Questions concerning Backplates.

[Eric Sedletzky]

I think this whole topic has gotten hugely overblown.
This is getting down to microscopic hairsplitting at it's finest.
I've gotten to the point in my diving that a BC of any kind has become more of a hindrance that an advantage. The only time I actually use the "BC" part is below 40' - 50', and even then it's just a huff of air, so the amount of gas in the bubble is small enough it really doesn't matter. Basically I just use the wing to take the edge off at depth, and to float my rig on the surface if I'm kayak diving (getting dressed in the water). Plus, due to the nature of my diving, I don't stay in "perfect trim" throughout my dive. Don't get me wrong, I can stay in perfect trim if I want, but our style is much more dynamic than that as hunters, which is my primary reason for my diving these days.
So all this talk about air transfer yada yada doesn't really apply to me since I am in so many positions, inverted, upside down, vertical, flat, to do what I have to do, whatever, the last thing I'm worried about is managing a "bubble" that is usually so small anyway (when I use a wing) that it doesn't matter. I don't have any "rules" that says I have to stay flat the whole dive and only use my bottom dump to get rid of air, I am free to arch my body up and dump from the inflator if I choose. I know it's hard for many of you zealots to wrap your head around that.

So Tobin, just coming from a neutral standpoint, why are you making and selling the Torus wing anyway? I tend to agree with you about single pontoons (didn't used to but I do now) and if donut wings really don't present any advantage then why even make them at all? And if you're going to make them then why no zipper?
It just seems like a business red herring to make something you don't believe in and then to have to deal with unstitching them and replacing bladders, plus the lost time for the customer, shipping costs, etc. it just seems like it wouldn't be worth hassling with them.
IMO if you're going to make a wing with an inner bladder then it should be accessible by a zipper so people (if they choose to) can make field repairs with those peel and stick Tear-Aid patches, they actually work pretty damn good. At that point I think it might relieve you of a lot of headache and grief.
BTW, other brands aren't immune to pinch flats, I had to fix a few on my Oxy wings.
I still think there is a market for a super simple single walled econo wing like they used to make. I know some of the guys in the Seadivers will fight you for one if they see it.

 

[cool_hardware52]

So Tobin, just coming from a neutral standpoint, why are you making and selling the Torus wing anyway? I tend to agree with you about single pontoons (didn't used to but I do now) and if donut wings really don't present any advantage then why even make them at all?

Eric, I've answered your question once already in this thread. A the risk of being repetitious we offer donut wings because so many people have been sucked into the myth that donut wings make you a better diver, with fresher breath and whiter teeth.

I have also stated previously that donuts are not evil, they just aren't the magical solution many promote them to be.

We started out with LCD style wings in 20, 30, and 40 lbs lift capacities. When we developed our Torus (as in Toroidal) wings I elected to size them in capacities that complement the horseshoe wings. That's why we make Torus wings in 17, 26, and 35 lbs lift capacities.

I have always argued that getting the lift capacity correct is more important than shape. A good majority of my customers dive cold water at home and warm water on vacation. Having a wider selection of lift capacities permits me to size a wing for cold water that is still reasonable to use in warm water.

With 30 mil bladders we now use, the 1050 duplex weave ballistic shells and our mounting technique that allow quick and easy removal of the wing from the plate we see very few pinch flats, that makes bladder access far less important. We do occasionally see them of course, but the wings can be serviced by us.

I will point out that we have about equal numbers of LCD wing and Torus wings returned for service, simply because many people (and many dive shops) don't want to work on their gear. I know that's hard for people like you and me to understand, but scuba is full of folks that aren't comfortable changing a low pressure hose......

Given that our narrow profile LCD wings dive pretty much *exactly* like a donut wing, if bladder access is your top criteria simply buy our LCD series wings.

I will admit there is a "hole" in our product line for those choose to believe that donut wings are magical, and are prone to damage things routinely.

I'll also point out that "zipperless" BC's are hardly revolutionary, all "single layer" wings, and all jacket style BC's offer no access to the inner urethane layer

Tobin

 

[ams511]

I will admit there is a "doughnut hole" in our product line for those choose to believe that donut wings are magical, and are prone to damage things routinely.

Here I fixed it for you.

