Hogarthian and Jacket BCs?

[mer]

I always considered the Hogarthian system's foundation to be backplate/wings/long hose; but then I read statement onebrightgator dug up from Bill Main of Hogarthian's "only guidelines being take only what you need, and if you need it, bring two."

Is it possible to have a minimalist approach with a jacket BC? I always thought it was not, and that a jacket would create more problems than it solved, but this very open guideline has made me pause.

PS - Congratualtions on the new forum. I also hope that us DIR divers can contribute civily over here. I do believe Hog. is a better, safer system, yet still allows the freedom for new divers to decide if they like the rig and make an informed decision as to which philosophy to follow.

[MechDiver]

I always considered the Hogarthian system's foundation to be backplate/wings/long hose; but then I read statement onebrightgator dug up from Bill Main of Hogarthian's "only guidelines being take only what you need, and if you need it, bring two."

Is it possible to have a minimalist approach with a jacket BC? I always thought it was not, and that a jacket would create more problems than it solved, but this very open guideline has made me pause.

My opinon would be, no, a jacket is not Hogarthian.

Now, to answer your direct question, could a jacket be minimalist, I would have to say it depends on the wearer.

I think you're trying to define two different terms Mer. Although the question is an excellent one.

MD

[Kim]

You'd look pretty funny with two BCD's

[Rick Murchison]

When I first started incorporating Bill Main's ideas into my own diving, I did so with a jacket - and a short hose, for that matter. There is *nothing* in the Hogarthian principles that dictates a BP/wing. Streamlining, minimalism with adequate redundancy, location of all essentials in the "triangle" can all be accomodated easily with most jackets. The "Hogarthian" rig has never been equipment specific, but rather a set of principles by which to rig what you have.
IOW, don't get wrapped around the axle on a specific piece of gear. The extended Hogarthian rig that does that is part of the "DIR" set.
Rick

[MechDiver]

When I first started incorporating Bill Main's ideas into my own diving, I did so with a jacket - and a short hose, for that matter.
Rick

And that would be expected, would it not? Otherwise, you would have already been Hog.

Probably a misconception on my part, but I equate Hogarthian with caves, tech, doubles, and the equipment that goes with that style of diving as I believe that was Main's focus at the time?

MD

[Ontario Diver]

And that would be expected, would it not? Otherwise, you would have already been Hog.

Probably a misconception on my part, but I equate Hogarthian with caves, tech, doubles, and the equipment that goes with that style of diving as I believe that was Main's focus at the time?

MD

Yeah, I believe that it was.... but this doesn not remove the usefullness of the system concepts for all divers. I know of a number of divers who have moved to necklace mounted secondaries even though still using a jacket.

I also know of a number of "divers" who could benefit from a more minimalist approach. (They look like they crashed through a dive shop on the way to the water.)

Another good example of cross-over is the use of line running in wreck penetration.

Anything that makes a dive and diver safer is a good thing.

[MechDiver]

Yeah, I believe that it was.... but this doesn not remove the usefullness of the system concepts for all divers. I know of a number of divers who have moved to necklace mounted secondaries even though still using a jacket.

I also know of a number of "divers" who could benefit from a more minimalist approach. (They look like they crashed through a dive shop on the way to the water.)

Another good example of cross-over is the use of line running in wreck penetration.

Anything that makes a dive and diver safer is a good thing.

Totally agree. I was just trying to pin down concepts more so than areas of usefullness.
Good post.

MD

[OneBrightGator]

Bill himself dives a BP/wing... I dunno if you can get more Hogarth then that!

That being said, I don't believe there's any exact specifications in Hogarthian diving, more ideals that can be applied to any equipment set to make diving better.

(btw, that was not a direct quote from Bill, just to clarify)

Ben

[underwater daphne]

since this is hogathian and not dir i don't see any reason why you shouldn't wear a jacket bc if it fits you well.

[headhunter]

Interesting question.

Obviously, the feeling here is that you could sort of pick and choose your gear in such a way that "minimalism" would be your guide. Streamlining also seems to play a part.

Could it be that some Jacket Style BCs would be considered Hogarthian while some others would not?

...or would it be said that all traditional Jacket Style BCs would be excluded from a Hogarthian rig because they are not streamlined due to their very form (shape and size)? I'm thinking of the way they wrap around you, making you look a bit like the Michellin Man. I imagine that this would produce quite a bit of drag going through the water and therefore not conform to the minimalist guideline. Additionally, would a back inflate BC be excluded from this criticism?

It seems that further definition is necessary to come up with our baseline definition for what is or is not Hogarthian.

Does anyone here know Bill? I read a statement made by him and a few of his contemporaries that they really don't spend any time in online discussion and only felt compelled to do so on a particular issue where they felt that they needed to (as a group) set the record straight.

I just thought that someone might be able to speak with him and post a short statement on his behalf. Or maybe he himself would be willing to write a simple statement that could be used as a sticky note at the top of the forum. I just feel that since we are going to attach his name to the forum for the whole world to see, that it would be nice to at least try to get his philosophy correctly portrayed, right from the start.

It is not my intent to hijack this thread. It just seems that in order the answer the original question, we also need to attempt to correctly define "Hogarthian". I think they are inextricably related.

Does this sound right to anyone else?

Christian