flounderboy
Guest
Not with me :11:
Dive safe
Mark s
BCD-Bp/W----WHY?
- Thread starter mrmonk7663
- 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
Not with me :11:
Dive safe
Mark s
I don't get the "little Tech" bit, do you want a "BCD" that can be used to execute a technical dive? If you are technical diving it implies that you are diving deeper or longer run times incurring decompression obligations, overhead environments using multiple tanks etc. It also means you are taking courses to execute the dive.
A traditional jacket BCD doesn't cut it with respect to stages, attaching canister lights etc. The only exception to this is the DR TPAC II some love it some hate it.
The reality is although a BP/W is the most modular system out there, you will own at least 2 wings, one for singles and one for doubles.
A traditional jacket BCD doesn't cut it with respect to stages, attaching canister lights etc. The only exception to this is the DR TPAC II some love it some hate it.
The reality is although a BP/W is the most modular system out there, you will own at least 2 wings, one for singles and one for doubles.
matt_unique
Guest
MechDiver:
Ha ha ha - I like the reply above!
Can you use a single tank and BC for a tech dive? Sure, absolutely. Is it the best configuration for this purpose? No. BP/W will offer more options for you to customize your d-ring placement (among other advantages) compared to a bc.
--Matt
OP
mrmonk7663
Contributor
As far as a little tech here in there, I'm talking about shallow wrecks and things of that nature, I'm not talking extremely deep with multiple stages and multiple deco stops, just mild tech 
Thanks again for all the responses.
Thanks again for all the responses.
matt_unique:
Example of a single tank tech dive please?
Kestrell
Guest
MechDiver:
I think there are a lot of different definitions for tech (technical) diving depending on the person. Some might define it as any dive not done in clear calm water, or if there is a wreck involved, maybe even night diving. While others don't consider a dive a tech dive until they are 200' deep and 1000 yards inside an unexplored cave with side mounts.
Anyway, I have a Ranger BC and I love it. It is great, I can't see how a BP/W could be more stable and it does everything I need it to do. Will I switch to a BP/W? Of course I will. When I start diving doubles and/or move on to a dry suit. Every piece of gear has its place. My Ranger will take me anywhere I want to go for some time yet but the one clear advantage I see with a BP/W is that it is mutch more customizable (if that is even a word) for some specific types of diving.
75 lbs is a lot of lift, even for many doubels configurations, but the Recon does very well with single tanks with none of the air trapping that you would expect. The straps and D-rings are also very heavy duty and are more than sturdy enough for tech applications. There are too many of them but you can remove the ones you don't need if they bother you.mrmonk7663:
The downside of the Recon is cost at about $400 and change for the BC itself and another $175 or so for the plate kit if you do decide to go with doubles. For those kind of bucks, you can put together an impressive BP and wing. But on the other hand you are laying the cash out in two installments and it is a good way to get into diving doubles with minimal equipment changes when and if you switch from singles.
orcatwiggy
Guest
If you disregard the drag factor...no wait...let's not disregard it. Let's start with it.
According to George Irvine and Jablonski, drag as it relates to equipment placement is a key to the DIR philosophy. (I know that it is not just an equipment philosophy)
He talks about breaking the water and swimming in the slipstream, like a submarine. With that approach, justification of multiple stage bottles, lights attached to the harness are all in the slipstream and not factors in increasing drag.
Am I to understand that a few pockets on the outside of the waist area cause enough drag to be non-DIR. I am talking about a BC with wings, not side inflate. What is the difference between the two, the pockets and the padding on the harness over your shoulders. (Let's not get into the fact that people cross there bodies to attach their octo, or any obvious stuff that does impact drag) We are only talking about (or arguing as in some threads) about a BC vs. BP/W.
There is risk of catching on something on your bc in a wreck, but aren't those risks there with the DIR bp/w approach. Leg pockets don't catch as much as a body pocket? Which moves more, both laterally and horizontally, the legs or the torso? For the most part, the torso is moved by the legs, in all directions.
Yes, they mandate the things be "cuttable" to solve hang ups, but if that part of the system is applied to a regular back-inflate bc, we come back to the main differences, the pockets and harness.
Take the Zeagle Ranger, all the rings as the Halcyon, easier to put on and take off. Crotch strap for doubles. I just don't see it.
OK, by now, you are probably convinced that I am a DIR basher or a troll. Definately NOT, I am researching the DIR philosophy as it compares to the traditional approach.
This is one attempt to get responses to my own rational questions.
Enough rambling. Your rational answers are appreciated.
