Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Sean: Thank you. I have been monitoring the comments, rantings and ravings, and the opinions(helpful and not) of all who have cared to express themselves on this topic. Yours is the first to have put forth the cons in a clear and succinct manner. You have restated the arguments against this product in a complete and objective way. Can anyoone do the same do the same in its defense? Good diving, Cpt. Dale Bennett Captain Dale's Dive Center Enterprise Marine Dive Charters CaptnDale@ao*.co* www.captaindales.com In a message dated 98-07-08 17:06:28 EDT, ststev@un*.co* writes: << I have never owned a set of OMS wings, so please consider the following information accordingly. Some of the disadvantages of the OMS wings that I have heard of are: They are the wrong shape. Comparing the OMS wing system to a traditional wing on a horizontally oriented diver, the standard wing presents a flatter profile (hence less drag) than the OMS. They are too large. OMS provides buoyancy compensators with as much as one hundred pounds of lift (as advertised by the manufacturer). If a diver is using the correct tanks for his or her particular application (considering the buoyancy characteristics) and is correctly weighted, there is absolutely no need for this amount of buoyancy in any situation. They assume an improper position. In the water, a traditional wing when inflated will press itself upward, wrapping around the divers tanks and, in fact, act to continuously maintain a thin profile. The retainer cords on the OMS wing keep the bladder constricted (round in cross-section) and present a greater forward profile and more drag. The retainer cords induce a positive pressure in the bladder. The cords in the OMS wing are constantly compressing the bladder, with intent to reduce the overall profile of the wing. In the event of a valve failure or other component failure which allows gas release, the retainer cords will act to forcefully dump the bladder. This is extremely dangerous in an emergency situation. The retainer cords can not perform their function ideally. A diver with proper buoyancy at depth may require very little air, if any, in the bladder. For the retainer cords to keep the bladder confined to its lowest possible profile in this situation requires that the cords be rigged under considerable tension. Retainer cords so rigged may constrict the bladder to such an extent that inflation to maximum volume is not attainable before the overpressure valve releases. These are all points that I heard from other people, so I can not confirm or deny any of them. Perhaps someone who actually uses an OMS wing can debunk this post. -Sean >> -- 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]