This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C15284.E2E7D750
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Olivier, I can say whatever I believe is right or wrong, and have the
credentials to back it up. Reinhard was diving in a restricted access place
without the benefit of a full team and with a short window of opportunity,
and chose to roll the dice. That does not make it a good idea, and don't
even try to pretend that maintaining multiple rebreathers underwater is an
easy thing to do or that totally depending on an extra one for bailout is
anything but a huge risk.

We will use two rb's when the dives get too long for one, and we will do it
the same way we run the scooters - use a little of each one so we have two
working backups, and we will use safety bottles. If something fails, we turn
the dive.

Right now we are still using one to dive and fresh one to deco, if we want
it. I usually keep my first one for 10 hours and then go to open circuit
which is far more fun to breathe. Your interpretation of things is a little
off, and frankly I really do not care what you think about what we do or how
you think it should be done. I suggest you leave out mentioning or speaking
for the WKPP if you do not like my responses. I will also say that it is not
your English that is bad, it is your convolution of the facts. Reinhard an
Michael are planning a sump dive  - dry / wet cave. Leaving extra equipment
in the dry sections is not the same as diving with three rebreathers, which
is patently absurd.

As I said, the rebreather list is where you will be hailed as a hero until
they hear your opinion of Stone and electronic rebreathers, and then they
will boot you off that list. You are also addressing an audience where the
only people besides yourself who have any clue what it is like to do the
times and decos we do is limited to WKPP members, including Rienhard and
Michael, and of that crowd, the total can be counted on two hands. Of the
people who have done this hundreds of times successfully and with a perfect
track record, that number on this planet is two : me and Jarrod. If I want
an opinion on how to do this, I will ask Jarrod - during deco.

  -----Original Message-----
  From: isler [mailto:isleroc@sp*.ch*]
  Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 3:27 PM
  To: Trey
  Cc: techdiver@aq*.co*; Cavers@aquanaut.com; rebreather@nw*.co*;
Wkpp@Ya*. Com
  Subject: Re: Redundant Rebreathers & The Doux de Coly


  Mr. Trey,
  Thank you for your message, even if our ideas are very diverging.

  I will answer to some of your assertions.

  " that was the only thing they did wrong - not putting safeties ". I know
well Reinhard and he is not a "burned head", so if he decided to use this
strategy, he had good reasons to do that and I you must respect that. How
can you say : << this is right, this is wrong >> ? Please, respect other
ideas different and well thought by people intelligent like Reinhard or
Michael.

  The WKPP think of the possibility to use double rebreather in the future ?
Great new and great evolution. I just can applaud this very good change of
mentality.

  For you, if they will use triple redundancy in the future, they will be
kamikaze ? Maybe you consider rebreather use as a very dangerous way. If
yes, why WKPP members use this kind of device ? For your information, I met
Michael 3 weeks ago in a caving meeting. He said me that they were thinking
to bring with them a third unit, used as bail out rebreather, so they could
deposit one or to unit in the sump during their penetration and take them
back during return way. Certainly a good idea.

  Rebreathers are not carpet but fabulous devices, you need just to use them
with  a good redundancy.

  Really, you don't know me I am really not a hero !

  regards (and sorry for my English)

  Olivier Isler

  Trey a *crit :

     Olivier, that was the only thing they did wrong  - not putting in
safeties, and it has nothing to do with your "philosophy", it has to do with
the fact that they did not have a team that could do it right. Also, the
double rebreather thing just slows you right back down again, and we would
only use it if we could not round trip the dive in a reasonable amount of
time. We would still put in safeties.In WKPP we put in safeties, and we do
the dives in one day, but we have a full team of pros.Hopefully Reinhard
will train up some people so he does not have to Kamikaze dive like you did
in the future. Rebreathers are a gas extension device, not a magic carpet. I
see you copied the rebreather list where you will be hailed as a hero for
your methods and especially your solo diving.
    From: isler [mailto:isleroc@sp*.ch*]
    Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 3:35 PM
    To: techdiver@aq*.co*; Cavers@aquanaut.com;
rebreather@nw*.co*
    Subject: Redundant Rebreathers & The Doux de Coly

      Hi everybody,
      I am new on the list. I am interested in  diving with rebreathers. I
speak French so, my sincere apologies for my approximativ English.
      I red the website of Reinhard BUCHALY and Michael WALDBRENNER, and I
would like to precise some points in this following message. The translation
is good, because I gave it to a good Friend much better than me for
Shakespeare language...

