oms wings

[DevonDiver]

OMS wings tend to be the most popular 'rental' wings in a lot of the centers I've dived. So my assumption is that many divers learn tech using OMS kit. I think that influences many divers subsequently.

I've seen plenty of sun/salt bleached 'ancient looking' OMS wings hanging up in dive centers - so I'd guess reliability isn't an issue. The only catastrophic, dangerous, wing failure I've seen was on a Halcyon... go figure.

I don't see a problem with OMS. Dual-bladder wings meet the PADI TecRec requirements for wing redundancy...and that's good for tropical wetsuit tech diving. The only alternative would be drysuits (PADI don't accept lift bags for redundancy). I see no logic in choosing exposure protection to satisfy a buoyancy requirement. Issues arising from inadvertent ascents using dual bladder wings are entirely user error/incorrect protocols.

What harms some manufacturer reputation is inappropriate marketing of their kit. Saying that double-tank wings can be used for single-tank etc.... pushing the concept of 'comfort' harnesses through disinformation about the properties of minimalist harnesses. Selling 90lb 'expedition-grade' wings to entry-level tech divers... it seems a little disingenuous and doesn't appear to have the customers' best interests at heart.

My personal preference is for very minimalist kit... so I don't have much interest in comfort harnesses, wing bungees etc. But that's me and the dives I do.... OMS offer a selection of kit, so everyone is free to choose, according to their preferences, philosophies etc...

The only kit that I really don't like is the sidemount 'Profile' and 'Tesseract' combo. The Tesseract/Profile is quite a horrible rig for sidemount. OMS are lagging behind in not producing one, or more, dedicated sidemount rigs. I'd always hope to see manufacturers accepting that warm-water/aluminum tank diving had different needs to cold-water/steel tank sidemount diving.

 

[sheeper]

so for no real reason, i sold my OMS wing and have moved to a DiveRite. no reflection on OMS though. i still am impressed with the quality and performance of their products

 

[ScubaRN6559]

OK in nearly 15 years of following this topic and controversy and diving a bungee wing I have to say a few things.
Yes I know this thread has been dead for a while. I’m not trolling as some of you call it nor am I looking to start an argument with anyone. I feel compelled to say a few things based on my experience of diving with them on and off for many years, and to dispel a few beliefs and such based on my experience and mine alone.

Disclaimer: I don’t claim to be an expert on the subject. I don’t claim to have an engineering degree or represent any scuba manufacture or otherwise. I am a trauma RN by trade.
I’m simply stating some things based on my experiences diving with OMS bungee wings myself and from others that I have spoken to. My opinion and view is that of my own based on my own experiences, etc.
1) Argument: Bungee wings represent a entanglement hazard.
Reply: Bungee wings don’t represent any more of a entanglement risk or hazard than a person diving with a tank (or tanks, stage bottle(s), hoses, etc. All of these had more potential to hang up or get caught on things when diving than a bungee that’s snug around the wing.
2) Argument: Bungee wings cause unnecessary drag.
Reply: If they do it’s negligible. The profile of a tank or tanks on a diver represents much more drag then the bungee would create on a wing. And the same for the Divers mask and anything else they may be attached to themselves as well.
3) Argument: In the event of a puncture to the wing the bungees would hamper inflation of the wing - especially if the wing needed to be inflated manually by breathing into the oral inflator.
Reply: Not true. The bungees add little resistance to inflating a wing even orally. I know I’ve done it. Orally inflating a wing with bungees on it is no big deal. It’s no worse than inflating a wing without them.
4) Argument: The bungees squeezing a wing creates air pockets in the wing that are difficult or impossible to vent. It also can affect trim.
Reply: BS. This have never been proven nor
Represents any more of a problem then a wing without bungees. Let’s face it – all wings will retain air to a certain degree even when deflated. If you think every bit of air exit so wing when deflated you’re wrong. Unless under incredible pressure some air will remain in a wing - any wing, to a certain degree. There are no dump valves on every area of a wing to ensure 100% deflation.
You would need a valve in every corner, upper and lower area of the wing.
5) Argument: A ‘doubles’ bungee wing shouldn’t be used for diving singles.
Reply: BS call again. A Bungee Wing can successfully be used diving singles or doubles without purchasing two separate sets of wings. Naturally your scuba dealer would love to sell you two sets of wings. But it’s not necessary. You can have one wing do it all and it always worked for me.
Think about it – if the bungee wings was so dangerous you wouldn’t see deep technical divers diving the Andrea Doria wearing them! Especially being one of the most challenging, dangerous and difficult dives a diver could ever face. Definatelt a technical dive and perhaps a penetration dive as well.

