I started my Padi Tech 40 class and the instructor told me i need to purchase a dual bladder wing.
The exact requirement is for "redundant buoyancy", not a dual bladder wing. However, unlike other agencies, PADI do not accept the use of a lift-bag as a redundant buoyancy option. Drysuits
are permitted however.
IMHO, this is a typical 'paditude', which discourages skills solutions to problems which can otherwise be solved with equipment.
This may be an indictment on the faith they have in abilities of their instructors..or their expectations of student capability... or it may be a genuine effort to K.I.S.S. their training. I know my assumptions skew towards the first two factors...
...but, never let it be said that PADI might factory produce tec instructors or skew their tec marketing to attract students below what might otherwise be considered a prudent and reasonable level of experience/ability....and therefore have to compromise on the depth (
pun intended) of skill that training can attain
...another istructor told me I didn't need a dual bladder because if there was a tear in the wing it probably would tear both bladders because they are on top of one another.
Personally, I wouldn't agree with this concern. A catastrophic 'tear' is most likely to originate from a materials or construction failure - LPI/OPV tearing free, glued/welded seams splitting etc. These would probably only affect one bladder. Smaller failures might originate from external factors; punctures are generally localized and minor (needle pricks).
And PADI is the only agency that uses dual bladders.
Not really true. The majority of agencies insist on 'redundant buoyancy'. There are others which want a definitive solution; not accepting the use of lift bags except as a final (not immediate) contingency. Drysuits are universally accepted by all agencies, as far as I know.
GUE and other 'DIR' agencies are the exception. They promote skills, not equipment, solutions to the issue. The primary recourse being the construction of the "
balanced rig".
you dive it disconnected with the LP hose bungeed to the inflator. haven't seen one magically self-connect, and takes seconds to connect and be back on track. no downside, as I have yet to see one connect itself on a dive.
Personally, I see those "seconds" as a major downside. For instance, when holding a 6m stop on 100% O2. It's not
that simple. The diver needs to start prioritizing their responses. Gotta switch off deco gas and onto a back/lean(er) deco gas
first....dropped a few meters..ears need clearing now...gotta locate the redundant LPI...ears need clearing again as still sinking...
What about overhead environments? A "few seconds" can mean a plummet into the silt.
It's the sort of "no downside" issue that can go badly wrong for a less experienced tec diver.
This is a skill that I see causing significant issues for tec divers in training...it's something they struggle with... especially when other (realistic) factors are presented in unison.
What I see a lot... is that there is always a proportion of divers who (post-training) opt for convenience a leave it plugged in. Like others, I've seen plenty enough 'real' stuck inflators and/or slow trickle leaks. That's presents a real danger for those divers. And...there'll be another proportion of divers who dive with the LPI disconnected... but never give it another thought... no practice, no skill retention. The redundant bladder becomes a 'complacency' - something that is relied upon, but shouldn't be relied upon (due to skill degredation).
Anyone ever had a runaway inflator? 600 plus dives and I have not!
Yes, several.
Also.. many more instances of "trickle" leaks. Something the diver doesn't necessarily notice at the bottom, but can catch them out big-time on ascent when that air accumulated in their redundant bladder starts to expand...