But in all seriousness, here you go again blaming your customers and potential customers. You are an experienced diver, you know sometimes things happen beyond the control of the user. By your logic cars with 5-star safety ratings are designed for accident prone drivers. You mention the 30 mil bladder that you now use which I assume that is the black bladder, what was the mil on the thinner opaque bladder that you used to use?

---------- Post added March 28th, 2015 at 05:16 PM ----------

I'll also point out that "zipperless" BC's are hardly revolutionary, all "single layer" wings, and all jacket style BC's offer no access to the inner urethane layer.

My understanding is that nothing that can be fixed inside a bladderless BC so a zipper is not used. If you want to fix it you just patch the outside. Patching the outside would not work on a BC with a separate inner bladder.

---------- Post added March 28th, 2015 at 05:20 PM ----------

I still think there is a market for a super simple single walled econo wing like they used to make. I know some of the guys in the Seadivers will fight you for one if they see it.

The Zeagle Express Tech 24 lb wing is single walled, as well as the older Apeks and the UTD Alpha/Delta.

---------- Post added March 28th, 2015 at 05:26 PM ----------

Of course this is conjecture, though I do know the people that created Halcyon wings ......I think the 18 lb horseshoe wing is/was slicker than the 30 lb wing, and this may partially be the hydrodynamics of the two shapes--how they differ. The horseshoe is more like a catamaran for the water flow--with two slick hulls.....The donut shape is NOT as good at being pushed or dragged through the water efficiently.... And then we go on to what the "market" cares about, and I am in the 1% that cares about the extreme low drag for a BC system....So what I am saying, is that I think that Halcyon and others decided that the market wanted what they wanted.....and the slickness of the horseshoe was not significant to them....and that the familiarity with the donut caused the "market" to have a more warm and fuzzy reaction to it, regardless of actual functional differences.

I have never seen an Halcyon 18 lb wing so I really cannot comment on it. However looking at a DSS LCD wing I cannot imagine adding a piece at the bottom is going to significantly add drag underwater as the water is already disturbed by the upper arc of the wing, the diver's head and shoulders and the tank.

---------- Post added March 28th, 2015 at 05:36 PM ----------

From the early 90's to around 1997, the average dive consumer was so "stupid", that they based their purchase decisions on new BC's, on the sudden availability of new colors, bigger or more pockets, and a host of features totally antagonistic to better performance of a BC....Halcyon was able to knock many "conscious" for a while, and DSS and others have continued this trend to attempt to push "Function" over DEMA hype.
Bottom line, the mass market is a place where what is selling well, often has no relationship to what is good...Remember "Pet Rocks", "Slinky's", and "Hula Hoops" ? The Dive industry has been selling "Hula Hoop BC's" with great success, for decades now

I am sorry Dan but most divers are not stupid. They are new and base their equipment decisions on what is recommended to them by an experienced dive professional. Usually that means whatever the LDS has in stock. BTW, slinkys and hula hoops are still being sold over 50 years latter.

---------- Post added March 28th, 2015 at 05:59 PM ----------

One need only look at er ah well "general fluffiness" that has crept into several corners the BP&W world, adjustable harnesses, multiple drings, waist belt mounted weight pockets, plate pads, shoulder pads, multiple gas dumps etc. etc. etc. to realize that prepurchase perception vs actual performance in the water is now driving design far too often. It's all an effort to attract divers trained on jacket BC's that look at BP&W as uncomfortable and hard to use.

First, if doughnut wings offer no disadvantages then why not offer only doughnut wings?

Second, I am not sure how you can claim fluff has entered into the BP/W area. Harnesses such as the Transpac have been around for at least 15 years maybe longer. While I admit many of these items are added to increase manufacturer and LDS profits, some of these items are beneficial to the diver. Not everyone subscribes to the minimalist approach. Some divers have mobility problems so an adjustable harness is beneficial. Some divers hike to the dive spot so shoulder pads help with the strain. The DIR book recommends storing the SMB behind the plate pad. I see no reason to disparage divers for using or wanting these things.

 

[cool_hardware52]

My understanding is that nothing that can be fixed inside a bladderless BC so a zipper is not used. If you want to fix it you just patch the outside. Patching the outside would not work on a BC with a separate inner bladder.

"Your understanding" I assume that means you've never actually tried to repair a single layer inflatable, but if course that doesn't prevent you from offering an opinion on such a repair.

