Help Get BC Myths Tested On MythBusters!

[-hh]

Actually, it's not. It's a back inflate, but not a BP/wing. It's poorly designed, in my opinion.

If there is a clear distinction in definitions between the two, then it can be articulated in writing. However, from a holistic perspective, let's be sure to determine if it is semantic hair-splitting that doesn't really pertain to its capabilities and form/fit/function.

Specifically, what I'm referring to is to challenge the validity of claiming differentiation based upon the material selection of the backpack (ie, plastic vs metal). Similarly, a claim of differentiation based upon if QD clips are/aren't present on its harness. The litmus test is: how specifically do these attributes make a meaningful difference in the system's performance?

FWIW, I don't dispute that there are some "Wing BCs" that are lousy designs. However, the key question is why. Is it because they're cluttered with pockets, padding and lousy weight-integration pockets? Afterall, such features are also possible on a backplate's harness, here, here and here.

An old Mae West is not on topic, either here or there?

I would disagree with you on that point. A Mae West is a vest and they were used as BC's by some early divers. They're what the horse collar came from.

The horsecollar is yet another basic style of a buoyancy compensating bladder which is available for divers to use - - and IMO it would be of interest to include it in a "dive drag" performance test.

It is easy for us to forget the horsecollar, since it faded from general popularity roughly 25 years ago. However, there's still some of us that do remember them.

I am the original poster (OP) of both original posts (op's) and I am the one that has set the parameters of what is on topic! I chose Vest, Back Inflate and BP/W because those are the modern Buoyancy Compensators (BC's) one usually finds/buys/researches for diving today.

Personally, I think that a horsecolar would be a real contender, although its probably very difficult to still find them new for sale. And as per the above, you'll need to provide me a convincing definition that differentiates between a "Wing BC" and a BP/Wing on a meaningful capability basis...AFAIC, there's really only three categories of BC forms: inflation/front (horsecollar), inflation/rear (wing) and inflation/both (jacket) - - the rest of a BC's attributes are merely implimentation details in material selections and other unrelated features (aux pockets, weight integration, etc), even though these will probably make a difference on streamlining performance...the point is that we should be able to eventually conclude: "...there's X amount of difference between bladder location, Y amount of difference from Weight Integration and Z from other Junk...".

Your best bet IMO is to challenge a physics major, hydrodynamics engineer, or somesuch who is an avid diver to expand this area of research, possibly to the dissertation level. The type and depth (no pun intended) of research necessary lends itself to academic research, if appropriate protocols and controls can be established. That, I think, is the bigger challenge - reliable, peer-testable protocols under laboratory conditions. Not Mythbusters.

Agreed, such as what I was referring to yesterday when I mentioned getting hooked into SIT as a Senior Design research project. Pragmatically, that's an optional alternative to MythBusters (and IMO, scientifically preferrable).


-hh

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

All righty then; this is where I suggested Bob hijack a different thread with his False Claims that I attacked him.
Kind of funny, that the first evidence Bob presents is a post where Bob tells everyone what I want.

My problem with that is that Bob has pretty much never known what I want, even when I repeat it over and over.

Or perhaps constantly spinning, twisting and propagandizing false versions of my views, wants and practices is but one of his bullying ways.

Sure ... one of your famed "Warped World" threads ... since closed ... where you used the terms "sloppy" and "ignorant" in reference to myself and other posters. Those are not names?

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/bu...-world-evolution-bp-w-subgroup-mindset-2.html

I'll call your attention to my post #38, and your reply #44 ... and again, I'll leave it to whoever bothers to read it to decide who's telling the truth.

OK; here is my post :44 ...

it is clear that Halemano has an agenda.

ya think?

....

he wants to promote what he uses, and what he sees most often. No biggie ... in the big picture, he's right that it's what most divers around the world are wearing. So in that respect he's promoting a perspective that the majority of divers can relate to. So I guess it's better than some of the other agendas I've seen on ScubaBoard over the years.

For years I have openly admitted my main agenda on SB; my dislike of sloppy, unsupported and ignorant typing!

I also point out when English comprehension and composition skills are not great, even among otherwise intelligent seeming folk who's native language is English.

Please show quotes that show that I "want to promote what I use."

I contend that I have mostly asked questions about and challenged sloppy, unsupported and ignorant typing with regards to much of the "advise" on ScubaBoard.

I guess Bob needs cliff notes; I "asked questions about and challenged" your "sloppy, unsupported and ignorant typing" (called your typing names, did not call you names).I even sorta complimented you; "otherwise intelligent seeming"

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

Bob, this is still bullying from my perspective, because I do not remember attacking you; all I remember is defending myself. The name calling is easy; I am sure I was not the first to call someone names. My memory is that I was called names many, many times before I replied in kind.

