R
redacted
Guest
It is a "princess and the pea" thing. Most diver will not notice any difference in the water.
Why Are Wing Comfort Harnesses Frowned Upon?
- Thread starter Diving Dubai
- 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
halocline
Contributor
I'm not sure what you mean by the weight load and the hips. Are you saying that the transpac harness transfers the weight of the tank to your hips like a hiker's backpack would? If so, that's an issue on land, but I prefer to evaluate dive gear based on how it performs underwater. In this case there's no weight load on your hips in the water, so I don't see the advantage in actual diving. And I have no idea how the transpac would accomplish this without a big padded hipbelt, not a webbing waist belt.
The transpac was supposedly designed specifically for on-land use, meaning carrying your tank on long approaches on shore diving. If you're doing that kind of diving I can see a real advantage to that sort of set up.
To me, the best thing about the single webbing hogarthian harness is how it 'disappears' in the water, without the feeling of clutter and restriction that a more padded and complicated harness can impart.
- Messages
- 20,643
- Reaction score
- 15,133
- # of dives
- I'm a Fish!
the transpac will actually transfer load to the hips through the backpad and cummerbund, and yes it was designed for hiking with doubles. It does that very well and on land is the most comfortable rig I have ever used. In the water, there are no benefits. I will use my transpac when working with students if I'm going to be standing up on docks or shore for extended periods of time, but that is with doubles not singles. With singles it just isn't enough weight for me to bother with it in the water since we are wearing at least 5mm suits with a hooded vest
Eric Sedletzky
Contributor
Q) Why are comfort harnesses frowned upon.
A) Because DIR/ GUE says so.
Here's what I mean.
GUE and the DIR configuration by in large is who popularized the BP/W system as we know it today into mainstream, or as mainstream as it can be all considered.
It was their rules that kind of set the standard of what a proper BP/W system should be. The whole idea being to eliminate any and all failure points by removing plastic buckles, padding, chest straps were considered unnecessary and just another thing that didn't need to be there, etc. The was all figured out for maximum extreme diving environments and the mindset of a totalitarianist system that makes every diver the same so that if there was a situation in a silt out or black out each diver would know exactly where everything was on each team mate.
These rules have been carried on now by people who adopt the DIR philosophy but have never or never will actually dive in extreme environments like caves or wrecks, but because the gear configuration and training dictate a continuous one peice harness that is what anybody who wants to be DIR has to do no questions asked and no deviation allowed. DIR is a wholelistic approach so no one thing within the system can be removed or changed otherwise you're not DIR.
However, if you don't care about DIR and like your harness then continue to use it. Look at all the other BC's out there, they make a comfort harness look like a total stripped down minimal setup compared. If you're just a regular fun diving recreational diver then it makes no difference, use what you like and what works. At least you have a plate and wing.
And another thing, don't listen to the crap about chest straps restricting breathing. 1st, the chest straps are bigh enough that it doesn't affect chest expansion. 2nd, for diving you should be allowing you lower diaphram to expand making your stomach swell with an inhale not so much your chest. Chest breathing is restrictive anyway because your rib cage can only expand so much. This is freediving 101 and it carries over into scuba too. Also for some, chest straps help to keep shoulder straps up where they need to be and prevent the annoying feeling of always having to pull straps back onto your shoulders.
Have fun!!
A) Because DIR/ GUE says so.
Here's what I mean.
GUE and the DIR configuration by in large is who popularized the BP/W system as we know it today into mainstream, or as mainstream as it can be all considered.
It was their rules that kind of set the standard of what a proper BP/W system should be. The whole idea being to eliminate any and all failure points by removing plastic buckles, padding, chest straps were considered unnecessary and just another thing that didn't need to be there, etc. The was all figured out for maximum extreme diving environments and the mindset of a totalitarianist system that makes every diver the same so that if there was a situation in a silt out or black out each diver would know exactly where everything was on each team mate.
These rules have been carried on now by people who adopt the DIR philosophy but have never or never will actually dive in extreme environments like caves or wrecks, but because the gear configuration and training dictate a continuous one peice harness that is what anybody who wants to be DIR has to do no questions asked and no deviation allowed. DIR is a wholelistic approach so no one thing within the system can be removed or changed otherwise you're not DIR.
