So Many BP/Wings to choose from!

[jonnythan]

BTW - do we notice that the folks who say OMS are wings of death are marketing and endorsing and receiving royalties from the competing brand?

I haven't noticed any such thing.

And it's not cause I'm slow.

 

[DA Aquamaster]

Gator - I alway carry two lift bags, in addition to my 100lb redundant bladders. There is nothing wrong with having more lift than you need. Why is there a fixation on diving with the extreme minimum? Minimalist diving is fine, except when you dont have what you need.
How do you know the difference between efficiency and excess?

I tend to agree with you.

I have problems with the logic behind the desire to base the size of your wing soley on your need for lift underwater. This invariably results in a relatively tiny wing that can leave a diver with minimal floatation on the surface where the extra lift can be nice while resting on the surface before or after the dive, particularly in rough water. To me it seems that divers pushing that argument are trading the security and safety of additional bouyancy on the surface for a minimal increase in saftey at depth.

I do not agree with the logic behind the stuck inflator and other paranoia that seem to accompany the "big wings are bad" argument. If the inflator sticks, you just disconnect it and dump the excess air from the wing. It's no big deal unless your in water skills suck in which case your untimely death is not going to be the wing's fault.

Worst case even if the wing fully inflated, drag still increases as the square of the velocity so in order to double your ascent rate you have to have four times the lift. So that means a 180 pounds of lift would be needed to double the ascent rate you would have with a 45 lb wing. And in the real world you are just not going to ascend that much farther in a 100 lb wing than you would in a 36-45 lb wing before you manage to dump the air from it. This of course assumes you have the presence of mind to assume a horizontal flared position in the water rather than going vertical and using your head for nothing more than an ICBM nose cone.

There is some validity to the arguments that the extra fabric in the wing may increase drag and that the taco effect can be more of a issue if the wing is not well suited to the tanks being used. However the bungee system actually is meant to address these concerns. Dive Rite for example has two wings that are designed for both single and double tank use and the bungee system is a key factor in reducing the taco effect and reducing air trapping when the wing is used with a single tank. They pose a potential, but arguably minimal, entanglement hazard but the bungees can also be removed when the wing is used with double tanks. Without the bungees the wings cannot, in my opinion, be safely used with a single tank due to concerns about potential air trapping.

My biggest concern with bungee sytems is that they can interfere with oral inflation of the BC on the surface. Although they do speed deflation of the wing both on the surface and underwater. From that perspective it can be argued that bungees on a large wing assist it in venting faster at depth in the event of a stuck inflator scenario and consequently further reduce the increase in ascent that would occur in a stuck inflator situation compared to a smaller wing.

I have used a 75 pound wing with no problem in the past and while I do not see the need for a 100 pound wing for the diving I personally do, I am not inclined to run around critisizing someone else for using one. Nor am I inclined to stop using OMS equipment just because they happen to sell 100 pound wings.

 

[Kakai]

Just wanted to say, i spent a good three months looking at bp systems and I kept coming back to the Zeagle Tech. I know it's not what you've been looking at but I tried to go another way and found that nothing else fit my needs the way the tech did. Being that you already own a zeagle you know they're durable and the tech will do almost anything a harness system will do and some things it won't. Just a thought.

 

[OneBrightGator]

Gator - I alway carry two lift bags, in addition to my 100lb redundant bladders. There is nothing wrong with having more lift than you need. Why is there a fixation on diving with the extreme minimum? Minimalist diving is fine, except when you dont have what you need.
How do you know the difference between efficiency and excess?

Well, I consider 4 independent sources of lift excess, if one fails you end the dive, if your second source fails (highly unlikely) then you look to your buddy, three failures and it's just your time.

I already addressed the problems with using a wing much larger then you need. There is no fixation with diving the extreme minimum, I dive with what's needed and I always have what I need. Please tell me why you need twice the necessary lift capacity in one source, and don't say to bring up your buddy in case his wing fails because that is not the correct solution to a wing failure. What happens if you lose your grip or your connection is broken? He drops to the bottom and you rocket to the surface.

Ben

 

[TLada]

Gator - I appreciate your dispassionate response. I'll try to do the same.

You ask why I need twice the lift capacity, but I can ask why do you think you need only half? The questions is: twice or half the capacity of what? If you always dive with what you need at whatever wing you choose, I always have what I need with whatever wing I choose... - this is moot.

It not whether one manufacturer is wrong on making 100lb redundant wings, or another chooses not to - it's how they are marketed and presented by diving shools and affected by reputations of the folks who use them.

Another (bad) point, why dive a black wetsuit - it makes you hard to see. According to the ONE philosophy of 'everything with a practical purpose' - wetsuits should be blaze orange. But nobody will buy a blaze orange wetsuit - okay.

Practical has a place, and doing things right can be taken too far. I think a percentage of the doing things right procedures result in over-analyzation and subsequently are solutions for problems that dont exist, and avoidance of non-popular-non-marketable problems.
If you consider 4 sources of lift excess, fine. For me, redundant bladders, lift bag(s), and perhaps the drysuit, ... fine.

 

[divegeek]

The overall feelings that I get from people about OMS are:

1) Some of their marketing ploys/ads are kind of tacky. You know the pictures showing the wing getting puctured (where you just happen to see the halcyon tag).

2) There stuff is well made, but not always well designed. I've heard that their new single tank wing which looks like a donut doesn't actually go all the way around (which can trap air)

I'll by some of their stuff and not others.

 

[Scubaroo]

BTW - do we notice that the folks who say OMS are wings of death are marketing and endorsing and receiving royalties from the competing brand?

LOL! I guess this was aimed at me.

I never said OMS were "wings of death". Anywhere.

I don't receive royalties either. I purchase stock up front to resell at my own risk.

Why do the numbers 446 pop into my head when I read your posts?

 

[TLada]

Scubaroo
I didnt aim this at you at all. I never quoted you on the WOD line, but that the common reference to OMS.
I think you took my post personally - please dont it was not intended to troll for you.
I dont know what 446 means, can you clue me in?

 

[Scubaroo]

Forget the 446 line. It's just that when a "Full Trimix Cave" diver/tech instructor with 4000+ dives, Andrea Doria, Monitor etc to their credit, and has somehow dived on the Wilkes-Barre 75' deeper than the seafloor, starts going around asking about the Vytec and what doubles tanks to get, peoples' bull**** meters go off.

Justify your statements about royalties then, I don't see anyone else in this thread involved in the sale of gear.

 

[TLada]

Ahh I undertstand, let em explain: I ask these newb questions because I've been out of diving for the past 4 years. But - I'm trying to catch back up again, I am just asking whats changed - I am kind of a gear-head. My c-card is from PADI circa 1977, I was pretty a active diver diring the late 90's. I got married and my wife dosn't dive, which pretty much means I dont dive either. But I plan on getting wet again sometime real soon.
A long time ago, I did some pretty cool stuff with my buddies over a few short years. But I starting over from scratch now, I bought all new gear, replaced the dry rotting stuff, had my dry suit sent back to DUI for an overhaul, swapped out my OMS rig for Halcyon, upgraded my computer - heck I have 3 now.
But Scubaroo, I think your right ... the bs meter should be going off, but what I say is true. I did what I say I did, but I did nothing in the past 4 years. So bear with me while I get back into it again.
I never said I was a cave instructor, but I am a tech instructor, IANTD #2856; TDI Trimix 186; IANTD Trimix 25206.
C cards dated circa 1999.

Humbly, I remain...