Hans-

The irony here is that these here superdeduper wings are susposed to be 
redundant, right? So what if a relief valve went bad, you've got another 
100lbs lift right in there and you are in like flint, correct?

So what went wrong? What went wrong is that OMS Superwings are a 
fundamentally flawed design, a stillborn idea if there ever was one. So 
why are they not a marketing failure? 1- they appeal to gearheads as the 
ultimate in "cool" 2- Most gearheads are to stupid or hard-headed to 
admit that they bought crap gear.

I am an ex-superwing user and boy am I glad I sold them before this 
accident happened because the bottom just fell out of the used superwing 
market.

   Jim

On 1/19/98 12:59 PM Hans Petter Roverud wrote:

>Let's recapitulate: We have a wet suited diver with a heavy rig. He decends
>to 250' and is unable to stay neutrally buoyant.
>
>The focus of this list seems to be on bondage wings. As much as we may
>dislike that bungee it does not explain why the wing doesn't inflate or stay
>inflated. The only point is that if the bungee is too tight and the wing
>leaks, the bungee straps will aid deflation. I believe it's more productive
>to look for a dump valve jammed in open position, a broken inflation hose or
>a quick connect inadvertently turning into a quick disconnect. 
>
>Pool training -- good point. There's no need to do it at 250' if it doesn't
>feel right at 10'. The best way to learn the characteristics of a new rig is
>to do long shallow dives.
>
>Wet suit is a liability at depth. The suit does compress and has to be
>compensated with the wing. Jammer Six says, "neutral is neutral". Nope! Any
>neoprene suit is worthless at depth -- with a neoprene drysuit you can at
>least put extra air into the suit while with a wet suit your entire lift
>relies on the wing. Even if Florida temperatures make the use of a wet suit
>at 250' sufficient (which I really doubt) it's still a lousy choice in terms
>of buoyancy. In fact, if you dive a wet suit you'd really need a dual
>bladder wing to stay redundant. Conclusion: Don't use a wet suit for deep
>diving.
>
>It would seem we're talking a combination of heavy tanks + wet suit and a
>FAULTY wing. As somebody suggested, the problem could very well be a low
>dump valve cord caught during donning. Still, if this guy really used a dual
>bladder wing he should have been able to inflate the other one. Evidently,
>this was not done. Since we can presume the instructor tried to put gas into
>any BC bladder this student diver was wearing, it's unlikely that
>unfamiliarity with the rig can explain this. For some reason, it seems, the
>wing(s) did not take or hold the gas. Why it did not is the main question to
>be answered. A simple test before going in on any dive is to inflate your BC
>fully and test that it works. This simple precaution will alert you to any
>leaks or open pull dumps. It should definitely be part of any pre-dive check
>list. Conclusion: Don't jump off a boat before wing inflation has been
>verified.  
>
>The only other option I can think of is that initial weight and wet suit
>compression was too much to compensate for, even with a fully inflated wing.
>It would have to be a small wing for this to be true. 
>
>--
>Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
>Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
>


 -------------------------------------------------------------------
 Learn About Trimix At http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/trimix.html


--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]