BP/W with weight belt

[Keith.M]

BTW, this is an old thread....

It's almost a brand new thread compared to some I have seen revived!

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

"Balanced rig" as I've been taught means that the weight is split up between the diver's body and the BC so that each is roughly neutral. That way you can doff your rig at depth without heading for the surface sans BC or vice versa.

As you get into colder water, this typically means more weight on the diver's body. I don't know why anyone would call all the weight on the BC a 'balanced rig'.

BTW, this is an old thread....

I too was confused about the terminology and thought "balanced" meant that both diver and SCUBA unit were equal in buoyancy at depth meaning you could take off your rig and both would be perfectly neutral. Upon further reading it turns out I was mistaken and reading the descriptions means all weight on the rig. Actually, looking back, the first time I saw the term "balanced" it was first used by the GUE/DIR crowd to describe all ballast put onto the rig to eliminate the need for a weightbelt. Prior to that I don't remember that term used by any other official organization/group/school/agency prior to GUE, so I'm assuming GUE pretty much owns the term and can use it to describe their weighting philosophy any way they see fit, but to be honest I really don't know.
Maybe somebody from GUE reading this could straighten us out once and for all.

To be honest I didn't look at the OP date to know it was an old thread, but thanks for that.

 

[danvolker]

I too was confused about the terminology and thought "balanced" meant that both diver and SCUBA unit were equal in buoyancy at depth meaning you could take off your rig and both would be perfectly neutral. Upon further reading it turns out I was mistaken and reading the descriptions means all weight on the rig. Actually, looking back, the first time I saw the term "balanced" it was first used by the GUE/DIR crowd to describe all ballast put onto the rig to eliminate the need for a weightbelt. Prior to that I don't remember that term used by any other official organization/group/school/agency prior to GUE, so I'm assuming GUE pretty much owns the term and can use it to describe their weighting philosophy any way they see fit, but to be honest I really don't know.
Maybe somebody from GUE reading this could straighten us out once and for all.

To be honest I didn't look at the OP date to know it was an old thread, but thanks for that.

Pretty sure the accepted meaning implies that the bp/wing/regs/can light...all of the rig, is something you can swim up to the surface if you have a total wing failure. A weight belt would be outside of this discussion, as ditchable weight is not part of the discussion of the rig itself being balanced.

Additionally, you might have a balanced rig that weighs 3 pounds with a full tank at 90 feet deep (wetsuit compression) , which obviously you could swim up....would be balanced....and you might add a rubber weight belt with 6 more pounds so that you can drop easily from surface with buoyant wet suit,,,,and at the bottom if shooting video or lobstering, you might need to be solid on the bottom when over bottom safe for this. If you can still swim the weight belt AND the rig up from the bottom, then I would suggest you can include it in your "balanced rig"....if you have to ditch it to swim to the surface, it is not part of a balanced rig.

 

[decompression]

Pretty sure the accepted meaning implies that the bp/wing/regs/can light...all of the rig, is something you can swim up to the surface if you have a total wing failure. A weight belt would be outside of this discussion, as ditchable weight is not part of the discussion of the rig itself being balanced.

Additionally, you might have a balanced rig that weighs 3 pounds with a full tank at 90 feet deep (wetsuit compression) , which obviously you could swim up....would be balanced....and you might add a rubber weight belt with 6 more pounds so that you can drop easily from surface with buoyant wet suit,,,,and at the bottom if shooting video or lobstering, you might need to be solid on the bottom when over botton safe for this. If you can still swim the weight belt AND the rig up from the bottom, then I would suggest you can include it in your "balanced rig"....if you have to ditch it to swim to the surface, it is not part of a balanced rig.

I'll go with Dan on this. Now, "weight distribution" is the dividing up of lead.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DeepSeaExplorer]

I too was confused about the terminology and thought "balanced" meant that both diver and SCUBA unit were equal in buoyancy at depth meaning you could take off your rig and both would be perfectly neutral. Upon further reading it turns out I was mistaken and reading the descriptions means all weight on the rig. Actually, looking back, the first time I saw the term "balanced" it was first used by the GUE/DIR crowd to describe all ballast put onto the rig to eliminate the need for a weightbelt. Prior to that I don't remember that term used by any other official organization/group/school/agency prior to GUE, so I'm assuming GUE pretty much owns the term and can use it to describe their weighting philosophy any way they see fit, but to be honest I really don't know.
Maybe somebody from GUE reading this could straighten us out once and for all.

To be honest I didn't look at the OP date to know it was an old thread, but thanks for that.

You have it right. The GUE uniform for cave is/was 104s and a dry suit. I preferred to call it a counter-balanced rig, meaning the weight of the tanks counter balances the buoyance of the dry suit. If a diver is separated from his rig, the diver will be on the cave ceiling and the rig will be on the floor, which is obviously not a good situation. (Depending on the inflation of the wing of course.) A true balanced rig, where the diver was neutral independent the rig, would be unnecessarily heavy.

 

[mruseless]

It's almost a brand new thread compared to some I have seen revived!

Yeah, sorry about that. I was searching for something and replied without even thinking about how old the original post was.

---------- Post added October 20th, 2014 at 03:03 PM ----------

The definition of balanced rig as I understand it is in two parts: First, that you can swim your rig up with no air in the wing and a squeezed down drysuit, and second, that you can hold a stop with nearly empty tanks at 3m. The balance is between having enough weight to stay down at your 3m stop without corking and being able to swim up the whole rig with full tanks and no bouyancy device.

