.
what full face masks
- Thread starter trymixdiver
- Start date
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
Please don't uses Tony's name in that context.. I met him several time an he was a real nice guy (He doesn't deserve being put down).. He wasn't the first to die using experimental gear and he will not be the last. His equipment was very complicated and DIED while trying out a new design, he died doing something he loved to do.... I don't think we will ever truely know what the cause of his accident really was, we do know he cut himself out of his rig and did a free ascent from 110ft.. I don't think he deserves to be treated like "monica".
I understand the reason he went to his rig (it dates back to a problem he has one time on the Doria where he had a gas problem, and the emergency gas that was supposed to be available at the deco stop wasn't), From that point he decided to always have more gas than he could ever need.
I understand the reason he went to his rig (it dates back to a problem he has one time on the Doria where he had a gas problem, and the emergency gas that was supposed to be available at the deco stop wasn't), From that point he decided to always have more gas than he could ever need.
My apologies if you were offended....
I didn't intend to use his name in *that way* but to point out that complexity can exact a price....
The original poster was concerned about the complexity of his own rig and that gas switching had become more complicated....
Being a nice guy and dying does not provide one with immunity from examination...
Tony's name can never be separated from the context of his complicated rig...
Lost Yooper
Guest
I think the moral of the story is to not try and solve a problem (that's either not really a problem or is easily solved by other, simpler means) by introducing more potential problems. This is so common in diving that it's scary sometimes. People's imaginations can get the better of them sometimes -- some get lucky and some don't.
If it seems weird, gimmicky, unusual, or extrodinary, then I'd be wary. Sometimes, you have to stand back and really think about what you are really trying to accomplish, and whether or not you are merely adding more problems than you're trying to solve. IMO, the last thing you want -- especially in this type of diving -- is gimmicks and convulations. You want simple, easy, uncomplicated, and clean while concentrating on risk reduction along the way. Having more "stuff" usually isn't a good solution to anything in diving.
Take care.
Mike
If it seems weird, gimmicky, unusual, or extrodinary, then I'd be wary. Sometimes, you have to stand back and really think about what you are really trying to accomplish, and whether or not you are merely adding more problems than you're trying to solve. IMO, the last thing you want -- especially in this type of diving -- is gimmicks and convulations. You want simple, easy, uncomplicated, and clean while concentrating on risk reduction along the way. Having more "stuff" usually isn't a good solution to anything in diving.
Take care.
Mike
OP
trymixdiver
Guest
Well i found the article you posted to be very interesting. I was not aware that he died until i read the subsquent post. I do have concerns with the complexity of my rig. However, i dont consider my rigs Wright brothers complexity to that of Mr Mafftones F117 stealth fighter like complexity a risky gamble. My system is as simple as it could be to do its job correctly and with safety. My concern is that i could reduce dive stress by switching back to a standard Hogartheian configuration and hence reduce dive stress. I cant help but think what if! therefore i posed the question to see if others were even doing this. I as have learned it seams to be a questionable practice.
Just to give you an idea of how simple this side block is:
three 1/4 turn ball valves each containing 2 viton O rings. I solid brass milled block. 1 female SS O2 cleaned quick connects, and 2 male ss quick connects. Like i said this side block is ultra simple, bare bones if you will. So i need to make a decision on weather to simplify my rig or continue to use this. I have logged about a year on this side block say about 60 dives, all when perfectly.
if anyone can point me to an analysis of his accident i would appreciate it very much.
Just to give you an idea of how simple this side block is:
three 1/4 turn ball valves each containing 2 viton O rings. I solid brass milled block. 1 female SS O2 cleaned quick connects, and 2 male ss quick connects. Like i said this side block is ultra simple, bare bones if you will. So i need to make a decision on weather to simplify my rig or continue to use this. I have logged about a year on this side block say about 60 dives, all when perfectly.
if anyone can point me to an analysis of his accident i would appreciate it very much.
OP
trymixdiver
Guest
Just a thanks for posting on this topic, i really do need to hear opinions from all. it would be foolish of me not to take advice from the wealth of knowedge this board and its members offer.
Hi Try...
Give me what you have identified so far as potential failure points in your set up... including potential user errors
Thanks
Lost Yooper
Guest
If you don't mind can we start at the beginning? Maybe some people on here can offer advice if they have some more background.
What exactly are you trying to accomplish by using a FFM? I'm assuming you want it for your oxygen deco.
What type of diving are you doing (O2 exposures, max depths, mix, O/W, cave, etc)?
You're rigged hogarthian (which most of us either use or understand somewhat), but are there any aspects you choose to not use that might be relavent here (solo diving, stages on either side, etc)?
Let's see if we can get started again.
Mike
What exactly are you trying to accomplish by using a FFM? I'm assuming you want it for your oxygen deco.
What type of diving are you doing (O2 exposures, max depths, mix, O/W, cave, etc)?
You're rigged hogarthian (which most of us either use or understand somewhat), but are there any aspects you choose to not use that might be relavent here (solo diving, stages on either side, etc)?
Let's see if we can get started again.
Mike
OP
trymixdiver
Guest
I am using the FFM to allow the switching to 2 different deco mixes without having to remove the FFM, hence the side block my buddy and I manufactured.
In my original post i had some concerns with the complexity that this side block configuration has added.
As far as the configuration goes, i am happy with it but it is un-proven and not tested except by me and my buddy who also dives the same configuration. Aslo, these valves are O2 valves but i bet they were not designed to be submerged in salt water. Being that i dont dive with the deco mixes connected to the block ( to avoid bumping a valve and sucking some deco mix at depth) the chance of breathing anything but my back mix is not possible, because its not connected til i need it. The side block is very simple yet what concerns me most is that if its this simple why are not more divers doing this! So to my buddy and I what seamed like a natural progression in equipment configuration no one else in our diving circle is even considering this application. And from what i am hearing on this board it is not really common at all. Also, is this side block configuration really even worth the trouble now with rebreather technology becomming what it is. After all isnt the future of tech diving going to be Rebreathers!
Sorry to babble so much but i feel like i am at a crossroads and i think i can obtain some valuable guidence from this group of diving minds.
or if im a total AS*hol* just leave me some shrinks name and Ph#
In my original post i had some concerns with the complexity that this side block configuration has added.
As far as the configuration goes, i am happy with it but it is un-proven and not tested except by me and my buddy who also dives the same configuration. Aslo, these valves are O2 valves but i bet they were not designed to be submerged in salt water. Being that i dont dive with the deco mixes connected to the block ( to avoid bumping a valve and sucking some deco mix at depth) the chance of breathing anything but my back mix is not possible, because its not connected til i need it. The side block is very simple yet what concerns me most is that if its this simple why are not more divers doing this! So to my buddy and I what seamed like a natural progression in equipment configuration no one else in our diving circle is even considering this application. And from what i am hearing on this board it is not really common at all. Also, is this side block configuration really even worth the trouble now with rebreather technology becomming what it is. After all isnt the future of tech diving going to be Rebreathers!
Sorry to babble so much but i feel like i am at a crossroads and i think i can obtain some valuable guidence from this group of diving minds.
or if im a total AS*hol* just leave me some shrinks name and Ph#
Well your not and I'm still interested in what you have identified as to the possible failure modes including operator error....
Then I have some questions....
Similar threads
