Quote: (Originally Posted by
db8us)
I can not speak for GUE even though i would have been there as a speaker if i could have made it from India to Budapest.
The discussion itself i think is good but in my opinion it does not mean that anyone is moving to eCCR in general.
And by the way, most of the advanced divers have tried them out anyway :-)
I see several issues starting from the cells during bottomtimes of 10hours but nevertheless maybe there is better technology available since it was evaluated last time.
I will stick tom my RB80 for the time beeing since i never had the feeling they are not capable of what we planned to do and did so far.
Most eCCR cavediving had been pretty much bouncediving so i am really curious about the questions, news, new technology etc.
Sometimes i have the feeling the outside gang really thinks we never try out something else or change anything.
Facts is, it is mostly tweaking smaller things but this does nit mean that from time to time one has to lean back and rethink the bigger picture also.
My 2 Rupies from India
Michael
An excellent response from a DIR diver actually doing what DIR was designed to achieve.
The rabid anti CCR bulls#it we confuse with the term DIR is from wannabe divers regurgitating the sensationalist marketing hype of the now disenfranchised GI3. The people to whom the diving is all important will no doubt experiment with and adopt any technology that becomes available.
If i were to plan a 10 hour cave dive i reckon a modified RB80 would be right at the top of my list (Id have a PP02 display).
However there is another side of DIR/GUE and that is the commercial side. That side must surely realize that to survive they must adopt some form of CCR to enable their rank and file members to go diving in a cost effective manor.
Doing It Right is prohibitively expensive when it comes to deep or remote location diving. Logistics prevent the economic use of OC and SCR isnt much better.
There are divers to whom saving £2-3000 a year in gas and associated logistical costs means nothing over the pure safety advantage of SCR. It is likely Michael falls into this group. However there is a far larger group for whom this is a major consideration. They still have the passion for diving but they need to economize.
If GUE loose the market for these divers over to the other agencies and equipment providers then they will lose money and the kudos of any achievements made in this arena. They are beginning to realize that CCR is rapidly gaining market share and they are loosing top end divers over to the side of cost effective and logisticaly simple diving.
They cant ignore that on any realistic business plan.
Far better to acknowledge that yes CCR is dangerous but that 95% of all fatalities are due to diver error. Then build a systems and training package to eliminate the bulk of these issues and start a real DIR-R
Id be near the front of the que.
ATB
Mark