Power inflator octo

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!

Oceandvr:
What's optimal to you? And are you talking recreational diving or technical?

Astute.

I don't think the philosophical discussion can be cleanly split in technical and recreational domains. Recreational divers have more freedom of movement and perhaps more haste when problems arise and technical divers are often more constricted in their freedom of movement but tend to be (as a group) a little more at ease dealing with such issues under water.

There are couple of things to consider:

1) where is my octopus? In that sense the AIR2 (et al) is a good solution because you always know where it is. There are other ways of ensuring that the octopus is always where they thought it was but either way it's a big improvement over the "back-there-somewhere" type of treatment many beginning divers seem to give to their octopus.

I should know. I was one of them. In 1985 I was nearly drowned by a rescue student with my "back-there-somewhere" octoups. Lesson number one (take if from me) is that if you don't know where your octupus is then you're asking for trouble.

This seems to be a big argument in favor of the AIR2 and it is.

2) Ease of donation. An AIR2 means that when it's raining s**t that *THAT* is the moment you need to take your regullator out of your mouth (if it isn't snatched) and fumble around for your secondary. The primary reg usually has a short hose and it means that when you could use a little room it isn't there. Moreover, most beginners aren't trained like this and rank beginners (the group most likely to encounter an OOA) who are the most ill at ease in the water really don't need confusion, extreme close proximity and extra steps when it's raining s**t. Swimming with this knotted up mess is creating two problems (craming, difficulty in swimming) and not even solving one.

3) Control over trim, buoyancy and ascent. This is where the AIR2 kind of sucks. Simply put, it complicates ascending under control. When it gets to the point that you need to use it, the next step is probably going to be to ascend. The AIR2 complicates that task.

So that's it. Octopus location....Ease of donation and control over ascent. On the first two the AIR2 scores at least as well as other options, but on the third point it creates a problem without solving any

For technical divers there is maybe one other issue, which is that you tend to have a little clutter on the left side anyway and having anything else on that side that's "in the way" is a bit of a pain. If you're poorly configured, your AIR2 could potentially become wedged between stage bottles or at the very least form a distraction. it's an issue because the inflator hose has to be long enough to service the AIR2 function, which would leave it dangling in the way or between your stages. So for technical divers, another solution was necessary.

The Hogarthian configuration sorts out this issue, plus it addresses the three points above adequately without creating new problems or solving problems that aren't there (like eliminating one hose.....which isn't an issue). The AIR2 doesn't do that. to me, Hogarthian is still optimal in 2005. You know where the octo is, donation is easy and control for both you and your buddy is as good as it's likely to get given the circumstances that make you want to share air.

Which begs the question, why isn't everyone going Hogarthian? Well, many divers are; either Hogarthian or DIR, which has its roots in the same soil. For tech divers this is a no-brainer, but for "recreational divers" the same 3 issues apply (where is the octo, ease of donation, control in an AAS situtation). The consequences of sloppy control etc aren't as severe for rec divers as they are for tek divers so you can get away with more but the issues are the same, none the less.

So why did we ever use the AIR2?

Ports.

My first reg had two LP ports. I had a primary reg, octopus, LP inflator and a drysuit. I was the first kid on my block with a drysuit that had a modern power inflator.... Lots of drysuits back then were still orally inflated and had an inflator hose like a BCD does today. Eliminating one hose meant having a *significantly* cleaner config and you could put your primary reg on it's *own* LP port. Part luxury and part necessity, especially in the cold waters in British Columbia, where I learned to dive.

This was the real forte of the AIR2 and needless to say this problem simply doesn't exist anymore.

So on point 1 above, the AIR2 is perhaps superior to a modern octopus but on points 2 and 3 it's not. Furthermore, alternatives such as the Hogarthian config address all three points adequately, which makes it, in my mind a better solution to the issues at hand.

R..
 
rockjock3:
Their sole purpose was not to reduce port usage. It is also to streamline gear.

UUUhhhh.....no

That's what divers started dreaming up to give it a raison d'être after regulators had enough ports.