Here is the reality. Single layer inflatable use a thin layer of urethane laminated to the *inside* surface of a woven textile. Smearing Aqua seal or similar moisture cured urethane adhesives on the *outside* textile surface may offer temporary repair, but is not a reliable long term solution. There are many threads on the Deco Stop concerning trying to access the *inside* of single layer wings via the OPV or fill fitting holes. Probably a few on SB too. The gas can get past the failure on the inner layer, travel sideways through the fabric and exit at a point beyond the original damage.

Love to see a list of wing / bc manufacturers that advocate such repairs. Look here to see Halcyon's position on repairs, which BTW I understand and agree with.Patching Inflatable Products | Halcyon

Smearing aquaseal on the fabric (outside) of an inflatable is like trying to fix a roof leak from inside the attic…..

Tobin

 

[Pullmyfinger]

But in all seriousness, here you go again blaming your customers and potential customers. You are an experienced diver, you know sometimes things happen beyond the control of the user. By your logic cars with 5-star safety ratings are designed for accident prone drivers. You mention the 30 mil bladder that you now use which I assume that is the black bladder, what was the mil on the thinner opaque bladder that you used to use?.

You've got it bad for Tobin.

It had to have been over 5 years since DSS used thin bladders; based on the first wings I purchased.
If the flaw you are finding is to cite thin bladders; you are really reaching..... to back in the day!

These back plate and wing threads never fail to entertain.:cool2:

You REALLY have to dig hard to find fault with a complete rig that costs $460.

Cheers,
Mitch

---------- Post added March 28th, 2015 at 10:36 PM ----------

"Your understanding" I assume that means you've never actually tried to repair a single layer inflatable, but if course that doesn't prevent you from offering an opinion on such a repair.

Here is the reality. Single layer inflatable use a thin layer of urethane laminated to the *inside* surface of a woven textile. Smearing Aqua seal or similar moisture cured urethane adhesives on the *outside* textile surface may offer temporary repair, but is not a reliable long term solution. There are many threads on the Deco Stop concerning trying to access the *inside* of single layer wings via the OPV or fill fitting holes. Probably a few on SB too. The gas can get past the failure on the inner layer, travel sideways through the fabric and exit at a point beyond the original damage.

Love to see a list of wing / bc manufacturers that advocate such repairs. Look here to see Halcyon's position on repairs, which BTW I understand and agree with.Patching Inflatable Products | Halcyon

Smearing aquaseal on the fabric (outside) of an inflatable is like trying to fix a roof leak from inside the attic…..

Tobin

Your attempts at logic will not work.

Nobody will be happy unless you begin repairs immediately!
At no charge to the customer, postage paid by you, and include a free t-shirt.

It won't matter if other companies are not patching bladders.......don't you see?...YOU must do this!

It's like the "Walking Dead"....they will just keep coming!

 

[cool_hardware52]

First, if doughnut wings offer no disadvantages then why not offer only doughnut wings?

We offer 6 singles wings (7 if you include the Super Scooter wing) As I've explained before this allows me to match a diver's application with a given lift capacity. Most brands offer 2 maybe 3 choices.

People like choices.

I have the patterns and welding dies for all 7 wings.

I need to maintain inventory of spares for all these wings to be able to continue to serve the many thousands of DSS wing owners who have these wings.

There is zero reason not to offer all 7.

There is also zero reason to redesign our LCD wings to satisfy an internet myth. We've sold more LCD 30's than any other model. Apparently most buyers simply go and happily dive them…….

Tobin

 

[dumpsterDiver]

"Your understanding" I assume that means you've never actually tried to repair a single layer inflatable, but if course that doesn't prevent you from offering an opinion on such a repair.

Here is the reality. Single layer inflatable use a thin layer of urethane laminated to the *inside* surface of a woven textile. Smearing Aqua seal or similar moisture cured urethane adhesives on the *outside* textile surface may offer temporary repair, but is not a reliable long term solution. There are many threads on the Deco Stop concerning trying to access the *inside* of single layer wings via the OPV or fill fitting holes. Probably a few on SB too. The gas can get past the failure on the inner layer, travel sideways through the fabric and exit at a point beyond the original damage.

Love to see a list of wing / bc manufacturers that advocate such repairs. Look here to see Halcyon's position on repairs, which BTW I understand and agree with.Patching Inflatable Products | Halcyon

Smearing aquaseal on the fabric (outside) of an inflatable is like trying to fix a roof leak from inside the attic…..

