I've dived HP100 doubles with a 5mm suit. No extra led. I carry both a lift bag and DSMB to use for redundant buoyancy in an emergency. I've also considered stacking two separate wings, but haven't gone that route in the past.
Double steels with wetsuit
- Thread starter NeedABiggerBoat
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
My standard is a dry suit with steel doubles (redundancy), but have used a wet suit in warmer (70+) water. Always have 2 lift bags, and a couple a time a year practice using a bag (with dump) as the primary buoyancy during an ascent. You don't want to do something for the first time during an emergency (Wing failure)
Exactly. Same here. I only do it in really warm water ... 75F+ ... and I practice ascending with a lift bag/DSMB if I'm going to go that route. If things hit the fan and I actually had to ascend that way, I'd probably dump the rig once on or near the surface, especially if the sea conditions were rough. In that instance, my life would be worth more than the $3k or so (tanks, regs, light, plate, wing, manifold, bands) the rig would cost to replace.
DevonDiver
N/A
Yes. I dive (at times) double HP100s, double HP120s, and double HP130s, with a 3mm wetsuit (and an AL BP).
I imagine you will still need to add weight to that rig, considering the neoprene and the TransPac. Therefore you should have ditchable weight, after you have properly weighted yourself, particularly if you dive salt water.
I suspect you could easily do that.
Yes to all. If you plan to dive double steel tanks in a wetsuit, it wouldn't hurt to have a dual bladder wing (or plan to use two single bladder wings back-to-back), although with double 100s and 7mm of neoprene and a TransPac, I suspect you would be able to get to the surface without even needing your BCD. I don't think the dual bladder adds significantly to complexity or task loading. In an emergency, if you simply can't get to the surface, having a SMB or lift bag as a tertiary back-up is not a bad thing either. I very much agree with the 'learn to use a redundant flotation device' advice from DD.dumpsterdiver:
Same. Although I reckon if I had really had to, I could have swum the rig to the surface.
Gilldiver
Contributor
Here is one of the best write ups on steels with a wet suit I have seen.
The following is from Joel Silverstine a while back:
B A L A N C E ..... balance.
Much of the "dont dive steel with wetsuits" information came out of South Florida in the mid 1990s when DIR / GUE / WKPP programs were being created. Much of this had to do with diving PST 104s with 3MM wet suits .... that in and of itself is a big ole problem larger than we have room to argue over. Since they were not going to change steel tanks aluminum was the logical choice.
Steel cylinders have been in use with wetsuits much longer than aluminum cylinders have been. Go back to the beginning before alum cylinders were made for scuba.
Different steel cylinders have different buoyancy characteristics. Some are rock heavy, some are light as a feather (loosely speaking) 7, 7.25, 8" cylinders all are different and displace different amounts of water. And each diver is different in displacement as well.
Remember that a BC / Wing is not an elevator it is a "compensator" it is to compensate for the decrease in thickness of an exposure suit and the compression of the air in the wing and lungs as one goes deeper. In an ideal world all you really need is enough lift to make you 1 lbs positive and you can then swim up. But the real world does not work that way and we have to sometimes overcompensate for stability with additional ballast for control.
My favorite cylinder with a 5mm wet suit in fresh water is a Faber 95. With a 3mm a Faber 85. I can glide -- move to salt water and I will add a little weight to compensate for the salt water.
For doubles it gets a little more involved because of the weight of the bands and manifolds but still manageable.
I have found that Faber LP steel cylinders have a cleaner buoyancy swing than the X cylinders have. And when not overfilled they balance out very nicely with wet suits.
Aluminums tend to be a bit floaty and will require 8 lbs of neutralization balast to be added for just the cylinders.
Assuming the balance of the rig can be created and, we know it can the big question comes down to this.
"What is the probability that a dive wing will fail and provide zero lift?"
Since 1989 when I started to dive with wings. I have had 3 wings provide some problems in
Wing 1. Dive Rite Classic wing - 1800 dives on it developed pin hole leaks at the welding seam. (did not lose buoyancy - replaced cell)
Wing 2. Halcyon Single Wing - 20 dives on it snagged wing on piece of wreckage on the Rhone and got small hole. (Halcyon could not repair or replace - I threw it out)
Wing 3 Inflator cracked due to HP seat failure in regulator. Wing held air as hose was below the bubble level.
Dive equipment rarely fails. When it does more than 95% of the time it has to do with a maintenance issue which falls back to user issue.
Divers need to learn how to inspect equipment pre and post dive. This will lead to few if any failures. Care for equipment on boats is important as well. Keep your gear tidy. In your space and not all over the place and it will rarely if ever get damaged.
So to answer the OPs question. .... Yes you can dive steel tanks with a wet suit so long as the rig is balanced and you can swim it out should you have ZERO ability to inflate the wing. The balance is something that is based upon your size and needs and the needs of your team.
cheers
JDS
The following is from Joel Silverstine a while back:
B A L A N C E ..... balance.
Much of the "dont dive steel with wetsuits" information came out of South Florida in the mid 1990s when DIR / GUE / WKPP programs were being created. Much of this had to do with diving PST 104s with 3MM wet suits .... that in and of itself is a big ole problem larger than we have room to argue over. Since they were not going to change steel tanks aluminum was the logical choice.
