In warm waters, I do not feel the need for a dry suit & sometimes I do not even feel the need for a wet suit. I like to dive with minimum equipment.
Why no weight pockets with doubles?
- Thread starter irycio
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
I happen to like weight pockets. In the odd instance that I want to ditch weight (failed BC, etc) I don't want to ditch all my weight & turn into a cork. I would much rather ditch a minimum amount of weight & keep enough to offset the buoyancy of my blubber & my wet suit. A pocket allows you to ditch your weight selectively. A pocket type weight belt allows the same option. Weight pockets do fit on standard 2" web type weight belts, so that's another option. You can have a belt with some fixed weights & some pockets.
I sometimes hide a weight pocket on the back side of my plate, where the waist belt goes through it. It's an out of the way place that isn't in harm's way, but I can still get at it if I want to.
A weight pocket also allows me to change my trim weights for different tanks with different buoyancy. I don't always dive the same tanks, so that is useful for me.
If you have small weight pockets, with small weights in them, then accidentally loosing one is not the end of the world. I normally use 2 or 3 pound weights in pockets, with 4# being my max. On an open circuit rig, I can offset a 2 or 3# loss with my breathing if I really need to for a deco stop.
One reason why I am less likely to have a lot of pockets on a double steel tank rig, is because the rig is already so darn heavy & hard to handle topside, that I don't want to make that problem worse by adding a lot of lead there. I'm old school. I still use a weight belt most of the time.
I sometimes hide a weight pocket on the back side of my plate, where the waist belt goes through it. It's an out of the way place that isn't in harm's way, but I can still get at it if I want to.
A weight pocket also allows me to change my trim weights for different tanks with different buoyancy. I don't always dive the same tanks, so that is useful for me.
If you have small weight pockets, with small weights in them, then accidentally loosing one is not the end of the world. I normally use 2 or 3 pound weights in pockets, with 4# being my max. On an open circuit rig, I can offset a 2 or 3# loss with my breathing if I really need to for a deco stop.
One reason why I am less likely to have a lot of pockets on a double steel tank rig, is because the rig is already so darn heavy & hard to handle topside, that I don't want to make that problem worse by adding a lot of lead there. I'm old school. I still use a weight belt most of the time.
Most assume that a double has to be much heavier and bulkier than a single.
It is not necessarily so.
The standard single here in Europe is 15 liters, 200 bars, carrying 3000 liters of air.
It is heavy and bulky, compared to an American 80 cft.
We have instead compact and streamlined 7+7 liters (or 8+8, 9+9, etc).
They are more compact than a single carrying the same quantity of air, provide a more streamlined setup and true redundancy thanks to the separation manifold and two complete regs.
They were the standard setup for rec diving when I started, in the seventies. They were replaced by singles whem American training agencies landed here in the eighties.
But now I see a resurgence of using these light, compact twin sets: they are inherently safer, more practical to carry around, and they "look technical", which is just fashion, but still adds to the appealing of these tanks.
There is no relationship with the usage of a dry suit. They do not require a different BCD or wing, so you can swap easily between a single or a twin set without changing much (all 15 liters single tanks, here, have two valves and two posts, so you can use your two independent regs without the need to revert to a crap "octopus").
Said all of this, why not using weight pockets?
I have nothing against them: you can use them on the harness of the backplate or on a separate weight belt.
I prefer the second, as my old-stlye backpack (hard plastics) works well also withouth a crotch strap.
With my previous one, which was missing the elastic velcro belt, the crotch strap was necessary, but I still did use the separate weight belt. The detachable weights mean that you can ditch them (or give one to your underweighted buddy) without complex manouvres.
I did never understand (or accept for my self) the rigidity and standardization of equipment predicated by DIR.
Their approach was carefully tuned for a very specific environment and type of operation.
It is already debatable that their technical choices are the best in that context, definitely they are not in completely different environments...
So I see no conceptual barrier of using detachable weight systems or weight pockets with doubles.
First, because doubles can be quite similar to a single in terms of bulkiness and weight. Second, because depending on the environment and operational conditions one should choose the setup which makes him more confortable.
It is not necessarily so.
The standard single here in Europe is 15 liters, 200 bars, carrying 3000 liters of air.
