Wing Design(s)

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

If Oxycheq wants to set themselves out from their knocks offs they should offer custom wings like you can get from Halcyon. Or multicam, I would pay extra for a multicam wing, because I'm an idiot.
 
I do not think VDH intended to copy the Oxy Mack V. The VDH wings have their own design elements, like the internal bungee system and they are a bit shorter and wider when inflated. But anyways, there are similarities as well, extreme both are in the small frontal footprint.

I love my Oxy Travel plate. Mine is an earlier version I guess. In any case, I have many dives on it and just recently fitted it back to my Oxy 18 when I put my VDH 23 on my VDH plate. My wife grabbed the VDH 18 out of my hands claiming it as hers!!!!!!!! Women!!!!!!!! I kinda like the 23 as it gives me a little bit more to deal with a steel tank or my camera when I forget to bring my float arms or offload lead for a switch to a steel tank. It is handy and still very small when the bungees have it fully retracted.

For warm water, tropical diving with minimal exposure suits, little or no weight load and importantly, aluminum tanks, 18 pounds lift wings are perfect. But, slip a steel tank into the rig, as I run into not infrequently in Florida and a few other places and I am now about 6 pounds more negative. Toss my camera in, up to 2 pounds negative without float arms and a exposure suit that needs lead to compensate for buoyancy and that suit then compresses at depth loosing much of that initial buoyancy and then consider as the OP points out that some plates might not allow full inflation, well, I have been on top with little positive buoyancy and the 18 pound wing inflated until it vents off! So, yeah, for such things, the 23 makes some sense. And, for all around diving, the 30 is still, IMO, the best size if one can justify only one wing. N
 
I used to be a dealer for Oxycheq and was around when Patrick came up with the Mach V. I was one of the very first to get one and try it. The first run of a few dozen he had made didn’t have slots or roll control, they had 11” center holes and you needed a STA. He changed that as soon as he figured out what geometery was best for slots and roll cushions. He also saw immediately what kind of demand that new style created. It was instantly successful. I redesigned my entire plate because of the Oxycheq Mach V change from the older signature and razor wings, so I was right in there with Patrick when all this happened. We used to communicate on the phone several times a week back in those days.
His idea was to create the slickest, narrowest, most streamlined single tank wing on the market to blow the doors off every other brand, and he succeeded. At the time he was facing some competition from halcyon, a few others, and to some degree DSS, but he always though Tobin was an idiot so he wasn’t terribly concerned about Tobin’s stuff due to the many design flaws he saw in his Torus wing.
Oxycheq took a little market share from Halcyon when their Pioneer wing used to be a single bladder style and they used to leak air out of every seam due to a bad internal urethane sealing job.
Patrick came up with the internal bladder Signature series wings and snatched a lot of business with that upgrade.
To this day the Oxycheq Mach V wing still rules overall in super streamlined design. A few have already mentioned the knock-offs like VDH and DGX. They are smart, because I’ll bet others will inevitably follow suit. You can already see it in in the Mares wings and the Apeks wing (and others) the influence that Oxycheq has had.
Patrick also was the one to come out with that sewn fabric travel plate. Mares even has a version of it now. The first time I called him to order a bunch of Signature wings, I told him about this new Freedom Plate back pack style plate that I had come up with and he mentioned he had a similar idea but to make one out of something like a tough conveyor belt material or fiber reinforced rubber like a commercial plate and it would be for travel. The fabric plate is what you got.
So there you have it.

What all this has to do with the difference/ benefits/ plus/minus of narrow vs wide, I don’t know, I was just giving some history.

Eric, that might not have been on the topic of narrow vs wide, but the point my starting this thread was just to discuss wing design in general. So giving some history is really helpful. I notice that DGX, Oxycheq, Mares, and Apeks all look disturbingly similar. I pondered over that for awhile, even thinking that maybe they were own by the same parent company (a case similar to Huish). But I did NOT know Oxycheq came out with the design first. I have the DGX version, and it is definitely very streamlined and narrow, etc. Almost too much, which is one of the questions I've posed. But that question aside, Patrick and you are both innovators and you have my respect.
 
