Backplate/wing: set-up questions concerning buckle and weights.

[happy-diver]

Big ruggedly handsome bloke with a lead block bolted to his plate

None dumpable

Gotta do something with all those free holes you paid for

And you can make freaky alien sculptures drilling the lead

 

[jlcnuke]

I'm starting to think this thread no longer belongs in "basic" discussion forums. Someone who just finished their OW course is going to read tbone's posts and conclude that since you can't possibly need ditchable weight at depth and it would be completely unsafe to ditch weight at depth, there is thus no need for a wing/BCD either, since they were taught that the ditchable weight is to provide buoyancy at depth if there's a problem with their BCD. They're then going to go down to 100 ft in a 7mm without any source of buoyancy but plenty of lead to get them there...

 

[tbone1004]

@jlcnuke and @MichaelMc why should it come out of the basic forum? The divers many of the instructors on this forum train, myself included, get our divers into the concept of a balanced rig from day 1. Many agencies do the same. It is a BASIC concept, arguably one of the most basic. If you ask any of the old school guys who were diving before the advent of a BCD, it is one of the primary basic concepts that they had to contend with when they were diving with old 1/4" rubber suits, no bc's, and had rocks to drop on the bottom.
Ditching weight at depth is idiotic and it is nothing more than a CYOA policy that agencies put in place to cover their a$$ for having incompetent instructors not weighting their students properly. It is not safe, it is not smart, and it is not a good way to have fun.
If you think that we should sacrifice basic concepts of buoyancy control because of the industries thoughts about making it easy and accepting piss poor performance from their instructors then I am sorry, but you are very much part of the problem.
This stays here, and I think @The Chairman will agree that it belongs here as he is quite passionate about making sure that divers are weighted properly from day 1.

 

[MichaelMc]

@tbone1004, I'm perfectly fine with 'how/should I do fundies' being in basic. A bit complex if it's doubles Fundies, which I think we start calling tech-ish, but rec. fundies absolutely. Buoyancy/Trim/Propulsion are hugely important basic issues, if not *the* basic issues, and fundies is a rock solid way of learning them early.

And I think balanced rig (aka not overweighted) as a partial expression of that is great.

But unless people got balanced rig (aka proper weighting) right, which many do not, and have the legs, no-ditchable in basic is a risky topic. If you're doing it right and have good water skills and fitness it works, but many divers fail on all three of those conditions. And no-ditchable is not implied by balanced, at least the other thread's definition, so it would be best to not keep using balanced as an excuse for no-ditchable, in basic.

Yes ditchable is CYOA, or just in case, or cover my own f*** up. But until we get most instructors and dive ops teaching students to be weighted properly, it's a good safety measure. And even then, not a bad idea. I am not a new diver, I dial weight finely, and I keep meaningful ditchable weight, just in case. Some ditchable is a safety measure that need not be discarded to have a balanced rig. Yes, the old guys and gals swam their rigs all over with no BC to help. But the new crowd is not them. Ditching weight features prominently in rescue drills once the surface is reached. It's a good option to have, if the mission (tech) allows, and in rec. the mission (pretty fish) should mostly allow it.

 

[jlcnuke]

@jlcnuke and @MichaelMc why should it come out of the basic forum? The divers many of the instructors on this forum train, myself included, get our divers into the concept of a balanced rig from day 1. Many agencies do the same. It is a BASIC concept, arguably one of the most basic. If you ask any of the old school guys who were diving before the advent of a BCD, it is one of the primary basic concepts that they had to contend with when they were diving with old 1/4" rubber suits, no bc's, and had rocks to drop on the bottom.
Ditching weight at depth is idiotic and it is nothing more than a CYOA policy that agencies put in place to cover their a$$ for having incompetent instructors not weighting their students properly. It is not safe, it is not smart, and it is not a good way to have fun.
If you think that we should sacrifice basic concepts of buoyancy control because of the industries thoughts about making it easy and accepting piss poor performance from their instructors then I am sorry, but you are very much part of the problem.
This stays here, and I think @The Chairman will agree that it belongs here as he is quite passionate about making sure that divers are weighted properly from day 1.

Because you aren't training all the divers here. The "basic" concept in your opinion is NOT what is taught to MOST basic divers. Since you're NOT teaching all the divers here, AND you're not providing all the information necessary to take what you're saying and apply it safely with the training that most divers DO have, it could be inherently unsafe for "basic" divers, with standard "basic" training (PADI OW etc), to try and interpret what you're saying.

