--------------8DCC5EC31A3650D24AFC2E28
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854";
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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 redundancy, when,
>      during my own solo dives, I had at my disposal triple
>      redundancy. With such a configuration, the crash risk
>      becomes tiny.
>
>      Olivier ISLER
>

--------------8DCC5EC31A3650D24AFC2E28
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Mr. Trey,
<p>Thank you for your message, even if our ideas are very diverging.
<p>I will answer to some of your assertions.
<p>" 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.
<p>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.
<p>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.
<p>Rebreathers are not carpet but fabulous devices, you need just to use
them with  a good redundancy.
<p>Really, you don't know me I am really not a hero !
<p>regards (and sorry for my English)
<p>Olivier Isler
<p>Trey a *crit :
<blockquote TYPE=CITE> <span class=636132900-10102001><font
face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>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.</font></font></font></span><span
class=636132900-10102001></span><span
class=636132900-10102001></span><span class=636132900-10102001><font
face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>In
WKPP we put in safeties, and we do the dives in one day, but we have a
full team of pros.</font></font></font></span><span
class=636132900-10102001></span><span class=636132900-10102001><font
face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>Hopefully
Reinhard will train up some people so he does not have to Kamikaze dive
like you did in the
future. </font></font></font></span><span
class=636132900-10102001></span><span class=636132900-10102001><font
face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>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.</font></font></font></span> 
<br><font face="Tahoma"><font size=-1><b>From:</b> isler [<A
HREF="mailto:isleroc@sp*.ch*">mailto:isleroc@span.ch</A>]</font></font>
<br><font face="Tahoma"><font size=-1><b>Sent:</b> Monday,
October 08,
2001 3:35 PM</font></font>
<br><font face="Tahoma"><font size=-1><b>To:</b>
techdiver@aquanaut.com;
Cavers@aq*.co*; rebreather@nw*.co*</font></font>
<br><font face="Tahoma"><font size=-1><b>Subject:</b> Redundant
Rebreathers
& The Doux de Coly</font></font>
<br> 
<blockquote dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">Hi everybody,
<p>I am new on the list. I am interested in  diving with rebreathers.
I speak French so, my sincere apologies for my approximativ English.
<br>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...
<p><b>Some informations about the exploration of the Doux de Coly.</b>
<p>Since 1984 the Doux de Coly is the longest known sump in Europe.
<p>Summary of explorations.
<br>1972. PJ DEBRAS reaches 352 m (a remarkable performance at that time).
<br>1981. Both Claude MAGNIN & 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
time all dives are made with open circuits).
<br>1991. ISLER stops at 4055 m using the RI 2000 (redundant rebreather
with 3 independant circuits).
<br>1998. ISLER progresses another 250 m (to 4300 m) having unrolled 1150
m of guide-line, again using the RI 2000 rebreather.
<br>2001. Reinhard BUCHALY and Michael WALDBRENNER reach a distance of
5000 m.
<p>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.
<p>The dive of Reinhard and Michael is reported with a lot of details on
the attractive website www.tekdyk/doux.
<br>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).
<p>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.
<p>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.
<p>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.
<p>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
redundancy,
when, during my own solo dives, I had at my disposal triple redundancy.
With such a configuration, the crash risk becomes tiny.
<p>Olivier ISLER</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</html>

--------------8DCC5EC31A3650D24AFC2E28--

--
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]