Added weight pockets to my Halcyon Carbon Fiber Backplate

[Yellowdog]

The family was out of town this weekend and I took advantage of the free time with a project I have been thinking about. The project was to add weight pockets to a Halcyon Carbon Fiber Backplate I found a good deal on. I have an aluminum plate so did not really need this one but it is cool to look at. The plate weighs 1 lb and I intend to use it for travel so I will need to add about 7 lbs of dive weight for warm salt water diving. I have two Halcyon ACB waist belt pockets and can easily carry all the weight I need on the waist but prefer to spread it out on the back plate for better trim. I could just add trim pockets to my cam straps but wanted to see if I could get the weight lower on the backplate itself like the Halcyon Traveler. My solution was to add a strip of old webbing to the back plate in order to attach two weight pockets. I cut the webbing to fit, installed two stainless steel grommets and attached the strap to the plate with two ss sex screws. It seems like it should work, adds almost no weight or bulk for travel and does not interfere with the wing. Giving it a try in Cozumel next week.

 

[stuartv]

If you want the weight low on the plate, why not position the pockets on top of the double slot where the waist belt goes through the plate? Let the waist belt go through the plate, through the trim pocket loop, then back out to the front of the plate.

I was actually just thinking about doing that very same thing to my Freedom Plate. I also want my trim weights lower down than where the tank straps end up.

 

[Diver below 83]

Love that plate. Don’t love the price

 

[doctormike]

I could just add trim pockets to my cam straps but wanted to see if I could get the weight lower on the backplate itself like the Halcyon Traveler.

Maybe I'm missing something.

I use trim pockets on my cam bands, and they sit essentially where yours are but lower. I mean, it looks like a fun project, but I don't see what it adds over just sticking the pockets on your cam bands. I think that would be a lot more secure, no chance of a grommet giving way. You also now have those pockets and the hard buckles rubbing up against your wing, which you wouldn't have on the cam bands.

Are you using a single tank adapter?

 

[noj3333]

Any worry of taking all your ditch-able weight and making it hard to/ impossible to drop?

I'm with @doctormike, why not just use cam band pockets?

 

[doctormike]

Any worry of taking all your ditch-able weight and making it hard to/ impossible to drop?

I'm with @doctormike, why not just use cam band pockets?

My main worry would be in an emergency on the surface, especially if there was a problem maintaining positive buoyancy (wing failure or impaired diver). That's where you (or your rescuer) might want to ditch your weights. Sort of an unlikely scenario, especially with a rescuer who could ditch your cam weights if necessary.

At depth, certainly for the kind of single tank OC warm water rig we are talking about, you should be able to easily swim to the surface even with a total wing failure, given the minimal suit buoyancy loss and the small amount of gas weight in a full tank.

 

[noj3333]

Agreed, and point taken on the single tank tropical set-up (you should be able to swim up with little effort)...

I would say it's still not a typical setup, and being on the surface, in distress, a possible insta-buddy may not be sharp enough to remember to drop your weights that are tucked away behind your wing... That, or your own inability to ditch weights on the surface (although you could ditch your whole rig, possibly).

I know that's a lot of 'if's'...

I just don't see the point when compared to cam band weight pockets...

 

[stuartv]

Maybe I'm missing something.

I use trim pockets on my cam bands, and they sit essentially where yours are but lower. I mean, it looks like a fun project, but I don't see what it adds over just sticking the pockets on your cam bands. I think that would be a lot more secure, no chance of a grommet giving way. You also now have those pockets and the hard buckles rubbing up against your wing, which you wouldn't have on the cam bands.

Are you using a single tank adapter?

I'm starting to think he meant "lower" in the sense of "closer to the ground" when in horizontal trim. I.e. closer to the diver's center of gravity.

I want mine "lower" as in "closer to my feet", but maybe that's not what he meant.

As far as hard buckles rubbing against the wing, are you talking about the plastic buckles on those pockets? At least with his setup, the wing would be floating up, away from those buckles. With them on the tank straps, I think the wing would actually be more likely to rub against them. However, they're plastic, so I don't see it as an issue, regardless.

 

[doctormike]

I'm starting to think he meant "lower" in the sense of "closer to the ground" when in horizontal trim. I.e. closer to the diver's center of gravity.

I want mine "lower" as in "closer to my feet", but maybe that's not what he meant.

Huh. Maybe. Very little difference with that regard between this and a cam band weight, which is usually tucked right in against the plate/STA. The only way to get closer to the center of gravity would be to bring a steel plate with you to the Caribbean. Which is what I do!

As far as hard buckles rubbing against the wing, are you talking about the plastic buckles on those pockets? At least with his setup, the wing would be floating up, away from those buckles. With them on the tank straps, I think the wing would actually be more likely to rub against them. However, they're plastic, so I don't see it as an issue, regardless.

Maybe underwater, but not on the boat ride. But the point is that this design jams the pockets between the wing and the plate, with a potentially tight fit, depending on how much weight you put in there. With cam band pockets, they really don't touch the wing - they are close to the midline (unlike these), so not rubbing on the actual wing where the bladder is, just the supporting material in the center of the wing.

 

[stuartv]

Huh. Maybe. Very little difference with that regard between this and a cam band weight, which is usually tucked right in against the plate/STA. The only way to get closer to the center of gravity would be to bring a steel plate with you to the Caribbean. Which is what I do!

Me, too! Diving an AL80 is sucky enough without having to add a pile of lead to my rig...

SS BP fits just fine in a carry-on bag.

Maybe underwater, but not on the boat ride. But the point is that this design jams the pockets between the wing and the plate, with a potentially tight fit, depending on how much weight you put in there. With cam band pockets, they really don't touch the wing - they are close to the midline (unlike these), so not rubbing on the actual wing where the bladder is, just the supporting material in the center of the wing.

It seems to me, on a boat ride, the rig will probably be vertical, so no real concern. Or maybe I'm not picking up what you're puttin' down. Also, unless the wing is inflated to full, it should not be a tight fit between the pocket and the tank at all, I don't think.

With my rig, and trim weight pockets on the tank straps, I push the pockets down to be up against the plate or as close as I can get them. I think they would post just as much risk to the wing as the way he's got it done. Probably more, actually. The V-channel of the BP at least creates a bit of a gap between the BP and wing. When I push the weight pockets around the tank strap, to be up against the BP, they are actually touching the wing at that point. Just a little bit - right where the bladder part connects to the center panel.

I also use the DGX trim weight pockets, though, which have a big patch of velcro to hold them shut, but no buckles to worry about.

Regardless, I think we're in agreement. Neither one of us would do it like it's done in those pictures.