Z system sidemount wreck diving part 2

[bluemed]

Guys, the objective of this video is to show you the minimalistic and hydrodynamic Z-system, one piece webbing, the right amount of D-rings and the nicely hidden manifold. (In this case I use a smaller version).

Together with proper training the Z system can be an awesome piece of kit !!

I am a strong believer in standardized training, this is the only SM system that comes with a "manual", by that I don't mean how to set it up, but how to "dive" it.

In this video I am diving a drysuit, carrying 2 AL 80's, UTD wing with manifold, spare mask, wetnotes, spare double enders, cookies, arrows, primary reel, primary light, 2 backup lights, 2 spools , bottomtimer and compas. (Rings a bell ?) I use exactly the same as I do on my doubles, and yes the same thing I use if I dive singles.

In my opinion, nowadays, there is much more than "oldschool doubles", everyone is moving on...even the ones that weren't moving on ;-)
I am very happy to be a part of this new school that finds its roots in traditional DIR.

Now.....whatever you think about this sytem..the VIDEO speaks for itself.
The Z-system looks tidy, hydrodynamic, is scalable, consistent with what I do.
I can dive with what I already know from before, all the muscle memory is still there !!.

I am a DIVER..NOT a "backmount diver"...a "sidemount diver"..a "rebreather diver", Yes...I dive all of these configurations..I am the diver and these are my tools !!

Z-SIDEMOUNT DIVING VIDEO SERIES - PART 2/3: WRECK SM Diving on Lanzarote - YouTube

 

[rddvet]

(Rings a bell ?)

Yep,

Of the previous threads where we discussed how all you've done is put a failure point on your back. I don't care how streamlined it looks in the video, it's completely neutered the redundant safety aspect of sidemount. That manifold is a hermaphrodite form of sideomount.

 

[bluemed]

I dive the z system here, and I can also dive independent sidemount, like I did before 2011 .
On the Z sytem, I can still "feather" regs, I can still donate cylinders if I would like to (if possible not), so I can dive like before if needed, But now, we can always donate and don't have to donate cylinders, everything is still the same.

For people that dive more than only sidemount, like myself, and people that dive in mixed teams and have received DIR minded training this piece of kit is a solution.
If you would take the diver on the video and ask him to remove his z system and put on his doubles, thats it ! everything would be still the same.
I would have everything where it was before, (in my pockets and not hanging in me in pockets on bolt-snaps, lights etc..), the protocols, OOG, drills and personal skills would still be exactly like before.
If divers can't see the advantages of that..well...lack of imagination.
Maybe if I would be living in Mexico, wetsuit, shallow caves and do solo stuff I wouldn't dive the Z system, but I don't and I chose another way of diving.
The potential failure points, true, but easily solvable and in all fairness not a big deal. With all due respect, but with the level of new sidemount divers lately, faillure points are to be found in their training received.

ANOTHER THING; With this system my teaching is consistent as well , there is a clear system how to teach this as opposed to what you might receive, or not, from your instructor and his "way" an looking at things after having done a SM Instructor course without any former sidemount experience 10 days before.
For example on facebook there is a discussion going on, Instructors and celebrities, regarding having your longhose, or not on your left and right tank. before UTD that was already hard to digest, but now...it is almost pathetic..
If one day an agency would come with a clear and consistent idea about how to teach independent sidemount I would again have a look at it.
But for now, with this new wave of potential new openwater sidemount fatalities, I will stick to this.

 

[DevonDiver]

Let me guess... you sell UTD equipment, including the Z-system w/manifold, right? (that's your site link in your sig block?)

So this is basically an advert?

 

[gearhound]

I dive the z system here, and I can also dive independent sidemount, like I did before 2011 .
On the Z sytem, I can still "feather" regs, I can still donate cylinders if I would like to (if possible not), so I can dive like before if needed, But now, we can always donate and don't have to donate cylinders, everything is still the same.

For people that dive more than only sidemount, like myself, and people that dive in mixed teams and have received DIR minded training this piece of kit is a solution.
If you would take the diver on the video and ask him to remove his z system and put on his doubles, thats it ! everything would be still the same.
I would have everything where it was before, (in my pockets and not hanging in me in pockets on bolt-snaps, lights etc..), the protocols, OOG, drills and personal skills would still be exactly like before.
If divers can't see the advantages of that..well...lack of imagination.
Maybe if I would be living in Mexico, wetsuit, shallow caves and do solo stuff I wouldn't dive the Z system, but I don't and I chose another way of diving.
The potential failure points, true, but easily solvable and in all fairness not a big deal. With all due respect, but with the level of new sidemount divers lately, faillure points are to be found in their training received.

