Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
A Hybrid Mesh would offer better redundancy then the Star topology, especially with 6 tanks :-) Sean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Connell" <kevin@nw*.co*> To: "Jeff Disler" <pdisler@io*.ne*>; "Jim Cobb" <cobber@ci*.co*>; "Art Greenberg" <artg@ec*.ne*> Cc: "Cam Banks" <cam@ca*.co*>; "Techdiver Mailing List" <techdiver@aquanaut.com> Sent: Monday, April 10, 2000 10:03 PM Subject: Re: Cave doubles > Jim - this is getting pretty funny. I own a set of 46's and I certainly > don't have any desire to band them together because I am too much of a > pussy to carry 104's or I think they are a better solution than a single 80. > > Better than "cave doubles", how about "The Greenberg Solution" > > Actually, what I'm planning on doing is duct-taping 6 AL13's together in a > "star" configuration for full redundancy for reef diving in the tropics. > > At 04:07 PM 4/10/2000 -0400, Jim Cobb wrote: > >Jeff- > > > >As I told Maggie and Art, if you have the money go ahead and get "OMS 46 > >doubles", I just think that your money is better spent on a set of 95's or > >104's which would wind up costing about the same and offer much more > >utility. > > > >Every time I get passionate arguments for gear like this, I tend to suspect > >it's because A) they actually own the piece of sh, er, equipment in question > >and don't want to look like a knucklehead on the next dive trip, or B) they > >are about to unload the piece of sh, er, equipment in question on the > >unsuspecting masses and don't want me to ruin the market. > > > >In this case the bottom has fallen out of the OMS steel 46 stage market due > >to their close proximity to several dead divers over the years and dozens of > >techies and marketers are desperately trying to come up with ways to get rid > >of these ridiculously expensive crappy POS. And the poor suckers thought > >they found salvation in the new "OMS 46 doubles" market. > > > >PULL! BANG! Dusted that sucker! > > > >But, Jeff, I will give you that if you are belly-crawling through caves and > >need a low-profile air source, then "OMS 46 Doubles" are ideal for that > >particular, narrow, targeted, unique, singular situation... Let's call them > >"cave doubles." > > > >Best Regards- > > > > Jim > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Learn About Trimix at http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/ > > > > > From: Jeff Disler <pdisler@io*.ne*> > > > Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 13:55:34 -0500 > > > To: Jim Cobb <cobber@ci*.co*>, Art Greenberg > > <artg@ec*.ne*>, Jim > > > Cobb <cobber@ma*.ci*.co*> > > > Cc: Cam Banks <cam@ca*.co*>, Techdiver Mailing List > > > <techdiver@aquanaut.com> > > > Subject: Re: Dual OMS 45's > > > > > > C'mon Jim, > > > > > > Don't close your mind to the possibility that small doubles, (OMS 46's) > > > might be a better set up than a single eighty for simple dives. Probably > > > most (on this list anyway) are already using the same backplate and wings > > > they use for their large doubles, to dive an Al 80 with an single tank > > > adaptor. So for those who already have these tanks ( I already use them for > > > sump diving because, IMO, they are the best small tank for sump diving) why > > > not just them for as small doubles as well. They really don't weigh anymore > > > than an solo 80, except for the additional first stage. They don't go way > > > positive when near empty. They are easy to swim up from depth without the > > > aid of inflation. They fit closer to the back than an aluminim 80. I don't > > > think they have as much drag, certainly not any more than an alum 80. These > > > are just a few things about the tanks I like. > > > > > > Things that I think we should all like, at least tolerate, or could just > > > get use to about the 46 doubles: > > > Hell you're covered if you blow a neck O-ring, if a reg fails (first or > > > second), if your buddy needs a bit more gas when his system goes boom > > > catastrophically or just plain ol' fails , and You simply have more gas, > > > which, too much of never hurts. > > > > > > I agree, probably most people don't need to go out and spend the bucks on > > > dual 46's. But I'll bet if you actually dived my dual 46's you'd prefer > > > them over a single eighty. If you did not like them better, I'd be suprised > > > and would like to hear the reasons why. > > > > > > I believe in using the right gear for the task at hand as well. If I need > > > my big doubles for the dive I'm doing, I use them. If I need side mounted > > > 95's for a sump dive, I use them. What ever it takes for the dive, thats > > > what I'll choose. I'm certain the few rec dives I do could be done with an > > > alum 80, but I choose to have the redundancy for all my dives. Is that so > > > wrong? <g> > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > By they way, I've heard a lot of folks don't like these tanks because they > > > are to heavy. Anyone who does not like their oms 46 and wants to sell, for > > > a low price, let me know how much. > > > > > > > > > "SILT HAPPENS"JD JEFF DISLER > > > SAFE CAVING NSS 26000 > > > > > > > > >-- > >Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. > >Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'. > > > ---------------------------------- > Kevin Connell <kevin@nw*.co*> > > NW Labor Systems, Inc > http://www.nwls.com > > Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate. > (plurality should not be posited without > necessity - Occam's razor) > > > ---------------------------------- > > -- > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'. -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
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]