      Some informations about the exploration of the Doux de Coly.

      Since 1984 the Doux de Coly is the longest known sump in Europe.

      Summary of explorations.
      1972. PJ DEBRAS reaches 352 m (a remarkable performance at that time).
      1981. Both Claude MAGNIN & Olivier ISLER dive one after the other and
MAGNIN stops at 1750 m.
      1984. MAGNIN reaches 2630 m, and ISLER stops at 3100 m (up to this
time all dives are made with open circuits).
      1991. ISLER stops at 4055 m using the RI 2000 (redundant rebreather
with 3 independant circuits).
      1998. ISLER progresses another 250 m (to 4300 m) having unrolled 1150
m of guide-line, again using the RI 2000 rebreather.
      2001. Reinhard BUCHALY and Michael WALDBRENNER reach a distance of
5000 m.

      At first, congratulations to Reinhard and Michael for their remarkable
dive. The Doux de Coly carries on and it is not the end. I am very happy to
see that my difficult dive in 1998, where I found the continuation of the
cave, has so successful consequences.

      The dive of Reinhard and Michael is reported with a lot of details on
the attractive website www.tekdyk/doux.
      Unfortunately, an error appears at the "Welcome" page of the site. The
assertion that  "... all dives were directed using the DIR philosophy
developped by the floridian cave diving team WKPP..." is NOT correct. In
fact, the dive was directed using an intermediate philosophy between that of
DIR and the rebreather redundancy developped by myself (as mentioned on the
site).

      The analysis of their dive in fact shows that they both carried 2 X 20
l tanks on their back (return on open circuit in case of rebreather
failure). They dived as 2 divers together, as in DIR philosophy. Beyond a
distance of 800 m, no safety or relay cylinders were placed in the sump. The
reason was that both divers used the double rebreather RB 80. This is
undeniably my philosophy of using Redundant Rebreathers.

      It looks evident that rebreather's redundancy, nevertheless thrown
back by the WKPP, was decisive in their successful dive. If they had
followed exact DIR philosophy, Reinhard and Michael both would have used a
single rebreather, and they would have relied on safety cylinders staged far
down into the sump (maybe 3000 m or more), impossible to carry out without a
powerful support team.

      As for myself, I am proud to note that, after 11 years of existence,
my philosophy of Rebreather Redundancy, has begun  at least to appear in
extreme diving activity. Even if it is not yet fully accepted, the idea of
Rebreather redundancy goes on, in Europe with Reinhard and Michael and in
Australia with David APPERLEY.

      I will end with a note that if Reinhard and Michael plan in the future
to cross the stage of total Rebreather Redundancy (by using an additional
small front mounted safety rebreather) they will both have quadrupled redund
ancy, when, during my own solo dives, I had at my disposal triple
redundancy. With such a configuration, the crash risk becomes tiny.

      Olivier ISLER


------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C15284.E2E7D750
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D652302822-11102001><FONT face=3DArial
color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Olivier, I can say whatever I believe is right or wrong, and =
have the=20
credentials to back it up. Reinhard was diving in a restricted access =
place=20
without the benefit of a full team and with a short window of =
opportunity, and=20
chose to roll the dice. That does not make it a good idea, and don't =
even try to=20
pretend that maintaining multiple rebreathers underwater is an easy =
thing to do=20
or that totally depending on an extra one for bailout is anything but a =
huge=20
risk.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D652302822-11102001><FONT face=3DArial
color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D652302822-11102001><FONT face=3DArial
color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>We=20
will use two rb's when the dives get too long for one, and we will do it =
the=20
same way we run the scooters - use a little of each one so we have two =
working=20
backups, and we will use safety bottles. If something fails, we turn the =