I do not think VDH intended to copy the Oxy Mack V. The VDH wings have their own design elements, like the internal bungee system and they are a bit shorter and wider when inflated. But anyways, there are similarities as well, extreme both are in the small frontal footprint.

I love my Oxy Travel plate. Mine is an earlier version I guess. In any case, I have many dives on it and just recently fitted it back to my Oxy 18 when I put my VDH 23 on my VDH plate. My wife grabbed the VDH 18 out of my hands claiming it as hers!!!!!!!! Women!!!!!!!! I kinda like the 23 as it gives me a little bit more to deal with a steel tank or my camera when I forget to bring my float arms or offload lead for a switch to a steel tank. It is handy and still very small when the bungees have it fully retracted.

For warm water, tropical diving with minimal exposure suits, little or no weight load and importantly, aluminum tanks, 18 pounds lift wings are perfect. But, slip a steel tank into the rig, as I run into not infrequently in Florida and a few other places and I am now about 6 pounds more negative. Toss my camera in, up to 2 pounds negative without float arms and a exposure suit that needs lead to compensate for buoyancy and that suit then compresses at depth loosing much of that initial buoyancy and then consider as the OP points out that some plates might not allow full inflation, well, I have been on top with little positive buoyancy and the 18 pound wing inflated until it vents off! So, yeah, for such things, the 23 makes some sense. And, for all around diving, the 30 is still, IMO, the best size if one can justify only one wing. N

Absolutely. You did a quick version of the "how much lift do I need" math and it demonstrates why we have so many different capacity wings. I'm in the "only one wing" camp for now, which is why I chose around 30#. I'll eventually settle on one and sell the other(s). But if you routinely dive the same area(s), having purpose-built wings is the best option.
 
I do not think VDH intended to copy the Oxy Mack V. The VDH wings have their own design elements, like the internal bungee system and they are a bit shorter and wider when inflated. But anyways, there are similarities as well, extreme both are in the small frontal footprint.

I love my Oxy Travel plate. Mine is an earlier version I guess. In any case, I have many dives on it and just recently fitted it back to my Oxy 18 when I put my VDH 23 on my VDH plate. My wife grabbed the VDH 18 out of my hands claiming it as hers!!!!!!!! Women!!!!!!!! I kinda like the 23 as it gives me a little bit more to deal with a steel tank or my camera when I forget to bring my float arms or offload lead for a switch to a steel tank. It is handy and still very small when the bungees have it fully retracted.

For warm water, tropical diving with minimal exposure suits, little or no weight load and importantly, aluminum tanks, 18 pounds lift wings are perfect. But, slip a steel tank into the rig, as I run into not infrequently in Florida and a few other places and I am now about 6 pounds more negative. Toss my camera in, up to 2 pounds negative without float arms and a exposure suit that needs lead to compensate for buoyancy and that suit then compresses at depth loosing much of that initial buoyancy and then consider as the OP points out that some plates might not allow full inflation, well, I have been on top with little positive buoyancy and the 18 pound wing inflated until it vents off! So, yeah, for such things, the 23 makes some sense. And, for all around diving, the 30 is still, IMO, the best size if one can justify only one wing. N
You’re right, the VDH wing is not really a knock off as much as it was heavily influenced by the Mach V.
I even heard from the VDH clan (many are contributors over here) that Bryan wanted to know from everyone what they thought a perfect wing should be like and everyone said to design it like the Mach V.
I personally like the VDH series wings the best. I like the tad wider and the internal bungee. I like the inflator hose too. Everything about it is perfect and that’s why I continue to endorse it as the number one wing to be paired with my plate.
I’m going to make you really jealous now and tell you that I have an 18 VDH wing in pristine condition being stored, just waiting for the day that I might go to warm water to dive.

Unfortunately, as so many of us have experienced severe problems with supply, prices of materials, consumables, etc. VDH wings are on hold right now until further notice. This Covid crap really sucks!!!

If I was to design a wing, I would have to really think about it and find the perfect balance of characteristics. I think the Mach V inner panel is too narrow. I think it needs to be about 4” wide not less than 3”. And I think the wing should be a tad shorter too. It could benefit from a little more stability without tacoing. I would have a tough time trying to improve on the VDH wing to be honest.