ANOTHER THING; With this system my teaching is consistent as well , there is a clear system how to teach this as opposed to what you might receive, or not, from your instructor and his "way" an looking at things after having done a SM Instructor course without any former sidemount experience 10 days before.
For example on facebook there is a discussion going on, Instructors and celebrities, regarding having your longhose, or not on your left and right tank. before UTD that was already hard to digest, but now...it is almost pathetic..
If one day an agency would come with a clear and consistent idea about how to teach independent sidemount I would again have a look at it.
But for now, with this new wave of potential new openwater sidemount fatalities, I will stick to this.

Wow! Arrogant!
It's a good thing UTD came along to save us, or there would be nobody diving safely in sidemount! And speaking about fly by nighters, how many sidemount dives did AG have before he designed the UTD sidemount gear?

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I dive the z system here, and I can also dive independent sidemount, like I did before 2011 .
On the Z sytem, I can still "feather" regs, I can still donate cylinders if I would like to (if possible not), so I can dive like before if needed, But now, we can always donate and don't have to donate cylinders, everything is still the same.

I'm trying to comprehend the argument here ... when I dive singles, I dive a standard hogarthian setup. If I need to donate, I donate my long hose. When I dive doubles I dive a Nomad. If I need to donate, I donate my long hose. The only possible difference is that if I'm not breathing off my long hose, it's clipped to a breakaway on my right shoulder D-ring ... where it's easily accessible. I do not ever have to donate a cylinder.

For people that dive more than only sidemount, like myself, and people that dive in mixed teams and have received DIR minded training this piece of kit is a solution.

... and what is the problem? I frequently dive mixed teams ... often with GUE or UTD trained dive buddies. Nobody seems to have any difficulties understanding how each other's equipment works.

If you would take the diver on the video and ask him to remove his z system and put on his doubles, thats it ! everything would be still the same.

Well yes ... but how much of an advantage is that, really? Seems to me to be an overstated argument ... if you're having difficulties dealing with minor equipment configuration variants, then perhaps that says more about your deficiencies as a diver than it does about the equipment your teammates are using.

I would have everything where it was before, (in my pockets and not hanging in me in pockets on bolt-snaps, lights etc..), the protocols, OOG, drills and personal skills would still be exactly like before.

Again, I'm not understanding the argument. When I switch from a back-mounted hog rig to a sidemount rig, nothing in my pockets changes. My light gets used the same way and clipped off in the same place. My emergency skills may or may not be identical, depending on which regulator I'm breathing off of at the time ... but worst-case, the differences are so minor that anyone who's doing dives that require two tanks should have adequate skills to manage it without much conscious effort.

If divers can't see the advantages of that..well...lack of imagination.

Imagination isn't needed ... information is. I see the advantages ... and I think, frankly, they're overstated. I also see the disadvantages ... all configurations come with both. I don't like the trade-offs ... which is why I didn't choose this rig.

Maybe if I would be living in Mexico, wetsuit, shallow caves and do solo stuff I wouldn't dive the Z system, but I don't and I chose another way of diving.

Well OK ... but then why come here and make a big deal about other people choosing another way of diving?

The potential failure points, true, but easily solvable and in all fairness not a big deal. With all due respect, but with the level of new sidemount divers lately, faillure points are to be found in their training received.

And I still don't comprehend your purpose in making this post ... my sidemount training covered failure points too. It also covered more than one type of system, pointing out the advantages/disadvantages of each. Did yours? With all due respect, I don't think the standardization that seems to be your major selling point is worth the potential failure points ... neither I nor anyone I dive with seems to have any real problems managing regulator changes. I use a long-hose on my right tank, and if I have to donate it works so closely to a standard hogarthian method as to be effectively seamless.

ANOTHER THING; With this system my teaching is consistent as well , there is a clear system how to teach this as opposed to what you might receive, or not, from your instructor and his "way" an looking at things after having done a SM Instructor course without any former sidemount experience 10 days before.

My sidemount instructor dives sidemount all the time ... in caves ... which is where I took my class. He's probably got more sidemount experience than you do ... and evidently a fair fewer biases in terms of what he teaches and how he teaches it.

For example on facebook there is a discussion going on, Instructors and celebrities, regarding having your longhose, or not on your left and right tank. before UTD that was already hard to digest, but now...it is almost pathetic..

