I'm curious about sidemount

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

I certainly see your point, and it's a very good one so I won't argue the point - much. :D But there is a larger systems issue to be considered and you have to look at the the whole package and approach.

In your example everyone goes away happy without buddy breathing, while the 1/3 rd differential is problematic. No disagreement there, but the solution was not to get there in the first place.

An advantage of the "one third" maximum differential approach is simplicity in terms of number of gas switches and minimum complexity in pressures to switch at - you only need to calculate and remember 2 numbers, so it's easy even at ENDs in the 100-130ft range.

The simple approach also makes it very easy to dive smaller "thirds" that will build in an extra gas reserve while maintaining balanced tanks with no real effort or mental gymnastics for the diver and still with only 2 reg switches. In your example the diver comes out 200 psi short of having enough gas to exit. However, if instead of diving 1100 psi thirds, the diver turned only 100 psi earlier, that extra 200 psi that is needed is now present, as there is 1300 psi in the lowest tank at the failure - and since the dive turned 100 psi sooner, that same failure is also 200 psi closer to the exit, so the gas pad in the "low" tank is now 400 psi. The only downside is that I probably got to see a little less cave - but I have a lot more reserve to deal with all manner of other delays and emergencies that could occur on any given dive, so I am ok with that.

As an aside, I also dive with a 5 foot hose on each tank, so I can give the larger tank to the probably excited OOA diver who probably has an elevated SAC. That avoids the potential of having to give the low tank to an excited diver and further complicating the gas crunch.

In that regard I agree with you that pushing a 1/3rd differential in full "thirds" gas management is problematic - *when diving mixed teams*, but requires multiple failures to become a problem on a side mount only team, and you address that indirectly in your example, so again I don't think we disagree on that point.

However, I'll go a step farther and argue diving all the way to thirds is potentially problematic on any dive. Consequently, I'm pretty happy managing my gas with only 2 reg switches, but doing it with 100-200 psi less than a full third used on penetration, especially on a sidemount only team.

The concepts are all related as the degree to which you will burn time and gas dealing with and beginning the exit after a failure is dependent on the cave, the conditions, the configurations and the team members involved. Consequently, gas management in SM aside, with a teammate that I communicate and work well with under pressure 100-200 psi smaller thirds in a touristy cave is fine. But when I dive with a team mate of lesser ability or who is not as known a quantity, the reserve goes up accordingly. Similarly, the reserve goes up with unfamilair cave, tighter restrictions, more potential for silt or other delays, no flow/low flow, siphons, etc. SM versus BM team mates becomes just another factor to consider in planning an adequate reserve rather than defaulting to full "thirds" for penetration.

The point is that the focus is now on a very carefully considered and planned reserve and switch/turn pressures, rather than the temptation that some divers may have of just switching every 500-600 psi and more or less winging it on what becomes a dive to full thirds gas management with an inadequate reserve.

I use 1/3s as an easy example because, unfortunately, there are way too many divers out there still diving to 1/3s. I don't dive 1/3s, don't advocate it, and don't teach it, even in my cave classes. It's just not safe enough.

---------- Post Merged at 09:45 PM ---------- Previous Post was at 09:44 PM ----------

Dude, don't be a buzzkill!

We start talking about failure points, and then we will start telling people how to do things instead of the marvelous explosion of ideas in sidemount. Example: I would never buy a Z system, but I love that it is out there.

More seriously, I have been using quick disconnects (as have hard hat divers, and at least some rebreather divers) forever, and I have never had one fail.

I have.

---------- Post Merged at 09:49 PM ---------- Previous Post was at 09:44 PM ----------

For the second pic (my student), was his first OW dive on sidemount, using a rented SMS100. We weren't in a position to alter his bungee lengths (they were standard, as supplied by Hollis).. but did refine the trim subsequently by bringing his tank bands higher. That pulled the tanks lower on his torso and held them much nicer. The photo was only to illustrate the SPG placement (out, but up).

Tie a knot in the bungees. Easy way to shorten them without doing a permanent modification. I offer classes to students in my own rigs pretty regularly and am able to make temporary modifications quite easily so they can trim out themselves and the cylinders.

---------- Post Merged at 09:54 PM ---------- Previous Post was at 09:44 PM ----------

Well I'm taking a swipe at devon because he made a crack about what I was asking without offering any useful information.