I posted a simple way that what you're saying could be interpreted by one of those basic divers and misused resulting in potential tragedy. I'd think as an instructor that cares for your students and divers in general, you'd want to ensure that what you're posting in an open forum for any diver of any experience level would be something that couldn't easily be mistaken in such a manner that could result in a tragedy. That PADI AOW student with 11 dives who sees you telling them to have no-ditchable weight and to never ditch weight at depth may just strap on a bunch of weight to their tank, go dive in that 7mm suit, then have their BCD fail and take your advice, just trying to "swim up" with all that weight on from 100 ft and no backup buoyancy (they're not carrying around a lift bag or redundant BCD etc) and may just not make it because they sit at a desk 60 hours/week and aren't in great physical shape.

For reference, I'm an AOW diver (with both PADI and NAUI OW training courses previously), with my PPB specialty completed, and I've never heard the term "balanced rig" outside of this board. I'd imagine 90%+ of recreational divers would similarly have no idea what you were meaning when you say that either as they're training was likely similar to mine.

 

[johndiver999]

As I understand it, the old school recreational divers who did not have a bc tried very hard not to dive with excess lead - obviously because they didn’t have a bc to offset any excess.

However, it is also my understanding that ditching the weight belt was an integral component of the training and mindset at that time. There was very little or no consideration of non-ditchable lead and would have been considered unsafe in cold water diving.

It is also relevant to remember that very large steel tanks that had huge capacities and large negative bouyancy were not generally available in the pre-bc days. So the situation is drastically different.

The concept that with our current technology, that there is no reason to ever, under any circumstances a reason for a diver to drop SOME lead at depth is not an idea I agree with.

Some might argue that a 7 mm suit should never be taken deeper than 20 ft, but this is not a realistic assumption. In most situations, if a recreational diver is going deep with a thick wetsuit, some amount of ballast should be droppable at depth. At the very least, it is a viable option that a diver should consider when planning for emergencies.

 

[MichaelMc]

@tbone1004, I think this is the issue. Bolding mine.

Because you aren't training all the divers here. The "basic" concept in your opinion is NOT what is taught to MOST basic divers. Since you're NOT teaching all the divers here, AND you're not providing all the information necessary to take what you're saying and apply it safely with the training that most divers DO have, it could be inherently unsafe for "basic" divers, with standard "basic" training (PADI OW etc), to try and interpret what you're saying.

 

[MichaelMc]

A different 'how this could escalate' story:

St. Peter: Why didn't you ditch some weight?
Diver: tbone said ditchable weight is bad, its risky, a balanced rig is better.
St. Peter: Well..., he was maybe trying to say ditching at depth is risky. But, ok. So, you had a balanced rig?
Diver: I did up north when I was in shape. A steel plate, customized with bolt on lead! No bulky ditchable weight pockets. Perfect for rec diving. I tell all my new diver friends about it.
St. Peter: Yeah.... And?
Diver: Well, we dove in the tropics. I took the lead off, but the steel tanks made me a 'bit' negative as it's the only plate I have, `cus I didn't want ditchable. And I've been busy at work, so got out of shape.
St. Peter: <long silence>.... Next person?

 

[johndiver999]

Using an excessively heavy steel plate which may or may not have additional lead bolted on in warm water (which implies thin wetsuits) is not smart and tbone is not advocating for diving an overly weighted rig.

I worry about cold water, thick suits and deep divers where the suit compression might be 20 lbs. That is the scenario that requires the waearing of considerable ballast

 

[MichaelMc]

Using an excessively heavy steel plate which may or may not have additional lead bolted on in warm water (which implies thin wetsuits) is not smart and tbone is not advocating for diving an overly weighted rig.

*I* know that tbone is not advocating that. But he did say 'You do not get to use '"ditchable weights" as the concept is incompatible with a balanced rig.' And one-concept-only (or confused part time) dead diver focused on no-ditchable and made all their ballast non-ditchable. They did not get the full message of "ditchable" meaning specifically to tbone 'dump it all at depth to get up'. Keeping some ditchable would have helped them. Because the ditchable is FINE but not REQUIRED, if PROPERLY balanced AND in SHAPE to swim it up, got lost, or forgotten, the site changed, and the ballast was all bolted together.