 

[dumpsterDiver]

Pretty sure the accepted meaning implies that the bp/wing/regs/can light...all of the rig, is something you can swim up to the surface if you have a total wing failure. A weight belt would be outside of this discussion, as ditchable weight is not part of the discussion of the rig itself being balanced.

Additionally, you might have a balanced rig that weighs 3 pounds with a full tank at 90 feet deep (wetsuit compression) , which obviously you could swim up....would be balanced....and you might add a rubber weight belt with 6 more pounds so that you can drop easily from surface with buoyant wet suit,,,,and at the bottom if shooting video or lobstering, you might need to be solid on the bottom when over bottom safe for this. If you can still swim the weight belt AND the rig up from the bottom, then I would suggest you can include it in your "balanced rig"....if you have to ditch it to swim to the surface, it is not part of a balanced rig.

Everything I learned about DIR has been from the internet. I personally think the issue of a balanced rig is VERY, VERY important. I see people use the term in many different ways and I think the term has been re-defined by common usage so often that it is losing it's meaning- which I think is unfortunate because it has huge implications for safety.

I don't completely agree with Dan's description in that he excludes the weight belt. My view of a balanced rig means the entire scuba unit, BC, lead weights and or weight belt, plate, wetsuit and pretty much everything the diver carries or has with them.

The overall idea is that a diver with a "balanced rig" can swim to the surface and not die if they lose the use of their BC (and possibly their dry suit, I was always a little unclear on that aspect). But since I don't use a dry suit, I don't really have to worry about that for myself.

The concept of a NOT balanced rig is a diver using heavy steel tanks, a thin wetsuit and possibly no lead. If they lose the BC, they have no ditchable ballast and they will be too heavy to swim to the surface. If they are diving deep with a thick wetsuit, the situation may be worse.

So MY interpretation of a balanced rig is along those lines... A diver should have enough ditchable ballast (generally lead, but could be a heavy light as well) to be able to swim to the surface without the use of a BC. With some divers, wetsuits and tank combinations, there is no need to wear any ditchable lead. I dive like this often with a single steel tank, a pony and a 3mm wetsuit and a regular BC or BP/W with an aluminum plate. I allow my son to dive like this as well, although he is skinny and the steel tank is probably close to what he can swim up.

To be honest I am much more comfortable with him wearing an aluminum tank and 4-6 lbs on a (rubber) weightbelt. I feel it is safer.

For myself, I sometimes can get two dives out of a big steel tank (150 cu-ft). I often do the first dive (when the tank is heavy) with no weightbelt and then put on a 6 lb belt for the second dive. I am a little heavier on the second dive, but it all works well.

I get very nervous when I hear people talking about combining steel plates and steel tanks and possibly unditchable lead with a thick wetsuit.

I hear people claim that someone wearing a 15 lb weightbelt is not diving a balanced rig because if they lost their BC they could not swim up without dropping lead... I think this is an incorrect interpretation. The whole idea of a balanced rig is not to bet your life on a BC (and all the parts that can fail in a BC system). In a true emergency, the option of dropping ballast is there (at least for recreational non-deco dives).

I also am amazed that people come on this board and say that a diver is wearing too much lead (and thus is not diving a balanced rig) if they can't just swim up from depth without dropping anything. That is ridiculous because a diver with a double layer 7 mm suit with maybe a third layer of a hooded vest is going to get a huge swing in bouyancy at a depth of 80 or 100 feet. I think some people believe that a diver is overweighted if they have to add any air to their BC at depth to stay neutral.

My understanding of balanced is pretty simplistic.. don't bet your life on a BC.

Of course a diver can carry alternate or supplemental means to attain buoyancy like a lift bag, SMB (or even a double bladder), but these are outside of the balanced rig concept because the diver should be able to survive without them (if diving balanced). I myself carry such redundant buoyancy devices because it would give me more options should my BC fail again.. it has happened a few times for me.

So who's right Dan or me or neither?

 

[mruseless]

The concept of a balanced rig is the ideal situation. With any given combination of tanks, exposure suits, and other gear, you should strive for (1) being able to swim it up with no buoyancy device, and (2) be able to hold a 3m/10ft stop with nearly empty tanks. If you can't do this, then weight yourself to be able to do (2), but make sure that the difference between (1) and (2) is ditch-able weight.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

OK, so where I dive the water is between 46 and 53 degrees.
I can and do dive here with no BC wearing a 7mm wetsuit, steel plate/steel tank/weightbelt all figured out so weighting is perfect, and also happens that I can float on the surface before and after the dive the way I have myself weighted without the aid of any air inflation device (BC).
I can swim up my rig (plate and tank) from depth and not die. Me sitting here typing this is living proof.
So would being able to dive a rig with no BC be considered a "balanced rig" just by default?
Or would that just be considered proper weighting in general?

 

[mruseless]

OK, so where I dive the water is between 46 and 53 degrees.
I can and do dive here with no BC wearing a 7mm wetsuit, steel plate/steel tank/weightbelt all figured out so weighting is perfect, and also happens that I can float on the surface before and after the dive the way I have myself weighted without the aid of any air inflation device (BC).
I can swim up my rig (plate and tank) from depth and not die. Me sitting here typing this is living proof.
So would being able to dive a rig with no BC be considered a "balanced rig" just by default?
Or would that just be considered proper weighting in general?

Can you hold a 3m/10ft stop with nearly empty tanks? If yes, then you are "balanced". If no, then add ditchable weight until you can hold the 3m stop.