Quote: (Originally Posted by
hchoat)
I find that the first clue that I need to add O2 is a slight drop in bouyancy, along with a slight perceived drop in loop volume. By paying attention to body and bouyancy, as well as the PO2 readouts, I generally maintain a pretty tight setpoint running manually.
-H
?? not everyone is diving in constant depth caves or diving with minimum or even a constant loop volume during their dives.
IMO all this talk that mCCR is safer is just not true.
mCCR = You have the habit to regularly squirt in some O2 and check your handsets at intervals during the dive, more frequenty when ascending.
eCCR = You have the habit to regularly check your handsets at intervals during the dive, more frequently when ascending.
Personally i
know Im going to die if I dont check my handsets on eCCR -so I check them. I dont need to make the PPO2 control less safe (by being forced to do it manualy, which can be at risk when task loading) in order to scare myself into being more careful with monitoring.
IMO eCCR with good monitoring skills = safer than mCCR
So I preffer to fix the problem - (bad monitoring skills) and let the eCCR do what I paid all that money for it to do - control my setpoint.
If (you may not) agree that eCCR with good monitoring skills is safer than mCCR - why would you deliberately choose a less safe method? To make up for your bad skills?