Looking for new wing

[Nemrod]

I didn't start diving yesterday. I saw the evolution of the backplate from it origins in the cave community to the mainstream. Yes, the original plates were built for doubles because the cave community dove with back-mounted doubles. However, as time progressed and the backplate was refined, it could be used for both singles and doubles (excluding Light Monkey and the S-Tek). You are and Eric are the only people making the distinction between singles and doubles plates. You are calling fabric travel plates and double hose plates singles plates, when they were designed for another purpose and being single tank only was a limitation of the design.

Anything round or cylindrical is going to be unstable, be it on a perch or flat surface. I am sure when you travel with tanks you block them so they don't roll. The roll control tabs only help to align the wing to the tank those little rods are not going to stop the tank from rolling. The rubber pads that grip the cylinder and the cam band keep it from rolling.

I have seen your argument before about the distance between the tank and the plate. The DSS fans used to make a point that Tobin's plates had a shallower bend. I took out all my plates and measured them and from memory I think the difference between any of them was more than half an inch. I don't think an inch or two will make that much of a difference (if any) in trim.

While I (like you) am interested in gear and have far too much of it. At the end of the day it is not the equipment that makes the dive, it is the people, location, and weather.

Equipment purpose built to the task at the end of the day will be more comfortable and efficient. Me and Eric might be the only people who know the difference, I guess, most folks once thought the earth flat. People copying each other and all doing the same thing does not make a plate design which was intended to set doubles tanks close to the back, and which does exactly the opposite with a single tank, optimal for single tank use.

Your point about anything cylindrical being unstable, no. A cylinder on a flat surface has no potential energy. Perched atop that center channel designed for the purpose of attaching a doubles bands, so perched it has potential energy and wants to move to one or the other sides. If it did not there would be no need for the patches, roll control tabs or an STA. A single tank plate, flat or contoured, does not need either of those because the cam bands alone are sufficient to stabilize the tank side to side when the diver rolls side to side.

Like using a double tank wing with a single tank, it can work, but it is not optimal.

 

[Nemrod]

Not sure why you posted this. When Jakob sold them at Golem gear it came in two versions: regular and reversed. I think the regular was for doubles and the reversed was for rebreathers. Golem Gear specialized in rebreathers but also sold regular open circuit gear.

Here is something similar in a full plate version.

Would keeping the canister closer to the back and thus closer to the diver's lungs not be beneficial to WOB? Or are the counter lungs, especially if chest mounted, the dominate factor? If with back mounted counter lungs? I am just curious?

I have seen those dog bone plates with the reversed channels. They are interesting. I would like to try one and see how it might work in use. What advantage do you see or confer with a full width plate vs a dog bone shape, both with a reverse channels, for a single tank as you linked?

One thing Happy Diver pointed out, can we move the shoulder straps in a skosh? Just get rid of the top part of the dog bone. A singles plate does not need the width intended to accommodate double tanks (another less optimal compromise) so maybe scoot those shoulder straps in just a little bit for normal sized folks. The straps can share the same slots and still be a continuous Hog compliant loop of webbing.

And just so you know, our disagreement on the basic plate design does not mean that I question your experience and knowledge or discount it. I just do not agree in this case.

 

[lexvil]

I remembered that after I posted. I re-watched some of the online videos and I must say that is the most gimmicky BP/W on the market. It looks like the illegitimate child of the X-Tek and Hydros Pro.

It’s actually a nice plate and long enough for me. Once you change the webbing and lose the pads (back pad still on) it very comfortable.

 

[ams511]

Nemrod,

Backplates are a mature technology, I am not sure what type of innovation are you looking for besides not bending the plate. DSS made some innovations and so did ScubaPro with their S-Tek.

I don't buy your potential energy argument. We are talking about backplates and cylinders not roller coasters. Assuming the spine on a doubles plate is flat, then a tank perched on it should not move either. The contact point of the cylinder is within the width of the spine of the backplate, so does the width of the flat surface matter? I don't think so. Also we are talking scuba diving, so the plate is not going to be flat on your back (people are not perfectly symmetrical) and the plate it not going to be flat while you dive. Your back will move a bit while you kick.

I have dove with a STA (Halcyon) and without one (DSS) and found no difference. I never got around to buying the VDH plate but I do have the Oxy plate and really didn't think it was that great. I only used it once or twice. Being I lived and dived in South Florida weight was not an issue.

 

[ams511]

It’s actually a nice plate and long enough for me. Once you change the webbing and lose the pads (back pad still on) it very comfortable.

I am sure it is very nice.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Equipment purpose built to the task at the end of the day will be more comfortable and efficient. Me and Eric might be the only people who know the difference, I guess, most folks once thought the earth flat. People copying each other and all doing the same thing does not make a plate design which was intended to set doubles tanks close to the back, and which does exactly the opposite with a single tank, optimal for single tank use.

Your point about anything cylindrical being unstable, no. A cylinder on a flat surface has no potential energy. Perched atop that center channel designed for the purpose of attaching a doubles bands, so perched it has potential energy and wants to move to one or the other sides. If it did not there would be no need for the patches, roll control tabs or an STA. A single tank plate, flat or contoured, does not need either of those because the cam bands alone are sufficient to stabilize the tank side to side when the diver rolls side to side.

Like using a double tank wing with a single tank, it can work, but it is not optimal.

