Scubapro Superhawk vs. Classic NT BCDs
Willski4fd
which much may be tropical/Carribean, depending on cash flow) and 40% New
Jersey wreck dives. Have narrowed field to Superhawk NT and Classic NT with
expedition integrated weight kit (which gives the Classic NT the same
"cartridge" or "pouch" weight system as the Superhawk) (DO NOT like the
integrated weight systems in their predecessor models, Seahawk and Classic
Expedition). May in future get into dry suit diving, and understand utility of
relative clear chest area (so as to access suit chest valve as well as reach
over to arm valve) of back units like Superhawk, which may be an advantage
over Classic, BUT Classic is built like a tank (finseal construction and
double neoprene coated bag), and Rodale's has so noted in reviews (they liked
Superhawk also). They also liked "performance" of the Classic, but what does
this really mean in the water? Question is, what's each like in the water at
depth. Understand face flotation issue at surface with back BCs, which may be
partly or entirely alleviated with tank or back counterweighting. Thought
Superhawk harness and straps, etc. fit very well, and of course would not
change in use as all flotation is behind. But what are the up and down sides
(a pun here?) of their respective performance while under. How will they feel,
what compensation must you be prepared to apply, etc. ? Obviously, back BCs
put you naturally in best underwater swimming posture, but how bout at other
times?; what does Classic do re underwater swimming posture? Also, not
entirely sure will like/tolerate the puffing out the Classic seems to do on
front of chest when inflated, but intend also to be neutrally weighted so as
not to have to fully inflate it either. A semi- issue.
Any help/advice would be much appreciated. Actually think the overall air
bubble of the Classic may be better generally, as I think I understand it, but
need to hear from experienced ones; but really liked the fit of the Superhawk,
just concerned about what a back model performs like under. Will, of course,
take all opportunities to actually test in pool, etc. and comparo, and may even
rent before buying, but what advice can anyone offer? Dont't want to make a
$600 mistake. (PS, also noted that Oceanic in their 1999 catalog has a "new"
model, the Contour, which seems to be an exact copy of the Classic, which has
been around since circa 1979. Ha, "new" indeed, but copying is the sincerest
form of flattery, and this seems to go against the proclaimed trend towards
back BCs, so what does this mean?)
RDecker388
Both BCDs are well constructed and tough as nails. The Classic has long
been a favorite of scuba instructors as it is extremely comfortable & stable
for floating at the surface (briefing students, explaining skills, dealing with
problems, etc.). As you mention, backinflation BCDs provide superior trim while
underwater. It depends, to a great extent, which is most important to you.
You mentioned the importance of keeping the chest area open and (I
believe) the need for flexible arm movement when diving a drysuit. With that
in mind, if you choose to go with a back inflation (wing) BCD you might want to
consider a couple of other options as well.
The Superhawk NT, while a well built BCD, carries with it the bulk (in
water drag) of most traditional BCDs. If you want a traditional type BCD
harness and the advantages of a back inflation system, you might take a look at
SCUBAPRO's XTek BCD. This model is a bit "cleaner" than the Superhawk.
To truely take advantage of the streamlining and trim characteristics of
back inflation buoyancy control, you might wanna look at a simple back-plate,
harness and wing system. Such systems have few potential failure points, are
extremely durable and dispose of a good deal of un-needed drag. SCUBAPRO also
offers one of these featuring a WKPP style one-peice harness.
Hope this helps,
Bob D.
Director of Training,
Olympus Dive Center
Morehead City, NC
PADI./NAUI Inst.
www.OlympusDiving.com
(remove "NoSpam" to reply)
bullshark
<snip>
> back inflation buoyancy control, you might wanna look at a simple back-plate,
> harness and wing system. Such systems have few potential failure points, are
> extremely durable and dispose of a good deal of un-needed drag. SCUBAPRO also
A SS backplate is also 4-5 lb. negative, reducing weightbelt requirements, and
essentially countering the bouyancy of an empty AL80. This is far more convenient
than a keel-weight, swince it moves with the BC when you change tanks. However,
this is weight you must pack and carry if that is a concern.
I am told that the Xtek harness is a re-work of the original Dive Right transPac,
which ScubaPro purchased the rights to. The only concern I have with the XTek, is
the wing options. They jump from 30 lb. lift (on the travel wing) to 50 on the
REC wing. For whatever reason, I had wanted something around 40; 50 seems like
over-kill. That notwithstanding,'rescue diver' certification is next on my list,
and 30 seems a tad shy for that.
