typically more harsh in a lot of ways then caves) see line attachment as a potential point of failure (sharp ship hulls, currents, debris). Many still use brass rings. I have shed the rings, taco's and D's but, use a pretty thick nylon line.

As to travelling, I am also surprised any operator would permit dissambling their tanks. I will be going on a liveaboard in Mar. and will bring a stage "sling" with. Hopfully the operator won;t mind the addition on one little hose strap. Also much more convenient to carry.

 

[CRDiver]

The only person who can tell you what is Hogarthian is W H Main.

Not true. Bill Main didn't coin the term Hogarthian (his co-divers did) and he was hardly the only influence in its formation. If you want to know what Hogarthian is, contact those cave divers who participated in the WKPP before George Irvine became the project director, like Bill Gavin (Irvine's former dive buddy) Lamar English and others along with Mr. Main.

I also find it amusing when people define Hogarthian solely by the contemporary writings of GI and JJ, and ignore the majority of divers who actually participated in the creation of the Hogarthian style of diving and in the formative years of the WKPP. Just ask Bill Main what he thinks about this. I'm sure you'll get an enlightening response .

 

[msandler]

I thought Hog was a philosophy and DIR was a methodology hmmm. btw, excuse my ignorance, what is the difference between a HOG rigged stage and a DIR rigged stage as referred to by DA in post 64, is it just the knot?

 

[mempilot]

...The obvious disadvantage of independent doubles (or sidemounting) is that should a first stage permanently fail, you cannot normally access the gas remaining in that tank. The advantage however over isolator manifolded doubles is that the two tanks are completely independent and you do not have to rely on an isolator valve to prevent the loss of all your air. Most of my diving is in very old water and a freeze flow is the most likely failure mode. So I prefer independent doubles as in the event a freeze flow ever occurs, no action is required to close a valve. It is still a good idea to close the valve and conserve the gas, but if circumstances prevent it you will not lose all your gas.

I'm surprised no one has developed a 'soft' isolation manifold for back mounted or side mounted independant doubles. It seems, a somewhat flexible high pressure hose run off each valve to a centralized isolation manifold would do the trick for cave divers and travelers wanting the benefits of doubles.

I'm a wrecker, and not a caver, and I have banged my manifold on some sharp pieces of metal that might have chewed through a rubber hose. I'm not advocating this setup for use in that environment. However, sidemounted with a soft manifold in the chest area could be interesting. I would imagine that sidemount divers occasionally need to dismount or swap out the tanks for maneuvering and extended range dives, so the manifold might preclude this.

 

[Soggy]

I'm surprised no one has developed a 'soft' isolation manifold for back mounted or side mounted independant doubles. I seems, a somewhat flexible high pressure hose run off each valve to a centralized isolation manifold would do the trick for cave divers and travelers wanting the benefits of doubles.

There is one that they use on the RB80, but I don't think it's been adapted for side mounts.

 

[mempilot]

There is one that they use on the RB80, but I don't think it's been adapted for side mounts.

Interesting. Anyone use the RB80 in wrecks, or is it primarily used in cave exploration? Just curious about how it is protected. I try to run my hoses down in a protected fashion, but a hp hose mounted horizontally up high might be more vunerable.

 

[DA Aquamaster]

Huh? I didn't disagree with his suggestions nor jump down his throat. If Aquamaster feels that way, I apologize.

I do however find it amusing when people claim something very specific to be "Hogarthian." To the best of my knowledge, there is *nothing* specifically specified regarding what is or is not Hogarthian. The only person who can tell you what is Hogarthian is W H Main.

Did Bill tell you this himself?

Yes, right after God spoke to me asking for advice on how to fix his whistling Mk 10. He's got his eye on you by the way.

Regardless of the specific knots used (which I don't think are specified by GUE), my point was that this system is safer, as it allows the bottle to be cut free in the event of an entanglement.

I agree entirely, metal to metal connections are a really bad idea. But my thought was that it was a situation where we at least should give credit where credit is due. That style of rigging a stage bottle was associated with divers who used hogarthian techniques before there was DIR or a GUE.

A lot of things have evolved in tech diving and evolution is a natural process that does and should occur if the sport is to advance. I have no problem with DIR, GUE or divers of any other race, color, sex, creed, religion or dive training affiliation adapting and evolving earlier techniques as I think it is a really good alternative to re-inventing the wheel before trying to improve it.

In this case however, the method you directed people to has altered the basic design to apparently allow the option of rigging it to allow the lower bolt snap to be readily removed. If that is a need for a specific diver, then thats the way for them to go. But there is a trade off in doing it that way, as well as a couple other changes and differences that may not have been immediately obvious to some divers. I felt that trade off was worth pointing out so that individual divers can make an informed decision about what may work best for them. Independent thought is after all considered ok in circles where everything does not have to be "specifically specified".

A lot of wreck divers (whose environments are typically more harsh in a lot of ways then caves) see line attachment as a potential point of failure (sharp ship hulls, currents, debris). Many still use brass rings. I have shed the rings, taco's and D's but, use a pretty thick nylon line.

I think using a thicker (1/4") line is a good compromise and makes it a bit harder for the line to be unintentionally cut.

 

[Soggy]

Interesting. Anyone use the RB80 in wrecks, or is it primarily used in cave exploration? Just curious about how it is protected. I try to run my hoses down in a protected fashion, but a hp hose mounted horizontally up high might be more vunerable.

I don't know anything more about it (or rebreathers, for that matter), but it is used on the bail out gas.

Here is some information....http://halcyon.net/rebreather/index.shtml

 

[jagfish]

I'm surprised no one has developed a 'soft' isolation manifold for back mounted or side mounted independant doubles. It seems, a somewhat flexible high pressure hose run off each valve to a centralized isolation manifold would do the trick for cave divers and travelers wanting the benefits of doubles.

I was just talking to someone about this a couple hours ago...I'm surprised as well.