I enjoy a lot of what is on this post and lean towards a smaller wing. I was in that line of thinking but the lds and one of the wing manufacures are steering me to a larger wing (60#). I am contemplating double 130 on a ss plate. 22 neg on tanks full, 8 lbs gear, 6 lbs plate only gets me 36 negative. Adding 26 lbs posative from the drysuit implies i am 10 neg and only need 10 lbs of extra lift to start. By the end of the dive i would shed 20lbs of air so i would need an extra 10 to start. That would still only imply I need 20 lbs of lift.
Do you agree with this math? Also if the suit fails I loose the 26 lift at the beginning or end of the dive when tanks are 22neg and 2 neg, respectively I would 36 neg and 16 neg, respectively. Seems like a smaller wing could swing that espc as one could ditch the 10 lbs of lead. what am I missing
I have doubled 130s. Here's my numbers (negative weight):
Double Tanks 130 ft[SUP]3[/SUP] tanks in salt : ~ -23.4 Ibs neg buoyancy (full) (- 11.7 lbs each see XS Scuba specs)
+ must factor in tank bands & manifold (4 Ibs?)
Dual regs (3-4)
SS Backplate (6),
Canister light & backups (2)
Reels & spools (3) (Cf. Tobin's numbers)
= ~42 Ibs lift needed. I'm purposely leaving out the positive buoyancy of a drysuit or wetsuit. So about a 40# wing is the bear minimum.
And seeing if this measures up to real life... I'll quote lamont discussing wings (Post):
This is about as low as a person normally would have for a wing. Though commonly we will use ~55# for doubled tanks with the weight of the Worthington HP 130s/LP 108s, because commonly stages are added into the equation later on.Actually, I've been using the 40# evolve with the double-130s lately since its just been with nitrox with no stages or anything else.