So clearly SM is better for at least some profiles of caves. SM is generally easier on the back. There's a large overlap of dives where it just doesn't matter. They are both tools, but I don't hear a lot about where the real limitations are. And I've listened to Boegarts get asked this question and he didn't really have an answer, either, and in the past 2 years since then I haven't seen it answered anywhere. So what is the reasonable amount of tanks to be carry sidemount either in cave or technically? What are the limitations where it does become no longer the right tool for the job and BM becomes more appropriate? I know people do SM with at least 4 bottles, but I'm unsure about aluminum-vs-steel for the bottom mix and if people are commonly using large tanks like hp130s with SM config. I also don't know what people are actually pushing the limits of the config to. 7 bottles mounted SM certainly seems silly, but I don't know if that's just due to my limited exposure. So, what is the actual practical limit of what divers are really doing SM?

I've sidemount LP121s. They are much larger than HP130s. Those are tanks I use for trimix only. They work nicely but are not my tank of choice. I dive 5 cylinders pretty regularly (okay, the deco bottle gets dropped off at the front of the cave so only 4 really). In caves stages can be dropped so even if I was taking in 6 tanks I would be dropping 4 of them off on the way in. If I needed that many tanks for an OW dive then I'm using my GEM not OC. For true sidemount restrictions too many tanks can be problematic. You have to be able to fit them all through and then push them all out. I've done sidemount restrictions with 2 stages pushed out in front of me. It's not much fun. I'd rather do set up dives and stage tanks at certain locations prior to the big push dive.
 
I suspect that anyone doing those kind of dives is not deciding their gear configuration by what is said on the interwebs. Choosing a configuration based on a once or twice in a life time dive some other guy might do isn't how I think - I go for what I'm mostly diving, most of the time.

Enjoying the discussion regarding SPG routing. Mine wind up pointing out even though I think I'm routing them right and getting the sag which only drops them more towards the bottom. I'm going to look at what they specifically do for dive one tomorrow and try routing them back along the tank for dive two.



Devon Diver said: "Glad nobody is crushing the second diver pic... was my last student (dive #2 of the basic sidemount course). LOL"

There's too much of that IMO and it only acts to stymie discussion and the development of ideas. Part of the process is experimentation and adjustment and that involves some growth along the way. If we're afraid to show where we are now along the pathway then we can never get any real feedback that helps us. My first attempts at SM look terrible to me now and it has only been a short time ago. I'm sure that down the road what I am doing now will look just as sad but I'm also confident that at some point I will have a usable, workable SM rig.
 
Regarding QD failures///

I have.
.

If you do not mind me asking what failed and when?

(I think something that might be true in the tropics is that the Ball Bearings rust/corrode before the rest of the QD fails so we might be replacing QDs before the other bits fail.)
 
7 is the most I've ever used in sidemount and probably the most I will use in the foreseeable future

2 lp108's, 2 al80 above main tanks and 2 al80 below main tanks, 1 al40 of oxygen raccoon tailed. I've done 2 300' dives and a couple 200'+ like that.
 
Regarding QD failures///



If you do not mind me asking what failed and when?

(I think something that might be true in the tropics is that the Ball Bearings rust/corrode before the rest of the QD fails so we might be replacing QDs before the other bits fail.)

Basically, the QD just disconnected. I was on my SCR and then all of a sudden my counter lungs collapsed on themselves. Easy enough to figure out what was wrong and I quickly reconnected it and filled the loop/counter lungs. The only thing I can think that caused it was the QD rubbing up against something on my rig and popping off. The point is failures do occur.
 
Basically, the QD just disconnected. I was on my SCR and then all of a sudden my counter lungs collapsed on themselves. Easy enough to figure out what was wrong and I quickly reconnected it and filled the loop/counter lungs. The only thing I can think that caused it was the QD rubbing up against something on my rig and popping off. The point is failures do occur.

What kind of QD? The OmniSwivel attachment shouldn't be able to pop off like on a Schraeder valve. Not doubting you-just very interested in QD failure stories.
 
Basically, the QD just disconnected. I was on my SCR and then all of a sudden my counter lungs collapsed on themselves. Easy enough to figure out what was wrong and I quickly reconnected it and filled the loop/counter lungs. The only thing I can think that caused it was the QD rubbing up against something on my rig and popping off. The point is failures do occur.

Holy Cow!

I am not glad it happened to you, but I am glad it happened to you and not someone else, if you know what I mean.
 
Still alive. I could see the routing solution for the spg's, now that I knew what to look for. Curiously enough, at this popular shore diving destination there were 4-5 others in a group also SM'ing. Most had Hollis rigs but I think I saw a Razor too. First for me seeing that around here.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/peregrine/

Back
Top Bottom