I would be most interested to hear what your thought are on that aspect.
Their[XTek] top-gun wing offering has 120 lb. lift with redundant bladders, BTW.
Dive Rite has a similar offering[backplate], making the crotch strap optional,
but available. However, in either case, drag is added back when equipped with a
zippered pouch. Where ya gonna put your slate, line cutter, or torch? Both makers
have a similar bag. Some posters have misgivings about the TransPakII, but a
backplate is a backplate.
One advantage Dive Rite has for single tank applications, is a SS (not AL)
tank bracket. If you need it, this gets another 2 lb. on your back, and helps
with balance on the surface, I would think. I have not dived either, but am
considering all three. For some, this may result in overweighting when combined with
a steel cylinder.
safe diving
bullshark
Roger Banks
The DiveRite zippered pouches are about useless though. If you must,
get the mask pouch. You may actually be able to fit something inside
of it.
--
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Roger Banks Austin, Texas |
| ba...@nospam.arlut.utexas.edu |
| |
| The day Microsoft sells a product that doesn't suck will |
| be the day they start selling vaccuum cleaners. |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
Aaron West
I dive the Scuba Pro (SP for short) classic for teaching in pool. I also use the
Super hawk for rec diving but i just bought a xtek and it is very comfy, i
personaly would use a super hawk or the xtek over the classic NT for rec diving.
the classic is great for teaching.
As you can tell i like SP gear regs are the greatest and i also have the double 120
lift wings for my tech diving etc. cant wait to try them on waiting for 95's to
come in and then i will let you know how it works.
Any ? email me more than glad to help.
Aaron
RDecker388
>this is weight you must pack and carry if that is a concern.
>
Since the interest seemed primarily with SCUBAPRO equipment, I tried to
keep the reply within that line of gear. However, AUL, DiveRite and, I
believe, Halcyon all make ABS and/or aluminum back-plates that would serve just
as well.
>I am told that the Xtek harness is a re-work of the original Dive Right
>transPac,
>which ScubaPro purchased the rights to.
That's pretty accurate. I've been playing around with one a bit for single
tank diving (helps to be familar with the gear to answer questions from
students ;-). It is certainly comfortable and while certainly not as "clean" as
back-plate/harness/wing... it's about as "clean" as so called "tech" BCs come.
>The only concern I have with the XTek, is
>the wing options. They jump from 30 lb. lift (on the travel wing) to 50 on
>the
>REC wing. For whatever reason, I had wanted something around 40; 50 seems
>like
>over-kill. That notwithstanding,'rescue diver' certification is next on my
>list,
>and 30 seems a tad shy for that.
Unless you're going to be using doubles, 30 should be more than adequate.
In fact, for single tank diving you want to avoid the bigger wings altogether.
They tend to wrap all the way around a single tank, degrading their drag and
trim characteristics.
I really don't care for dual bladder BCDs at all. 1) you can only inflate
one bladder at a time anyway. 2) they "muck-up" the configuration by adding
additional hoses, etc. 3) they create a potential task loading situation.
IMHO a diver is better off proprly weighting himself so he could swim to the
surface without the aid of a BC in an emergency rather than relying on an
additional bladder. BC failures are pretty uncommon to start with and if one
chooses tanks, etc. carefully reaching the surface shouldn't be an issue
anyway. Scuba had a long history before the BC was ever invented.
>Their[XTek] top-gun wing offering has 120 lb. lift with redundant bladders,
>BTW.
I'm familiar with it. Just don't care for that whole genre of wings.
>Dive Rite has a similar offering[backplate], making the crotch strap
>optional,
>but available. However, in either case, drag is added back when equipped with
>a
>zippered pouch.
Yes, you do gain a bit of drag for each and every pocket you add. About
the smallest of the pouches I've seen, BTW, is the one OMS sells.
>Where ya gonna put your slate, line cutter, or torch?
Well, when I carry a slate it's usally a small wrist mounted one. I
typically carry a either a small knife or shears on my waist band and one of
the little UK Ramora's screwed onto the left shouler strap (above the d-ring ,
beneath the inflator hose). Small dive lights are attached, one each, to the
shoulder harness d-ring and held beneath the arm via a bungee strap/rubber band
around the shoulder strap to prevent it from becoming a "dangling demon."
About the only time I absolutely, positively have to have a pocket/pouch is
when I'm teaching and need to carry a few teaching aids. ;-)
>Both makers
>have a similar bag. Some posters have misgivings about the TransPakII, but a
>backplate is a backplate.
