BP Wings vs BCD explanation

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Scuba Duffer

Contributor
Messages
230
Reaction score
0
Location
Oakville, Canada
Help! I was reading the board about the BCD vs Wings arguement. I came across an article a member had written for a scuba club - there was a link to another site. The article was great - very well written - had great explanations and diagrams. I wanted to show it to a friend and I'll be darned if I can find it. Anyone know where it is??

I forget the members name that wrote it but they had a pic of themselves on a boat in thier avatar - I believe he was an instructor.

I've searched and searched but I can't find it!!
 
Maybe you should just give me your phone and I can call you with all my questions!! If this keeps up, I'm gonna have to buy you a beer!

Thanks!!!

Edit - tried the link - not working - but I did PM to see if I can get a current link!
 
mwilding once bubbled...
Another ScubaBoard member wrote this


Unfortunately, this testimonial has some hole in it. The physics as described are technically (narrowly) correct, but its assumptions are problemmatic, which makes this "Garbage In, Garbage Out" insofar as its conclusions.

For example, it assumes that you dive with your BC 100% inflated. The reality is otherwise, which means that the air in the bladder can and does shift around. Similarly, since nearly all Jackets have smaller bladders up around the shoulders than down by the waist, it means that the illustration's center of lift is incorrectly marked (its too high).

Also note that unlike the illustration's depiction, it has actually been possible to locate lead on the back of your weightbelt for the past 50+ years, which means that this front bias is possible, but easily correctable (for free).

Claims such as "[they] dry out faster than BC's with thick, heavy padding" have nothing to do with the design. If you want a fast drying BC, don't get one with thick padding.

Claims of BP/Wings generally being cheaper are an interesting one. Sure, you can find expensive BC's, but there's tons of darn good cheap ones too. The Tusa Liberator is one example, and it can be had today for as around $200. To match that with a BP/Wing, you have to roll your dice on Ebay, because the dealer-supplied Halcon is over $500.

Meantime, the claims about any system being "more streamlined" are just that: claims. No one has cold, hard Engineering data that actually proves it. And without data, its just an unsubstantiated opinion...or Marketing Hype. If someone's going to make the claim, they had better be able to come up with the data. Besides, even if there was a 10% difference in drag, does it even matter if you're doing drift dives?


Finally, while there's good things to be said about a BP/Wing arrangement, note that the described system has all of its ballast in the BP, which means zero budget for ditchable weight. The reality is that there are trade-offs to be made between what might be "optimal" for trim versus other performance parameters for the overall dive.


The bottom line to this is that good gear certainly helps, but even the best gear won't bail out a diver with poor skills: good skills transcend the equipment you happen to be using.


-hh
 
who tried to explain that stainless steel bolts were a failure point???

Pardon me if I have a few problems believing all your 'objectivity, -hh.

Have you actually EVER dove with a BP and Wings? Especially one of the new circular wings from Halcyon or Oxycheq? Methinks not.
 
Boogie711 once bubbled...
who tried to explain that stainless steel bolts were a failure point???

Send me one, and I'll break it. How many pieces would you like it in? :-)

The simple facts are that all fasteners can fail, and the context of that statement was that if you're going to eliminate fasteners as a failure point, you better do "All, or Nothing".



Pardon me if I have a few problems believing all your 'objectivity, -hh.

Yes, SeaJay did throw out a lot of Ad Homenium insults at me on that thread. Nevertheless, he did admit that he was assuming that the BC was always 100% inflated, which is wrong. He tried to brush it off, but any logical arguement is only as strong as its weakest link, and this one has several weak ones. Upon seeing this thread, I looked again and found more shortcomings.


Have you actually EVER dove with a BP and Wings?

Yes, and I've also dived with a Jacket and a horsecollar too: none of them are perfect; each has its trade-offs.


BTW, I did do a quick analysis on my observed reliability rate on those "horrible" plastic Quick Disconnects (QD's), and calculated that they're exceeding 1000 hours MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure) at a 75% confidence interval.

This is the basis of why I said that the two types of fasteners are within the same basic order of magnitude for reliability.

But if your Engineering Analysis differs, please provide the numbers: for without hard data, all you have is an opinion.


-hh
 

Send me one, and I'll break it.


FWIW, my comment reminded me of a project I worked on many moons ago. It was on GE's Hyperaeroballistic Chamber in South Philly. and we had an instrumentation viewing port which protected the camera with a 5" thick piece of "unbreakable" Lexan.

On one test-run, we broke the Lexan port. A full 5 inches thick, and around 16" diameter, split neatly in two like a Gingersnap cookie.

While we replaced it with a slab of 3/4" steel to finish the test, the Chief Engineer hand-carried the broken lexan to the VP of the Lexan division to have a few words about that Department's claims of "Unbreakable" :-)


-hh
 
-hh once bubbled...
On one test-run, we broke the Lexan port.

You should have used Halcyon grade Lexan.
 

Back
Top Bottom