Get off my project!!!
I'd suggested this a couple of years ago as a subject for my diving science Masters research project and my tutor whinged about it and wouldn't agree to it. Good luck with it, guess that shows I have some good ideas afterall!!!
Anway... I thought there may be other advantages as well that would offset to a certain extent altitude sickness. Mountain air is extremely dry and dehydration is a massive contributor to altitude sickness, obviously rebreathers produce a very moist gas. I was interested in how this may affect climbers' performance. Similarly, I also wondered about how breathing hot gas would affect them. Another question, we all know scrubbers become less efficient at depth when gas becomes dense so does that mean they become more efficient at altitude where pressure is very low?
I don't think there would be a weight increase. As only about 1/4 of the O2 volume would be required there is a much smaller bottle so really it is scrubber size that becomes crucial. Surely the weight saved by the bottle would be enough for a scrubber?
I think for a similar duration that OC and CC systems would probably be about the same weight. I guess the question would come down to is how physiologically different is breathing CC oxygen? Is it more advantageous? Unless the answer was yes then I doubt whether CC oxygen is an option. And can this be balanced with the risk assessment? A rebreather has more parts so more chance of failure.
Best of luck,
Stuart
__________________
Can you imagine drifting along in the sea with your mouth open and a load of f***ing plankton going in? You'd like it, would you?
www.westons-cider.co.uk
Azerbaijani Association of Technical Divers Publicity Officer and Goat Wrangler