OneBrightGator:
I'm not trying to pick a fight, I promise. HH, have you tried rearranging your weight to offset the moment created by your camera?
Been there, done that, Ben. I've already relocated 100% of my weighting to behind my spine.
I could move it slightly further back by throwing an ankle weight around my tank stem, but this effect here would be minimal - - its really a trick if you need more "nose down" for in-dive horizontal trim. Pragmatically, to move my weighting any further back to offset this buoyancy torque, I'd have to add a weight pocket on the tank strap and put 3-5lbs in it.
I'm relucatant to do this partly because its an ugly klunge, but also because IMO its a band-aid hiding the real, underlying problem, which is the torque from the centroid location of the buoyancy source being too far rearward for this application.
I would think it would effect your diving/floating no matter what type of BC you had.
Floating first:
This would be true only if the centroids of the center of buoyancy for both bladder styles (Jacket vs. Wing) were the same, and they're not: the Wing's design is further "behind" the diver by a good 2-3 inches.
This difference is intimately linked with the designs and the Jacket's "squeeze" complaints: the way in which the Jacket's centroid is further forward is by configuring its bladder so close to the diver such that it "surrounds" him. The Wing avoids the squeeze issue by locating itself entirely behind the diver, which is why its buoyancy centroid is located further behind. The resulting torque differences when the diver is floating upright are straightforward Physics derived from the Moment Arm for each.
For diving:
The diver is rotated to horizontal, and because the moment arms we've been talking about are relative to the Gravity vector, the one discussed above lose their offset from the gravity vector (eg, become close to zero significance).
But this rotation also changes the allignment vs gravity of the centroids in another plain. Specifically, what was the "height" of the bladders' centroids are now horizontally removed from the gravity vector, thereby gaining moment arms. This is where the claims about a Wing's "lower" (closer to the weightbelt) centroid as being beneficial for trim come from. It sure is. However, this is also a trim issue that is similarly addressed by moving around various components.
Overall, we can't cherrypick and use Physics only for those features we want, and try to ignore it for those where it works against us: a perfect system doesn't exist. Pragmatically we need to identify what's more important than others and design our trade-off decisions accordingly.
For me personally, I rank surface float "trim" as important enough that I'm willing to trade off some in-water trim performance/comfort - I see it as air consumption vs. drownproofing on longer floats. For the most part, my trade-off is not to maximize one factor at the expense of all others, but is instead intended to minimize system weaknesses for my application. If you never do non-short surface floats in rougher waters, then what I consider important for my needs may not be a consideration for you; YMMV.
-hh
