I figure these self-proclaimed experts in Hog configuration and hard diving in general who criticize the designs of the Infinity or the Transpac should go have a talk with the guys that have a lot to do with these two designs.
It's like an avid motorcyclist who rides around the track a few times then go criticize a MotoGP champion like Valentino Rossi about him sticking his leg out during a hard corner.
Most of us are not the caliber of Jablonski or Hires. Most of us will never do the kind of diving these two legends in diving do. If they can use these "newfangled" contraptions in lieu of the Hog style, maybe, just maybe, these "newfangled" contraptions are OK for the rest of us mere mortals.
For those who prefer to do the chickenwings, by all means, knock yourselves out. But there are plenty of us who either aren't physically able to move our shoulder joints in a certain direction, or do not even wish to have to do the funky chicken at all, there are options available.
I know a little more about design than you think.
The original back pack designs where among the simplest and comfortable common sense designs ever created. The reason back packs went out of fashion is because poodle jackets became popular among the masses as the sport grew. BC's became a standard feature in combination with training that surrounded the use of the BC. Back inflate wings where not in general use at the time so therefore nobody at the time officially thought of fitting a wing to a backpack to continue the use of the pack.
Simultaneously tech diving began to grow and the use of a back plate and wing became popular with tech divers. As the tech population grew it attracted both techies and recs into the mix. The superiority of the BP/W over the poodle jacket was apparent to many in this camp and someone got the bright idea to adapt a single tank onto a plate so they could use a back plate for all their diving.
So somewhere back in the late 70's the back pack got squeezed out and forgotten about and then several years later was replaced with a completely different plate designed for doubles (with the new plate users oblivious of the prior existance of the original back pack). It's not that the back pack was a lousy design, it was the marketing of the new BC that diverted attention away from back packs long enough that they virtually disappeared from diving for several years, except for a very small niche group.
What I did was see the benefits and value of the original backpack design. At the same time I also saw the drawbacks of using a doubles plate for single tanks.
So I started from scratch with the back pack theory and desinged the Freedom Plate -exclusively for single tank use - except the Freedom Plate is fully modernized to use all the newest wings and accessories.
The drawbacks I saw of using a conventional doubles backplate for single tank diving:
1) The plate is too wide on top and the edges sit right on the scapula not allowing the tank to sit as close to the back as it potentially could. Doubles plates that have a steeper "V" tend to make this problem worse. This is one of the reasons why these plates can be uncomfortable without a pad.
2) Conventional plates as viewed straight down are perfectly straight which they have to be because of the channel that is formed with the press brake. The problem is the human back is not straight, the spine has a long S curve shape when viewed from the side.
3) The channel that runs down the center of the plate that was designed to keep the wing nuts that held the all thread rods on the set of doubles away from your back keeps a single tank even further away from your back (in addition to the V shape of the overall shape of the plate).
4) To compound the two above problems even further, many conventional plates use a STA to be able to attach a single tank, however the STA adds even more distance between the tank and the diver now by several inches. Some manufacturers have eliminated the need for a STA by adding cam band slots in their plates and flattening out the plate in an attempt to get the tank closer to the diver, however there is and always will be the issue of the channel hight and the width at the top.
5) The edges on many conventional plates because of the square flat design can eventually begin to chafe the fabric on drysuits around the lower edges and in the scapula area.
What I see are companies trying to use a doubles plate design and do whatever they can to pimp it out and convert it to be more useable and marketable for the single tank diver.
Not one of them has actually thought to really look at what they have and think about a way to completely redesign the product to be the best designed for single tank use. They all want to be able to sell one product that can be used for both singles and doubles to be able to capture a larger market share. The problem is a compromise always falls short.
It's kind of like trying to convert a hiking boot into a running shoe. Instead of lightening it up, changing the tread, putting padded up insoles in it etc. why not just design and sell a running shoe?
That's what I see with this new system that Halcyon came up with. It's for marketing to the fluff diver. The back pad adds stuff, the shoulder pads add stuff, the pockets add stuff, on top of something that is not ultimate for single tank use.
Halcyon originally was the anti stuff and now they're all about stuff, no doubt because there's money to be made selling to people who like to drop lots of money for extra "stuff" and fluff.
This product is all about breaking into the mainstream market and grabbing market share, not about getting the hard core tech diver (and cirtainly not the minimalist!), they know better. They're after the poodle jacket diver with lots of money to throw away.
Their cinch system BTW is nothing new. Backpack divers have been adjusting their rigs for years by leaving out the keepers and pulling down on the waist straps as they gear up to cinch up the rig. I have been doing this with my plate for years. It's not a big deal.
Here's what I designed into the Freedom Plate to correct the problems I saw with using a conventional plate for single tanks. One thing I really wanted to do was get the tank as close as absolutely possible to the diver to maximize streamlining (slipstream) and reduce overall profile (height) to improve hydrodynamics.
Comfort was equaly important, but I wanted to achieve it with raw design, not added fluff.
1) The cut away design allows the plate and tank to drop right down into the valley in between your shoulder blades (scapulas) for total freedom of movement of the arms and shoulders. No other plate design allows for this close of a tank to body fit.
2) The compound shape at the base of the plate (curved in sides and and curved away lower edge allows for form hugging fit and relief of edges digging in.
3) Completely rounded over and deburred edges minimizes chafing on wetsuits and drysuits. This also allows for t-shirt diving in the tropics.
4) No need for an STA since the plate was designed already for single tanks, therefore there isn't anything to adapt.
This plate is dirt simple and I intend to keep it that way. I could care less if it ever makes it into the mainstream, that's not why I make them. They are for serious single tank divers that like the minimalist approach. Some people put comfort harnesses on them but I never would personally. Sliding out of a hog harness is automatic and lighting fast and as far as I'm concerned cannot be improved upon.
I don't understand your description of the "chicken wing". When I get out of a Hog harness it looks nothing like what you describe.
Hope this helps
I just thought of something: Did you know that I've never dove in the tropics in a t-shirt? I rely on the testimonials of the lucky and priviledged.