Tobin

I've patched MANY bladderless BC's with a dab of aquaseal. I bought a used BC a while ago and it looked to have been pieced completely through both sides of the BC. I cut some old material from a failed BC and glued patches over the holes with aquaseal. I've used the BC a few dozen times in the last 3 years and zero problems. I would not attempt to patch a rip or failure that would be dangerous should the patch fail, but it is pretty easy to use aquaseal to address a few small holes in a typical BC. If you catch spiny lobsters and you (or anyone else on the boat) is at all careless about keeping the catch bag away from the bag of lobsters, it is not unusual to get a few small punctures- which are annoying more than anything else.

So the questions seems to be.. if you know that an accident with the plate being dropped can destroy the bladder in a wing due to the sharp edge of the plate, why not alter the plate so this accident can not occur so easily? Why make someone go through the inconvenience of assembling and disassembling their BP/W, literally THOUSANDS of times during the projected lifespan of the product?

Also why eliminate a zipper, which would allow the user to inspect the bladder and perform repairs themselves, rather than ruining the whole dive outing? Is it simply a cost savings that can be passed on to the consumer?

 

[cool_hardware52]

Second, I am not sure how you can claim fluff has entered into the BP/W area. Harnesses such as the Transpac have been around for at least 15 years maybe longer. While I admit many of these items are added to increase manufacturer and LDS profits, some of these items are beneficial to the diver. Not everyone subscribes to the minimalist approach. Some divers have mobility problems so an adjustable harness is beneficial. Some divers hike to the dive spot so shoulder pads help with the strain. The DIR book recommends storing the SMB behind the plate pad. I see no reason to disparage divers for using or wanting these things.

I'm not "disparaging divers" I'm commenting on manufacturers that choose to market their goods based on prepurchased perceptions vs post purchased reality.

Most of the "extras" eventually end up being removed from these "fluffy" rigs and left at home.

I routinely encounter (often several a day) new divers (you know the people I disparage, and blame for everything) seeking my advise on their first rig. It's very common for them to view a BP&W as uncomfortable, and hard to use. They definitely believe they need pockets and a reef dragger corrugated hose and a hose actuated pull dump and an "Air2" and integrated weights and extra drings and shoulder pads and plate pads and quick releases on the harness etc. etc. etc.

Often these folks *only* experience and knowledge of gear is what they were exposed to at the LDS during their initial training. They have been conditioned to want the "advanced" "Tech" bc, the one with all the "features"

I typically ask these folks why they are interested in a BP&W. Usually the answer is they a friend has one and loves it, and or they want something streamlined, and simple. That's when I point out that starting with a simple clean BP&W and festooning it with all the extras they think they need is going to turn it back into the BC they are trying to leave behind.

I point out that pads of all types add buoyancy, and eliminating inherent buoyancy is one of the real benefits of a simple BP&W vs a typical BC. I take the time to explain that while a BP&W may look uncomfortable the reality is, correctly adjusted they essentially disappear underwater. I point out that divers doing multi-hour tech dives really can't tolerate something uncomfortable. If they really want pads I recommend they source a used youth wetsuit on ebay for $10-15 and cut it up. Zip tie a plate shaped piece to the plate and cut off the arms and slip them on to the shoulder straps. I tell them it will be less painful when after 3-4 dives they cut them off and throw them away. If they want or need to carry a lift bag ~$2 worth of bungee loops on the base of the plate works fine.

I often discuss how to correctly vent a wing, and the downsides of hose actuated rapid exhausts, and how to use a short streamlined fill hose. Often nobody has ever discussed the downsides of rapid exhausts/ cable wear etc.

I often discuss the pros and cons of combo Octo Inflators, many of these people have never encountered *anyone* who was willing to point out that the single benefit of a combo inflator, i.e. one less LP hose, needs to be weighted against the list of potential problems. Again these folks are typically on the steep part of their scuba gear learning curve.

It's pretty routine for new divers to add 1/2 dozen drings and keepers to their order in addition to the ones we furnish in a Harness kit. Why? because they are sure they will need them. The rig on display at the LDS had at least 10-12….. That's when I point out the dives I've done, and many, many others have done, with a mountain of gear using no more than the 5 drings standard to a "Hogarthian Harness" I can frequently hear the light bulb going off over the phone

Adjustable harnesses and shoulder quick releases. No doubt some divers need these, but not very many. One need only consider the 100,000 + BP&W's on the planet with no quick releases or quick adjusters. *SOMEHOW* divers use these everyday.