It is heavy and bulky, compared to an American 80 cft.
We have instead compact and streamlined 7+7 liters (or 8+8, 9+9, etc).
They are more compact than a single carrying the same quantity of air, provide a more streamlined setup and true redundancy thanks to the separation manifold and two complete regs.
They were the standard setup for rec diving when I started, in the seventies. They were replaced by singles whem American training agencies landed here in the eighties.
But now I see a resurgence of using these light, compact twin sets: they are inherently safer, more practical to carry around, and they "look technical", which is just fashion, but still adds to the appealing of these tanks.
There is no relationship with the usage of a dry suit. They do not require a different BCD or wing, so you can swap easily between a single or a twin set without changing much (all 15 liters single tanks, here, have two valves and two posts, so you can use your two independent regs without the need to revert to a crap "octopus").
Said all of this, why not using weight pockets?
I have nothing against them: you can use them on the harness of the backplate or on a separate weight belt.
I prefer the second, as my old-stlye backpack (hard plastics) works well also withouth a crotch strap.
With my previous one, which was missing the elastic velcro belt, the crotch strap was necessary, but I still did use the separate weight belt. The detachable weights mean that you can ditch them (or give one to your underweighted buddy) without complex manouvres.
I did never understand (or accept for my self) the rigidity and standardization of equipment predicated by DIR.
Their approach was carefully tuned for a very specific environment and type of operation.
It is already debatable that their technical choices are the best in that context, definitely they are not in completely different environments...
So I see no conceptual barrier of using detachable weight systems or weight pockets with doubles.
First, because doubles can be quite similar to a single in terms of bulkiness and weight. Second, because depending on the environment and operational conditions one should choose the setup which makes him more confortable.
AfterDark
Contributor
That's what double bladder BCD and lift bags are for secondary buoyancy aid. Can't dive doubles without a dry suit. What a bunch hog wash! Divers were diving doubles in the 1950 without BCD or dry suits.
Having to use a dry suit with doubles is a sign of a lack of skill not because of safety.
Actually I think that without a BCD it is easier to use a compact double than a bulky single, the doubles fit well on your back with their own harness and no backplate. A single is unstable without a backplate...
However I do not understand entirely the last phrase: which is the additional skill required by the double? I do not see any additional skill required.
Given the same air capacity, and proper harness (or BCD attachment), using a double set is usally simpler than using a single. Their center of weight is less arretrated, so you can walk easier and more balanced on the boat or on the shore.
When doing the giant stride for entering water there is less risk of hitting the border with the bottom of the tank.
Underwater the valves are easier to reach.
Everything is easier with a compact double.
What is the additional skill required?
AfterDark
Contributor
None that I'm aware of, my point was the dogma that a dry suit is "required" to dive doubles IMO shows a lack of basic skills and understanding of diving physics. The dry suit is a crutch IMO.
There are some diving environments where a dry suit is probably better with or with doubles but there is no reason I know of to make dry suits "required" when diving doubles.
Maybe it's a cult or something like that.
seeker242
Contributor
If that is the case, then the same can be said about a double bladder BC, it's a crutch and shows a lack of basic skills and understanding of diving physics. .
AfterDark
Contributor
Yes or a lift bag which is my preferred crutch.
seeker242
Contributor
So in other words, your preferred way is the right way and other ways are just wrong. Hmm, sounds familiar! lol
I am one of the few remaining divers considering the BCD an optional piece of equiment, which is better not to use in a number of cases.
I am not so extreme to consider it dangerous and not useful, which was the opinion of Raimondo Bucher.
But for certain types of dives you can stll be safe without a BCD, relying on a shopper plastic bag as your emergency floating system to be employed if needed...
For such a vintage diving setup, a thin 3mm wetsuit and a double tank of proper size are just perfect, making it easier to maintain reasonable buoyancy and trim for the whole dive.
I am not so extreme to consider it dangerous and not useful, which was the opinion of Raimondo Bucher.
But for certain types of dives you can stll be safe without a BCD, relying on a shopper plastic bag as your emergency floating system to be employed if needed...
For such a vintage diving setup, a thin 3mm wetsuit and a double tank of proper size are just perfect, making it easier to maintain reasonable buoyancy and trim for the whole dive.
Similar threads
