Question about “balanced rigs” and having all ballast unditchable

[Eric Sedletzky]

Reluctance to doff and don gear underwater is foreign to me. When did they stop teaching it to recreational divers?

Apparently they never stopped according to boulderjohn, it is alive and well.

 

[lowviz]

I see a big conceptual difference between 'doff and don' and 'balanced' that doesn't seem to be all that well described in this discussion.

For doff and don, there are two units that need to both be rather neutral. 1) A WORKING rig consisting of BCD, tank, regs, and associated hardware. And 2) A second unit consisting of a diver, fins, mask, exposure protection and a weight belt.

So the diver only ever needs to use a W/B that allows him/her to be reasonably neutral when parting with the rig for doff and don. That isn't all that hard to do.

Contrast that to 'balanced' where the goal is to drop weight (if required) and swim or control a dead rig up to the surface. Let's look at the extremes by way of comparison. Diving an AL 40 should allow one to easily achieve both ideals. Diving a non-technical coldwater big tank is in another category altogether.

Which one are we discussing?

 

[Dan]

Yeah, that's the one. It would have been five but the dive op never reported them missing, so the next morning when he was rescued he was not technically missing.


Bob

He ditched his rig so he could surface swim against the current and landed on Mapelo. The next morning he saw another liveaboard, Yemaya docking at the island & alerted the SAR authorities that his 3 other dive buddies & DM could still be floating. Two days later they found 2 of his dive buddies, alive, still floating with their rigs on. They never found the DM and found a body that was identified as his 3rd dive buddy. Sad story.

 

[rivers]

Like @northernone I live and dive in an area where it is not uncommon for OWD students to use 7mm farmer johns on their open water checkout dives.

They are very much a "basic scuba" technology, and are in widespread use in this climate.

Drysuits pose their own buoyancy control problems, and cost aside, are not ideal for beginners. I stick to a wetsuit for a number of reasons, among them that I am difficult to fit and cannot expect to find an off-the-rack drysuit that fits well, let alone a used one.

I would say more than 90% of the OW divers trained at dive site I work at, are trained in a drysuit as opposed to a wetsuit. And at certain times of the year (fall into late spring), they don't have a choice. It's a drysuit. And it doesn't cause any more issues than divers learning in a wetsuit.

 

[CT-Rich]

Well first, I don't dive with $2-5,000 worth of gear to begin with, even if I bring along my camera and a pony I most likely don't break a grand. I learned to ditch gear and swim back before BC's as a last ditch emergency procedure, like dropping weight only more so. I only got close once, but got lucky. As for staying with diving, it wouldn't be the money, it would be the situation that I got into the mess that would make me think twice.

I wouldn't expect anyone to practice or even read about it, but then again OW divers read about dropping their weight belt, but how many practice? Or drop when necessary?

There was a thread in accidents that 5 divers went missing, the current was taking them away from their boat and an island. One diver ditched his rig swam to the island and was the first to alert the authorities. He was one of three that survived.

Bottom line is which is worth more, your gear or your life.



Bob
-----------
I may be old, but I'm not dead yet.

Let me clarify that. Dumping your rig as part of a self rescue should be a step five in the process, not step two. When you eliminate ditchable weights, a possible link in the chain is removed. As events cascade (accidents are almost always a series of errors, not a single event), a diver can use different steps to mitigate the problem (thumb the dive, switch to back up air,deploy a DSMB, buddy breath, drop weight, activate a beacon, signal mirror.... ditching your rig is always an option, but it is a pretty significant step and should be taken lightly. I have doffed my gear underwater to clear fishing lines and put it back on afterwards. It’s a great skill to have in addition to being a great confidence builder in class. But there need to be steps that a diver is going to take before tossing off his/her equipment and ditchable weights is one of them.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Let me clarify that. Dumping your rig as part of a self rescue should be a step five in the process, not step two. When you eliminate ditchable weights, a possible link in the chain is removed. As events cascade (accidents are almost always a series of errors, not a single event), a diver can use different steps to mitigate the problem (thumb the dive, switch to back up air,deploy a DSMB, buddy breath, drop weight, activate a beacon, signal mirror.... ditching your rig is always an option, but it is a pretty significant step and should be taken lightly. I have doffed my gear underwater to clear fishing lines and put it back on afterwards. It’s a great skill to have in addition to being a great confidence builder in class. But there need to be steps that a diver is going to take before tossing off his/her equipment and ditchable weights is one of them.

I think a lot of the proceedures used are also are regional in nature which no one here really seems to talk about. Somebody mentions one thing and someone else says that’s wrong because that’s not how they do it where they are from. Diving in an active breathing churning ocean with swells, cold water, kelp, and rocks is not a cave or a calm tropical paradise with minimal exposure protection. Bail out proceedures and self rescue steps are also different in each situation. I think if each of us were to go to each others diving environments we would realize why they do what they do.
Perhaps this whole discussion should be broken down by areas and not try to think that one configuration will work for all diving. People tend to gravitate towards configurations and proceedures that work best for their area and the type of diving they do.
Ponificating about this and that doesn’t seem to be working here.

