I'm curious about sidemount

[DevonDiver]

not to mention he has other issues with tank trim as well.

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

 

[JamesK]

well in that case......

 

[Mark Michaud SELAUSAR]

Agree with your points... it's a matter of preference.

For me, every time I see forward-pointing gauges, in relation to using a guideline....I think of this:

View attachment 132860

As reference...

View attachment 132861
View attachment 132862

These bottles are mounted on the side, but sidemount? The front is hanging way too low (both photos) and the rear on the first photo is too high. These bottles don't appear to be trimmed (with the diver) very well, and I assume that is the example you wish to present. The spg should point out, but in toward the face or chest a bit so that is doesn't hang down and grab.

 

[lamont]

Is there anyone pushing sidemount to the (reasonable) depth limits of OC technical diving, comparable to BM? I'm thinking of an equivalent amount of gas to double-130s, 2 stages of bottom mix, 3 deco bottles and depths around 300-330 or so... (and in 42-50F water, current, etc). The argument that you're pushing the limits of OC and should start using CCR aside, it seems like having 7+ SM bottles, with 2 of them negative steels and needing to deal with additional task loading of swapping regulators around would be much more of a CF than the BM configuration and that the risk of breathing the wrong gasses would increase significantly, and that while it might be done, it'd be even more of a stunt dive than the BM config. Or am I just missing something and being an anti-SM bigot here?

 

[DevonDiver]

Is there anyone pushing sidemount to the (reasonable) depth limits of OC technical diving, comparable to BM? I'm thinking of an equivalent amount of gas to double-130s, 2 stages of bottom mix, 3 deco bottles and depths around 300-330 or so... (and in 42-50F water, current, etc). The argument that you're pushing the limits of OC and should start using CCR aside, it seems like having 7+ SM bottles, with 2 of them negative steels and needing to deal with additional task loading of swapping regulators around would be much more of a CF than the BM configuration and that the risk of breathing the wrong gasses would increase significantly, and that while it might be done, it'd be even more of a stunt dive than the BM config. Or am I just missing something and being an anti-SM bigot here?

Not everyone believes that a solitary configuration has to be applicable to every conceivable situation.

I'm not sure about the deepest attempted depths using SM. I'm sure there's lessons to be learned. The general trend seems to favor trailing tanks.

These bottles are mounted on the side, but sidemount? The front is hanging way too low (both photos) and the rear on the first photo is too high. These bottles don't appear to be trimmed (with the diver) very well, and I assume that is the example you wish to present. The spg should point out, but in toward the face or chest a bit so that is doesn't hang down and grab.

I can't speak on behalf of the first photo, it was a Google image grab.

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).

 

[lamont]

Not everyone believes that a solitary configuration has to be applicable to every conceivable situation.

Okay, but then you are not denying that the opposite is also true that if your interest is in deep wreck diving that a BM config is considerably better than SM.

And so far I don't see any proponents of SM mentioning any limitations of the SM config compared to BM config. Mostly I read that SM is the wave of the future and BM is all stupid and we're all neanderthals that need to evolve into the 21st century.

 

[JamesK]

I am not seeing where you read thy Lamont. I think all of us here see side mount as simply another tool. Some things BM is much better, others SM makes more sense.

 

[DevonDiver]

Okay, but then you are not denying that the opposite is also true that if your interest is in deep wreck diving that a BM config is considerably better than SM.

All I can say is that I've not yet conducted a dive that caused a conflict of configurations. Sidemount is my choice for penetration. If I had to carry so much gas that sidemount felt detrimental, then I'd be limiting my penetration also... or looking towards some other solution.

And so far I don't see any proponents of SM mentioning any limitations of the SM config compared to BM config. Mostly I read that SM is the wave of the future and BM is all stupid and we're all neanderthals that need to evolve into the 21st century.

As others have said... it's a tool in the box. A fine one for certain applications. If/when situations arise that it isn't a fine option, then I'd hope that sidemount divers wouldn't become dogmatic in pressing for its use and/or arguing that it was 'sidemount-or-nothing'.

 

[lamont]

I am not seeing where you read thy Lamont. I think all of us here see side mount as simply another tool. Some things BM is much better, others SM makes more sense.

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?

 

[beanojones]

Is there anyone pushing sidemount to the (reasonable) depth limits of OC technical diving, comparable to BM? I'm thinking of an equivalent amount of gas to double-130s, 2 stages of bottom mix, 3 deco bottles and depths around 300-330 or so... (and in 42-50F water, current, etc). The argument that you're pushing the limits of OC and should start using CCR aside, it seems like having 7+ SM bottles, with 2 of them negative steels and needing to deal with additional task loading of swapping regulators around would be much more of a CF than the BM configuration and that the risk of breathing the wrong gasses would increase significantly, and that while it might be done, it'd be even more of a stunt dive than the BM config. Or am I just missing something and being an anti-SM bigot here?

I am not sure that reasonable describes that situation.

As far as depth limits go:
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/technical-diving-specialties/428881-300-sidemount-trimix-dive.html

But with 7 bottles: Either way, the only difference if CFy-ness is that your back two tanks are manifolded in the BM version. Either way, I would not consider that a particularly 'reasonable' dive. The fills alone are what? $600 dollars?

Anyone even thinking about those sorts of dives has to be at least considering a rebreather to be considered reasonable. And once the rebreather is considered, then maybe it's just not 'reasonable' to do a dive that needs 7 tanks, four of which are bottom mix trimix. If for no other reason than helium is a precious enough resource that its worth conserving, and swimming around 7 tanks in current is ineffective.

(Actually if we are busting out the word silly now, then 7 tank dives in current are silly. There is essentially no way a diver can actually do anything with 7 tanks on them in current regardless of configuration. But if stuck between the two, I'd take the SM configuration where I could jettison dead tanks if needed.)