If my memory is not correct, you should be able to provide quotes, as proof. Without proof, these are just more spin on your bullying lies!



It would be preferable if you provide those quote proofs in the threads where they happened (or if it's a closed thread, use this one; http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/ba...045-help-get-bc-myths-tested-mythbusters.html).

Incidentally ... you don't consider "bully" and "liar" name-calling? Who's using those terms right here?

"Techspurt"? That is your term for myself and several other people you've argued with on various threads ... what is a techspurt anyway?

It is not name calling when you are bullying and telling lies; it is the truth!

Bob, again with the false accusations. Please show proof, as in quotes, where I ever called you a techspurt.

 

[Thalassamania]

The data is already out there, you just have to look.

 

[Thalassamania]

If there is a clear distinction in definitions between the two, then it can be articulated in writing. However, from a holistic perspective, let's be sure to determine if it is semantic hair-splitting that doesn't really pertain to its capabilities and form/fit/function.

Specifically, what I'm referring to is to challenge the validity of claiming differentiation based upon the material selection of the backpack (ie, plastic vs metal). Similarly, a claim of differentiation based upon if QD clips are/aren't present on its harness. The litmus test is: how specifically do these attributes make a meaningful difference in the system's performance?

FWIW, I don't dispute that there are some "Wing BCs" that are lousy designs. However, the key question is why. Is it because they're cluttered with pockets, padding and lousy weight-integration pockets? Afterall, such features are also possible on a backplate's harness, here, here and here.





The horsecollar is yet another basic style of a buoyancy compensating bladder which is available for divers to use - - and IMO it would be of interest to include it in a "dive drag" performance test.

It is easy for us to forget the horsecollar, since it faded from general popularity roughly 25 years ago. However, there's still some of us that do remember them.




Personally, I think that a horsecolar would be a real contender, although its probably very difficult to still find them new for sale. And as per the above, you'll need to provide me a convincing definition that differentiates between a "Wing BC" and a BP/Wing on a meaningful capability basis...AFAIC, there's really only three categories of BC forms: inflation/front (horsecollar), inflation/rear (wing) and inflation/both (jacket) - - the rest of a BC's attributes are merely implimentation details in material selections and other unrelated features (aux pockets, weight integration, etc), even though these will probably make a difference on streamlining performance...the point is that we should be able to eventually conclude: "...there's X amount of difference between bladder location, Y amount of difference from Weight Integration and Z from other Junk...".




Agreed, such as what I was referring to yesterday when I mentioned getting hooked into SIT as a Senior Design research project. Pragmatically, that's an optional alternative to MythBusters (and IMO, scientifically preferrable).


-hh

Steve Paulet (who shows up here once in a while) when he was a student in Ocean Engineering, did this project using an instrumented ship model tow tank.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

Since many of you seem to be buying into the propaganda spewing from a few loud members of the SB "Techspurts" let's look a little closer at the above quote.

Here on SB, many new divers ask for help choosing BC's. Interestingly, they often have a lot more in common with the typical diver I encounter, when compared to the divers the "Techspurts" encounter.

...


AFAIR, I have only pointed out when "Techspurts" type their opinion as if it were fact! If the "Techspurts" could type their opinion as opinion, I would then only perhaps type my opinion.

Bob, here is the first post where I used the already existing word "techspurt", on ScubaBoard. The person I quoted when I made that post is the only SB member who can really claim I pretty much called him a "techspurt" but he is not a vengeful techspurt and I like his fins.

After that Warped BP/W Mindset thread, where I first used "techspurt" three times in one post, never mentioning you, it seems the next time "techspurt" was used was by you!

cuyler ... I'd sit this one out before you get labelled a "techspurt" and made the subject of the next installment in the "Warped World" series ...

At most, the SB member I quoted in that post could feel "labeled" - another seems to have labeled himself. :kiss2:

Who is SB?
And what is a techspurt? Sure sounds messy, but who knows ... might be kinda fun ...

If I have ever even implied techspurt regards you, it was after you implied techspurt regards you.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Halemano ... I'm not quite sure what relevence your above posts have in this thread ... but since you're going to bring it here ... let's please put some context around it.

Here is the post I was responding to in that other ... now closed ... thread.

I have debated with myself on multiple occasions whether or not to report the OP for it's inflammatory title and obnoxious quote. I haven't done it yet so I guess I probably won't but it is clear that Halemano has an agenda.

... to which I replied ...

ya think?

