barney(Offline)

It is quite humorous to see some of the responses resulting from the introduction of this wing. With the exception of limited responses on another forum, most comments do not have any bearing on the design of the product, but simply on the company that produced it. But I digress...

I switched over to a rebreather because open circuit was just not the optimal approach for the projects we were pursuing, not to mention the logistics required to safely and efficiently conduct those dives. A rebreather was simply the better tool for the job. I don’t care to argue this issue with anyone on these lists; for me the positives far outweigh the negatives.

When I did make the switch, the lack of standardization within the rebreather community was readily apparent. While some of this can be attributed to design differences in the spectrum of rebreathers on the market, there are still widely divergent approaches to gear rigging and general philosophies amongst divers using the exact same rebreather.

With most of our group now using the same rebreather, we opted to work towards a standardized configuration, etc. We wanted to try and keep our units light, streamlined, and efficient, avoiding weight addition to cylinders or harness for trim, or even a weight belt for overall buoyancy.

There are numerous wings on the market that work fine for open circuit technical divers – doubles are pretty much doubles. In contrast, most rebreathers are much shorter packages, and weight distribution is much different. We tweaked our configuration as much as possible, trying to get perfect trim like we were used to on open circuit. However, because of the shortness of the rebreather, the OTS counter-lungs, and the fact the valves are positioned on the bottom (i.e., bottom heavy), we still had some niggling issues with trim and attitude. To help with our trim, we could have reversed the bottles and put the valves at the top, but we felt there were some drawbacks to this approach. Conventional wings simply trapped the small amount of compensating gas needed when diving the rebreather in the wrong area of the wing. Other wings were too long for the unit, and in our eyes some doughnut-style wings presented a failure potential due to repetitive stress (pinching) on the lower portion of the wing when sitting down on boat benches, etc.

I personally felt a wing with a more appropriate design would be the solution to our dilemma. And, for us, it ultimately has. To their credit, Halcyon helped fabricate a better wing for our rebreathers.

Getting all worked up about whether it is or isn’t DIR is pretty pointless, especially when some of the approaches considered DIR and taught as DIR is simply and clearly wrong. But that’s a subject for another thread….

Cheers,
Michael Barnette

caverkevin(Offline)

Hello Barney!!

Nice to see you over here on DIRX. This is a really sweet board.

I do not think you need to defend your choice for switching to a CCR for wreck diving. I have seen other posts eluding to the desire for a CCR to ease up the gas logistics. I know i have been thinking about a CCR for many year because of wreck diving. You hit the nail right on the head about standardization. The configuration of CCR divers is pot-luck at best. This is fine if you only plan on solo diving. What about when you care about your buddies??

I am pretty sure your team is running Megs. Do you think you could outline what your team has done to make CCR as safe as possible, and standardized between members AUE? Enlighten us a little bit about your typical gas planning.

Cheers!!

Kevin

Clare Gledhill (Online)

It is also a subject for another board. In the same way that I would expect to be shot down in flames if I posted to Rebreather World that it was all wrong, it not very helpful to post that way on here is it?

The clue is in the name of the site my friend.

Debate - yes of course, I still believe that this is always healthy but accept that whilst many of us respect your right to dive how ever you wish, we have already chosen not to join you in doing so.

But welcome anyway - join in as I'm sure you have much to contribute

__________________

Interested in DIR dive training? Always happy to chat/answer questions so get in touch via PM or visit www.dirdiver.co.uk

barney(Offline)

Well, if people can discuss if a piece of gear is DIR or not, then why not discuss if certain practices are really correct or not? This is not about rebreathers, but many of the things I observed diving open circuit. And individuals to whom the DIR community look towards for guidance have conceeded/agreed on some of these issues.

You are free to call it DIR or whatever makes you happy...but that does not necessarily make it correct

Cheers,
Mike

Clare Gledhill (Online)

Then I misunderstood your post, and look forward to some interesting debate

- although preferably not about CCR wings - I figure we've done that

__________________

Interested in DIR dive training? Always happy to chat/answer questions so get in touch via PM or visit www.dirdiver.co.uk

Bob Cooper(Offline)

So what did you have in mind Michael?

barney(Offline)

I'll throw some stuff out for discussion in more appropriately titled threads.

barney(Offline)

...and by the way, the CCR wing must be DIR because it says so...



just kidding

jasonmh(Offline)

It's funny because it's true...

ericfine50(Offline)

Mik,e

Let me know what you want to "break out" and I can take care of it.