Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

From: "Sean T. Stevenson" <ststev@un*.co*>
To: "techdiver@aquanaut.com" <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1998 13:41:57 +0800
Subject: Re: Bondage Wings
The following is a message I posted on this forum a while ago concerning the
supposed disadvantages 
of OMS wings.  Shortly after posting, I received a private reply from someone
at OMS indicating 
that this information was in error, and that I could contact OMS for the real
information.  I never 
followed that up, but it seems to me that the most objective analysis would
come not from the 
manufacturer, but rather from persons who have used both these and other wing
systems.  Having said 
that, here is my original post:

>

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]