Good morning, Christian, at least it's morning here.
> Sure, and I may do that, or at least get a loan of one to see how that
goes.
It's largely a matter of preference. As I sit here, I'm contemplating what
to use on my annual lobster and spearfishing trip. While I like the
benefits of my 6 foot hose, it has its drawbacks, mostly in pre and post
dive convenience. It's advantages are pretty much centered in entanglement
resistance and assistance to others. The dives I'll be doing on this trip
are, at best, SOB dives with no real entanglement issues, i.e. open water.
I'm considering adding a necklace to the US Diver's Micra regulator I used
before I purchased my Scuba Pro and using it for the trip. My thinking is
at least partly flavored by the fact that my DIR style rig was converted to
DIN a while back and the boat's fill whips are A clamp. I have an adapter
for filling DIN, but the compressor is set for 3,000 psi and except for the
advanced, extra tip, I'd be lucky to get 2,700 in my 3,500 psi HP 100 tanks.
I've also got an DIN to yoke adapter for my regulator, but with 6 or 7 dives
a day, times 12 or more divers, I'm not crazy about the idea of dealing with
an adapter in the between dive rush to get everybody ready to go again. The
more I think about it, the more likely I am to use my shorter hose equipment
for this trip . . . maybe. 8^)
On the other hand, I purchased a somewhat longer than DIR hose yesterday. I
put a 60 foot hose on the Sea Hornet regulator Strike donated in Coz and I
won. Hopefully it's still in good working order. I used it once before I
found that it could not be serviced here. It's been in storage ever since.
I plan on using the very long hose regulator with my kayak, leaving the tank
on the kayak and diving hooka style. I'm probably going to put my old hose
mount USD air computer on the setup, just in case.
> My wing is Oz made, indeed its maker's "factory" is not ten minutes
> from home and less than five from w**k. Useful.
The Halcyon factory used to be almost that close to my home. It's moved up
the state a ways, but one of the two factory stores is still here. That had
quite a bit to do with how I converted to a DIR-Like configuration. I'm not
DIR, I've just adopted enough of their equipment choices to look like I am.
There are a lot of DIR followers whose choice of gear is based on the
dictates of the top few in WKPP. Mine are dictated by what I personally
decide is best for me. It just happens that a lot of their ideas are best
for me too. Another factor that led to my particular brand of conversion is
Michael Doelle, who you've seen posting here. The group trip to Coz, a few
years ago, was the first time I saw a DIR or DIR-like setup. Michael is
closer than I am. At any rate, one look at the gear in action was all it
took to convince me. I converted almost immediately upon my return to S.
Florida.
> Matter of fact he "built" my wing for me to my (and his) specs. It has
> conventional webbing, a la BCD style in front (but no cummerbund) and
> D Rings at the ends of the straps that tighten the pack on the
> shoulders. I attach one or both of my primaries (depending on whether
> I'm diving twins or singles) to each of these. They're too far away
> for me to be able to get to them with my mouth, but then I'm not a
> caver ... and *very* careful of penetrations having had a particularly
> nasty one many years ago which I still very carefully remember. Oh
> yes, in twin mode I dive individual doubles, definitely not DIR.
I'm having trouble picturing the configuration you're describing. It sounds
more like a jacket style BCD than a wing. It may just be my
misunderstanding. Not that there's anything wrong with a jacket if that's
what you like, it's just not my preference. The plate is the key element in
my system. The wing is a long secondary factor. Is there a picture on line
somewhere that will help me understand?
I'm curious about your choice to dive independent doubles. I was shopping
for doubles and a trimix course about the time that I decided that I really
didn't want to go deep enough for long enough to need them. The nature of
the S. Florida coast provides tremendous opportunities for diving in normal
recreational depths, whether it's wrecks or reefs that are of interest. At
any rate, my study of the various multi tank options convinced me of the
advantages of an isolation manifolded twinset. All else being equal,
primarily meaning cost, it seems to be the clear winner for any diving that
benefits from twins. Since you dive twins and I don't, I'd be pleased to
listen to your reasons for your choice. You never know, I may still do that
trimix course and, of course, will need twins to put it to good use.
> I *do* believe in the principles of DIR, per se, it's just that this
> old dog thinks that new tricks, for his style of diving, are not
> necessarily important enough to warrant change. Rightly or wrongly.
Right and wrong are subject to personal opinion. Do what you like best as
long as it keeps you safe and happy. There's really nothing particularly
new about the DIR philosophy or equipment. While they have advanced
decompression knowledge quite a bit, close buddy support, physical fitness
requirements, practice of safety procedures, all of the individual pieces of
equipment the use and even the concept of taking what you need and nothing
more, are much older than DIR . . . or me, for that matter. DIR's biggest
contributions are probably their marketing of themselves and their system
and their insistence on a single configuration for all divers that
participate in their advanced group diving. Their biggest mistake, in my
opinion, is trying to convince the world that their configuration is the
best for everybody and all kinds of diving. It's OK for everybody and OK
for all types of diving, but not necessarily better.
