sasdasdaf
Guest
The last time I dove double AL80s in a 3 mil wetsuit I used a stainless steel backplate and needed no extra weight. I was in the sea. So if I were to dive fresh, I would use an aluminum plate.
OMS why all the flames?
- Thread starter nyresq
- 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
Dryglove
Contributor
Whats that got to do with mike ferrera's statement. I think you misread or misunderstood what he said.
This acronym is new to me.
What is a BWOD?
What is a BWOD?
Don Burke
Contributor
I saw a bunch of flames about a batch of Faber tanks they sold that had paint failures. My 112s haven't shown anything like that.
Add that to the odd gear they promote and you'll get a company pretty unpopular with some people.
No it does not. If you have gas you'll be heavy (need air in your wing). When at depth your wet suit will have little buoyancy. Even if you are wearing Al tanks and can swim up (balanced rig), you will not be neutral. You'll be negative. That's fine if you can just go to the surface but if you have several hundred feet (or more) to go in a horizontal direction, you'll need to be neutral and horizontal. I think you have trouble.
The cave I described is exactly what sections of Peacock looks likein one of the most trveled sections in the system so it's not an off the wall situation either.
With my dry suit and steel tanks I would put some air in the suit. It wouldn't ba any fun but I could do it. I would pay to see some one do it in a wet suit, AL doubles and no wing.
Scuba_Vixen
Guest
There are situations where a redundant bladder wing is the only practical risk management tool available. In the scenario given, it turns a big Ohh **** into a slight inconvenience.
What I find interesting, is that many of those who are categorically against redundant bladders, are the same ones who are categorically opposed to pony bottle redundant air sources as well. I'm seeing that there must be fundamental differences in diving philosophies...... On one side there are those who would let/rely on their buddy to bail them out in a problem situation, and on the other side are those who would try to avoid a situation getting that far along in the first place with backup eqipment choices.
Just some observations,
Darlene
What I find interesting, is that many of those who are categorically against redundant bladders, are the same ones who are categorically opposed to pony bottle redundant air sources as well. I'm seeing that there must be fundamental differences in diving philosophies...... On one side there are those who would let/rely on their buddy to bail them out in a problem situation, and on the other side are those who would try to avoid a situation getting that far along in the first place with backup eqipment choices.
Just some observations,
Darlene
Over the past few years I have purchased several OMS products, IQ PAK, SS Backplate, STA, Wing, and 112 & 85 tanks. My problem with OMS started after I purchased their 21 watt HID light. My first hint of a problem was at the time of purchase, there was no operators manual, the charger looked like a dime store product. When I got home I opened the cannister to checkout the internal wiring, what a surprise that was. One side of the circuit board was covered in a layer of silicone, but basically unprotected. Needless to say I was disappointed, I called OMS to ask about charging times and care for the light head/battery. No one could or would help me. I sent several emails to their on line information site, NO response. I sent a letter to the president of OMS, NO response. After getting No where with OMS I sold the light, since then I have been replacing my OMS gear with Halcyon, FredT, and Dive Rite products.
OMS makes some nice gear, but I will no longer buy anymore of their products. Now I'm working on my buddies, so far one has dumped most of her OMS gear and replacing it with Oxycheq.
OMS makes some nice gear, but I will no longer buy anymore of their products. Now I'm working on my buddies, so far one has dumped most of her OMS gear and replacing it with Oxycheq.
Boogie711
Guest
Real simple - there's already redundancy, in a drysuit and a pair of manifolded doubles. There's redundancy, and then there's ridiculous. Carrying an extra inflator hose around the whole time in the unlikely event of a bladder failure is, in my mind, ridiculous. Carrying a Pony bottle is a substitute for improper gas management.
It's called team diving, and before you start accusing me of some sort of DIR-ness, I'm not. And pray tell - what situation would get "far enough along" that you would magically avoid with a Pony bottle and dangling extra inflator hose?
Scuba_Vixen
Guest
And by the same logic, having a spare tire in your car is a substitute for improper tire management and should be avoided. ..... What a crock... a pony to cover an unanticipated loss of gas has Nothing to do with improper management of that gas
The dual bladder is primarily a viable option for wetsuit divers as the pony is for singles divers..if you're in doubles or dry, both become much less practical. (and I don't recal seeing it suggested either) Or are You suggesting that everyone should be diving manifolded doubles and a drysuit on every dive as they are the only "acceptable" means of redundancy?
The best of buddy teams do at times become seperated, if only temporarily, Murphy would suggest that if you're going to have a failure, that's when it's likely to occur.....
Whatever logic you have that says manifolded doubles and drysuit redundancy is good, but dual bladder and pony redundancy is bad, continues to escape analytical thought...
Darlene
The dual bladder is primarily a viable option for wetsuit divers as the pony is for singles divers..if you're in doubles or dry, both become much less practical. (and I don't recal seeing it suggested either) Or are You suggesting that everyone should be diving manifolded doubles and a drysuit on every dive as they are the only "acceptable" means of redundancy?
The best of buddy teams do at times become seperated, if only temporarily, Murphy would suggest that if you're going to have a failure, that's when it's likely to occur.....
Whatever logic you have that says manifolded doubles and drysuit redundancy is good, but dual bladder and pony redundancy is bad, continues to escape analytical thought...
Darlene
Similar threads
