Paul, what ever the case, you know the drill: put on your full rig including
your light and your normal insulation with only a modicum of gas in the
tanks and test the buoyancy in a pool. Bring dive weights to pick up and
count to see if additional weight is required to stay neutral just under the
surface. Then mentally add the weight of the full gas to see where you will
be to know if you can get up by dropping the light and or the additional
weight.

This is how you treat all tanks. With positive tanks, you use the weightbelt
and or light to offset both the surface buoyancy and the empty tanks.

Only with a shell drysuit is any integrated weight ever used to offset the
insulation since that buoyancy will not change with depth.

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Braunbehrens [mailto:Bakalite@ba*.co*]
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 8:53 PM
To: Trey; Ian Puleston; techdiver@aquanaut.com
Subject: RE: OMS vs PST tank specs


Thanks Trey, I'll be getting my set soon and will test them.  I doubt
they have changed anything, but will report back here if they have.
There are quite a few wrong tank specs floating around on various web
sites, but this is the PST site.  If it's wrong, I'll let them know
as well.


Trey wrote:
~
>Obviously not correct. I have four sets from 1971 to 1998. All -9 for a set
>of doubles, and   I checked each and every one of them. Paul, we can not
>chase bullshit from web sites. Either believe it or don't, but unless these
>morons have changed the tank, and that means a whole series of DOT
approvals
>for nada, then they fucked up on the web site, or more likely, given that
>they are involved in the dive industry, they have no freaking clue what the
>tanks do, and of course there is the slim chance you got it wrong. 121
PST's
>have exactly the same buoyancy characteristics as the 104's, have them ,
>too, 1998 vintage.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Braunbehrens [mailto:Bakalite@ba*.co*]
>Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 1:03 PM
>To: Trey; Ian Puleston; techdiver@aquanaut.com
>Subject: RE: OMS vs PST tank specs
>
>
>Trey wrote:
>
>>For dry suit diving anywhere, the PST offers a better buoyancy fit as a
>pair
>>are -9 in fresh vs neutral for the Faber. To offset a proper shell suit
>with
>>insulation takes between 20 and 26 pounds, and that is achieved by the
>>tanks, the plate, the light, and the regs, leaving the diver neutral at
all
>>depths with little or no gas, and negative by the amount of the gas when
>>full, plus or minus a little depending on the insulation and the diver,
>with
>>the light being droppable in an emergency to get up.
>
>
>Now I'm completely confused!  The pst site has these figures:
>LP-104	104 CU.FT.	8.00	26.19	45 LBS	-0.7 LBS
>
>which would make a set of doubles only 1.5 pounds negative!
>
>Are we talking about the same tank?
>--
>Paul B.

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

--
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]