Again it's a prepurchase perception issue. The typical jacket BC user is used to ratcheting down their harness in a futile effort to keep their tank from flopping around, and they assume they will need to wear their BP&W harness just as snug. Once they understand that the plate takes the roll out of the cylinder and a regular Hog Harness need not be eye popping tight the demands for quick release / adjust on the fly harnesses mostly goes away. (I often take this opportunity to further abuse my potential customers by advising them that they should actually try their new rig before they purchase a DSS glide harness adapter. )

I routinely discuss weighting and how and where to carry ballast, and the impact on required wing capacity of having 100% of the required ballast on the rig for cold water diving. This often leads me to be able too recommend a smaller wing that is a practical compromise for warm and cold water diving. (More customer abuse!)

The fact remains that when many of the "old school" scuba companies decided to get into the BP&W business they let their "BC Product Managers" spec out the goods, and all too often the end result was complexity that may sell, but IMO, doesn't really serve the customer.

Tobin

---------- Post added March 29th, 2015 at 08:17 AM ----------

I've patched MANY bladderless BC's with a dab of aquaseal.

I'm happy for you. I've done countless repairs on all sorts of goods, some far more "mission critical" than a scuba BC, but I also recognize fully the risks *I'm* taking.

It would be irresponsible for me to recommend others do the same, and foolhardy to perform these repairs on a commercial basis.


Tobin

---------- Post added March 29th, 2015 at 08:38 AM ----------

Why make someone go through the inconvenience of assembling and disassembling their BP/W, literally THOUSANDS of times during the projected lifespan of the product?

Do you remove your reg after the dive? It takes less time to remove a DSS singles wing from the plate than it does to remove the typical Din Reg…...


I'm guess you don't dive doubles much. After pretty much "every" outing dives using doubles are burdened with the extraordinarily difficult and time consuming task of breaking down their ring into 1) Plate and Harness, 2) Wing 3) Cylinders.

One wonders *where* they find the time and energy……….

Tobin

 

[Lorenzoid]

I know the DSS wings have those rubber "locator" pins that make assembly and disassembly of the wing to the plate quick and easy, but is there a particular reason why the wing should NOT be left attached to the plate over the course of a dive trip? When I'm on a dive boat that provides "valet" service, the crew takes care of my gear, storing it overnight and setting it up in the morning. I found that if the wing became separated from the plate--all too easy when there is no fastener holding them together--it sometimes befuddled the crew how to reassemble them. So I replaced the rubber locator pins with plastic sex bolts (aka book screws). I pack the plate and wing separately for air travel, but then when I arrive at my destination dive shop, I assemble the wing and plate with the bolts and leave it that way for the remainder of the trip so that the wing and plate stay together the way the crew expects. Anything wrong with this?

 

[cool_hardware52]

I know the DSS wings have those rubber "locator" pins that make assembly and disassembly of the wing to the plate quick and easy, but is there a particular reason why the wing should NOT be left attached to the plate over the course of a dive trip? When I'm on a dive boat that provides "valet" service, the crew takes care of my gear, storing it overnight and setting it up in the morning. I found that if the wing became separated from the plate--all too easy when there is no fastener holding them together--it sometimes befuddled the crew how to reassemble them. So I replaced the rubber locator pins with plastic sex bolts (aka book screws). I pack the plate and wing separately for air travel, but then when I arrive at my destination dive shop, I assemble the wing and plate with the bolts and leave it that way for the remainder of the trip so that the wing and plate stay together the way the crew expects. Anything wrong with this?

With modest attention to packing wings are at little risk during air travel. DSS wings are quite tough as evidenced by your report, but the more time wing spends wrapped around the plate, particularly when there is no tank fitted the greater the chance of a pinch. Personally I'd not let others handle my gear with the wing assembled to the plate. I know for a absolute fact that any wing on the market today can be damaged via impact, and the most common "impactor" is the plate.

I'll point out again that nearly every wing we have returned for bladder replacement shows signs of having been bolted to the back plate. I would recommend against your current practice for any BP&W.

Tobin