However, if you don't care about DIR and like your harness then continue to use it. Look at all the other BC's out there, they make a comfort harness look like a total stripped down minimal setup compared. If you're just a regular fun diving recreational diver then it makes no difference, use what you like and what works. At least you have a plate and wing.
And another thing, don't listen to the crap about chest straps restricting breathing. 1st, the chest straps are bigh enough that it doesn't affect chest expansion. 2nd, for diving you should be allowing you lower diaphram to expand making your stomach swell with an inhale not so much your chest. Chest breathing is restrictive anyway because your rib cage can only expand so much. This is freediving 101 and it carries over into scuba too. Also for some, chest straps help to keep shoulder straps up where they need to be and prevent the annoying feeling of always having to pull straps back onto your shoulders.
Have fun!!
TONY CHANEY
Contributor
I thought that the Comfort Harness was and still is OMS. Good points were already posted here. The really is no problem with with the Comfort Harness and if you are into SM diving (which DIR is not into), a lot of my friends rather like the chest straps. (I have yet to see a metal buckle on those yet). If a group does not like your setup, then just move on to another group that does accept it. If you already own gear that others tell you that it is unacceptable then you only have two choices. Buy new gear or go to a different group that will accept the gear that you have. No harm no problem. Just have fun diving
eelnoraa
Contributor
But we need to be fair first, the rule of not allowing comfort harness is if you need to take GUE/UTD class. It is their course, so their rule. Outside of class, it is really a personal preference and your team's preference. There is not rule to say anyone has to dive with a DIR harness. In fact, you don't even need to dive bp/w, long hose if you prefer so.
As for why so many like basic harness, I can only give myself as example. I started with transplate, thinking about the same thing about comfort, adjustability, weight distribution .. It was OK, not bad at all, but not particularly superior in comfort. Before my fundie, I decided to give basical harness a try. I met with a GUE diver, who helped made the proper adjustment. A few dives later, I felt it is superior in comfort and stability. It was how I converted, but because the rule, but personal experience.
Having that said, I also know someone who never got comfortable with the whole bp/w ideas. He bought an Infiniti to try, after a few months, he sold the Infiniti and went back to Zeagle Ranger.
As for why so many like basic harness, I can only give myself as example. I started with transplate, thinking about the same thing about comfort, adjustability, weight distribution .. It was OK, not bad at all, but not particularly superior in comfort. Before my fundie, I decided to give basical harness a try. I met with a GUE diver, who helped made the proper adjustment. A few dives later, I felt it is superior in comfort and stability. It was how I converted, but because the rule, but personal experience.
Having that said, I also know someone who never got comfortable with the whole bp/w ideas. He bought an Infiniti to try, after a few months, he sold the Infiniti and went back to Zeagle Ranger.
AlexL
Contributor
if the design of the gear causes such loading that it is painful to the user on land, it does not matter how well it performs underwater, because its not going to see the water in the first place.
i wouldn't wish back pain on anyone, but my BCD kindly reminds me of my mid back injury every time its donned, as it loads mainly on the shoulders; my BP/W on the other hand, loads more on the hips, and is much more tolerable to lug around. they both trim out and work fine at depth, but the BCD has been collecting dust, meanwhile the BP/W is my trustworthy dive companion... because it doesn't have me reaching for the naproxin at the end of the day.
as for comfort harnesses, i dont like em personally; d-rings and buckles are just more things to dig into your shoulders/chest when wearing a skin.
DevonDiver
N/A
You ask why, then immediately proceed to disregard the answer that you know is coming. That makes it a bit of a loaded question IMHO.
GUE...and, in general, those who follow a 'hogathrian' methodology to equipment configuration view comfort/deluxe harness as unnecessarily complex and containing more failure points than an equivalent 'bare' webbing harness.
There's no need to provide evidence or record of QR buckle failures. The simple fact is that a QR buckle could break, wheras nylon webbing, without a QR buckle, will not.
I can drop a cylinder onto a QR buckle...and onto bare webbing, if anyone wants to argue the toss over that point...
Beyond that, in 25 years of diving.... I've seen a few QR buckles fail. Sometimes those failures weren't evident until during the dive (hairline cracks). I've never seen a bare webbing harness fail... they don't fail, they wear out. It's easy to diagnose and replace a worn harness.... inconceivable that anyone could dive a bare harness to the point of failure without noticing it has degraded.
Technical divers....and the principles they follow.... tend towards minimizing risks whenever and however they can. That mindset is universal across tech agencies and instructors. What differs is merely the calculation of what constitutes a risk and how that is perceived to weigh against the benefits.
