I still dive a draeger dolphin on recreational dives. I was on the Hollis P2 and now I'm on the Meg 15. I don't think I'll ever dive OC again. I did want to make a point about diving with our bailout mounted to the back as well. Typically, we run bailout in sidemount and ccr on the back. Unfortunately, American dive operations are so focused on profit that they neglect safety. If we aborted every dive that was too crowded, we would never dive. So we make a point to carry dual 7liter bottles and 2 or 3 liter bottles for the CCR. This ensures we can dive from the tech boats and still enjoy the dive. If we were going to dive a cave system, that changes everything.
Achim, your videos are great insight into the thinking and evolving DIR philosophy. This video made me ask questions though: Why ISE offers certification on eCCR if the philosophy supports mCCR? What do you think of a hybrid CCR, where the CMF/COPIS/KISS valve functions throughout the dive, and solenoid acts as a backup under setpoint 0.7 for example in high stress scenario? I think any eCCR could have a leaky valve added on the O2 side. What do you think of CCR vs pSCR used for deep/long caves? PSCR seems to have a better safety profile, but not as many advantages. Thanks!
HI Adam, this would be a LONG answer - I will make a quick video about that this week - much easier. We do NOT offer eCCR training any more - we play with the idea for a while but stopped it because we believe that our philosophy and believe should not be compromised by political or business decisions
CoastalDevelopment - InnerSpace Explorers - ISE Achim, thanks for the reply! That’s very impressive and I really respect the ISE philosophy. I am not yet at the level of needing a rebreather, still using the trusty doubles, but exploration diving is so fascinating to me, as well as rebreather technology. I would love to train with ISE one day on a technical course. Always look forward to hearing more about these topics and ISE in general.
Hi Axel, nice video, but I notice your argument on Eccr's do not factor in the probability of the concerns you have with them. Also your concern about an oxygen cell being in the wrong environment in a rebreather is entirely applicable to an mCCR as well. Cathal
Hi Cathal, The difference clearly is that on the ECCR the machine make a "desicion" and can FORCE me to REACT, whilst on the MCCR, I make the decision and are allowed to ACT. SO the MCCR makes me think and be aware of the ststus of my dive while the ECCR let a lot of divers get lazy and dive into the blue leaving the responsibility by the computer. Best Achim
Hi Achim, first of all my apologies for getting your name wrong!! So what I am trying to explain is that proposing the existence of an event without discussing its probability or frequency of it occurring is meaningless. As an example, we know aircraft can crash which result sometimes in hundreds of people dying but we also know that travelling by aircraft is one of the safest forms of travel due to the frequency or probability of these crashes i.e. latest figures are somewhere in the region of one accident per 2.4 million flights. So when you state that getting saltwater on your electronics can cause you to miss a dive really you should tell us how frequent you believe this occurs, likewise with the oxygen control issue or else it is meaningless. Regards Cathal P.s Keep up the videos!
Hi Cathal, of course you are right. This is rare - but it happens. and we all know that it happend in the most problematic time possible (murphy) So I have seen people with ECCRs on Palau, diveing OC because of a total failure of the electronics and friends who went to Bikini had the same issue. So prefere to eleminate this possibiility. The cells another topic. We al accept that we get information from that source, no matter if ECCR or MCCR: The differemc eis that if the MCCR user looks on his display and sees 3 differnt digits he has to think, make an educated desicion and then act accordingly (for example flush the unit with Diluant, calc the PO2 regaridng his depth and figur which of the cells shows the correct PO2. On an ECCR he mioght not even realize something is wrong as the machine is doing all of this. This may worl most of the time but if it does not, it can kill you. of coure you can fly the ECCR manual and ue the Electronics as an additional safety backup, but the intention of the video was to give an idea why the MCCR fits the ISE philoophy best. Thanks and best Achim
Hi Achim. I dive a KISS GEM, which is, as you say, a gas extender (PSCR,) but I use it with twin LP 50s, which is not heavy to begin with. My total weight in a wetsuit is about 43 kg or 86 pounds. It does get heavier, like everything else, when I use a drysuit, by about 5 kg or 10 pounds. It can also be used with a single tank (like AL or steel 80s) but I want the redundancy without having to use multiple stage bottles. There are ways to get more than 3:1, like 5:1+, out of it and you can use trimix in it as well, but it is not advertised this way by KISS as there is no certification if one were to make these adjustments. Still, many GEM technical dive users have learned how to do this. The advantage to this system is as you say, it is about as simple as you can get. There is only one 02 cell and everything else is done manually. If I do make my own adjustments and get say more than 5:1, my 100 cu.ft. tanks now have 500 cu.ft. of gas in them - a lot of gas. Why do you think this is wrong? With a KISS Classic (a great machine) you have at least 1 AL40 as bailout, so you are carrying about the same amount of weight as me, but you have three 02 cells (failure points?) to my one. Thanks!
HI, there is nothing wrong at all. As You say it is a leightweight unit and when I was saying heavy I was refering to the big old PSCRs that where betwen D12s or bigger. What I do not like is the one cell as you have no chance to see when it goes wrong as you have no refference like on 2 or three - but in the end that is all personal choice and a matter of risk analysis. safe diving.
