Any news?

AD_ward9

Under $1000 is what attracts serious companies because above that, rebreathers become a specialist tech diver item that will forever be low volume. Most SCUBA divers only spend $3k on their kit in their diving career, a quarter that of an average tech diver: for every tech diver on a rebreather there are 100 normal Scoobie doo divers. If rebreathers are to become mainstream, the price barrier has to be broken at the same time putting in place the safety features that are core to the O.R. initiative.

Marketing companies are a bit like the tax man: they take revenue in lots of layers. This means the rebreather is one price; accessories, dive computers etc, add up probably to the same price again. In essence, they see the $3k potential from a Scoobie doo, realise that $1k is the dive suit, mask, fins etc, so break up the other $2k with a low entry level and sell fancy parts.

Pricing was identified a few years ago, but around the world dollars are gradually being replaced by euros. Just as when we buy a product in the UK, the USD to GBP has been converted at 1:1, the same may well happen in reverse with products that are built using Euros being sold in the USA. I would not be surprised at 1k Euro units instead of 1k USD.

Alex

MichaelS.

That is an awesome price I to cannot wait for it. Now at one time you talked about a exploration model, is it still in the works and what is added above the sport model in terms of function and possible price.

AD_ward9

Pricing details are dreamed up by the OEMs: our end just designs "things", prove "things" work, tools "things", ensures production "things" are all the same and we help with the paperwork. The low volumes an expedition unit would sell in, and its high risk relative to normal sports diving means it is not top priority, other than it is a personal interest of mine. I can be more helpful in answering your question regarding function, and will try to do that below.

The O.R. rebreathers are a set of modules forming two parts: breathing loop and monitoring. We combine these, with differences in moulding materials and configuration, to produce the packages our clients require.

First is the breathing loop, including scrubber etc.
The loops we have include a single 5" scrubber CCR, dual 5" scrubber CCR+SCR and a dual 7" scrubber CCR+SCR. The commercial diving rebreather uses the dual 5" unit for now. We had the single 5" unit at DEMA 2007 in a SCUBA eCCR. Each of these exist in both a professional format and a low cost format. Only the commercial dive unit is released to production just now, but the other configurations will get there in their own time. We are in the process of releasing the single 5" scrubber unit for another professional type application: will be done by June.

Second is the electronics package (a.k.a monitors): we have top side monitors via umbilical and we have on-diver monitors. All monitors can provide the basic safety features: fail-safe PPO2 control and monitoring, CO2 monitoring, respiratory monitoring, scrubber life monitoring, scrubber health monitoring and tank monitoring, but the commercial diving unit has extra things like CO monitoring, dual video and voice comms as well.

The on-diver monitors can plug into any rebreather, including retro-fits, by fitting one of our large P-Ports (twin button, 36mm I.D): the port reinforcing rings etc are part of the package. The monitors have entered their commercialisation phase, so we can't publish much until they are launched by the OEMs, but the safety information is being put onto the O.R. part of the DL web site. We have shared key safety points with competitors, such as the auto-on with falling PPO2 instead of wet contacts, so these might be less revolutionary when they finally appear in the shops, but there are still things like working CO2 monitoring, auto-loop shutoff - bail out, and continuous PPO2 sensor self test which are unique.

The continuous O2 cell fault detection was particularly pleasant to see during the most most recent dives we did in Norway: diving equipment is not just about safety but about making sure the kit works when you need it. In Norway, we did a dive with 1 sensor out of 4 working one one side, and in another dive, 2 sensors out of 8 working: the system identified which one was correct automatically - the others had been thermally stressed or had water on them, one cell was broken. The PPO2 set point was 0.3 (we over-rode the minimum of 0.7), these were shallow dives with a diver bouncing from 3m to spring out the water and insufficient O2 in the gas for the diver workload (32% O2 instead of the recommended minimum of 50%), so the tolerance for error was almost nil.

The O.R. O2 cell study paid off well there. It was nice to hear recently that it is referred to on Wikipedia's "Oxygen sensors" page as the reference for dive cells, and from discussions with other companies we are glad other manufacturers are finding this useful too: the ethos behind this is to get the core safety information out into the public domain. The WOB and PPO2 reports should be out fairly soon as flow and configuration is now stable.

So going back to your question: a sports expedition version is certainly available for the OEMs once the sports safety case generally is completed. Whether OEMs really want to support tech divers is another matter: more than one have suggested that many of the accidents with rebreathers in sport diving stem from the fact it is primarily tech divers that use them. Not sure I agree, but the view is widely held. There will definitely be some sports expedition units around, simply as a byproduct of a personal interest in this area.

Alex

NB: Picture, to show divers really did "spring" out the water!
Incidentally, our manned tests are designed to avoid any experimental diving - they just verify things we have already machine tested to confirm ergonomics etc: we verified previously PPO2 control both formally and on a breathing machine in a chamber for maximum descent to 600msw (to avoid spikes above the EN14143 limit), and maximal ascent at 110m/min, with sensors going faulty at different times, but seeing diving with such narrow PPO2 in the flesh makes it much more real.

Attached Images

Jon Are doing shallow bounce diving.jpg (140.6 KB, 624 views)

MichaelS.

Ok that makes since. Now realizing "its all up to the OEM's" what are the limits allowed in the unit? Has a OEM agreed to make or talk about a full feature unit without artificial limits, and I realize that goes against the "breed".