TransPak, TransPak II, Xtek... none of them are true back-plate/harness
systems. All are a compromise and anytime you accept a compromise you give
something up. In this case you give up a bit of streamling and rigidity of
mounting doubles in exchange for some padding and wider shoulder straps. For
single tank diving I won't belittle anyone for choosing a so called "tech BC,"
ADV style BC or Stab Jacket.... for diving doubles I'll always highly recommend
back-plate/harness & wing. With the right wing, the back-plate/harness is hard
to beat for diving singles as well.
>One advantage Dive Rite has for single tank applications, is a SS (not AL)
>tank bracket. If you need it, this gets another 2 lb. on your back, and helps
>with balance on the surface, I would think. I have not dived either, but am
>considering all three. For some, this may result in overweighting when
>combined with
>a steel cylinder
The concern is not to add so much non-ditchable weight as to make reaching
the surface without the aid of a working wing an issue. For diving in an open
water environment, the diver is always well advised to be equipped in such a
way that about 50% of the weight can be ditched quickly. Beyond that, yes,
there are advantages to getting some of the weight off the waist where it
stresses the lower back.
I hope some of this helps a bit,
bullshark
<snip a lot of useful information>
> I hope some of this helps a bit,
I don't know about the original poster, but it helped me
a lot.
I have been oscillating between the backplate and a
minimal (so-called) tech harness for quite a while.( The local
shops grimace when they see me lately...) I really do not need
the 'tech' features, as much as I want the smallest, functional
rig available for travel...It just so happens that 'tech' BC's
offer that. Realistically, I doubt I'll ever join the 'doubles'
club. Were that not the case, I would go for the backplate in
a heartbeat.
In all honesty, the biggest drawback to the backplate is the cost.
A rig that in theory should be less expensive, for some reason,
costs about a lot more (way more, like 50%), in these parts.
As it turns out, I just saw the XTek in real life yesterday.
It looks about perfect for my needs. With the Rec wing, it's
about the smallest BC I've ever seen. Too many D-rings, but hey!
if I objected to that, someone might accuse me of taking myself
seriously. Besides, you never know when you might need to hook up
to a plow. Other than that, it seems to fill the bill. I wish
it had a pocket, but with all those D-Rings, maybe I won't need
one. Your tip on the small light and bungee, sounds like a
good one.
safe diving,
bullshark
TM
$148 and a 27lb Pioneer wing for $228. Then spend maybe $20 for d-rings,
weightbelt webbing and steel triglides then make a Hog. harness yourself.
Not to mention you can do better than these prices with Trader John's...
Grand total much less than $400.
An X-tek, Transpac II or OMS IQ pack would be quite a bit more and not
nearly as trim.
TM
bullshark <bull...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:36FBBF9A...@my-dejanews.com...
TM
Actually, I dive a Halcyon rebreather and through this investment, end up
talking to the owner of the company and Larry C in sales (too)regularly.
The prices you quote are direct from Halcyon, distributors often sell for
less. I did forget the single adapter as I don't dive singles but even
Halcyon has a version cheaper than the steel.
They are great wings ( I have two) but you don't need an Explorer unless you
dive doubles - they are too wide. The smallest is 38 lbs but is made
specifically for double AL80's and rebreathers. The Pioneer is not a bag in
a bag design but is plenty buff unless you are penetrating a jagged wreck.
But then you would be diving doubles anyway... You have *seen* one haven't
you?
And yes I have *seen* an X-Tek and put about 50 dives on one. I just sold
mine on the equipment NG next door, too bad you missed a sweet deal. There
is no comparing the trim. If a single piece of webbing flat against your
chest and tucked under your arms with a streamlined Pioneer doesn't seem
more trim than an X-Tek, then it seems _you_ haven't *seen* them side by
side. I've dove both rigs on the same day. Not to mention there is no
comparison between the quality and finish of the wings.
Also, as much as I like their gear, Halcyon isn't the only maker of these
products. OMS tends to be as or more pricey but Dive-Rite and especially
AUL can be much more reasonable. Halcyon is simply the best of the bunch
has fantastic customer support and thus commands a premium.
But just for grins let's try this one from Trader Johns: (forgive me
Garrett)
Steel Backplate (and Hog harness) $149 I'd guess $100 w/o harness, webbing,
d-rings $20?
