Regulator and Air Integration Question for Doubles/Twinsets

[DevonDiver]

Take your transmitter apart and count the other o-rings and seals...

A failure of which would cause loss of the redundant transmitter, not gas loss.

Of course, if the transmitter was critical to the execution of the dive, then it'd be a different matter.... but we are talking about having it as a superflous back-up... and whether it's failure would lose gas. Right?

 

[RJP]

A failure of which would cause loss of the redundant transmitter, not gas loss.

Of course, if the transmitter was critical to the execution of the dive, then it'd be a different matter.... but we are talking about having it as a superflous back-up... and whether it's failure would lose gas. Right?

There must be other seals within the transducer as well, no? What keeps the air that goes into the transmitter from escaping - gotta be a seal of some sort.

 

[DeepSeaExplorer]

Why would a qualified tech diver need to be told these things?

Dive time remaining (based on gas). What use is that on a pre-planned tech dive? Wouldn't you already be calculating your gas requirements prior to the dive?

SAC. Show me a tech diver that doesn't know their regular and accelerated SAC...and I'll show you a diver that shouldn't be tech diving.

Wouldn't you apply you existing knowledge, skill and procedures - as a tech diver - onto all of your (non-tech) dives?

Oh, please...

I said I take off the transducer (transmitter) for tech dives. If I don't need it for a tech dive; then obviously, I don't need it for a rec dive. But, need and want are two different things... I don't need a GPS to go on a road trip or a hike, but as a gadget guy... I have 3 GPS, AND I still need one more. (Waiting for the price of the Garmin Oregon to come down to Earth.)

I used to calculate my SAC on every dive, several hundred dives ago, but now I don't bother anymore. If the computer will do it automatically and save it with the profile, hey why not. I know very well how long I can stay down at different depths and with different size tanks. And, I can usually guess my tank pressure within 200 PSI at any point during the dive just by looking at my watch. So it's not a crutch. Needing a computer to do a dive is way different than taking one along just because you want to.

You can throw stones at anything... I could say the negative things about DPVs. They're only for lightweights that can't swim or have poor technique. They're a technology crutch, another point of failure, etc. Same with rebreathers... What's the matter, doubles and stages too heavy for ya? Maybe you shouldn't be tech diving until you get in shape! Oh, you want the latest HID light? What, you scared of the dark?

Come on, we all know deep down that the only reason computers aren't acceptable is because the ones setting the pace right now don't have it within their resources to make a computer of their own. If that were to change, we would suddenly find them getting the stamp of approval, certain ones only of course. Just like what happened with Rebreathers.

Anyway, my old Nitek HE died and I got a new AI computer with the download cable because I didn't like the X. If this one dies, I probably wouldn't shell out the extra coin to get AI again, but I have it now and I intend to use it. It was great on the liveaboard, since it stored a week's dive data in memory. Can't do that with the old analog gauge.

In my garage you may see technology things like oscillocopes, signal generators, spectrum analyzers, frequency counters, radios, routers, switches, etc. I like technology and my work is technical so I understand that using technology doesn't automatically equate to unskilled or stupid. Quite often, it's just the opposite. :cool2:

There's a rumor going around that NASA has been using computers in space...

 

[DeepSeaExplorer]

ajdup... wrote that the addition of a transmitter was "an additional failure point." Hmmm, not so convinced. I have a transmitter on my right post, points down and is NOT any sort of entanglement hazard. (If it gets entangled I would have a lot more problems than just this!) But anyway, the transmitter has a single plug which replaces the single plug in the HP port. Am I not just trading one plug for another? If so, how is that "an additional failure point?"

Why do I have a transmitter on my doubles? Just because I had a transmitter available and, I will confess, it is easier just to look at my wrist to get my pressure while I'm also getting depth and time. It is necessary? No, of course not. Is it useful? I think so.

I hear ya...

I think the whole o-ring thing is overplayed. Scuba gear is full of o-rings and little plastic parts. I take the transmitter off for tech dives, not because of the o-ring count, but because it could get smacked and broken off in wrecks or caves. Not that I'm a clumsy diver, but stuff happens even on deck. If it wasn't for that I would have no problem leaving it on all the time.

Much of the rhetoric about things like o-ring counting started out as sales gimmicks. It's not that my inflator is slow, it's actually better because it has fewer o-rings and thus fewer failure points. Anyway, good divers don't need a power inflator. It's a sign of poor technique. And so on...

My Scubapro BC is like 10 years old with hundreds of dives and lots of storage time and the inflator has never even been serviced much less replaced and still works. I wish I could say that about the 4 wings I have. I'm sure it must have a higher o-ring count. At one point, I even considered putting a Scubapro inflator on one of my wings. It's really more about quality engineering and construction than parts count. Generally speaking, the more sophisticated something tends to be, the higher the parts count.