You have to take the era into consideration too though. The Mach V was designed during a time when there was a race and everything was about streamlining, slipstream, trim, narrow, minimizing any drag, etc. Patrick came out with this design that was so radical at the time that it knocked the wind out of every competitor, nobody had anything remotely close. And the way ego’s fly in the dive gear world, especially in a niche area like wings, nobody would dare copy him because that would mean he had a great idea and they lost.
It’s still kind of that way but maybe not as fanatical. It was definitely a time when the puniest wing won.
The OMS, Hollis, and several other of that wider inner panel, wide outer style are actually an older design from when single tank wings first came out. The Oxycheq Signature and razor wings were this style. They work, there’s nothing wrong with them.
 
I notice that DGX, Oxycheq, Mares, and Apeks all look disturbingly similar. I pondered over that for awhile, even thinking that maybe they were own by the same parent company (a case similar to Huish). But I did NOT know Oxycheq came out with the design first.

The Oxy was the first of the new style of super slim wing. Credit were credit is due. The Oxy Mach V was and is the slimmest of wings that I have seen and it was first. My Oxy 30 was sans slots, it is that old. I added some however. I have had it a long time. When I first saw the Oxy 30 MV it was like, whoa!!!!!!, what is that! It was different and I had to have one. It is my favorite wing and is currently installed on my early (prototype) Freedom Plate. I just dove with it a couple of weeks ago on the wreck of the Zebulon Pike or General Pike (??) in Table Rock lake.

These wings, the ones you mention OP, well, they do look much alike or share similar features, it is convergent evolution. They all look similar for the same reason so many cars look identical today, the forces driving the designs (laws, physics, regulation, crash protection---I hate car analogies, lol!) are the same. No, wing BCs are not being driven by regulation or crash protection, lol, but market forces now favor the slim, low profile designs innovated largely by OxyCheq. And tech (diving) or at least the tech look is also now a major driving force in diver consumer choices of gear.

James
 
You’re right, the VDH wing is not really a knock off as much as it was heavily influenced by the Mach V. ------- If I was to design a wing ----- I would have a tough time trying to improve on the VDH wing to be honest.

I was a relatively early adopter of the Oxy wings with double hose regulators. I blabbered about them from early on and I am to be found on said VDH forum from time to time, wink, wink. The Oxy Travel Plate does work very well with the double hose regulator. And still does though the VDH plate offers a bit more stability.

You are right, I think the VDH wing series hit the sweet spot for features, profile and sizes and price. They are sweet wings, about perfect, not sure how they could be improved. I do like self fabric wings, to reduce weight for travel and also that ceramic material Oxy has used for toughness.
 
...Unfortunately, as so many of us have experienced severe problems with supply, prices of materials, consumables, etc. VDH wings are on hold right now until further notice. This Covid crap really sucks!!!

If I was to design a wing, I would have to really think about it and find the perfect balance of characteristics. I think the Mach V inner panel is too narrow. I think it needs to be about 4” wide not less than 3”. And I think the wing should be a tad shorter too. It could benefit from a little more stability without tacoing. I would have a tough time trying to improve on the VDH wing to be honest.

...The OMS, Hollis, and several other of that wider inner panel, wide outer style are actually an older design from when single tank wings first came out. The Oxycheq Signature and razor wings were this style. They work, there’s nothing wrong with them.

I think you summed a lot of it up for me. We as consumers all work within the bounds we have, which (even during COVID) pamper us compared to most of the world. I think the VDH is ideal. I also think I want to dive and not wait for the golden wing. Not the company's fault... Blame mother nature!

I agree with your evaluation of the Oxy. The inner panel is too narrow on the DGX (and assumedly the Oxy since they are basically the same panels), and I think a little more width would be a good thing. But it has made a huge impact for good reason!

But that's just it... There's nothing really wrong with any of them. @AustinV dives an OMS 32# and likes it. I have it also. Others say it's too big. Most everyone likes the DGX/Oxy, while I say its inner panel is too small and it's a bit too narrow. It's all about preference. But I do find the thinking behind the designs interesting.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/peregrine/

Back
Top Bottom