Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Message Display

On Sat, 25 Nov 1995, Jason Rogers wrote:

> > >
> >     What about an isolation manifold.... dived with the tanks isolated?
> > The plan (of course) being to shut off the free-flowing reg, then open
> > the isolation valve?
> >                         Regards, Bernie Woolfrey
> > --
> 
> Yep, that sounds great! the best of both worlds, till you think about it.
> 
> 
> It can be a killer too.  I know of a diver who practiced opening the
> isolation valve in shallow water before setting out on a big dive.
> (sensible precaution!)   Trouble was that really deep, he needed his
> wings fully inflated.  Discovered that he couldn't reach his valve!
> (at +100m, in a current, on a line, after he exahusted the first cylinder)
> 
> He didn't die because there was someone there, and on the spur of the
> moment he made up a hand signal meaning "if you have a second, could you
> open this valve for me?".  Amazingly this strange gesture was understood!
> 
> Cheers Jason =:)

	I must be thick.......What is wrong with diving an isolation manifold
with the isolation valve OFF.... Use independent regs. Just as you do 
with a dual system?
	What's all this stuff about crotch straps, BC inflation etc...(it's been 
a long day).
	Twin tanks, join them with an isolation manifold. Isolate the tanks. 
Breathe off each reg (one at at a time), switching to balance gas use in 
each tank. In the event of an unstoppable free-flow, how can you be worse 
off than independents? At least if you manage to shut off the 
free-flowing reg, you can salvage whatever gas you have in the failed 
side by opening the isolation valve.
	?
			Regards (why am I on techdiver on Saturday night?)
						Bernie Woolfrey
> > > > 

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]