GUE tolerates little risk of failures. In addition, they see little need for adjustable harnesses. A bare webbing harness performs quite effectively and has no weak links. The critical aspect is that the harness itself is set-up and sized properly.
Some technical divers might have physical issues (mostly shoulder mobility) that make a non-continuous harness more desirable. That's a valid argument for many.
Other technical divers might state that they need an adjustable harness so that they can more easily configure between different exposure protection, when travelling around etc. That's less valid - arguably - as it favors convenience over safety. Technical divers are taught not to compromise safety.
These factors DO NOT apply to recreational divers. Recreational divers are not generally taught to dive with this strictly risk-adverse mindset. There is good reason for that.. Recreational diving is generally a very forgiving activity. Failures, mistakes and errors do not have a catastrophic or damaging consequence in 99.9% of occurrence.
Technical diving is not a forgiving activity.... and the more advanced the technical diving becomes, the less forgiving it becomes. Until the stage is reached where an unmitigated error or failure has a near certain probability of death. Hence, a very different mindset applies.... and this mindset is encouraged from the outset of technical diving training.
GUE...and some other tech-focused agencies, adopt a 'beginning with the end in mind' philosophy to training. For that reason alone, they promote a technical diving mindset to their recreational level divers. It's not for 'now'.... it's for 'later'.
The best way to view the issue of failure points, and other equipment decisions, is by balancing risks and consequences...
Risk of Failure versus Consequence of Failure.
The risk of failure of plastic QR buckles is debatable. However, it could be said that they are higher risk than metallic attachments. They are definitely higher risk than no breaks in the webbing at all.
Now, let's consider the consequence of failure. This is absolutely dive activity dependent. A QR buckle failure is probably nothing more than an inconvenience on the average recreational dive. It would be hazardous on a technical dive, where the harness might be supporting 4-6 cylinders. On a long-duration, exploration, cave dive in high flow, or using a scooter... it could be much more than hazardous.... it could be catastrophic.
Small risk of failure versus small consequence of failure: Fine....go for it....
Large risk of failure versus small consequence of failure: Best avoided, but you'll probably "get away with it" when it happens.
Small risk of failure versus large consequence of failure: Nope... don't go there... not worth the risk, as it is avoidable and unnecessary.
Large risk of failure versus large consequence of failure: Suicide. You'd be an idiot.
There's a lot of 'grey area'.... but it's always a personal decision. That decision is based on what you've learned, what you agree with, your personal acceptance of risk, your awareness of risk mitigation, how you dive... and how you plan to dive in the future.
Strategies for risk mitigation is part-engineering and part-philosophy. When it comes to someone determine their own personal safety, I don't think that anyone is beholden to produce facts, figures or statistics.
If a diver is properly educated on the risks and consequences of the diving they undertake (or plan to undertake), then they are capable of determining what balance of risk-mitigation versus risk-acceptance they are comfortable to tolerate.
For me... I don't care if QR buckles only fail in 1:1000 or 1:100000000 incidents. If I don't need to add a QR buckle and there is any risk of failure, then I'll err on the side of risk avoidance.
Others may decide differently. That's their prerogative.... and there's myriad factors that'd determine why they choose an alternative approach.
JBFG
Contributor
I switched from a comfort harness to a single piece for the following reasons:
1) The damn plastic buckle broke on me
2) Too much stuff that I was not using. I only carry 2 D-Rings (chest) and that's it.
1) The damn plastic buckle broke on me
2) Too much stuff that I was not using. I only carry 2 D-Rings (chest) and that's it.
GUE also appears to take the position that even if a GUE diver plans to do rec-only diving for the rest of his life, he should use the same basic, standard configuration as any other GUE diver. That doesn't appeal to every rec diver, and I can appreciate why. As you put it, "small risk of failure versus small consequence of failure." GUE's dictating a standard appealed to me because it seems to me that a line has to be drawn somewhere by someone, and better GUE draw it for me than for me to think I am capable of drawing it. I am not saying I am incapable of thinking for myself. I am certainly capable of reasoning whether to use quick-release buckles or adjustable or padded harnesses. But it occurs to me that if I adopt one minor variation that does not comply with GUE's standard, and then adopt another, and another, where does it end? I decided that for peace of mind I needed to buy into the whole thing.
Similar threads