 

[ScubaRN6559]

PS And I want to add all this talk about them being dangerous in solving a problem that doesn’t exist is BS. They actually do solve a problem that exist and that’s one wing that can be a multi-purpose wing if desired and used no I don’t worry on doubles but singles. I know I’ve done it without any issues in the past. All these arguments and such are based merely on conjecture not fact. I research this ovary year before I decided to purchase my first set of bungee wings. I couldn’t find a single documented case of diver(s) tradegy or death associated from the use of ANY bungee wing - be it OMS, Dive Rite it anyone else’s.
I would suggest that people do your own research and form your own conclusions for yourself. Get the facts not conjecture. Only then you’ll be in a better position to make an educated decision for yourself. Good luck and safe diving everyone.

 

[tbone1004]

@ScubaRN6559 if your comments about oral inflation being no more difficult with than without, then there is no point in the bungees themselves, same with the bungees squeezing air out. If those statements were true, then the bungees defy the laws of physics. They will squeeze the air out until the bungees are no longer engaged. The argument against them is that they will deflate, and that is a fact, if the wing fails and the bungees are engaged. Whatever volume is in there before they're engaged will remain, but if you are diving heavy doubles and are engaging the bungees, it will squeeze it out. The fact that they were used on the Doria don't really mean anything in this day in age.
I do have one, the bungees have been removed. It's a nice doubles wing. It was a terrible singles wing, even with the bungees. It works if you dive doubles primarily and dive singles once in a blue moon, but if you regularly dive both, buy both wings.
Now, with the nightmare that is the current company running OMS, you couldn't pay me to use one of their wings and I would recommend people avoid them as a company, not just that product. The old OMS has been defunct for the better part of a decade and the last few years were really rough. They are irrelevant and there was no need to revive that thread.

I'm an engineer fwiw....

 

[DevonDiver]

I would suggest that people do your own research and form your own conclusions for yourself. Get the facts not conjecture. Only then you’ll be in a better position to make an educated decision for yourself. Good luck and safe diving everyone.

Where exactly did you get your 'facts' from? Sounds like untried conjecture to me..

To what level are you qualified and experienced to make statements on entanglement hazards, especially in a range of overhead environments?

At what parameters have you tested oral inflation, bubble-trapping etc in real dives? How many cylinders; 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6+? At what depth ranges: recreational, extended range, hypoxic trimix? Failure on descent, ascent or whilst neutral at the bottom?

I'd suggest that it's quite important to demonstrate the legitimacy and veracity of one's own opinions, if make sweeping accusations that dismiss opposing opinions as mere conjecture.

You have neglected to do that, wheras many of the prior participants in this thread have verifiable substantial experience that constitutes an 'informed opinion', rather than a baseless one.

Your profile information and picture don't suggest that you have conducted any level of technical/overhead diving or training, nor have any specific experience of higher level diving or the associated proficiencies. From what basis are you disputing the informed opinions of seasoned technical and overhead divers/instructors?

Lastly, it's irrelevant to cite an absense of 'reports' found online. With any meaningful experience in diving, people soon learn that only a very tiny fraction of diving incidents are reported or recorded publicly online..and that's for fatalities and serious injuries, not even for near-misses where significant lessons were learned.

 

[ams511]

The 1990's called and it wants its tech gear back.....

LOL, this made me laugh. I didn't think anyone was still diving those super large wings. I know bungees have made a comeback. Hollis, HOG, and Zeagle uses them on single tank wings.