I think the reason all of them are still producing plates with channels is they can’t get away from the idea that people ‘might’ someday explore using doubles and they are terrified that they will be left out. The channel needs to be there so there is some place for the wing nuts to hide, both for a set of doubles or a STA. Nobody wants to commit to making a single tank only plate. Somehow they think people wanting to get into tech diving with doubles are all broke and can’t afford a proper steep bend plate for that purpose? They think all they can afford is one plate that will do it all. Or maybe they think somebody will do a full blown tech dive then after decide they want to a single tank dive so all they have to do is unscrew the doubles set and swap out the wing then bolt on the single that’s mounted on a STA. I don’t know what they think.
But if they think anybody into tech diving is too broke to afford another few hundred on another plate after spending thousands of dollars on tech gear is mistaken. This is probably the dumbest argument I’ve ever heard.
All you have to do is look at wing sales and that alone will tell you what most people are using backplates for. Most wings are sold for single tank use.

Back to work.

 

[JoeTPhilly]

I think the reason all of them are still producing plates with channels is they can’t get away from the idea that people ‘might’ someday explore using doubles and they are terrified that they will be left out. The channel needs to be there so there is some place for the wing nuts to hide, both for a set of doubles or a STA. Nobody wants to commit to making a single tank only plate. Somehow they think people wanting to get into tech diving with doubles are all broke and can’t afford a proper steep bend plate for that purpose? They think all they can afford is one plate that will do it all. Or maybe they think somebody will do a full blown tech dive then after decide they want to a single tank dive so all they have to do is unscrew the doubles set and swap out the wing then bolt on the single that’s mounted on a STA. I don’t know what they think.
But if they think anybody into tech diving is too broke to afford another few hundred on another plate after spending thousands of dollars on tech gear is mistaken. This is probably the dumbest argument I’ve ever heard.
All you have to do is look at wing sales and that alone will tell you what most people are using backplates for. Most wings are sold for single tank use.

Back to work.

I think it is easier to use the same plate. On my last trip, I was mostly diving doubles but on a couple dives were single tank dives. It was a breeze to switch. The regulators, not so...

 

[ams511]

Would keeping the canister closer to the back and thus closer to the diver's lungs not be beneficial to WOB? Or are the counter lungs, especially if chest mounted, the dominate factor? If with back mounted counter lungs? I am just curious?

I have no idea, I never said I was a rebreather expert. I just mentioned what Golem Gear used to sell.

I have seen those dog bone plates with the reversed channels. They are interesting. I would like to try one and see how it might work in use. What advantage do you see or confer with a full width plate vs a dog bone shape, both with a reverse channels, for a single tank as you linked?

The only advantage I see with a full size plate is weight (could be a disadvantage) and the ability to use a storage pack. Maybe Happy Diver will build us one. I never used a dog bone plate so I don't know if they are comfortable or not.

One thing Happy Diver pointed out, can we move the shoulder straps in a skosh? Just get rid of the top part of the dog bone. A singles plate does not need the width intended to accommodate double tanks (another less optimal compromise) so maybe scoot those shoulder straps in just a little bit for normal sized folks. The straps can share the same slots and still be a continuous Hog compliant loop of webbing.

I don't think the size of the backplate technically matters for doubles. But I would think that a dog bone plate would be uncomfortable when carrying heavy doubles from the parking lot to the dive site. Sometimes the distance can be a bit far. I am not sure how to make the shoulder straps adjustable while still using one piece webbing. Maybe multiple slots would work or a wider top slot with an insert to adjust the spacing.

And just so you know, our disagreement on the basic plate design does not mean that I question your experience and knowledge or discount it. I just do not agree in this case.

I feel the same.

 

[ams511]

I think the reason all of them are still producing plates with channels is they can’t get away from the idea that people ‘might’ someday explore using doubles and they are terrified that they will be left out. The channel needs to be there so there is some place for the wing nuts to hide, both for a set of doubles or a STA. Nobody wants to commit to making a single tank only plate. Somehow they think people wanting to get into tech diving with doubles are all broke and can’t afford a proper steep bend plate for that purpose? They think all they can afford is one plate that will do it all. Or maybe they think somebody will do a full blown tech dive then after decide they want to a single tank dive so all they have to do is unscrew the doubles set and swap out the wing then bolt on the single that’s mounted on a STA. I don’t know what they think.
But if they think anybody into tech diving is too broke to afford another few hundred on another plate after spending thousands of dollars on tech gear is mistaken. This is probably the dumbest argument I’ve ever heard.
All you have to do is look at wing sales and that alone will tell you what most people are using backplates for. Most wings are sold for single tank use.

Back to work.

Here is Nemrod's ultimate backplate:

Found this on Amazon, it was used in something called a modular BC. Details were scarce so I looked at the Seac website. It seems they replaced this product with a conventional backplate. Sometimes new and different doesn't sell. Remember the story of Ford and the Edsel. I remember Tobin mentioning that 80% of the rigs he sold were single tank.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Here is Nemrod's ultimate backplate:
View attachment 811598

Found this on Amazon, it was used in something called a modular BC. Details were scarce so I looked at the Seac website. It seems they replaced this product with a conventional backplate. Sometimes new and different doesn't sell. Remember the story of Ford and the Edsel. I remember Tobin mentioning that 80% of the rigs he sold were single tank.

WTF???!!!!!!