silent running
Contributor
Hello Nick, I'm sure you're busy bringing more products to market, but have you seen the side mount version of the Prism? There is picture of one on the SMI home page and another guy has converted his here: Rob's NJ Wreck Diving Blog
Apparently, the only major modifications necessary were to the hose elbows on the counterlungs, the addition of an Inconel sphere for the O2 and the fabrication of a housing for the O2 sphere to fit under the scrubber bucket and allow the unit to stand up and also to protect the Inconel sphere.
I'm wondering if you would give any thought to making the Prism 2 more adaptable to this configuration, maybe as an option. The advantages are a much thinner front to back profile as the scrubber, head and cylinders are tucked under the arms, with only the BC bladder on the back. I asked Peter Readey and he said there would be no compromise in WOB or functionality and this configuration may well be the thinnest profile possible for CCR. Obviously this is great for cave and wreck diving where restrictions are encountered all the time. Another great benefit I see as a traveling diver, is the ease of carrying a large supply of gas in the form of a side mounted 80 cuft cylinder which can then function as the diluent supply and bailout together. And as 80 cuft tanks are the standard world wide, traveling would be that much easier as there would be 1 less cylinder to bring and also no need to bring a small cylinder for bailout and 3rd regulator, which I have to do every time I dive in remote places that aren't CCR friendly. For these reasons and for the additional safety provided by such a large dil/bailout gas supply, I will probably convert mine as well.
I think there would definitely be a market for it among tech divers and anybody like me who regularly travels far to dive. You would be the first manufacturer to offer a side mount CCR and I think it could change the way people dive, especially those who dive in overhead environments and think over the shoulder counterlungs are too bulky. I personally think that the Prism counterlungs don't add much if any bulk to the diver's front to back profile as we never swim perfectly flat in the water with our arms straight out in front of us. The advantages of OTS counterlungs are better WOB/ hydrostatic loading for all body positions, as a water trap for any water that comes in through the mouth PC and enhanced control of buoyancy in tough conditions. I am able to easily reach and manually depress my over pressure valve on the exhale lung and vent my expanding loop very fast in a bad up current and keep from being blown to the surface. I believe this a major safety benefit and have had to do this many times. I could not have managed it with a back mounted counterlung unit as none of them allow for easy access to the OPV and my loop would have to fill up completely to open up on it's own at which point the diver will have little or no control over their ascent rate.
By getting rid of all CCR components from the back, you would have removed most, if not all of the objections overhead environment divers have about OTS counterlung designs, which would certainly be a game changer for many. And with your manufacturing resources, I'm sure you could make a more attractive and sturdy product. The biggest problem I can see would be getting a supply of spheres for the O2 as I'm not sure anybody is currently making them. If you were to try and source them, a better material might be carbon fiber as it seems like it would be more tolerant of being dropped/abused.
Please let me know your thoughts about this, thanks -Andy
Apparently, the only major modifications necessary were to the hose elbows on the counterlungs, the addition of an Inconel sphere for the O2 and the fabrication of a housing for the O2 sphere to fit under the scrubber bucket and allow the unit to stand up and also to protect the Inconel sphere.
I'm wondering if you would give any thought to making the Prism 2 more adaptable to this configuration, maybe as an option. The advantages are a much thinner front to back profile as the scrubber, head and cylinders are tucked under the arms, with only the BC bladder on the back. I asked Peter Readey and he said there would be no compromise in WOB or functionality and this configuration may well be the thinnest profile possible for CCR. Obviously this is great for cave and wreck diving where restrictions are encountered all the time. Another great benefit I see as a traveling diver, is the ease of carrying a large supply of gas in the form of a side mounted 80 cuft cylinder which can then function as the diluent supply and bailout together. And as 80 cuft tanks are the standard world wide, traveling would be that much easier as there would be 1 less cylinder to bring and also no need to bring a small cylinder for bailout and 3rd regulator, which I have to do every time I dive in remote places that aren't CCR friendly. For these reasons and for the additional safety provided by such a large dil/bailout gas supply, I will probably convert mine as well.
I think there would definitely be a market for it among tech divers and anybody like me who regularly travels far to dive. You would be the first manufacturer to offer a side mount CCR and I think it could change the way people dive, especially those who dive in overhead environments and think over the shoulder counterlungs are too bulky. I personally think that the Prism counterlungs don't add much if any bulk to the diver's front to back profile as we never swim perfectly flat in the water with our arms straight out in front of us. The advantages of OTS counterlungs are better WOB/ hydrostatic loading for all body positions, as a water trap for any water that comes in through the mouth PC and enhanced control of buoyancy in tough conditions. I am able to easily reach and manually depress my over pressure valve on the exhale lung and vent my expanding loop very fast in a bad up current and keep from being blown to the surface. I believe this a major safety benefit and have had to do this many times. I could not have managed it with a back mounted counterlung unit as none of them allow for easy access to the OPV and my loop would have to fill up completely to open up on it's own at which point the diver will have little or no control over their ascent rate.
By getting rid of all CCR components from the back, you would have removed most, if not all of the objections overhead environment divers have about OTS counterlung designs, which would certainly be a game changer for many. And with your manufacturing resources, I'm sure you could make a more attractive and sturdy product. The biggest problem I can see would be getting a supply of spheres for the O2 as I'm not sure anybody is currently making them. If you were to try and source them, a better material might be carbon fiber as it seems like it would be more tolerant of being dropped/abused.
Please let me know your thoughts about this, thanks -Andy
. But he is the best guy for answering any questions regarding the Prism2.