 

[TrimixToo]

@ScubaRN6559 if your comments about oral inflation being no more difficult with than without, then there is no point in the bungees themselves, same with the bungees squeezing air out. If those statements were true, then the bungees defy the laws of physics. They will squeeze the air out until the bungees are no longer engaged. The argument against them is that they will deflate, and that is a fact, if the wing fails and the bungees are engaged. Whatever volume is in there before they're engaged will remain, but if you are diving heavy doubles and are engaging the bungees, it will squeeze it out. The fact that they were used on the Doria don't really mean anything in this day in age.
I do have one, the bungees have been removed. It's a nice doubles wing. It was a terrible singles wing, even with the bungees. It works if you dive doubles primarily and dive singles once in a blue moon, but if you regularly dive both, buy both wings.
Now, with the nightmare that is the current company running OMS, you couldn't pay me to use one of their wings and I would recommend people avoid them as a company, not just that product. The old OMS has been defunct for the better part of a decade and the last few years were really rough. They are irrelevant and there was no need to revive that thread.

I'm an engineer fwiw....

I'm not an engineer, and I didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I have actually measured the pressure exerted by the bungees on my wing. IIRC, it was a whopping 5" of water.

 

[tbone1004]

I'm not an engineer, and I didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I have actually measured the pressure exerted by the bungees on my wing. IIRC, it was a whopping 5" of water.

OK, so 5" of water is still significant in terms of inflation resistance, and even 1" of water pressure will cause it to deflate until they are no longer engaged.
Size your wing properly, moral of story. Alternatively, use a method like Dive Rite uses on the Rec wing where you can choose to engage or disengage the bungees that are only on one side. I.e. no air trapping, no entanglement, and unlike the OMS you can actually shape the wing relatively quickly/easily if you're going between singles and doubles. Much better design

 

[TrimixToo]

OK, so 5" of water is still significant in terms of inflation resistance, and even 1" of water pressure will cause it to deflate until they are no longer engaged.
Size your wing properly, moral of story. Alternatively, use a method like Dive Rite uses on the Rec wing where you can choose to engage or disengage the bungees that are only on one side. I.e. no air trapping, no entanglement, and unlike the OMS you can actually shape the wing relatively quickly/easily if you're going between singles and doubles. Much better design

I think this is one of those questions for which there is more than one "right answer." For what it's worth, I have no difficulty at all inflating a bungeed wing by mouth even on the surface where there's a lot more than 5" of water pressure differential involved. I'm not sure how many people have actually tried it. It's worth noting that there will be a pressure differential between air in the wing and the water with or without bungees, else it would generate no lift. And, as long as the vent (designed in or otherwise) is 5" or more below the air in the wing, the wing will not self-deflate no matter what. It's hard to worry about a hole in some place that keeps me from leaning to one side or the other to generate a 5" difference in where the air goes inside the wing when I have never seen anyone put a hole in a wing. (Broken hoses and dumps, yes. Holes in the bladders, not yet. I'm sure that day will come, though.)

Note, too, that the 5" of water pressure was measured with the wing fully inflated. It's progressively less as the wing empties, not a constant, and I would not expect it to decrease at a constant rate, either. Since I was trying to find the max at the time, I didn't measure the intermediate pressures. It's been a really long time since I took college physics, so maybe I've got this wrong, but if the bungees were perfectly elastic I would expect them to behave with a spring constant proportional to the increase in length, which would rise at something more or less like the square of the amount of inflation volume. So at half full, I'd expect rather less than half of 5", probably somewhere between 2.5" and 1.25" of water pressure since wings tend to be roughly oval in cross-section as they inflate, not circular, and the bungee material is probably not perfectly elastic. Maybe someday I'll repeat the experiment and see what the shape of the curve looks like.

Mine are bungeed to keep them tucked in when they are close to empty, which is the case after I've dropped my deco (and sometimes stage) tanks. That way, I think they are less prone to catch on things inside a wreck and get caught or damaged. The wings don't trap air to speak of. When you empty the bladder, water pressure forces pretty much all the air from the wing. The bladders just sort of fold up if they are retained by a bungee as they empty, sort of like a baggy you remove air from by gathering it your hand to reduce the size of the open end and inhaling. Also, the top bungees are tied more or less tightly to help manage my trim without using ankle weights, tank weights, or moving the tanks up or down in the bands, which is handy. I do have more than one size wing, and the smallest is not bungeed, as it happens, but I generally just dive the larger one just for convenience's sake.

I think I have some grasp of the ins and outs of bungeed vs. free wings and that I've made an informed choice. I know not everyone will agree with the solution, and that's OK. It works fine for me.