SteveC
Contributor
How did the old timers dive with out a BC? I don't see how this was done.
Vintage divers... no BC?
- Thread starter SteveC
- 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
dhampton82
Guest
dhampton82
Guest
Also I was able to use only 4 lbs. or weight compared to my normal 14 lbs. of weight.
Bob3
Contributor
Yep to the above, you weighted yourself properly to begin with & used lung volume for the fine tuning. No problem hovering motionless in the water column, as long as there was some sort of visual reference.
Usually done with a single 72 cu ft steel tank, wearing doubles & weighting for deeper dives with thick wetsuits (sometimes 3/8") made for being a bit heavy at the beginning of the dive, at least while at the bottom.
Twin 38s or 40s made for a trim & balance situation that was really sweet.
*sniff sniff* - I miss my old 38s, but the buggers at the dive shop charged double (there's 2 tanks, isn't there?), even though they held dang near the same amount of air as a single 72.
Usually done with a single 72 cu ft steel tank, wearing doubles & weighting for deeper dives with thick wetsuits (sometimes 3/8") made for being a bit heavy at the beginning of the dive, at least while at the bottom.
Twin 38s or 40s made for a trim & balance situation that was really sweet.
*sniff sniff* - I miss my old 38s, but the buggers at the dive shop charged double (there's 2 tanks, isn't there?), even though they held dang near the same amount of air as a single 72.
Diving without a BCD is the most fantastic thing ever.....
OP
SteveC
Contributor
hmmm.... I use my lungs and proper weighting and I don't see how it would work. With a farmer john it takes 26 lbs of lead to go down. Not one lb less will do. But once I get down to depth it takes alot of air in the bc to compensate for the wet-suit compression. I use my lungs to fine tune, but there is no way it would fully compensate for compression.
Rickg
Contributor
I have seen pictures of divers in Hawaii used something referred to as a "Hawaiian Sling" rig and saw one in use on just a single occasion. Here are several links to pictures of something similar to what the guy was using:
http://www.scubaboard.com/gallery/data/533/21540PC080001.JPG
http://www.vintagescubasupply.com/jerrylang.jpg
The one I saw didn't have a solid backpack but other than that it was built along the same idea. It seems to be the ultimate in a "minimalist" approach to what is needed. The only time I dove with a guy who was using something like this, he was geared up and in the water before I even had my first BC buckle secured.
Rickg
http://www.scubaboard.com/gallery/data/533/21540PC080001.JPG
http://www.vintagescubasupply.com/jerrylang.jpg
The one I saw didn't have a solid backpack but other than that it was built along the same idea. It seems to be the ultimate in a "minimalist" approach to what is needed. The only time I dove with a guy who was using something like this, he was geared up and in the water before I even had my first BC buckle secured.
Rickg
I still dive with no BC 75% of the time. I learned in 1966 with no BC, there were none! Much effort and time was spent in these earlier scuba courses learning how to accomplish this feat of antigravity. Also, during this era divers used surface floats and paddleboards for beach and shore dives to aid long surface swims, I did also but now use a kayak for a surface float. Of course diving from a boat presents no unusual problem for a diver without a BC.
The key to diving with no BC is the steel 72. This tank has the perfect balance and bouyancy with little bouyancy swing. Also some LP double 38s, 45s and 50s of that era did so as well. The use of heavy steel tanks as is common now did not really come into being until much later. The steel 72 with a full 2500 psi fill has over 72 cf, the aluminum 80 is actiually only 77cf and with a typical short fill no more than a steel 72. Of course, the common 80 actually does OK with no BC, you just tend to be more positive near the end of the dive than ideal but easily delt with.
There are times that the BC is useful, heavy exposure protection in cold water, so called "tech" diving where the diver may have a considerable equipment load come to mind.
I can maintain perfect balance and bouyancy in fresh or salt water with up to a 3/2, after that it can become challenging such as with a 1/4 full wetsuit. The bouyancy swing as the neoprene crushes results in your becoming negative and it is that reason it is a challenge
Further, being slightly positive was often the goal when the tanks were near empty, in that time we did not do safety stops, that also came along later. I can hold a safety stop if slightly positive but surely would not want to do deco that way--lol.
Here is a picture of a modern rendition of the original style harness on a steel 72 with a USD Mistral (1958 and owned by me since about 1968 with hundreds of dives). This harness uses modern ScubaPro bands such that it can accept tanks of 6.7 to eight inch diameter easily--excellent for travel.
Oh, I will add one other thing, old divers, well, we had to be strong swimmers--and --I am.
Edit spelling
N
NAVED Master Diver 111
The key to diving with no BC is the steel 72. This tank has the perfect balance and bouyancy with little bouyancy swing. Also some LP double 38s, 45s and 50s of that era did so as well. The use of heavy steel tanks as is common now did not really come into being until much later. The steel 72 with a full 2500 psi fill has over 72 cf, the aluminum 80 is actiually only 77cf and with a typical short fill no more than a steel 72. Of course, the common 80 actually does OK with no BC, you just tend to be more positive near the end of the dive than ideal but easily delt with.
There are times that the BC is useful, heavy exposure protection in cold water, so called "tech" diving where the diver may have a considerable equipment load come to mind.
I can maintain perfect balance and bouyancy in fresh or salt water with up to a 3/2, after that it can become challenging such as with a 1/4 full wetsuit. The bouyancy swing as the neoprene crushes results in your becoming negative and it is that reason it is a challenge
Further, being slightly positive was often the goal when the tanks were near empty, in that time we did not do safety stops, that also came along later. I can hold a safety stop if slightly positive but surely would not want to do deco that way--lol.
Here is a picture of a modern rendition of the original style harness on a steel 72 with a USD Mistral (1958 and owned by me since about 1968 with hundreds of dives). This harness uses modern ScubaPro bands such that it can accept tanks of 6.7 to eight inch diameter easily--excellent for travel.
Oh, I will add one other thing, old divers, well, we had to be strong swimmers--and --I am.
Edit spelling
N
NAVED Master Diver 111
SteveC:
You have much more neoprene on than we did. My first wetsuit, home made, was less than 4mm but quite baggy. My tailoring skills were not the best.
From memory I needed about 10lbs of lead.
I was weighted so that I had to swim down the first 10 to 15 ft with a full tank. Then the suit would burp out all the captured air and I would be neutral. I never went below about 50ft and was able to control my buoyancy quite easily.
Fenzies (toilet ring life jackets) were just comming into use, these were only used on the surface or if an emergency ascent was required. There use to control buoyancy was a few years away.
Physical training was much more rigirous so we were all fit, had large lung capacity from playing underwater hockey, and were strong swimmers.
Working hard underwater was, probably, a necessity, to keep warm in the cold waters of the Scottish coast.
Similar threads