According to George Irvine and Jablonski, drag as it relates to equipment placement is a key to the DIR philosophy. (I know that it is not just an equipment philosophy)
He talks about breaking the water and swimming in the slipstream, like a submarine. With that approach, justification of multiple stage bottles, lights attached to the harness are all in the slipstream and not factors in increasing drag.
Am I to understand that a few pockets on the outside of the waist area cause enough drag to be non-DIR. I am talking about a BC with wings, not side inflate. What is the difference between the two, the pockets and the padding on the harness over your shoulders. (Let's not get into the fact that people cross there bodies to attach their octo, or any obvious stuff that does impact drag) We are only talking about (or arguing as in some threads) about a BC vs. BP/W.
There is risk of catching on something on your bc in a wreck, but aren't those risks there with the DIR bp/w approach. Leg pockets don't catch as much as a body pocket? Which moves more, both laterally and horizontally, the legs or the torso? For the most part, the torso is moved by the legs, in all directions.
Yes, they mandate the things be "cuttable" to solve hang ups, but if that part of the system is applied to a regular back-inflate bc, we come back to the main differences, the pockets and harness.
Take the Zeagle Ranger, all the rings as the Halcyon, easier to put on and take off. Crotch strap for doubles. I just don't see it.
OK, by now, you are probably convinced that I am a DIR basher or a troll. Definately NOT, I am researching the DIR philosophy as it compares to the traditional approach.
This is one attempt to get responses to my own rational questions.
Enough rambling. Your rational answers are appreciated.
matt_unique
Guest
MechDiver:
You can do a decent dive with 120cf of air. As we know depending upon your SAC rates, etc. you can do a 160' dive for 15 minutes with a steel 120 and deco bottles. Best? No. Doable? Of course.
--Matt
BC versus backplate and wing
It is not as much a matter of what is feasible. Its more a matter of what is optimal.
You can perform technically-oriented dives wearing a BC. Is it the equivalent of doing so in a backplate and wings? IMO, no it isnt.
First, lets consider a technical dive to be one in which the diver is incapable of surfacing should something go wrong. Either a solid overhead prevents ascending, such as a cave or wreck, or a decompression obligation exists that may injure or kill the diver if they surface. If you can swim directly to the surface should some sudden problem occur, regardless of what youre wearing it isnt a technical dive. There is no such thing as tech-lite. You either solve the problem submerged, no matter what it is; or it isnt really a technical dive.
Second, like lots of things, much of this issue comes down to philosophy. People go into wrecks and caves wearing the most outlandish array of crap, and quite frequently they survive. You CAN do a whole lot of things. In a question like the one youve posed, its more a matter of what are the arguments both ways, and what represents an OPTIMAL approach and why.
The philosophy espoused by many technical divers, from different agencies, is simplicity and minimalism. Dont take it if you dont need it. Streamline aggressively to prevent entanglements and becoming hung up. Solve problems above the surface, before they become problems below the surface. When you absolutely must solve a problem at 200, many technical divers become real focused on preventing problems from occurring there in the first place.
Generally speaking, BCs offer things that bp/wing rigs do not. A generic BC might have plastic triangular rings sewn onto the fabric in different places, pockets, chest straps with plastic quick release buckles, Velcro cumberbunds around the waist, straps sticking out to hold hoses coming over your shoulders, padding in the back or in the shoulder straps for comfort, nylon strap handles near where the top of the tank would sit, weight pockets for non-ditchable weight secured with either Velcro or quick release buckles, ditchable weight pockets with small T-shaped handles that allow the weight pockets to be ditched, two or three D-rings on each shoulder, adjustable straps hanging down in the front which you pull on to tighten the BC over your shoulders, some offer another waist attachment strap, also often with its own quick release buckle. Every place there is a buckle or fastener, there is a nylon strap that allows adjustment, and the free ends of these straps wave about underwater. They are complex affairs, and they offer numerous edges, fabric panels, clips and rings and releases and straps and handles all of which could conceivably tangle in monofilament fishing line, fish net, electrical wiring hanging down, lines and cables and broken panels in shipwrecks, small cracks in rocks, etc.
BP/wings rigs offer very little of this. They are simple affairs. They appear uncomfortable to the uninitiated, as they are metal plates, wingnuts, and nylon straps. No padding. No pockets or adjustable straps or buckles. Just one long nylon strap and one waist buckle.
The goal is simplicity, elimination of all possible hazards or things that could go south below 200. And yes, they are harder to take off than a BC. The thing is, the last thing you want to do below 200 is to have one come off.
It is a philosophical position that attempts to foresee all the things that could cause problems for the team, and systematically eliminate them as potential problems.