Steel cylinders have been in use with wetsuits much longer than aluminum cylinders have been. Go back to the beginning before alum cylinders were made for scuba.
Different steel cylinders have different buoyancy characteristics. Some are rock heavy, some are light as a feather (loosely speaking) 7, 7.25, 8" cylinders all are different and displace different amounts of water. And each diver is different in displacement as well.
Remember that a BC / Wing is not an elevator it is a "compensator" it is to compensate for the decrease in thickness of an exposure suit and the compression of the air in the wing and lungs as one goes deeper. In an ideal world all you really need is enough lift to make you 1 lbs positive and you can then swim up. But the real world does not work that way and we have to sometimes overcompensate for stability with additional ballast for control.
My favorite cylinder with a 5mm wet suit in fresh water is a Faber 95. With a 3mm a Faber 85. I can glide -- move to salt water and I will add a little weight to compensate for the salt water.
For doubles it gets a little more involved because of the weight of the bands and manifolds but still manageable.
I have found that Faber LP steel cylinders have a cleaner buoyancy swing than the X cylinders have. And when not overfilled they balance out very nicely with wet suits.
Aluminums tend to be a bit floaty and will require 8 lbs of neutralization balast to be added for just the cylinders.
Assuming the balance of the rig can be created and, we know it can the big question comes down to this.
"What is the probability that a dive wing will fail and provide zero lift?"
Since 1989 when I started to dive with wings. I have had 3 wings provide some problems in
Wing 1. Dive Rite Classic wing - 1800 dives on it developed pin hole leaks at the welding seam. (did not lose buoyancy - replaced cell)
Wing 2. Halcyon Single Wing - 20 dives on it snagged wing on piece of wreckage on the Rhone and got small hole. (Halcyon could not repair or replace - I threw it out)
Wing 3 Inflator cracked due to HP seat failure in regulator. Wing held air as hose was below the bubble level.
Dive equipment rarely fails. When it does more than 95% of the time it has to do with a maintenance issue which falls back to user issue.
Divers need to learn how to inspect equipment pre and post dive. This will lead to few if any failures. Care for equipment on boats is important as well. Keep your gear tidy. In your space and not all over the place and it will rarely if ever get damaged.
So to answer the OPs question. .... Yes you can dive steel tanks with a wet suit so long as the rig is balanced and you can swim it out should you have ZERO ability to inflate the wing. The balance is something that is based upon your size and needs and the needs of your team.
cheers
JDS
elan
Contributor
You should calculate how negative you will be when you are at the depth with the weight ditched. Do you really need any weight ? I used no extra weight with my suit when diving HP100s - and it's 24lb buoyant. I think it is not a common practice here. Check in the pool how much you can swim up and ! stay on the surface for some time, enough to ditch your equipment. Or stay enough to deploy your liftbag.
I dive doubled steel tanks (50's, 100's, 108's, 120's) with wetsuit (3mm, 5mm, or 7mm) all the time.
My redundant buoyancy is a lift bag.
Like so many other things in diving, it's a risk assessment. If you are not going very deep AND you have a hard bottom to stop you, a lift bag is probably a reasonable option. If you are sinking down a 600 foot wall, deploying and filling a lift bag won't be easy, and may not, by the time you get it done, give you the buoyancy you need.
With thin neoprene and double steels, you are overweighted, but you're about as bad at the beginning of the dive as you will be at any point -- so if you can swim up from 10 feet, you can swim up anywhere. The problem lies with thick neoprene, because so much buoyancy can be lost from it at significant depths. I know of someone who did an experiment with a 7 mm suit, and found it could lose 23 lbs of lift at 100 fsw. Add that 23 pounds to the 12 or so pounds negative from your gas, and you've reached a point where it may be quite difficult to swim up.
On the other hand, the average diver around here (wearing 14 mm on the core, and 7 on the legs and arms) will need about 25 pounds of ballast with a steel tank. Doubled steels will take about 6 or 7 pounds off that, but you're still left with a weight belt. So, if you're wearing 12 or 15 pounds on your waist, once you ditch it, you're only around 15 pounds negative, and that's pretty doable, especially since you will begin to regain buoyancy as you ascend. In fact, that will end up being another big problem . . .
With thin neoprene and double steels, you are overweighted, but you're about as bad at the beginning of the dive as you will be at any point -- so if you can swim up from 10 feet, you can swim up anywhere. The problem lies with thick neoprene, because so much buoyancy can be lost from it at significant depths. I know of someone who did an experiment with a 7 mm suit, and found it could lose 23 lbs of lift at 100 fsw. Add that 23 pounds to the 12 or so pounds negative from your gas, and you've reached a point where it may be quite difficult to swim up.
On the other hand, the average diver around here (wearing 14 mm on the core, and 7 on the legs and arms) will need about 25 pounds of ballast with a steel tank. Doubled steels will take about 6 or 7 pounds off that, but you're still left with a weight belt. So, if you're wearing 12 or 15 pounds on your waist, once you ditch it, you're only around 15 pounds negative, and that's pretty doable, especially since you will begin to regain buoyancy as you ascend. In fact, that will end up being another big problem . . .
Similar threads