Well the solution to that problem is simple ... don't get your training on Facebook.

If one day an agency would come with a clear and consistent idea about how to teach independent sidemount I would again have a look at it.

Some of us prefer to think for ourselves, and make choices that best suit our goals, diving environment, and preferences. I'll base mine not on what some agency tells me is the "right way", but on what makes the most sense to me based on the dives I want to do.

But for now, with this new wave of potential new openwater sidemount fatalities, I will stick to this.

Is there a wave of new openwater sidemount fatalities? Can you point me to some statistics showing how all these fatalities could have been prevented by sticking a manifold on your back and removing the very advantages that an independent sidemount rig has to offer? Because, honestly, I'm just not seeing them ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[DevonDiver]

And I still don't comprehend your purpose in making this post ... my sidemount training covered failure points too. It also covered more than one type of system, pointing out the advantages/disadvantages of each. Did yours? With all due respect, I don't think the standardization that seems to be your major selling point is worth the potential failure points ...

Personally, I'm quite shocked to hear a 'DIR' diver/instructor state that it's okay to tolerate and "deal" with failure points, rather than minimize them in the first place. Isn't the philosophy to eliminate them, wherever possible? Thus reducing the need to ever "deal" with them?

Heck, I could 'deal' with suicide clips, heavy narcosis, over-weighting and a myriad of other fundamental compromises. It'd be stupid to do so though.. when I could just avoid them altogether...

 

[Kevrumbo]

Personally, I'm quite shocked to hear a 'DIR' diver/instructor state that it's okay to tolerate and "deal" with failure points, rather than minimize them in the first place. Isn't the philosophy to eliminate them, wherever possible? Thus reducing the need to ever "deal" with them?

Heck, I could 'deal' with suicide clips, heavy narcosis, over-weighting and a myriad of other fundamental compromises. It'd be stupid to do so though.. when I could just avoid them altogether...

The objective for myself Andy is to keep consistency with the Long-Hose Paradigm I first learned in GUE Fundamentals of Better Diving Course well over ten years ago, and in keeping to that firm foundation as it applies to sidemount, I have accommodated the learning curve of the Z-system distribution block, and incorporated its contingency procedures to make any rare occurrence "failure points" a benign & manageable event. The Z-Distribution Block is a Low Pressure block with 8 static o-rings. The chances of failure are considerably less than let's say a Isolator Knob on a conventional backmount doubles manifold (High Pressure and dynamic), so I am not especially concerned, especially since that Distribution Block is relatively tiny and buried compared to a conventional crossover backmount manifold --so chances of smacking it are slim

Every concept and technique of DIR/Hogarth as it applies to past courses on Tech/Deco Diving, Scooter/DPV, Cavern and Advanced Wreck Diving that I've taken over these ten years --it all applies similarly to Z-system sidemount: No need to configure with breakaway clips for regulators or other such machinations & convolutions of classical independent doubles sidemount diving; no need to learn incompatible techniques & procedures with that already inculcated in my "muscle memory". . .

 

[ams511]

Scalable - One can use ONE system for all diving... Single (1) Tank (Recreational), 2 tanks (Tech-reational), 3 tanks(Technical), 4 tanks (Trimix). Deco bottles, Stages...Imagine that you can now stage a cave with cylinders, and deco bottle, plug them into the system and always have donate-able long hose, necklace, bcd, drysuit and even rebreather function with any cylinder in the cave. Even Rebreathers (PSCR and mCCR) - See MXZ mCCR Rebreather Configuration - One CANNOT do this with traditional Side-mount.


Does this sound dangerous or is it me? Why would you want to put different gas mixes on one manifold? To me it would seem to increase the probability of breathing an incorrect mix.

 

[Kevrumbo]

Scalable - One can use ONE system for all diving... Single (1) Tank (Recreational), 2 tanks (Tech-reational), 3 tanks(Technical), 4 tanks (Trimix). Deco bottles, Stages...Imagine that you can now stage a cave with cylinders, and deco bottle, plug them into the system and always have donate-able long hose, necklace, bcd, drysuit and even rebreather function with any cylinder in the cave. Even Rebreathers (PSCR and mCCR) - See MXZ mCCR Rebreather Configuration - One CANNOT do this with traditional Side-mount.


Does this sound dangerous or is it me? Why would you want to put different gas mixes on one manifold? To me it would seem to increase the probability of breathing an incorrect mix.

As always, just do your deco gas label checks, trace out the supply hose to the correct deco bottle --all with a buddy watching & confirming the gas switch.