DIR Forum

[Gombessa]

Are you sure that the drysuit balances the rig?

The education nowadays definitely teaches the drysuit as redundant buoyancy to the wing. And we do ensure that for the gear configuration being dived, the buoyancy of the drysuit allows for proper floatation of a balanced rig in the event of a complete wing failure.

If anything, I distinctly remember an article by GI3 about why you don't wear heavy steel doubles with thick wetsuits in cold water, nothing about prohibiting drysuits.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Are you sure that the drysuit balances the rig? I've heard arguments among the top DIR divers and educators that the drysuit is not a backup buoyancy device. That in pure DIR it wasn't thought of as one, but this changed. I'm not sure, but maybe George Irvine had posted something to that effect? I don't do lots of archival searching so if anyone has George stating drysuits aren't back up buoyancy let me know.

Maybe I'd take you more seriously if you'd drop the rhetoric and make your point.

FWIW - I don't read George Irvine or any of the DIR boards. That's not why I'm here, so please don't waste my time with the same bull**** I've read over and over again already.

Drysuit is only part of the picture, of course ... weighting, cylinder size and buoyancy characteristics, undergarment choices ... it all factors into a balanced rig. Bottom line being if you're carrying 300+ cubic feet of gas you're gonna be starting the dive seriously overweighted, and you'd better have some way to get your ass to the surface if your wing fails.

There is another reason that is probably not chanted.

Yeah ... they needed the gas.

I had a lot more respect for you before you started putting so much effort into trying to paint DIR divers as unthinking idiots. So far all the ones I've dived with had pretty good reasons for their gear choices. Almost all of them didn't even mind that I had made some different choices ... once I explained to them why.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[RTodd]

Are you sure that the drysuit balances the rig? I've heard arguments among the top DIR divers and educators that the drysuit is not a backup buoyancy device. That in pure DIR it wasn't thought of as one, but this changed. I'm not sure, but maybe George Irvine had posted something to that effect? I don't do lots of archival searching so if anyone has George stating drysuits aren't back up buoyancy let me know.

There is another reason that is probably not chanted.

Are you purposely trying to act stupid or do you actually not understand this basic stuff after mutiple GUE classes? This is completely inappropriate to this discussion. Of course GI3 taught the drysuit as redundant boyancy and of course you could pick a combination of huge steel tanks and steel backplate that make a rig unbalanced and inappropriate but steel tanks with drysuit are perfectly acceptable if it is a balanced rig. Steel with wetsuit is generally not acceptable because most rigs can't be made balanced with this set up.

 

[JeffG]

Are you purposely trying to act stupid or do you actually not understand this basic stuff after mutiple GUE classes? This is completely inappropriate to this discussion. Of course GI3 taught the drysuit as redundant boyancy and of course you could pick a combination of huge steel tanks and steel backplate that make a rig unbalanced and inappropriate but steel tanks with drysuit are perfectly acceptable if it is a balanced rig. Steel with wetsuit is generally not acceptable because most rigs can't be made balanced with this set up.

He is commenting on this post by GI3 in 2005

Yahoo! Groups

RE: [gavinscooters] Loaded Question.....

Ricardo, you are correct - the drysuit is not redundant buoyancy and should not be considered that in planning or balancing a rig. This kind of misconception could lead to adding too much fixed weight and then finding out the hard way what happens when you try to use the drysuit as your only source of inflation - it really gets ugly.

By the way, I tried to lift a dead body off of the ocean floor by inflation the drysuit after the bungee wings the person was wearing could not be filled enough without blowing the opv - did not work - the suit got huge and then I realized that if I did get it moving up, it would then run away on me and blow the gas out of the seals. On a live person, the suit becomes unmanageable if the weighting is not right.

On the other hand, with a properly balanced rig and a wing failure with drysuit, once you get up a little, you should not need any significant amount of gas in the drysuit to stay fairly normal. Conversely, if you are overweighted and have a wing failure and can not get rid of any weight, the drysuit may or may not hold its gas at the surface enough to keep you up once you get there, and the process of getting there through any deco stops with a ballooning suit is something that causes major gas consumption and machinations to achieve.

As always, it is just easier to do it right and to do it the simple way.

 

[Gombessa]

He is commenting on this post by GI3 in 2005

Yahoo! Groups

Jump in to correct a noob, but it sounds like the point he's making is that balanced rig is not merely "lift > ballast."

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

He is commenting on this post by GI3 in 2005

Yahoo! Groups

You still need some form of redundant BC ... because even if you're diving a mix with a lot of helium in it, that gas still weighs something ... and you've gotta account for the fact that at the beginning of the dive you're gonna be overweighted.

If you're planning a longer, shallower dive ... like in a cave ... where your backgas is nitrox, that could end up in the neighborhood of 15 or 20 lbs of gas you've gotta compensate for.

... and he's got a point ... that much gas in a drysuit's likely gonna just blow out through your dump valve or a seal ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[JeffG]

You still need some form of redundant BC ... because even if you're diving a mix with a lot of helium in it, that gas still weighs something ... and you've gotta account for the fact that at the beginning of the dive you're gonna be overweighted.

If you're planning a longer, shallower dive ... like in a cave ... where your backgas is nitrox, that could end up in the neighborhood of 15 or 20 lbs of gas you've gotta compensate for.

... and he's got a point ... that much gas in a drysuit's likely gonna just blow out through your dump valve or a seal ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I don't mean to speak for GI3, but I have commented a ton of times that my drysuit and my double 130's with nitrox were very unbalanced.

But as far as the statement/rule "drysuit is not redundant buoyancy" that Trace wants to use to demonstrate the lemmingness of the DIR diver...I think is almost a twisting of words scenario.

 

[RTodd]

Trace, don't post this kind of garbage in DPZ anymore. If you want to discuss this some leeway will be given in the DIR forum. In here, the only reason your posting privileges haven't been removed is because lamont is travelling.

 

[JeffG]

Jump in to correct a noob, but it sounds like the point he's making is that balanced rig is not merely "lift > ballast."

two points really. 1 - A drysuit makes for a piss poor BCD, but if you need a little bit of lift its ok.

2 - When looking at a balanced rig, you need to see all the moving parts. Which means...what can be dumped?...What things change (and how do they change) through the water column.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

two points really. 1 - A drysuit makes for a piss poor BCD, but if you need a little bit of lift its ok.

2 - When looking at a balanced rig, you need to see all the moving parts. Which means...what can be dumped?...What things change (and how do they change) through the water column.

And to clarify ... when I made the comment that "I supposed they were wearing drysuits", it wasn't to suggest that a drysuit was such a substitute ... it was to suggest that it ain't a wetsuit, which has significant buoyancy changes with depth.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)