Should I switch to BP/W?

[-hh]

I'll just go with the balance rig

Unless you're diving naked, there's no such thing.

As soon as we have thermal protection, we have its compression vs. depth issue to factor into our planning - this is a loss of inherent buoyancy from sources other than the BC/drysuit air bladder, and precisely why we need to add air to the BC/drysuit as our depth increases.

The whole issue of ditching ballast really only comes about as a contingency planning issue if the diver has for some reason suffered a major failure in his ascent / buoyancy system(s). Adding redundency to your buoyancy systems (dual bladder BC, BC+drysuit, etc) simply defers the option of ballast ditching to further down the list. But it doesn't justify its pragmatic removal as a contingency option.


-hh

 

[-hh]

Perhaps I'm not following you, but... I don't think that cutting off your harness and leaving your rig on the bottom is a good idea.

When all of your ballast is integrated into your rig, if worse comes to worse and you have to ditch ballast, it means that your tanks have to be left behind with your ballast.

It is quite sobering to read through the DAN annual fatality reports each year and notice just how many divers are found on the bottom still wearing their weightbelts, or with evidence of them having attemptied to remove it, but got entangled in it.

It is distressing to see it recur in the fatality reports year after year after year; YMMV if you want to blame it on human error of the victim or of how the victim was trained, but the bottom line is that it is quite preventable...my real concern is that with the equipment trends now returning to systems that have a submarine strap, this old training element has probably been either forgotten or dropped, and IMO, Jacket users changing over to a BP/W are the ones at greatest risk.



-hh

 

[BabyDuck]

i purposely wear mine (when i *do* wear one) under. if i wore it over, it would be around the widest part of my hips, not my waist, and would slip off as soon as i hit the water. i do cover where the weights are with my buddy, though, since often i don't wear a belt, but put ankle weights through my butt d-ring.

and, yep, i can definitely swim my rig up as it is. if i used doubles, maybe not, but since i don't, it isn't a problem.

and to the original poster - yes, you should switch. right now. it's part of the scubaboard tos. sorry, but those are the rules...

 

[-hh]

i purposely wear mine (when i *do* wear one) under. if i wore it over, it would be around the widest part of my hips, not my waist, and would slip off as soon as i hit the water.

Your problem is likely that the bottom of your arm straps are attached too low to your plate, and/or that your BP/W waist strap is too low, at hip level.

Raise them up on your plate to your waist height and you'll be able to have both your BP/W waist strap and your weightbelt on at waist height.


Donning procedure would be arm, arm, waist strap, crotch strap, weightbelt.


BTW, if you have a problem with a buckle stack, you should put the weightbelt buckle slight towards your left hip side and your BP/W buckle towards the right. This is preferred because the mass that's on the weightbelt wants to pull down, but the freed end (which won't have as much weight on it) will tend more to move across the other buckle and go around your back to drop. The opposite configuration tends to try to cross the 2nd buckle perpendicularally, which is more likely to get it snagged, especially since its going to be WB with weights on it instead of the smooth belt tongue.

In either circumstance, proper weightbelt ditching is to then hold it fully clear of the body with your left hand and confirm no snags before dropping.

Some self-rescue techniques even recommend that the WB be deployed to this position - - but not dropped - - during a neutrally buoyant emergency swimming ascent. Their logic is that if you were to become unconcious, you'll relax and let go of the belt and thus become buoyant to at least have your body make it to the surface (where hopefully, someone will be close enough by to revive you if you're not face-up, etc). Its probably not a big chance of survival at this point, but any chance is clearly better than zero.


-hh

 

[JeffG]

Unless you're diving naked, there's no such thing.

All you have done is prove to me that you don't understand the concept.

 

[BabyDuck]

my plate is where it should be, and i *want* the strap at hip level instead of waist level. waist level would put the top of the plate too high since my back isn't that long. and since i don't plan on my weights going anywhere without a whole lot of thought on my part, i'm happy with the belt being under. or not even being on!

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Your problem is likely that the bottom of your arm straps are attached too low to your plate, and/or that your BP/W waist strap is too low, at hip level.

Raise them up on your plate to your waist height and you'll be able to have both your BP/W waist strap and your weightbelt on at waist height.

I'm not following your logic here ... waist/arm straps are fed through fixed slots in the backplate ... there is no "raising them up on your plate" involved.

Donning procedure would be arm, arm, waist strap, crotch strap, weightbelt.

Well, according to those I know who teach and dive in backplates, the donning procedure is weightbelt, left arm, right arm, waist strap, crotch strap.

I think I'll trust the instruction of people who actually dive and teach in the gear ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[-hh]

Well, according to those I know who teach and dive in backplates, the donning procedure is weightbelt, left arm, right arm, waist strap, crotch strap.

That's not the way it was taught 20+ years ago, before most people knew what a Jacket BCD was.

If you want to verify that with my old Instructor, Ray was NAUI #926.


Please tell me what in diving has changed to justify the change in protocol.

Specifically, I am asking why it is now considered an acceptable risk to no longer have ballast configured to be ditchable.


-hh

 

[-hh]

All you have done is prove to me that you don't understand the concept.

Unfortunately, the concept of 'balanced rig' makes the optimistic assumption that a loss of buoyancy failure will happen with no other complicating factors (such as a coldwater leg cramp, or OOA) being present that could in any way impair the diver's physical swimming abilities. And it doesn't identify or test for how much thrust a diver can generate over the appropriate amount of time to swim up a rig, so while it has some goodness, it can also lead to overconfidence in one's abilities...a classical human judgement error in the making.

Granted, the appropriate amount of ditchable weight for a contingency plan where the diver is for whatever reason unable to swim up his rig can be determined (and also minimized) by using balanced rig techniques, but its not organic to its base nature. As such, it is merely one more tool, not the be-all, end-all solution to all potential issues or problems when it comes to contingency planning. This isn't to say that its not a good tool ... it is. Its just not the only one.



-hh

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

That's not the way it was taught 20+ years ago, before most people knew what a Jacket BCD was.

If you want to verify that with my old Instructor, Ray was NAUI #926.


Please tell me what in diving has changed to justify the change in protocol.

Specifically, I am asking why it is now considered an acceptable risk to no longer have ballast configured to be ditchable.


-hh

A lot has changed in 20 years ... teaching methods, diving protocols, and gear. Do you still dive in such a manner as to rely on your J-valve to tell you when it's time to start your ascent? Do you still ascend at a recommended rate of 60 fpm?

Specifically, in this case, diving protocols changed with the invention of the BCD.

As to an earlier comment you made about releasing the weighbelt from under the crotch strap being too complicated ... it's not. I teach it to my OW students ... who I teach in a BP/wing system with standard one-piece harness. They demonstrate the skill to me on their second night in the pool, in fact.

If you want to dive as you were taught 20 years ago, feel free ... but to state that it's acceptable protocol today is, simply put, not accurate. The "good old days" had their advantages and disadvantages ... but the simple truth is that protocols change to accommodate refinements in equipment, knowledge, and experience ... the smart diver stays abreast of those changes, and modifies his or her diving protocols accordingly. Or, as Dive Training magazine so aptly puts it ... "A good diver is always learning" ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)