Is a Transpac considered a Back-inflate BCD or BP/W?

[Splitlip]

Just curious is all. I'm new to the sport and still learning things.

So the vocal concensus is a BP/W has to be rigid to be named such. Got it.

I am not so sure I that I would agree with that. I look at the plate as distributing ballast across the lungs. I would consider those harness systems made by by Oxy, OMS and DR where the plate is inserted as BP's.
I would not consider the plastic neutral plates as BP's. Nor would I consider my old plastic backpack a BP.
Before you guys flame me too, Jarrett asked, I gave my opinion.

 

[PerroneFord]

If the manufacturers you just listed don't consider their systems to be BP/W's why do you?

The essence of a BP is that it:

1. Can support the weight of double tanks without undue issues

2. Can be rigged in the traditional (Hogarthian) manner

3. Is integral to the BC

If it can be removed and replaced, you do not have a BP/W. And no self respecting company will tell you that you do.

 

[cool_hardware52]

I would not consider the plastic neutral plates as BP's.

Why not? A backplate serves a number of functions, one being a means of attaching the harness to the tank(s)

Another is source of additional ballast, if needed. Cold water and single tank makes a SS plate look pretty good. Warm fresh water and heavy steel doubles make a lightweight plate useful, as a SS plate might overweight the diver.

Another is to secure the wing to the harness and tank(s)

Nor would I consider my old plastic backpack a BP.

The old ScubaPro blowmolded backpacks were cool, that's what I learned to dive with, but they do not easily accomodate a modern wing, so I do not consider them in the same category as a BP&W.


Tobin

 

[Splitlip]

Perone, Tobin:
Between crashing servers and my civic activity as an athletic supporter, I mean booster, at my daughter's high school, I have been unable to finish my thoughts.
In response to your questions/comments:
In this day and and age of cross over SUV's, luxury sports coups, fighter-bombers, hybrid golf clubs, cross training sneakers and jumbo shrimp, Jarrett's question had me thinking. I would have agreed with Perron's traditional/purist description of a BPW a year ago. But time was that I did not consider a corvette a sports car or an RX330 an SUV.
I dive a simple plate with a hog harness. I see more plate divers however with IQ type rigs. They will tell you they are diving BPW's.
I thought about how simple Hog rigs morphed into setups like the transplate (BPW). When quick disconnects, chest straps, padding and cumberbuns get added are they still BPW's? Yes? Add "padding" along the lines of an MC pack and integrated weights. Still BPW? I think so. Now let's say a clever thinker takes this and says let's slip the plate inside the harness instead of weaving the harness through the plate. Still a BPW? As I said before, IMO, yes. This because the "essence" of what a BPW did for me is still there. The ballast and buoyance are spread across my lungs for dead on trim and buoyancy control.
Is a hog harness better. Absolutely. Would the hybrid rigs create problems such as unwanted inherent buoyancy? I am pretty sure. Is Kenny Chesney a country singer? I guess.