 

[CT-Rich]

Most rig configurations include ballast. A tropical diver in a wet t-shirt may not require ballest, not much to do there. Most divers wear a suit of some kind and in open water diving they will benefit from having easily adjusted weighting that could be jettisoned while in the water (be it on the surface or, much less attractively, at depth. There will be exceptions, shouldn’t be the norm.

I remember when they imposed seat belt laws, I heard people rationalizing not buckling up by saying they wouldn’t use them because what if the car was on fire or went in the water and the belt was trapping them? Ignore all the benefits of ditchable weights at your own peril.

I wonder if the Colombian divers who stayed with their rigs held on to their weights.

 

[Bob DBF]

Let me clarify that. Dumping your rig as part of a self rescue should be a step five in the process, not step two. When you eliminate ditchable weights, a possible link in the chain is removed. As events cascade (accidents are almost always a series of errors, not a single event), a diver can use different steps to mitigate the problem (thumb the dive, switch to back up air,deploy a DSMB, buddy breath, drop weight, activate a beacon, signal mirror.... ditching your rig is always an option, but it is a pretty significant step and should be taken lightly.

I'm in agreement, I use a weight belt and I advocate having ditchable weight. I also know that my steel tank, plate, and trim weight is also ditchable weight if the need arises, of course I dive wet so that is also a factor.

The only reason I know about ditching a rig is because I'm old and the list of emergency procedures were shorter back then. As it is, dropping a weight belt is a skill that is mastered in OW, but is rarely practiced, and is not necessarily used when appropriate, so I doubt if we need worry about divers ditching rigs in any big rush.

I remember when they imposed seat belt laws, I heard people rationalizing not buckling up by saying they wouldn’t use them because what if the car was on fire or went in the water and the belt was trapping them

Well before the law I was already installing seat belts in any car I bought. Of course I was raised around 1/4 midget and stock car guys. Their theory was that you couldn't get out if you were knocked out cold in the initial impact, or were ejected into traffic or under your own vehicle.

I wonder if the Colombian divers who stayed with their rigs held on to their weights.

I didn't read anything one way or the other. I wouldn't bother to drop the weights until it got dark, or I had to add air to the BC too often.



Bob

 

[topher10]

I thought I would post a newbie perspective.

I dive primarily gulf coast saltwater in a 3mm full, rental Al80 with a steel BP and 20lb wing. In that situation, I do not require any additional weight and therefore do not carry 'ditchable weight' in the classic sense of a weight belt. The lack of weight belt initially made me nervous, so I practiced in the swimming pool where I am even heavier. With a full tank and no air in BC I can swim up the rig from the bottom and I can tread water at the top with fins for several minutes without air in BC. It is a little work, but not too bad. In saltwater I am more floaty and I have to kick myself down (or pull myself with downline) at the start of a dive. By the end of the dive I have basically no air in my BC when at the safety stop I feel very neutral. After the safety stop I ease up to the surface and usually climb up the ladder without ever touching my inflator.

Am I putting myself at risk in this situation because I have nothing to ditch at the surface?

I considered buying an aluminum BP and putting the weight on a weight belt just so I could have something to ditch, but this seems crazy to me. I have no trouble at the surface in saltwater. I also love diving this way because it feels very streamlined and the lack of a weight belt is part of it. However, if I wear anything thicker when the water is colder, I do put the extra weight on a weight belt. I sometimes wear a 3/5 hooded vest when the water gets cooler, and it requires 4lbs on a weight belt (possibly less). Going to a 5mm or especially 7mm would also mean a weight belt, although I might put some of that weight in camband weight pockets. I have not actually dove in a 7mm and so haven't worked out the details.

I would say my experience is similar to others who dive warmish water in thinnish wetsuits with an Al80 and steel backplates. This question I guess is whether this is bad practice on other opinion?

 

[johndiver999]

the bigger concern for me is getting to the surface with a failed bc. If you can make it to the surface with a steel plate and aluminum tank and little effort, then that seems pretty safe. You need to remember that the critical time will be at depth, once you reach the surface . The full 3 mm is expanded and you should be pretty secure.

I think it might be more desirable to have a lighter plate and wear 4 lbs on a belt, but we are splitting hairs.

The problem that may arise in the future is if you want to use a heavy 120 hp steel tank. With that tank, I would not want a heavy steel plate, given you body and suit buoyancy characteristics.

Also a 20 lb wing and a 7 mm suit could be a problem, but that is a wing size issue which is not the original question.