dive.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D652302822-11102001><FONT face=3DArial
color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D652302822-11102001><FONT face=3DArial
color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Right=20
now we are still using one to dive and fresh one to deco, if we want it. =
I=20
usually keep my first one for 10 hours and then go to open circuit which =
is far=20
more fun to breathe. Your interpretation of things is a little off, and =
frankly=20
I really do not care what you think about what we do or how you think it =
should=20
be done. I suggest you leave out mentioning or speaking for the WKPP if =
you do=20
not like my responses. I will also say that it is not your English that =
is bad,=20
it is your convolution of the facts. Reinhard an Michael are planning a =
sump=20
dive  - dry / wet cave. Leaving extra equipment in the dry sections =
is not=20
the same as diving with three rebreathers, which is patently absurd.=20
</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D652302822-11102001><FONT face=3DArial
color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D652302822-11102001><FONT face=3DArial
color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>As I=20
said, the rebreather list is where you will be hailed as a hero until =
they hear=20
your opinion of Stone and electronic rebreathers, and then they will =
boot you=20
off that list. You are also addressing an audience where the only people =
besides=20
yourself who have any clue what it is like to do the times and decos we =
do is=20
limited to WKPP members, including Rienhard and Michael, and of that =
crowd, the=20
total can be counted on two hands. Of the people who have done this =
hundreds of=20
times successfully and with a perfect track record, that number on this =
planet=20
is two : me and Jarrod. If I want an opinion on how to do this, I will =
ask=20
Jarrod - during deco. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D652302822-11102001><FONT face=3DArial
color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> isler=20
  [mailto:isleroc@sp*.ch*]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, October 11, 2001 =
3:27=20
  PM<BR><B>To:</B> Trey<BR><B>Cc:</B> techdiver@aq*.co*;=20
  Cavers@aquanaut.com; rebreather@nw*.co*; Wkpp@Ya*.=20
  Com<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Redundant Rebreathers & The Doux de=20
  Coly<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>Mr. Trey,=20
  <P>Thank you for your message, even if our ideas are very diverging.=20
  <P>I will answer to some of your assertions.=20
  <P>" that was the only thing they did wrong - not putting safeties ". =
I know=20
  well Reinhard and he is not a "burned head", so if he decided to use =
this=20
  strategy, he had good reasons to do that and I you must respect that. =
How can=20
  you say : << this is right, this is wrong >> ? Please, =
respect=20
  other ideas different and well thought by people intelligent like =
Reinhard or=20
  Michael.=20
  <P>The WKPP think of the possibility to use double rebreather in the =
future ?=20
  Great new and great evolution. I just can applaud this very good =
change of=20
  mentality.=20
  <P>For you, if they will use triple redundancy in the future, they =
will be=20
  kamikaze ? Maybe you consider rebreather use as a very dangerous way. =
If yes,=20
  why WKPP members use this kind of device ? For your information, I met =
Michael=20
  3 weeks ago in a caving meeting. He said me that they were thinking to =
bring=20
  with them a third unit, used as bail out rebreather, so they could =
deposit one=20
  or to unit in the sump during their penetration and take them back =
during=20
  return way. Certainly a good idea.=20
  <P>Rebreathers are not carpet but fabulous devices, you need just to =
use them=20
  with  a good redundancy.=20
  <P>Really, you don't know me I am really not a hero !=20
  <P>regards (and sorry for my English)=20
  <P>Olivier Isler=20
  <P>Trey a *crit :=20
  <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3D"CITE"> <SPAN
class=3D636132900-10102001><FONT =

    face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT size=3D-1>Olivier, that was =
the only=20
    thing they did wrong  - not putting in safeties, and it has =
nothing to=20
    do with your "philosophy", it has to do with the fact that they did =
not have=20
    a team that could do it right. Also, the double rebreather thing =
just slows=20
    you right back down again, and we would only use it if we could not =
round=20
    trip the dive in a reasonable amount of time. We would still put in=20
    safeties.</FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
    class=3D636132900-10102001></SPAN><SPAN =
class=3D636132900-10102001></SPAN><SPAN=20
    class=3D636132900-10102001><FONT face=3DArial><FONT =
color=3D#0000ff><FONT=20
    size=3D-1>In WKPP we put in safeties, and we do the dives in one =
day, but we=20
    have a full team of pros.</FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
    class=3D636132900-10102001></SPAN><SPAN =
class=3D636132900-10102001><FONT=20
    face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT size=3D-1>Hopefully =
Reinhard will train=20
    up some people so he does not have to Kamikaze dive like you did in =
the=20
    future. </FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN=20
    class=3D636132900-10102001></SPAN><SPAN =
class=3D636132900-10102001><FONT=20
    face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT size=3D-1>Rebreathers are a =
gas extension=20
    device, not a magic carpet. I see you copied the rebreather list =
where you=20
    will be hailed as a hero for your methods and especially your solo=20
    diving.</FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN>  <BR><FONT =
face=3DTahoma><FONT=20
    size=3D-1><B>From:</B> isler [<A=20
    =
href=3D"mailto:isleroc@sp*.ch*">mailto:isleroc@span.ch</A>]</FONT></FON
T>=
=20
    <BR><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT size=3D-1><B>Sent:</B> Monday,
October =
08, 2001=20
    3:35 PM</FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT face=3DTahoma><FONT =
size=3D-1><B>To:</B>=20
    techdiver@aq*.co*; Cavers@aquanaut.com;=20
    rebreather@nw*.co*</FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT
face=3DTahoma><FONT =

