chris hecker:He was,1/8 inch wetsuit. I don't know much about "vintage diving" as far as equipment dates e.t.c, but he told me his tank was hydro'd in 1963, and he dove into the 70's.(still with no b.c. or s.p.g.) He just chuckled about the drysuit, the only drysuits at that time where full commercial suits with helmets. Maybe there should be another class of diving, "ancient"??? :diver:John C. Ratliff:Chris,
Your Dad is right, if you are not wearing an exposure suit.
Chris,
Your Dad and I are of about the same vintage. I dove 1/8 inch wet suits in the US Air Force (we used them for warm water swimming, diving and parascuba jumping). The 1/8 inch wet suit has almost no buoyancy. When I used them, we used minimum or no weight, and there was no change in their buoyancy with depth. They were ideal for warmer waters.
But the 1/4 inch wet suit had quite a bit of buoyancy, and did change with depth. This was the better choice for cold water, and I used them in the Pacific Northwest, and in Korea when I was in the USAF. I had a supervisor question that a 1/4 inch wet suit was better than dry survival suit over a flight suit, so I challenged him on it. We took him to a local reservoir and he jumped in with the survival suit over a thin flying suit. He nearly froze before we could get him out of the water (it was winter in Kunsan, Korea--cold).
Concerning whether there were dry suits at that time, the US Navy had dry suits very early (1950s). Here's one from a 1965 book titled Skin Divers in Action by Erik Bergaust and William Foss. I can show the photograph, and it can be copied by others, because it is an "Official US Navy Photo."
SeaRat