AUL 30lb wing $200
Halcyon ABS single adapter $65 I've seen other brands for $35
However, an X-Tek/TranspacII/OMS IQ Pack is probably just the thing for you.
Make sure you get a bungied dual bladder wing (since you seem to be hung up
on bladders) to go along with it.
Thomas
bullshark <bull...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:36FC62D8...@my-dejanews.com...
> You asked. Here is how it is more expensive:
>
> I don't know where you get your prices, or maybe you haven't checked
> them lately. http://www.halcyon.net/prices.htm
>
> A backplate & harness with crotch strap 202.00
> a pioneer wing costs 228.00
> a single tank bracket costs 95.00
> ------
> 525.00
>
> ...but a pioneer wing doesn't even have a bladder. To get that, you
> have to move to explorer... add another 70.00...
>
> so were up to 595.00
>
> A 'Power purchase' as they call it, discounts a whopping 18.00
> off the ala carte price (sucha deal!)
>
> HAL-PWR-38X 577.00
>
> The back pad costs another 58.00 (and its not even a pad)
> ---------
> ...now were up to 634.00
>
> ...and we haven't even covered sales tax.
>
> Meanwhile, I can get an XTek with a (bladder) travel wing for 385.00,
> or with a 50 lb. recTek wing for 395.00, and that's not even trying hard.
> That includes an inflator hose with pull dump, but no inflator...
> I happen to have one around, so that's no expense to me.
>
> So, call it cheaper if you like, but even the way you play, it costs more
than
> the XTek, once you add that single tank adapter. Just using your base
figures
> for a wing without bladder, you have $376.00. I don't know where you come
from,
> but where I live, $376 is not 'much less than $400'. Add your $20, and the
> difference will buy you a Big Mac. Add the tank bracket, and you're at
$491.
> Considerably more money than the XTek, and way more than $400.
>
> Not nearly as trim? Apparently, you haven't *seen* an XTek harness,
> or the travel wing.
>
> safe diving,
>
> bullshark
bullshark
TM
TM <tmit...@spamfilter.puget-silence.com> wrote in message
news:9225209...@news.remarQ.com...
>
> And yes I have *seen* an X-Tek and put about 50 dives on one
Bantering with Dogfish about $'s aside, for the sake of accuracy, this isn't
exactly true. I put 52 dives on a Transpac which is the basically the same
BC as the X-Tek since they are made by Soniform (now part of JWA). I then
replaced it with an X-Tek and larger wing upon their release. Soon after
made the jump to doubles so the X-Tek hung on the wall until this week.
It's a decent harness and is very comfortable if a bit 'busy' with all the
d-rings. I thought it was great until I saw the Halcyon products...
The good thing about the X-Tek\Transpac type BC's is that they have the
normal 'BC feel' but still enjoy the same advantage of a backplate & wings
in that you can just buy the harness and change the wing for different
diving conditions rather than having two BC's or one that is ill suited to
home or travel water conditions (if they are different).
TM
RDecker388
>You can get a Halcyon stainless backplate for $148<snip>
And in another:
>Steel Backplate (and Hog harness) $149
Stainless steel back-plates are great, for *drysuit* divers. For those
diving warm water - open water locations in thin wesuits they may not be the
best of choices! It is imparative, even Hograthian/DIR, that the open
ocean/water diver be able to swim to the surface, sans wing, in an emergency
situation. Typically this requires a *ditchable* weight system, especially in
the saltwater environment.
Stainless steel back-plates are wonderful for drysuit dives and even cave
divers where losing a weight system could signal the diver's demise by pinning
him against the ceiling, but they're not particularly the best choice for
diving in a thin wetsuit. Aluminum or ABS back-plates offer the same
streamlining features as stainless steel without compromising the wetsuit/open
water diver's safety by eliminating the need for a weightbelt.
Bob D.
RDecker388
>a bag design but is plenty buff unless you are penetrating a jagged wreck.
>But then you would be diving doubles anyway...
Why assume all wreck penetrations require double tanks? Ice divers usually
only carry one tank. Cavern divers explore overheads using single tanks.
Intro to Cave divers make single tank cave dives using a tank equipped with a
dual outlet valve. The same standard isn't applicable to the wreck diving
environment?
There is a very basic tenent that is, at least in my mind, the very
essence of Hograthian based gear configurations; "take only what you need to
successfully complete the dive." There are many situation where a single tank
is all that is required.
My 02¢
Bob D.
TM
start another DIR thread but I think the rationale is more along the lines
of 'what you need to successfully live through a reasonable estimate of the
worst case scenario'.