When they first came on the market the context was different. Many divers weren't using an octopus at all and giving as reason that they didn't have a port. The AIR2 *solved* that problem in that context by eliminating the hose.

Nothing more

Nothing less

R..
 
Kevfin:
we didn't worry about buoyancy control. You grabbed your buddy with the OOA situation and started your controlled ascent.

.

I'm reading an oxymoron in this.

R..
 
Diver0001:
So on point 1 above, the AIR2 is perhaps superior to a modern octopus but on points 2 and 3 it's not. Furthermore, alternatives such as the Hogarthian config address all three points adequately, which makes it, in my mind a better solution to the issues at hand.

R..

Great well thought out explaination.

The DIR/Hogarthian config has many advantages and it's debated throughout S/B. I won't go there.

Bottom line for me and I think any diver is know your equipment, train with it for several contingencies, and know your buddies equipment too.
 
Kevfin:
If you mean buoyancy control Vs. controlled ascent... there is a difference.

buoyancy control = the ability to maintain neutral buoyancy

controlled ascent = surfacing carefully

See: http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/medical/dictionary.asp


LOL.... no that's not what I really meant. You said "not worry about buoyancy control" (or something to that effect) and "make controlled ascent".

To me that came across as saying something like "not worry about traffic rules but drive safely".

It might not be what you meant to say but that's how I received it.

R..
 
Whether "was" applies, it DOES remove one extra hose today, so streamlining is a real, valid, concept. I shudder when I see the trailing-octo bit, though that is readily cured by a $6 octo holder, doesn't require a bungied necklace.

The Hogarthian rigging does, undoubtedly, have certain advantages. The question is, as usual, what is "good enough", in a given diving context. In a perfect world perhaps everyone would only be Hogarthian rigged, no other equipment would be available. Reality is that there are a lot of BCDs and other equipment out there, in people's hands, working kit.

If I had unlimited funds I could throw away all of my existing gear, which has worked admirably, to get that extra couple of percent of superiority (I don't mean that word in a negative sense, I actually mean that there are certain real, honest, pluses, but it's clear that the majority of non-Hog setups in use, by non-tech divers, are working in the vast majority of rec dives -- folks aren't dropping like flies because they are not setup Hog). Then again, what I use is comfortable, compact, easy to don/doff, it suits me.

It's taken me years to really appreciate the concept of "Better is the enemy of good enough.", that good enough really is just that, good enough, not a bad thing. As a new engineer I always wanted to push the better/faster technology, but fortunately had mentors who taught me to chill out a bit, to figure out where it was critical to spend the additional $ rather than just declare that something must be used because it is better.

(This isn't a comment relative to Diver0001's posts, which I find informative, useful. Really just my personal view on the idea that things may be better, perhaps, at a mathematical, objective level, yet not absolutely necessary. I love learning about options, why people prefer what they use/do, without feeling compelled to automatically switch if what I have works.)
 
Diver0001:
To me that came across as saying something like "not worry about traffic rules but drive safely".

R..


If you lived in Los Angeles this would make sense too... :D
 
If you lived in Boston you would leave out the "but drive safely" :)
 
markfm:
Whether "was" applies, it DOES remove one extra hose today, so streamlining is a real, valid, concept. I shudder when I see the trailing-octo bit, though that is readily cured by a $6 octo holder, doesn't require a bungied necklace.

This is a good point. In 1985 my whole life boiled down to how I handled a 15 second span of time. The $6 octopus holder would have vastly superior to what I had at the time (nothing) and if there is one lesson to be taken out of the whole discussion, that's that knowing where your octopus is cannot be stressed enough.

That incident was also the direct reason why I bought and AIR2, which I only retired when I read about DIR on the internet. (note: I'm not DIR. I feel more attracted to the term Hogarthian)

You make another good point is that the HOG regulator config can be a bit fiddly when using a jacket type BCD. There are some ways to make this work too but deciding to reconfigure with a longhose doesn't need to entail a huge expense. It would help if you had someone to show you the ropes but the costs to make the first step are minimal.

R..
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/peregrine/

Back
Top Bottom