Thanks for the reply. A quick note. Yes, the GEM only has the one 02 cell, but you immediately know when something goes wrong as you will see absolutely no bubbles (you exhale 1/3 or 1/5, etc. the gas through your mouthpiece) when you should see some as you exhale. Then you know there's a problem and you can bail out to OC very easily. Since the GEM is not working off of pure 02, but Nitrox up to 40%, you don't need the three 02 cells as we only have to monitor P02 levels for hypoxia in the shallows if we go beyond the 1:3 ratio, or accidentally go beyond the Nitrox P02 levels at depth. Once we're into trimix, we can go very deep. I know a few GEM divers who regularly dive to 60 or 70 meters with it. But I agree, it's nowhere near as heavy as the RB80, etc. And I dive it, (and will eventually buy an MCCR) because I do believe in your philosophy - manual control and simplicity is best.
I think closed circuit is attractive because you only need to bring bail out gas with you encase the unit fails. Since there is no need for switching gasses manually during the dive it removes one of the biggest failure points of technical dives which is breathing the wrong gas. The higher quality units usually have multiple sensors which do tend to go bad, but as long as you care for the unit and replace the sensors -- as well as listening to what the computer is telling you it can be a superior unit to open circuit systems. The biggest issue with closed circuit at depth is respiratory failure because in most cases its your lungs circulating the system; so over exertion and respiratory failure are a real threat; the next is if your computers gives you the wrong information IE everything is fine but you're breathing 2+ Partial Pressure Of Oxygen at 80m or the system goes hypoxic; however in most cases the computer is going to give you some sort of warning. I think if I had the choice I'd still run a closed circuit unit for technical dives provided you're not going 150m+. I'd be really interested in anyone's thoughts and opinions on this.
zBones762 - I don’t understand a bail out bottle. If you’re at 150m, a 12ltr or even 15 ltr tank isn’t going to get you back to the surface is it? These cylinders last, what 10, max 15 minutes at 40m or have I missed something?
@@elmo319 You bring enough gas to bailout from the depth you plan to dive to. That, or you and your dive buddy bring enough gas for one of you to make it back. Edit: For example, your bail out may be 4 tanks of tri-mix, then you have your closed circuit re-breather as your primary.
I still dive a draeger dolphin on recreational dives. I was on the Hollis P2 and now I'm on the Meg 15. I don't think I'll ever dive OC again. I did want to make a point about diving with our bailout mounted to the back as well. Typically, we run bailout in sidemount and ccr on the back. Unfortunately, American dive operations are so focused on profit that they neglect safety. If we aborted every dive that was too crowded, we would never dive. So we make a point to carry dual 7liter bottles and 2 or 3 liter bottles for the CCR. This ensures we can dive from the tech boats and still enjoy the dive. If we were going to dive a cave system, that changes everything.
What watch you wearing? ;)
Achim, your videos are great insight into the thinking and evolving DIR philosophy.
This video made me ask questions though:
Why ISE offers certification on eCCR if the philosophy supports mCCR?
What do you think of a hybrid CCR, where the CMF/COPIS/KISS valve functions throughout the dive, and solenoid acts as a backup under setpoint 0.7 for example in high stress scenario? I think any eCCR could have a leaky valve added on the O2 side.
What do you think of CCR vs pSCR used for deep/long caves? PSCR seems to have a better safety profile, but not as many advantages.
Thanks!
HI Adam, this would be a LONG answer - I will make a quick video about that this week - much easier. We do NOT offer eCCR training any more - we play with the idea for a while but stopped it because we believe that our philosophy and believe should not be compromised by political or business decisions
CoastalDevelopment - InnerSpace Explorers - ISE
Achim, thanks for the reply! That’s very impressive and I really respect the ISE philosophy. I am not yet at the level of needing a rebreather, still using the trusty doubles, but exploration diving is so fascinating to me, as well as rebreather technology. I would love to train with ISE one day on a technical course. Always look forward to hearing more about these topics and ISE in general.
it will be nice with a follow up video showing your Kiss Classic setup :-)
What about the JJ ? Vs kiss ?
Hi Axel, nice video, but I notice your argument on Eccr's do not factor in the probability of the concerns you have with them. Also your concern about an oxygen cell being in the wrong environment in a rebreather is entirely applicable to an mCCR as well.
Cathal
Hi Cathal, The difference clearly is that on the ECCR the machine make a "desicion" and can FORCE me to REACT, whilst on the MCCR, I make the decision and are allowed to ACT. SO the MCCR makes me think and be aware of the ststus of my dive while the ECCR let a lot of divers get lazy and dive into the blue leaving the responsibility by the computer.