Granted, my views are colored by local conditions; cold, deep, high current.
For me, this would be a standard DIR doubles rig or my rebreather (also a
fully functional OC doubles rig).
TM
RDecker388 <rdeck...@aol.comNoSpam> wrote in message
news:19990327113406...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
TM
There is more than one maker of steel backplates. If you had taken a minute
to research the location mentioned, all would be apparent. BTW, the fact
that the second doesn't say _Halcyon_ was a clue...
Further, DIR mandates a positive when empty cylinder when diving a wetsuit
such as an AL80 for the very purpose you mention. The 6lbs of a steel
backplate are offset by the plus 2 of the empty cylinder for a net 4ish lbs
of weight. Given individual physiques/exposure suits, this may be heavy
for some but I would think that most of the divers I see in 3/2's are
carrying at least that much weight. But I have to admit, I have friends
that dive rigs with _no_ weight and no wing either for that matter - a
hawaiin sling.
However if someone can't swim a full AL80 and 6 lbs of weight, they probably
aren't fit enough to be diving in the open ocean. Oh, another DIR tenet -
fitness...
Of course the 18lb plate that I'm trying to have machined blows the above
out of the water 8v)
High tide in an hour, gotta go
TM
RDecker388 <rdeck...@aol.comNoSpam> wrote in message
news:19990327112725...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
bullshark
>
> Sigh...
Having CO2 retention problems?
Check your scrubber Tommy, (that's the PVC pipe thingy on the bottom).
(If you follow the primary water trap down the left side, you'll find it)
<snip bodacious "I'm a doubles/rebreather dude" and "Gee, I talk to Larry C" preamble>
Maybe you didn't read the thread. I'm interested in a so-called 'tech' rig
for compactness and travel. Don't want doubles, don't wannabe...
> They are great wings ( I have two) but you don't need an Explorer unless you
> dive doubles - they are too wide. The smallest is 38 lbs but is made
> specifically for double AL80's and rebreathers. The Pioneer is not a bag in
> a bag design but is plenty buff unless you are penetrating a jagged wreck.
> But then you would be diving doubles anyway...
Yeah, the explorer probably is too big. I only mentioned it because that's the
line that has equivalent manufacturing value/expense. The pioneer is El-Cheapo
stuff. Bladder is a matter of durability. It's replaceable, see? The shell takes
the wear and tear.
> You have *seen* one haven't you?
As a matter of fact, I live less than 2 miles from the factory. Nobody within
60 miles will touch the stuff, because they don't want to patronize a competing
dive shop. Thats the problem. For that matter, nobody around here really carries
any of the other stuff either. There's no market, and what little there is, is
mostly WKPP (team Halcyon) or wannabes...and we already know they're going to
buy their own dive line, and not from any dealer.
You asked how was it more expensive, so I told you. Sorry it got you in a tizzy.
I can't help it if you didn't do the math.
Who is Trader John? Are you spamming, or is this a household name in Bellvue?
> However, an X-Tek/TranspacII/OMS IQ Pack is probably just the thing for you.
> Make sure you get a bungied dual bladder wing (since you seem to be hung up
> on bladders) to go along with it.
...and a hearty caver's "are you OK?" hand signal to you too, buff-boy...
Want to call me a name? Do it outright, instead of making veiled techno-crap
innuendos with your rapier-sharp chicken-schick-razor-wit. The least you
could do is invent something original. I am honored, in any event.
You sound like you're from California. Are you from California? Ku-el.
Like, get a grip dude. 'Buff' and 'trim'? Omigod, like, I'm rully Shur-ure.
safe diving( in spite of your contrary wishes for me ),
bullshark
RDecker388
>to research the location mentioned, all would be apparent. BTW, the fact
>that the second doesn't say _Halcyon_ was a clue...
Gee TM, did I say there wasn't? Matter of fact SCUBAPRO, DiveRite, OMS and
a variety of other manufacturers offer stainless steel back-plates. What does
that have to do with the buoyancy consideration for wetsuit divers?
Particularly for those using 1.5mm, 2mm and 3mm suits?
>Further, DIR mandates a positive when empty cylinder when diving a wetsuit
>such as an AL80 for the very purpose you mention.
I'm very aware of "DIR mandates," thank you. Been there, done that and had
that coversation more than a couple of times with various WKPP members.
>The 6lbs of a steel
>backplate are offset by the plus 2 of the empty cylinder for a net 4ish lbs
>of weight.
