Why isn't the Freedom Plate DIR compliant?

[TSandM]

As AJ said, mounting on the plate is better, because you have full access to the valve. Only when you simply can't run the dive on 6 cf of inflation gas do you move to a setup that loses you that. (If you've ever descended with your argon bottle turned off, you know how nice it is to be able to reach that valve!)

I don't know how you could modify the Freedom Plate to allow plate-mounting of the argon bottle, but I'm sure there is some arrangement where you could have holes in the center portion of the plate for a longer webbing strap, and holes in the bottom for the bungie. If you're serious about breaking into this market, you need to do this AND allow the use of doubles, because the flexibility and scalability are central to the ethos.

 

[elan]

following the scalability logic an SS plate is not scalable as you cannot use it in some cases - i.e fresh water diving with double HP108/130 etc in many cases it will make one overweight.
Where do we draw the line here? Its the concept that is scalable , not the piece of equipment.

 

[TSandM]

However, an Al plate can be used with a v-weight to dive salt water; or the diver can choose less negative tanks for fresh water diving.

Yes, we almost all end up with multiple plates eventually (out of laziness, if nothing else). And I have not said that the FP is a completely unacceptable choice for a DIR diver. I have said, and I'm sure it is true, that it would not be RECOMMENDED in its current incarnation as a good choice for an entry-level GUE diver.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

A little history.

If it wasn't for the DIR movement the back plate as we know it today would not be in mainstream use. I say "mainstream" in the context of the internet and people who frequent the boards. Anybody who has hung out on any scuba related message boards in the last 12 years probably knows what a BP/W is regardless whether they use one or not. People who just go into their LDS and are oblivious to BP/W because the LDS doesn't carry them and the customer never goes on the internet is living in the overall mainstream, yes, but they and their LDS's are also in a parallel universe.

Because the DIR movement was instrumental in bringing the BP/W out of the cave and wrecks and into our mainstream, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that possibly most BP/W users are either fully certified DIR or at least dive a loose DIR configuration and follow the rules as closely as they know how.
I started using conventional plates this way and did a few years of tech diving myself through TDI, although I never took fundies.

The Freedom plate has it's roots from somewhere else. It is drawn from the old school of the back pack. I developed the modern version 10 years ago after I decided I didn't want to do tech diving anymore but wanted a plate that was more comfortable than what I was using, which was an OMS plate (which I modified BTW).
So from that the Freedom Plate was born but it never was intended to be a tech plate. It was just supposed to be a simple single tank plate but do the job very well.

From that standpoint I decided to market it to people who knew what plates are, but I hit a roadblock exactly with the issues that are being discussed in this thread, can't use doubles, can't use argon, blah, blah.
The vintage divers don't want it because it's not "vintage" enough.
The LDS's - forget it, remember they are in a parallel universe.
So far the ones that use it most are recreational single tank jacket BC converts who will never dive doubles and never use argon bottles

But there still is a good chunk of people who are getting into BP/W who look to you guys (DIR) to see what you use and why.
So for me to break into the DIR market would be huge, because with that endorsement it would mean it could be used anywhere for anything by anybody.
After all, if it wasn't for DIR the rest of us would still be using jackets.
People need to remember that.

 

[PfcAJ]

following the scalability logic an SS plate is not scalable as you cannot use it in some cases - i.e fresh water diving with double HP108/130 etc in many cases it will make one overweight.
Where do we draw the line here? Its the concept that is scalable , not the piece of equipment.

I use my steel plate WITH a v-weight and double 104s sometimes.

Lynne, the al14's valve is accessible. If its not, its not mounted properly.

If you're looking to find out why the freedom plate isn't recommended, its quite simple. Naturally, you're free to dive however you'd like. Has a GUE instructor ever forbade its use in a class? "Not recommended" and "not allowed" are quite a bit different. I read the post about a student saying what an instructor said (a little he said she said for my tastes). Has anyone spoken directly to an instructor?

 

[JamesK]

I applaud you for your efforts. You have what appears to be a beautiful product. Until this thread I had never heard of them. I am a long time BPW/DIR user, and very recent GUE certified diver.
My wife is planning on taking SCUBA lessons soon as well. I would have absolutely no problem at all putting her in one of your back plates. With her size being 5'3" and 100 pounds with a very narrow shoulders I think your plate would work perfect for her. GIR Rec 1 would be the limit of her training, and I feel this plate would be in the standard for that.
So simply making this thread and bring attention to your product has quite possibly done some of what you wanted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[Akimbo]

…After all, if it wasn't for DIR the rest of us would still be using jackets...

Interesting perspective, but I see that as an overstatement. I have only used a poodle jacket BC once and hated it. I actually hated horse collar BCs a little less. I switched from horse collar to the first wing (the Ad-Pak minus the fiberglass cowling and backpack) in the 1970s.



I began diving in the early 1960s when the industry was in transition from simple 1" cotton webbing harnesses attached to essentially permanent steel bands around the tank to backpacks. It is ironic that manufacturers were willing to invest in progressive metal stamping dies and injection molds in the 1960s for packpacks and not now. These backpacks were at least as form-fitting as the Freedom Plate, but used single proprietary metal bands and most were painted steel, aluminum, or ABS plastic rather than stainless steel that supports two cam bands.

These back packs lost favor in the market when jacket BCs started to dominate the market. Tooling for jacket and wing BCs is relatively inexpensive and could be sold for a lot more than the backpack alone. The old backpacks also took up a lot of room in your dive bag since the metal bands were hard to detach on most products. Webbing cam bands developed much latter.