AD_ward9

There is definitely an OEM who wants a unit for Tech diving without limits. The issue is more of whether there is a route to support that company at the same time as the companies who are more interested in the average sports dive.

Alex

MichaelS.

Could you explain further?

AD_ward9

Yes: I will be bold, to raise a point or two for debate in the process.

Bottom line is that companies that want to focus on the sports market do not want to see a close variant in a tech diving format because the stupid things the rebreather accident list shows some tech divers do, will give the unit a bad record unfairly. The companies involved in professional diving, even more so.

The root problem is that for every sane and normal tech diver, like yourself, there seems to be another diver who is the mirror image lurking somewhere.

The sane divers still have accidents, but they seem to be down to either general diving hazards (e.g. a shark ate them), or down to a manufacturer's ignorance of safety design procedures (which is avoided simply by doing things properly). It is the "mirror guys" who spoil it for everyone else.

The things the mirror guys do are what challenges the safety case. I can list some of them:

1. The diver believes he can dive to the CNS clock limits, or more, with impunity. Numerous accidents prove otherwise, and the diver is generally ignorant of the fact that hypercapnia greatly reduces the O2 tolerance, so CNS hits have occured with a PPO2 as low as 1.0. This particular piece of ignorance has killed a string of rebreather divers.
2. Diving at 100msw or more after less than 10 hours experience on a unit. That killed a few.
3. Ditto with no trimix training at all. That killed a few more.
4. Plumbing in nitrox to the ADV at 100msw or more. Killed more than one.
5. Plumbing in hypoxic gases to the ADV on the surface.
6. No bail out that can be reached. Killed at least one.
7. No checks, no servicing: we have that nailed with the handset countdown, but you get the mindset, so one needs automatic mushroom valve checks etc. Killed several.
8. Never clean the breathing loop: many confess to this on Rebreather World.
9. Idiot actions such as taking off a rebreather underwater: it either floats or sinks, and the hydrostatic difference means the diver cannot breathe from it even if the mouthpiece is in his mouth. I cannot believe a head of a major training agency still teaches this. Killed more than one.
10. Going to exotic places and using O2 with less than 100% oxygen just because it was too much hassle to do it properly, with the obvious fatal result. Killed at least one.
11. Dive to 180msw on a Zepp.
12. Modify the kit, carry out no scientific tests to show the mod works and is safe, then do manned testing solo. That got at least one diver.
13. Solo diving. There must be at least half the accident list taken up by solo divers.
14. Cheapskates who will not throw out sorb, or buy medical sorb that dissolves as soon as it smells water, or who fit sorb holders in place of an EAC scrubber, or think they can extend the manufacturer's stated scrubber life by a factor of 1.2, 2, 3, or even 5. This particularly piece of stupidity killed quite a few.
15. Use O2 cells until they are all dead, and when they all go dead at an inconvenient time such as the middle of a dive trip, fly the unit as a SCR. That trick caught out a few divers.
16. There is no such thing as a Work Of Breathing depth limit. So say lots of dead divers. Ignorance of the runaway effect of WOB is rife: almost every tech diver today is diving way past the safe WOB limits. In a few years time, WOB limits in EN14143 might be corrected to show what is safe based on scientific tests by NEDU instead of what regulators did 25 years ago, but will anyone notice?

The O.R. units handle 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 14, 15 and 16 automatically. That still leaves 2, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13 plus lots of things we have not dreamed of doing: the last idiot is still to be born, and idiots usually win out over geniuses when challenging a system - the answer is stay away from populations of idiots. Tech diver population is 50% superb divers and nice guys, and 50% egomanicidal idiots IMHO.

I frequently see the grief of diving accidents first hand: relatives, manufacturers in court - swapping position is something no-one in their right mind would want to do (unless they are in the "mirror" camp of tech diving, where it seems they do not care).

Anyhow, add these two facts up, and it makes the position of supporting a company producing tech rebreathers, very uncomfortable.

There are various ways of handling this. GUE and Halycon do it by trying to screen out the idiots: and it has worked very well for them so far.

We may do the same and just hire/lend out the serious expedition units, to leave the companies who manage professional and sports divers in peace. I would certainly like to see the full tech version out there, as I am a deep wreck diver. However, turning down the offers of money from companies that want to sell tech diving rebreathers to all and sundry certainly looks like a good self preservation policy.

Alex

MichaelS.

I hope you will release the explorer version, and I do understand your concerns.

spunkmire

Just out of curiosity,
how is it that this thread has gone to 10 pages, with dozens of glowing reviews, without any pictures of the actual model

The pictures shown are clearly either the commercial version under test (is this (commercial) unit not in professional use as we type?) or some circuit boards (great, now we just need the rest of the rebreather to go with them)

Reading the frequent presentation deadlines (e.g. DEMA 2007) I cannot help but be filled with dispair.
Possibly Mr Ward's copious output on the rebreather market (and in all areas of rebreatherworld), might be indicative of where his time is going (instead of on his sport rebreather).

As I can see it, it is all very well to talk of safe design e.t.c., but you don't actually KNOW what will happen until the first diver walks off the end of the boat - i.e. it is bollocks to criticise other units in such incredible detail ( not naming names of course ) without producing a unit yourself.
SO GET ON WITH WITH IT

DeepBlueInnovation

If you have any genuine interest then go back and read the posts in the thread. Otherwise stop trolling. Cheers, Ben.