Perhaps Dan Volker will jump in here soon, then, and explain why he, a
WKPP offshore team member, recommends open water divers equip themselves in a
manner requiring a ditchable weightbelt! In fact, I seem to recall Dan
mentioning the need for a diver to acheive *positive* buoyancy in an emergency
per DIR mandates, not simply be in good enough physical conditioning to swim up
a slighly negative to neutrally buoyant rig.
> Given individual physiques/exposure suits, this may be heavy
>for some but I would think that most of the divers I see in 3/2's are
>carrying at least that much weight. But I have to admit, I have friends
>that dive rigs with _no_ weight and no wing either for that matter - a
>hawaiin sling.
I don't believe I said it would absolutely be too heavy for every diver, I
believe my comment was that it *may* not be suitable for a warm water, wetsuit
diver. I went on further to explain why it might be the wrong choice. I'm not
particularly inclined to pass out commandments such as "thou shalt configure
your gear in this manner." I tend to explain the theory and logic behind a
particular configuration with the belief, albeit perhaps misguided, that the
individual should be capable of making the right decission of his own accord.
>However if someone can't swim a full AL80 and 6 lbs of weight, they probably
>aren't fit enough to be diving in the open ocean. Oh, another DIR tenet -
>fitness...
The entire diving world, particularly the recreational diving world, is not
DIR compliant. Nor is the entire world likely to become so. If explaining the
concerns and logic behind certain DIR and/or Hogarthian principles happens to
save some poor, out of shape, once-a-year, while on vacation diver's behind,
I'd be inclined to consider that a good thing.
>Of course the 18lb plate that I'm trying to have machined blows the above
>out of the water 8v)
No kidding!
>High tide in an hour, gotta go
Have a great dive,
Bob D.
RDecker388
>start another DIR thread but I think the rationale is more along the lines
>of 'what you need to successfully live through a reasonable estimate of the
>worst case scenario'.
TM,
Frnakly, considering the small size of the hatches on a WW II u-boat,
and the restrivetive nature of the interior, I'd prefer a single over doubles
for a u-baot penetration. My favorite tank for such a penetration is a single
LP 95 equipped with a modular H-valve to provide some redundancy. (A small
"bail-out bottle," such as a 30 cuft pony, carried stage bottle style, isn't a
bad addition.) Even that makes an emergency egress via some of the hatches
virtually impossible without removing the gear!
Even a smallish set of doubles, such as a pair of LP steel 85s of 72s,
limits the available escape routes from a u-boat. A side-mount rig might be a
suitable alternative for this type of penetration. Considering the restricted
avenues of escape, coupled with the realitively short length of a u-boat, the
dive can be considered similar to an "intro to cave" dive. Such a penetration,
however, should only be attempted by divers with a good deal of experience and
training in overhead environments.
>Granted, my views are colored by local conditions; cold, deep, high current.
Fortunately cold isn't a major factor for the southern 1/2 of North
Carolina. Depth wise, you're looking at about 110 fsw max. I'd tend to expect
most divers, in decent phsyical shape, could do the dive, within thirds and
possibly even accumulate a bit of decompression obligation with around a 100
cuft gas supply. Strong currents can be a factor but are far from an everyday
occurence along the southern 1/2 of the NC coast.
>For me, this would be a standard DIR doubles rig or my rebreather (also a
>fully functional OC doubles rig).
There's not a thing wrong with that but the diver needs to realize that
restricts their entry/exit options to the battery loading hatch. All the other
hatches are simply too small to navigate in that rig. (Well... maybe a smallish
diver in small doubles could get through some of them.... especially if they
happened to be a bit of a contortionist ;-)
Bob D.
TM
bullshark <bull...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:36FD271A...@my-dejanews.com...
>
> Who is Trader John? Are you spamming, or is this a household name in
Bellvue?
Trader John's is simply the first discount tech source with prices my search
turned up. They are in Pennsylvania and I'm not a customer and had no
intent to spam otherwise I would have provided an email address. Lloyd
Bailey in your part of the country seems to be a similar outfit.
>
> > However, an X-Tek/TranspacII/OMS IQ Pack is probably just the thing for
you.
> > Make sure you get a bungied dual bladder wing (since you seem to be hung
up
> > on bladders) to go along with it.
>
> ...and a hearty caver's "are you OK?" hand signal to you too, buff-boy...
>
> Want to call me a name? Do it outright, instead of making veiled
techno-crap
> innuendos with your rapier-sharp chicken-schick-razor-wit. The least you
> could do is invent something original. I am honored, in any event.