> Like you, as you know, I usually dive off the same boat with the same
> group. We know each other extremely well and that's a significant
> advantage. Me? I always breathe the AIR 2 on descent (a) to ensure
> that it's working properly and (b) because it allows me to "level off"
> (aka buoyancy control) in a much more controlled fashion (exhaled
> breath) than pushing air into the wing conventionally.
I think I mentioned that I tried an alternate/inflator with my plate and
wing. It just didn't work out for me. An alternate/inflator unit needs a
longer fill hose, the corrogated one, to be comfortable when breathed and
the harness on my plate and wing does not provide a convenient place to
secure it. Once I got used to the short hose alternate, I liked it better
anyway. Just a bit under my chin, with the shorter hose, keeps it real
handy, but completely out of my way except, of course, when I have to
remember to put the necklace on first and take it off before dekitting. 8^)
In my opinion, it's one of the more universally useful elements of the
system, but not everybody agrees.
> I have an itty bitty knife in a webbing sheath sewn "upside down" to
> the webbing strap of the left shoulder control webbing, if that makes
> sense. It has a big "hook" to catch filament (fishing line) and like
> yours is kept sharp. It is there for precisely the reason of being
> able to cut filament. no more, no less. Why "upside down" or handle
> pointing to ground when you are standing upright? I'm right handed,
> it's the easiest, most comfortable, way for a right hander to get at
> it. Also, it's in front of you, rather than somewhere on your belt
> where you could easily already be restricted (that filament).
I considered that too. On my previous jacket style bcd, my primary knife
was a bit larger and on the inside of my left leg. The secondary, the small
one was on the hose to my console which ran across my chest, fastening to
the right side chest D ring. With my current setup, the chest strap D rings
are where my backup lights go. There's not a lot of room left for a knife.
Because of the D rings on my waist strap, the left and right knives work out
quite well for me. Anywhere you can mount cutting tools that you can reach
at least one of them in almost any circumstances, seems like a valid choice
to me.
> We are not, here, allowed to take anything (live) out of the water
> other than 10 abalone of the appropriate size. I, long ago, forgot
> about hunting u/w on SCUBA, or anything else for that matter. To be
> politically correct, I acknowledge that YMMV. ;-7
Spearfishing on scuba is probably one of the least understood sports I know
of. There's a strong presumption that it's slaughter, the fish standing no
chance and the human haveing all the advantages. That's just not how it is.
It's more like hunting dear with a radio blasting out noise. You aren't
going to sneak up on anything and the fish here have long since learned what
a speargun looks like. Of course, scuba does open the sport to a lot more
people than could or would participate if it were strictly a freediving
sport. The effect on stocks is controlled by the same limits and laws that
govern hook and line fishermen plus outright prohibitions on spearing many
species and on spearing in replenishment areas, near piers, in most channels
and the like. It's a system that has been working well for a long time.
Controls on commercial fishing operations, on the other hand, have not
worked well at all, but we're getting better.
If you can't take anything but abalone, which we don't have here and don't
allow to be taken on scuba (I think) on the west coast, where they do have
them, where do the lobster (crayfish ?), fish, shrimp, etc. that I see in
the advertistements come from? Strictly commercial harvesting of sea
resources simply will not work here. The fishing industry, including spear
fishing and lobstering, is just too well established for us to accept the
right of a commercial operator to take something that ordinary citizens may
not.
> Actually, I simply route mine in the approved DIR way, without any of
> the "fail safe "tuck away" devices and, apart from often dislodging
> when I do a backward roll (easily remedied) it seems to work.
I've never found a need for the amount of light a cannister provides. The
most I've ever needed was easily provided by the UK 400 I carry as a primary
light. I have two Extreme Exposure Scout lights as backups that I'll
replace as soon as I can find something better suited to my preferences.
The Scouts are good lights, but they have a bit too tight a beam for my
taste. I prefer a less bright, less penetrating but wider beam. Almost all
of my diving is done in good visibility. Periods of low visibility rarely
last more than a short time and there's usually good visibility somewhere in
range of my boat and/or the local dive boats. Most of the time, a little,
widely spread, not so bright light is better than a lot of very bright
light. If I were to start diving caves again, I'm sure my opinions would be
different.
> Thanks for the advice.
You're welcome. Hopefully, it's worth at least what you paid for it.
Lee
|