The “conventional” DIR-style plates evolved in the 1980s when most of the metal backpacks were off the market, were not wing-friendly, and most were not all that doubles-friendly. Enterprising divers fashioned back plates in their garage and took them to local sheet metal shops to bend on metal brakes. This was a very low-skill and no-tooling solution to get the job done. It was also a doubles solution and kludges for singles came along much later.

The market was small and the DIR divers were satisfied with this primitive product so why on earth would a manufacturer spend six-figures on metal stamping tooling for more elegant form-fitting solutions with compound curves like the old backpacks or the Freedom Plate? To make matters worse, the DIR/GUE movement has become extraordinarily dogmatic and reluctant to accept innovation. IMHO, this attitude is hindering advancement in the industry.

It reminds me of military and commercial diving in the 1970s. It was a constant debate between proponents of full-face masks and lightweight form-fitting fitting helmets versus this guy:



Keep up your good work Eric. Hard hat gear lost the battle because it was inferior and so are today’s DIR back plates. The difference is you are always looking for ways to improve it instead of imagining convoluted reasons it can’t be done.

 

[elan]

Thats my point we still have a freedom to select particular implementation of the concept (al vs ss support for inflation vs no support) for the specific task

On a side note.

Just out of curiosity I once asked a GUE instructor if my converted SP pilot regulator will be good for the class. He said yes as long as im not taking a cave class. I asked my fellow GUE divers the same question and it got a negative response - no it does not have a removable faceplate

The freedom plate case is probably the same type of question.
Until the single tank nitrox only GUE dive community is very strong the market would probably be limited.

However, an Al plate can be used with a v-weight to dive salt water; or the diver can choose less negative tanks for fresh water diving.

Yes, we almost all end up with multiple plates eventually (out of laziness, if nothing else). And I have not said that the FP is a completely unacceptable choice for a DIR diver. I have said, and I'm sure it is true, that it would not be RECOMMENDED in its current incarnation as a good choice for an entry-level GUE diver.

---------- Post added October 28th, 2013 at 06:10 PM ----------

Eric it seems you also operate on a assumption that GUE = DIR. I feel that GuE does not equate themselves to DIR. In quite a few conversations recently when something was discussed recently DIR -not DIR I heard from instructors saying "We teach GUE procedures, not DIR procedures"

 

[TSandM]

GUE has distanced themselves from the term "DIR" after the schism between GUE and UTD. GUE diving is clearly what GUE says it is; DIR diving is much more ill-defined and subject to argument.

I don't presume to answer for UTD, NAUI-Tech or anybody else. I do know something about GUE's approach to things and why they do what they do.

Eric, I totally empathize with you. One of my goals in life is to try to expand the reach of GUE diving more into the dedicated single-tank recreational diver, because I think many of the ideas GUE teaches would result in better diving experiences for people in general. Your plate is perfect for that purpose . . . but MY view of what I'd like to see happen is not the vision that GUE has, which is to streamline the process for the diver who might not even have thought about technical or cave diving, but when he does, finds it a seamless transition. Gear which is optimized for single-tank, recreational diving just doesn't fit in that philosophy. We have found that even with the Deep Sea Supply plates, which we own and like; the shallow bend Tobin has created to make single tank diving better can cause issues with rental doubles, if the bolts aren't long enough. At least the plates WILL work for doubles, if you can find the right bolts; your plate simply won't work for them at all, and that just doesn't fit with the concept of scaling.

You built the plate for a reason, and it's a really good reason, and probably applicable for an awful lot of the people who are thinking about backplate setups here on ScubaBoard. I think you would be better served to figure out how to market to those people, rather than trying to figure out how to fit your plate into a diving philosophy where it just doesn't fit very well.

 

[geoff w]

... If it wasn't for the DIR movement the back plate as we know it today would not be in mainstream use. I say "mainstream" in the context of the internet and people who frequent the boards. Anybody who has hung out on any scuba related message boards in the last 12 years probably knows what a BP/W is regardless whether they use one or not. People who just go into their LDS and are oblivious to BP/W because the LDS doesn't carry them and the customer never goes on the internet is living in the overall mainstream, yes, but they and their LDS's are also in a parallel universe.

Because the DIR movement was instrumental in bringing the BP/W out of the cave and wrecks and into our mainstream, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that possibly most BP/W users are either fully certified DIR or at least dive a loose DIR configuration and follow the rules as closely as they know how...

I'm sorry, but from my experience with most of my dive buddies, nothing could be further from the truth. There are many variations on BP/W harness configurations, e.g., DiveRite's Transplate setup that is similar to a mountaineer backpack, but are still BP/W based. My wife tried several BCs over the years after we got certified, and until she used the Transplate harness, nothing fit her properly. Our BP/W setups have normal length (not long) secondary hoses, pull dump valve on the inflator hose, multiple quick release buckles, integrated weight pockets on the waist strap, and Atomic SS1 inflator instead of a conventional octo. Just about everything counter to DIR philosophy, but very, very nice for recreational diving. Many friends who have tried my setup walked into my LDS and ordered the same.

If anything, the benefits of BP/W setup, whether DIR or not, are streamlined configuration, nearly infinite adjustability and customization, simplicity (or as much complexity as you want), stability, better weight balance, comfort (both for wearing and diving), ease of achieving very good trim in the water, and great fit. If you look at the ScubaPro or Apeks "high end" harnesses, it's almost hard to tell it's a BP/W underneath with all the stitching and what not. I have no intention of switching to a more DIR-oriented configuration at this point, but will absolutely never go back to a "conventional" BC. Outside of scuba message boards, relatively few recreational divers care about DIR, but do want something functional to dive in, which in my mind is where a BP/W configuration excels over the alternatives