>
> You sound like you're from California. Are you from California? Ku-el.
> Like, get a grip dude. 'Buff' and 'trim'? Omigod, like, I'm rully
Shur-ure.
>
> safe diving( in spite of your contrary wishes for me ),
>
> bullshark
The assumptions are unilaterally incorrect but the witty reparte is truly
awe inspiring. Thanks for brightening a dull day of cold water and low vis.
....safe diving to you too (no contrary wishes - golden rule and all)
TM
Richard Kaszeta
> I'm not particularly inclined to pass out commandments such as "thou
> shalt configure your gear in this manner." I tend to explain the
> theory and logic behind a particular configuration with the belief,
> albeit perhaps misguided, that the individual should be capable of
> making the right decission of his own accord.
Amen. If a person doesn't understand *why* they should configure
their gear in a certain manner, then having it configured that way is
seldom likely to help them. The logic is important, the configuration
is merely the result of that.
"Hogarthian" isn't a gear configuration, it's a philosophy (one which
when properly applied results in a set of similar gear configurations,
of course). And I'm *flat out tired* of being told "yer equipment is
all screwed, stroke, where's yer light and reel?", when I am doing a
daytime, clear viz, open water shallow dive. Too many people I run
into seem to think that hogarthian is a specific gear setup, and if I
leave something out I'm a "stroke"... I left my light and reel behind
since I didn't need them, and they were just extra garbage for the
dive.
--
Richard W Kaszeta Graduate Student/Sysadmin
bo...@me.umn.edu University of MN, ME Dept
http://www.menet.umn.edu/~kaszeta
Mike
RDecker388 wrote in message
<19990327112725...@ng-cg1.aol.com>...
> In one post we find:
>
>>You can get a Halcyon stainless backplate for $148<snip>
>
> And in another:
>
>
>>Steel Backplate (and Hog harness) $149
>
> Stainless steel back-plates are great, for *drysuit* divers.
For those
>diving warm water - open water locations in thin wesuits they may not
be the
>best of choices! It is imparative, even Hograthian/DIR, that the open
>ocean/water diver be able to swim to the surface, sans wing, in an
emergency
>situation. Typically this requires a *ditchable* weight system,
especially in
>the saltwater environment.
The stainless backplate is only 6 lbs. Not much effort to swim this
plate in warm waters with minimal exposure suit requirements.
Mike
Scott
Methinks someone saw Bullshark coming and him got screwed!
You can get a back plate set up for much less than that if you shop around.
(and you won't need the pad)
In article <36FC62D8...@my-dejanews.com>,
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
RDecker388
>their gear in a certain manner, then having it configured that way is
>seldom likely to help them. The logic is important, the configuration
>is merely the result of that.
Personally I think the term "stroke" applies equally well to the individual
that mimicks proper gear configuration but doesn't have a clue why the gear
needs to be configured that way in the first place as it does to someone who's
configuration is a total mess.
While imitation may be the greatest from of flattery, knowlege and
understanding is what leads one down the path to greatness.
Bob D.
bullshark
>
> But of course you didn't but all that crap did you? If so...
No I didn't. I have purchased exactly nothing.
> Methinks someone saw Bullshark coming and him got screwed!
> You can get a back plate set up for much less than that if you shop around.
> (and you won't need the pad)
I was just quoting the rapacious prices published by the maker.
I essentially posted the reason I don't have a a backplate setup.
The post was about the price. And As far as I can see, anybody who
pays/payed more than about $250 for a backplate and wing is
getting/got screwed.
But just for the sake of argument, just where in SoFla are you
going to get this stuff for a reasonable price? I can't find
it. Using the 'discount' sources quoted, this junk still costs
around $400...a total rip-off... I'm not about to buy mail order
from someone I don't know, and driving 4 hours to get it is out
of the question. The Halcyon prices are a joke.
Observation:
In the last year, I have seen exactly 0 backplate/wings in use.
For all the talk/advocacy/spamming that goes on here about them,
it seems that hardly anyone uses them in real life. The thought
occurs to me that all 12 of you (worldwide) post here :-)
In the dive shops of Fort Laud. that do carry some 'tech' gear,
none, save one, actually have backplates. The one, of course, is
the Halcyon factory dive store. Their stock is neatly thrown in
a pile on the floor under the display. It hasn't changed much
(at all?) in the last few months.