    size=3D-1><B>Subject:</B> Redundant Rebreathers & The Doux de=20
    Coly</FONT></FONT> <BR> =20
    <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">Hi everybody,=20
      <P>I am new on the list. I am interested in  diving with =
rebreathers.=20
      I speak French so, my sincere apologies for my approximativ =
English. <BR>I=20
      red the website of Reinhard BUCHALY and Michael WALDBRENNER, and I =
would=20
      like to precise some points in this following message. The =
translation is=20
      good, because I gave it to a good Friend much better than me for=20
      Shakespeare language...=20
      <P><B>Some informations about the exploration of the Doux de =
Coly.</B>=20
      <P>Since 1984 the Doux de Coly is the longest known sump in =
Europe.=20
      <P>Summary of explorations. <BR>1972. PJ DEBRAS reaches 352 m (a=20
      remarkable performance at that time). <BR>1981. Both Claude MAGNIN =
&=20
      Olivier ISLER dive one after the other and MAGNIN stops at 1750 m. =

      <BR>1984. MAGNIN reaches 2630 m, and ISLER stops at 3100 m (up to =
this=20
      time all dives are made with open circuits). <BR>1991. ISLER stops =
at 4055=20
      m using the RI 2000 (redundant rebreather with 3 independant =
circuits).=20
      <BR>1998. ISLER progresses another 250 m (to 4300 m) having =
unrolled 1150=20
      m of guide-line, again using the RI 2000 rebreather. <BR>2001. =
Reinhard=20
      BUCHALY and Michael WALDBRENNER reach a distance of 5000 m.=20
      <P>At first, congratulations to Reinhard and Michael for their =
remarkable=20
      dive. The Doux de Coly carries on and it is not the end. I am very =
happy=20
      to see that my difficult dive in 1998, where I found the =
continuation of=20
      the cave, has so successful consequences.=20
      <P>The dive of Reinhard and Michael is reported with a lot of =
details on=20
      the attractive website www.tekdyk/doux. <BR>Unfortunately, an =
error=20
      appears at the "Welcome" page of the site. The assertion =
that  "...=20
      all dives were directed using the DIR philosophy developped by the =

      floridian cave diving team WKPP..." is NOT correct. In fact, the =
dive was=20
      directed using an intermediate philosophy between that of DIR and =
the=20
      rebreather redundancy developped by myself (as mentioned on the =
site).=20
      <P>The analysis of their dive in fact shows that they both carried =
2 X 20=20
      l tanks on their back (return on open circuit in case of =
rebreather=20
      failure). They dived as 2 divers together, as in DIR philosophy. =
Beyond a=20
      distance of 800 m, no safety or relay cylinders were placed in the =
sump.=20
      The reason was that both divers used the double rebreather RB 80. =
This is=20
      undeniably my philosophy of using Redundant Rebreathers.=20
      <P>It looks evident that rebreather's redundancy, nevertheless =
thrown back=20
      by the WKPP, was decisive in their successful dive. If they had =
followed=20
      exact DIR philosophy, Reinhard and Michael both would have used a =
single=20
      rebreather, and they would have relied on safety cylinders staged =
far down=20
      into the sump (maybe 3000 m or more), impossible to carry out =
without a=20
      powerful support team.=20
      <P>As for myself, I am proud to note that, after 11 years of =
existence, my=20
      philosophy of Rebreather Redundancy, has begun  at least to =
appear in=20
      extreme diving activity. Even if it is not yet fully accepted, the =
idea of=20
      Rebreather redundancy goes on, in Europe with Reinhard and Michael =
and in=20
      Australia with David APPERLEY.=20
      <P>I will end with a note that if Reinhard and Michael plan in the =
future=20
      to cross the stage of total Rebreather Redundancy (by using an =
additional=20
      small front mounted safety rebreather) they will both have =
quadrupled=20
      redundancy, when, during my own solo dives, I had at my disposal =
triple=20
      redundancy. With such a configuration, the crash risk becomes =
tiny.=20
      <P>Olivier =
ISLER</P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0021_01C15284.E2E7D750--

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]