Gue debating use of eccr rebreathers?

Mephisto26

Richard Lundgren is on this bord, what do you have to say to that???

Hugh

Looking at this further:

In the most recent dive where they linked Leon Sinks and Wakula, the primary team dive was for 5 hours bottom time at approx 280 ft.

There were several teams doing 4 to 6 hours on the bottom and several hours of deco., I think around 20 hours.

Given they are covering distances of 20,000 feet each way on different dives, there is a need for CCR to be streamlined and breathe easily in almost horizontal position to maintain scooter efficiency.

1. So which current CCR would they likely model their DIRCCR on.

2. Tim suggested Better Deco?, how much quicker would the deco be on CCR. - Trob suggested not much less.

3. Mikel suggested two eCCRs. How much o2 and Dilutent would you use for 6 hours at 280 feet?

Regards


Hugh
Tourill PASCR

RAL

If they do approve a CCR my moneys on the Copis Meg. I believe it would be a bit easier for them to accept a manual unit than a full blown eccr. The copis would edge out the Kiss & revo because of its greater scrubber capacity plus it has that military look

RAL

__________________
The sea does not care about you.

decoweenie

Once at depth, and assuming that you will not vary depth so much that you will need to dump and add gas to your wing - thus same for the loop, THEORETICALLY you will not be using any diluent for the 6 hours at 280 feet.

Of course, that is not realistic since you will be clearing mask, varying depth a bit, etc so some diluent will be used, but negligible amount.

O2 use will be in the average of 1-1.5 L/min especially on scooters. Count 2 L/min to account for wastage. So (6)(60)(2) = 720 litters (or 25cf at 3000 psi). Again THEORETICAL estimation...

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

Mark Chase

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

__________________
Is it supposed to make that noise ?

I took my unit to the dive shop and demanded they bolt on every thing that would fit.

Join my elite diving teem and get a Tshirt

"Doing It Chasey"Hammerhead Eccr Advanced Diving System

Speakeasy

Mark,

I think you make a good point that there is a very real business side to this whole dive industry and that as a business GUE/DIR ifolks have to make enough money to stay afloat. However, I would think that if this was a money issue we might see the price of the RB80 come down a little and maybe a return to the days of rb80 class 1 and 2 (being able to put more units on the market at a less expensive point of entry training wise.) I think there is a demand for a DIR CCR or mCCR I also think that market is a little more tight and they might find them selfs behind in the game. Where as with the RB80 they are the leader. Just my 2 cents.

Woz

From the talk that Casey and JJ did at our club a few weeks ago I got the impression that if there is a tool to do the job, they'll come up with a DIR way of running it safely and in a team manner. I'm sure that CCR is high on their agenda due to the obvious benefits.

Right at the cutting edge, where they are miles underground, the GUE "configuration" takes a bit of a running jump anyway- you use the tools to do the job you need to.

__________________
Still punting shiny diving tatt to gullible divers
www.kitfondle.co.uk

Richard Lundgren

Hi and thank you for asking

The official GUE policy has always been and still is that we don’t support the use of CCR-breathers. If this policy would change several safety factors and needs would first have to be fulfilled. A policy change of this magnitude would also only be presented by an official post directly from the GUE HQ.

Apart from this as Misha wrote earlier on, GUE is not closing any doors to evolution or new techniques. We respect CCR diving even if GUE historically have chosen the OC path only supporting SCR for more experienced divers.

The upcoming GUE conference in Budapest indicates that GUE is open minded but it’s farfetched to assume that GUE is turning pro-CCR only based on the fact that we have some prominent explorers present happening to use CCR as a tool.

Take care
Richard Lundgren

OceanOpportunity

it'd be very easy to convert the RB80 to ccr...and seeing as it is the accepted Rebreather platform, why not??

__________________
Michael Lombardi
Oceans of Opportunity
www.oceanopportunity.com

Elected Director, Society for Human Performance in Extreme Environments

MN'07, The Explorers Club

Project Manager, Diving a Dream