It's really a matter of preference. If a jacket BC works for you, then use one. If a back-inflate style BCD is more your preference, get one of those. If the BP/W makes ya grin, go with it.

We all dive in different environments. Often the gear you use is determined by the environment you dive in ... and how well it plays with the conditions and the other gear you use.

The OP lives in Hawaii ... he wants to promote what he uses, and what he sees most often. No biggie ... in the big picture, he's right that it's what most divers around the world are wearing. So in that respect he's promoting a perspective that the majority of divers can relate to. So I guess it's better than some of the other agendas I've seen on ScubaBoard over the years.

As for the original question ... I've been using a BP/W since about 2004. I chose it because it works better for me than the other styles I tried. In OW class I used a jacket style BCD, and for the first three years I used a back-inflate style. Jackets were never comfortable, so I quickly decided I didn't like them. And although I was perfectly content with my TUSA Imprex Pro and my ScubaPro SuperHawk, when I tried a BP/W I felt like I had more control ... so why wouldn't I want one?

Other people's mileage may vary ... and that's OK. One of the benefits of a forum like ScubaBoard is reading about what works for other people and why. If we could only do it without making it sound like those who make different choices than ours are somehow wrong, it'd make for some interesting conversation.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

... to which you responded ...

For years I have openly admitted my main agenda on SB; my dislike of sloppy, unsupported and ignorant typing!

I also point out when English comprehension and composition skills are not great, even among otherwise intelligent seeming folk who's native language is English.

Please show quotes that show that I "want to promote what I use."

I contend that I have mostly asked questions about and challenged sloppy, unsupported and ignorant typing with regards to much of the "advise" on ScubaBoard.

You seem to enjoy being unnecessarily rude to people, picking just enough out of their post to make some snide comment about how sloppy or ignrant they are ... or how they lack reading comprehension skills ... as you did in your reply to me.

You like to go from forum to forum to forum creating threads you KNOW will be controversial ... and taking just those pieces of someone's reply that you can use to insult them ... as you did above ... in order to create an argument. You completely ignored the context of the one part of a sentence you picked out to argue about ... which also ignored the fact that I was, in fact, defending your viewpoint. I don't think you wanted a defense ... you wanted an argument. And so you chose to only look at the few words in a multi-paragraph post that you could use to create one. And in crafting your response to the few words you could use to create one, you were intentionally rude, insulting, and condescending.

That, I think, is just who you are ... a rude, insulting, and condescending person.

You continue to assert that you somehow have a right to tell people which threads they're allowed (by your criteria) to post in ... even to the point of taking pieces of a disjointed conversation from a completely unrelated thread, in order to create yet another internet argument on a different thread ... as you have just done here.

To me it seems that you just enjoy engaging people in internet arguments ... taunting them with your rude, condescending comments until they respond, and then acting all hurt and treated unfairly. That's why so many of your threads have ultimately ended up closed ... which you THEN respond to by creating another thread whining about how ScubaBoard management is out to get you, and in cahoots with certain members ... which is, of course, absurd.

You have posted on other threads that you want adult conversation. Well, in order to achieve that end, you must first learn how to behave as an adult.

Give it a try sometime ... maybe if you stopped being such a rude, condescending, anal-retentive individual, people like myself would quit reacting in ways you apparently don't like.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

... and just to play your game a bit more ... I will call your attention to this post ...

Not a perfect segue, but I have tried to set an example of dealing with what I consider to be unjust posts, in the thread they were originally posted in.

... which by making your two posts above (#72 and 73) you CLEARLY DID NOT DO.

Therefore, applying your own criteria, that makes you a LIAR!

... and since you are doing what you've complained about me doing, it also makes you a HYPOCRITE!

Are you happy yet? You seem to enjoy this sort of behavior, since you felt it necessary to revive an old thread to continue doing it ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

One more ... just because I feel in a giving mood this holiday season ...

For years I have openly admitted my main agenda on SB; my dislike of sloppy, unsupported and ignorant typing!

I also point out when English comprehension and composition skills are not great, even among otherwise intelligent seeming folk who's native language is English.

Please show quotes that show that I "want to promote what I use."

I contend that I have mostly asked questions about and challenged sloppy, unsupported and ignorant typing with regards to much of the "advise" on ScubaBoard.

It's usually good form ... if you're going to be insulting about someone else's English comprehension and composition skills ... to not make stupid errors with your own.

Do you know the difference between the words "advise" and "advice"?

Surely someone as quick as you are to call out others for sloppy, unsupported and ignorant typing must ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[JKPAO]

Oh to what end of this invaluable grammatical assistance!
see you topside! John