It seems those of you that are so into this stuff, are very few
in number. The very small market, is the very reason that the
prices are so high. There is no economy of scale to manufacturing
equipment for a few purists. There is no money in it at all, w/o
huge markups. Makers with other lines (DiveRite,SP,OMS) will not
drop the prices, since doing so would hurt the market for their
other gear.
Oooops, time to go diving. I missed the night dive with Curtis and
Ana last night. Gotta make up for lost time...
safe diving,
bullshark
>
Dan Bracuk
In the last year, I have seen exactly 0 backplate/wings in use. For all the
talk/advocacy/spamming that goes on here about them, it seems that hardly
anyone uses them in real life.
I was hoping to see some of this fantastic gear from the cute phrase people
at Underwater Canada, but there was none on display.
Dan Bracuk
Toronto, Canada
War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
rec.scuba faq http://scifi.squawk.com/scuba.html
Iain Smith
individual
>that mimicks proper gear configuration but doesn't have a clue why the gear
>needs to be configured that way in the first place as it does to someone
who's
>configuration is a total mess.
Forgive my ignorance, but as a Scot, and a newcomer to this NG, I have been
baffled by some of the terms (presumably derogatory) that are bandied about.
Could someone explain the meanings of "stroke" and "troll" (and any other
terms frequently used!) Are they used in specific contexts, or are they just
general insults?
Thanks,
Iain
John Goodwin
Stroke means fool, or bad diver, but nobody seems to know why. The
question has been asked before, and all we got was the name of the
first person to use the term.
Troll is someone who posts with the intention of generating a
megathread or flame war.
JG
Mike Zimmerman
It used to be (geez I sound old), just 3-4-5 years ago that you could
get (easily) a set of DR wings, harness, and (ABS) backplate for ~$300.
Seems like ~2 years ago when steel backplates started getting more
"press" that they could be had for ~$100, so call it $375 for steel
backplate, harness, wings (giving yourself $25 credit for the ABS
backplate).
The very people that push the $550 combos, used to decry the "tech"
BC's that cost $550 as well, saying how anyone was stupid for spending
more than the basic ~$300 for wings and a harness. I find it ironic
that these "basic" combos now cost as much as those "stroke" tech BCs.
Me, I'm just glad I bought my stuff in the good old days. :-)
(1 steel, 1 ABS backplate, DR 60# wings, rigged the bloody
harness myself).
Best of luck shopping.
Mike
--
Mike Zimmerman < zim...@aur.alcatel.com > Alcatel Network Sytems, Ral, NC
*My opinions, not Alcatel's* [\] NC Diving: http://users.vnet.com/scuba/
A is A. Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt man doing it.
Jesse Sands
I've gathered that it was a more pedestrian way to call someone an
onanist, without being too explicitly vulgar.
>Troll is someone who posts with the intention of generating a
>megathread or flame war.
My assumption as to the derivation of this one is that it's likely a
play on words that refers to images of both someone trolling with
fishing equipment and to an ugly creature.
Jesse
Spam filter: remove bob to reply
Rugrat
Jesse Sands <jsa...@bobkayescholer.com> wrote in article
<37011707....@enews.newsguy.com>...
> On Sun, 28 Mar 1999 16:38:02 GMT, J...@opticon.demon.co.uk (John
> Goodwin) wrote:
> >>Forgive my ignorance, but as a Scot, and a newcomer to this NG, I have
been
> >>baffled by some of the terms (presumably derogatory) that are bandied
about.
> >>Could someone explain the meanings of "stroke" and "troll" (and any
other
> >>terms frequently used!) Are they used in specific contexts, or are they
just
> >>general insults?
> >Troll is someone who posts with the intention of generating a
> >megathread or flame war.
>
> My assumption as to the derivation of this one is that it's likely a
> play on words that refers to images of both someone trolling with
> fishing equipment and to an ugly creature.
>
> Jesse
> Spam filter: remove bob to reply
This from the "Jargon File" version 4.00:
:troll: /v.,n./ [From the Usenet group
alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on {Usenet}
designed to attract predictable responses or {flame}s. Derives
from the phrase "trolling for {newbie}s" which in turn comes
from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one
trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The
well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and
flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they
already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and
experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't
fall for the joke, you get to be in on it.
Some people claim that the troll is properly a narrower category
than {flame bait}, that a troll is categorized by containing
some assertion that is wrong but not overtly controversial.
Rugrat
--
"Never argue with a fool because the casual observer may be unable to tell
the difference."