And with respect to the team, who are you diving with? If a team of 4 divers is proceeding down a narrow constricted passageway in a shipwreck for example, and the leading diver becomes snagged on some debris in low visibility, the entire team is bottled up behind that diver until the situation is resolved. Each member of the team is responsible to and for the entire team, not just their own well-being. If you were the 4th diver, you could conceivably suffer great harm due to the lack of diligence of another team member. Why would any diver deliberately choose to be the team member with the highest probability all else being equal of encountering some form of malfunction or accidental delay?
Technical diving is only peripherally about the equipment. Its about your mind. Its about your mental approach to diving. As Spectre puts it its about how youre diving the dive. Technical diving is a thinking persons game, and if you think about it, the goal is to reduce the risk of unexpected catastrophic failures to near zero.
Thats why most technical divers wear backplate and wing rigs.
Can you wear a BC and do technical dives? Sure. Have at it.
Is it the wisest way to approach those dives? IMHO, no.
Dive safe.
It is not as much a matter of what is feasible. Its more a matter of what is optimal.
You can perform technically-oriented dives wearing a BC. Is it the equivalent of doing so in a backplate and wings? IMO, no it isnt.
First, lets consider a technical dive to be one in which the diver is incapable of surfacing should something go wrong. Either a solid overhead prevents ascending, such as a cave or wreck, or a decompression obligation exists that may injure or kill the diver if they surface. If you can swim directly to the surface should some sudden problem occur, regardless of what youre wearing it isnt a technical dive. There is no such thing as tech-lite. You either solve the problem submerged, no matter what it is; or it isnt really a technical dive.
Second, like lots of things, much of this issue comes down to philosophy. People go into wrecks and caves wearing the most outlandish array of crap, and quite frequently they survive. You CAN do a whole lot of things. In a question like the one youve posed, its more a matter of what are the arguments both ways, and what represents an OPTIMAL approach and why.
The philosophy espoused by many technical divers, from different agencies, is simplicity and minimalism. Dont take it if you dont need it. Streamline aggressively to prevent entanglements and becoming hung up. Solve problems above the surface, before they become problems below the surface. When you absolutely must solve a problem at 200, many technical divers become real focused on preventing problems from occurring there in the first place.
Generally speaking, BCs offer things that bp/wing rigs do not. A generic BC might have plastic triangular rings sewn onto the fabric in different places, pockets, chest straps with plastic quick release buckles, Velcro cumberbunds around the waist, straps sticking out to hold hoses coming over your shoulders, padding in the back or in the shoulder straps for comfort, nylon strap handles near where the top of the tank would sit, weight pockets for non-ditchable weight secured with either Velcro or quick release buckles, ditchable weight pockets with small T-shaped handles that allow the weight pockets to be ditched, two or three D-rings on each shoulder, adjustable straps hanging down in the front which you pull on to tighten the BC over your shoulders, some offer another waist attachment strap, also often with its own quick release buckle. Every place there is a buckle or fastener, there is a nylon strap that allows adjustment, and the free ends of these straps wave about underwater. They are complex affairs, and they offer numerous edges, fabric panels, clips and rings and releases and straps and handles all of which could conceivably tangle in monofilament fishing line, fish net, electrical wiring hanging down, lines and cables and broken panels in shipwrecks, small cracks in rocks, etc.
BP/wings rigs offer very little of this. They are simple affairs. They appear uncomfortable to the uninitiated, as they are metal plates, wingnuts, and nylon straps. No padding. No pockets or adjustable straps or buckles. Just one long nylon strap and one waist buckle.
The goal is simplicity, elimination of all possible hazards or things that could go south below 200. And yes, they are harder to take off than a BC. The thing is, the last thing you want to do below 200 is to have one come off.
It is a philosophical position that attempts to foresee all the things that could cause problems for the team, and systematically eliminate them as potential problems.
And with respect to the team, who are you diving with? If a team of 4 divers is proceeding down a narrow constricted passageway in a shipwreck for example, and the leading diver becomes snagged on some debris in low visibility, the entire team is bottled up behind that diver until the situation is resolved. Each member of the team is responsible to and for the entire team, not just their own well-being. If you were the 4th diver, you could conceivably suffer great harm due to the lack of diligence of another team member. Why would any diver deliberately choose to be the team member with the highest probability all else being equal of encountering some form of malfunction or accidental delay?
Technical diving is only peripherally about the equipment. Its about your mind. Its about your mental approach to diving. As Spectre puts it its about how youre diving the dive. Technical diving is a thinking persons game, and if you think about it, the goal is to reduce the risk of unexpected catastrophic failures to near zero.
Thats why most technical divers wear backplate and wing rigs.
Can you wear a BC and do technical dives? Sure. Have at it.
Is it the wisest way to approach those dives? IMHO, no.
Dive safe.
Similar threads