Best Achim
Hi Achim, first of all my apologies for getting your name wrong!! So what I am trying to explain is that proposing the existence of an event without discussing its probability or frequency of it occurring is meaningless. As an example, we know aircraft can crash which result sometimes in hundreds of people dying but we also know that travelling by aircraft is one of the safest forms of travel due to the frequency or probability of these crashes i.e. latest figures are somewhere in the region of one accident per 2.4 million flights. So when you state that getting saltwater on your electronics can cause you to miss a dive really you should tell us how frequent you believe this occurs, likewise with the oxygen control issue or else it is meaningless.
Regards
Cathal
P.s Keep up the videos!
Hi Cathal,
of course you are right. This is rare - but it happens. and we all know that it happend in the most problematic time possible (murphy) So I have seen people with ECCRs on Palau, diveing OC because of a total failure of the electronics and friends who went to Bikini had the same issue. So prefere to eleminate this possibiility. The cells another topic. We al accept that we get information from that source, no matter if ECCR or MCCR: The differemc eis that if the MCCR user looks on his display and sees 3 differnt digits he has to think, make an educated desicion and then act accordingly (for example flush the unit with Diluant, calc the PO2 regaridng his depth and figur which of the cells shows the correct PO2. On an ECCR he mioght not even realize something is wrong as the machine is doing all of this. This may worl most of the time but if it does not, it can kill you.
of coure you can fly the ECCR manual and ue the Electronics as an additional safety backup, but the intention of the video was to give an idea why the MCCR fits the ISE philoophy best. Thanks and best Achim
Hi Achim. I dive a KISS GEM, which is, as you say, a gas extender (PSCR,) but I use it with twin LP 50s, which is not heavy to begin with. My total weight in a wetsuit is about 43 kg or 86 pounds. It does get heavier, like everything else, when I use a drysuit, by about 5 kg or 10 pounds. It can also be used with a single tank (like AL or steel 80s) but I want the redundancy without having to use multiple stage bottles. There are ways to get more than 3:1, like 5:1+, out of it and you can use trimix in it as well, but it is not advertised this way by KISS as there is no certification if one were to make these adjustments. Still, many GEM technical dive users have learned how to do this. The advantage to this system is as you say, it is about as simple as you can get. There is only one 02 cell and everything else is done manually. If I do make my own adjustments and get say more than 5:1, my 100 cu.ft. tanks now have 500 cu.ft. of gas in them - a lot of gas. Why do you think this is wrong? With a KISS Classic (a great machine) you have at least 1 AL40 as bailout, so you are carrying about the same amount of weight as me, but you have three 02 cells (failure points?) to my one. Thanks!
HI, there is nothing wrong at all. As You say it is a leightweight unit and when I was saying heavy I was refering to the big old PSCRs that where betwen D12s or bigger. What I do not like is the one cell as you have no chance to see when it goes wrong as you have no refference like on 2 or three - but in the end that is all personal choice and a matter of risk analysis. safe diving.
Thanks for the reply. A quick note. Yes, the GEM only has the one 02 cell, but you immediately know when something goes wrong as you will see absolutely no bubbles (you exhale 1/3 or 1/5, etc. the gas through your mouthpiece) when you should see some as you exhale. Then you know there's a problem and you can bail out to OC very easily. Since the GEM is not working off of pure 02, but Nitrox up to 40%, you don't need the three 02 cells as we only have to monitor P02 levels for hypoxia in the shallows if we go beyond the 1:3 ratio, or accidentally go beyond the Nitrox P02 levels at depth. Once we're into trimix, we can go very deep. I know a few GEM divers who regularly dive to 60 or 70 meters with it. But I agree, it's nowhere near as heavy as the RB80, etc. And I dive it, (and will eventually buy an MCCR) because I do believe in your philosophy - manual control and simplicity is best.
I think closed circuit is attractive because you only need to bring bail out gas with you encase the unit fails. Since there is no need for switching gasses manually during the dive it removes one of the biggest failure points of technical dives which is breathing the wrong gas. The higher quality units usually have multiple sensors which do tend to go bad, but as long as you care for the unit and replace the sensors -- as well as listening to what the computer is telling you it can be a superior unit to open circuit systems. The biggest issue with closed circuit at depth is respiratory failure because in most cases its your lungs circulating the system; so over exertion and respiratory failure are a real threat; the next is if your computers gives you the wrong information IE everything is fine but you're breathing 2+ Partial Pressure Of Oxygen at 80m or the system goes hypoxic; however in most cases the computer is going to give you some sort of warning. I think if I had the choice I'd still run a closed circuit unit for technical dives provided you're not going 150m+. I'd be really interested in anyone's thoughts and opinions on this.
zBones762 - I don’t understand a bail out bottle. If you’re at 150m, a 12ltr or even 15 ltr tank isn’t going to get you back to the surface is it? These cylinders last, what 10, max 15 minutes at 40m or have I missed something?
@@elmo319 You bring enough gas to bailout from the depth you plan to dive to. That, or you and your dive buddy bring enough gas for one of you to make it back. Edit: For example, your bail out may be 4 tanks of tri-mix, then you have your closed circuit re-breather as your primary.
zBones762 - thanks, it’s good to understand.
I agree using twin 12L cylinders with a CCR is crazy. But using twin 7L diluent is very nice for deep dives since it means you can have 1 less stage.