and now the truth... abouth WOB

andrespp

You really made a point here....

PhilSiswick

Agree with both you and Dave. Standards are necessary and the complete data (the test conditions, the results and pass/fail) should be provided to or made available to all users.

You hit the nail on the head - standards should be iterative as technology and manufacturing practice develop and the body of safety and user knowledge improves. How anyone can imagine that a standard can be set in stone defies belief.

Joe,

I usually agree with much of what you say, but I feel your view of the CE rating is ill-informed. It isn't a protectionist tax, just a reflection of a different way of doing things over here. We prefer to set a standard up front and try to meet it in such matters (prevention rather than cure).

I know that the issue revolves around the restriction on sale of non-CE units through official channels (dealers, rather than personal import). It would be madness to allow otherwise - how could you justify setting a standard and then allowing people to freely buy a unit that failed to meet them in a shop. What then would be the point of setting the standard in the first place?

There is of course no law that prevents you diving a non-CE unit for private diving (other than in France, but that's a whole different matter ).

The issue is not that there is a standard, but that that standard is pickled in aspic. Denying change is never a good policy.

Cheers,

__________________
Phil (WSKD 0001)

I have always felt that the dive I am on is not nearly important as the dives I plan to be on the rest of my life. Tom Rose, 2007

The person who gets the farthest is generally the one who is willing to do and dare. The sure thing boat never gets far from shore. Charles A. Lindbergh

www.hugsac.org.uk

divetheworld

Hats off to you Paul.

Personal opinion:
Standards are good, really good. But would be much better if they were; Written with a proportionate amount of input from manufacturers, Made simpler to comply with, More relevant to actual diving requirements, Reduced ability to manipulate test results and More flexibility in certification agencies.
The standard has excluded one major rebreather design from the market by the back door. What happened to healthy competition? Oh, that’s right, with a standard like this, the Competition act can’t apply.
Making the standard insist on automatic maintenance of setpoint is equivalent to insisting all parachutes have an automatic opening mechanism.

__________________

caveseeker7

Correct on the scrubber of the Divematics Shadow Pack III.

Divematics actually holds an export license for their military rebreather products.

__________________
Cheers
Stefan



"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority,
and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.!"

caveseeker7

Competition is only healthy if their products are not as good as yours and cost more.
If it's the other way around it's rather unhealthy.

__________________
Cheers
Stefan



"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority,
and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.!"

Ben Field

Ditto- nice job!



While I can see where you going you have got to remember that a CE standard gets written as required so AP wanted to sell the Inspiration as Ce approved so a standard got written to allow it. IIRC at the time there wasn't really anyone else to ask for input?

Since the EU has become an unstoppable regime and are glacial slow at making changes I suspect we're just going to have to wait.

I did get the impression from Martin Parker at the dive show last year that a revision was at least being discussed...

__________________
www.hugsac.org.uk

silent running

Hello Phil, it certainly becomes a defacto protectionist tax if a small CCR maker can't affort the expense of getting the CE mark or can't afford the legal expense of challenging a silly regulation that prevents them from getting the CE mark-like not having a solenoid.

Standards are good, but become less so if they have within them silly fine print like requiring that one must be able to pick up a CCR by it's breathing hoses. Or worse yet, disqualifing any CCR that is manually controlled despite the safety record of MCCRs. If that's not nannyism, I don't know what is.

I bought a Prism partially because of the amount of testing done on it by the manufacturer to their and the USN's satisfaction. In otherwords, I was the one who ultimately made the decision that the unit was safe to use. I didn't wait for a large, cumbersome, unresponsive government organization to tell me it was safe. I think Paul is trying to do the same-here's some data, let the consumer decide-and hats off to him. If you are engaging in an activity that is risky by it's very nature, it's YOUR responsibility to make sure that you're safe. You alone are the best judge of how well a particular unit meets your needs and requirements for safety and usefulness. To me this is plain as day, especially if you are a CCR diver as opposed to say, a kite flyer or toaster plugger-inner.

Sorry for the sideways rant everybody...

caveseeker7

Good question. Seeing that there are at least two mCCRs available with a CE sticker, being sold more or less legally within the EC ... How do you justify a standard and then people bypassing it by having their CCRs tested and certified as personal protection equipment, or on some cloak-and-dagger trip to some Italian shipyard? Makes the whole EN14143 a steaming pile of BS.

Have you ever talked to non-Europeans going through CE, for dive equipment other RBs? I have, and their tales ain't happy. Makes it even easier to believe that the CE is indeed a protectionist tax.

Looking at CE-certified RBs' body count I say your prevention needs a cure.

__________________
Cheers
Stefan



"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority,
and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.!"

PhilSiswick

I carefully didn't argue that this standard was a good one, just that published standards are good. I actually said that this one shouldn't be pickled in aspic, in support of Dave's statement that the standard should be changed to allow the KISS style units in (which only takes one change, I believe).

I completely agree (not sure that I said I didn't). If I had thought that the Vision wasn't safe, despite its CE rating, I would not have bought it. You happen to have bought one of the only other units that has published testing available to purchasers. I'd respectfully say that we made our decisions based on much the same criteria.

Me too

Cheers,

__________________
Phil (WSKD 0001)

I have always felt that the dive I am on is not nearly important as the dives I plan to be on the rest of my life. Tom Rose, 2007

The person who gets the farthest is generally the one who is willing to do and dare. The sure thing boat never gets far from shore. Charles A. Lindbergh

www.hugsac.org.uk

PhilSiswick

How can you damn any law because people are bypassing it? There are two disconnected things here - publication of and testing to an 'independent' standard and enforcement of the use of that standard. I am for both, but only the former is currently in place.

We have a problem that the EU is happy to bang standards out there, but never particularly happy to ensure that all countries enforce them to the same level. Some countries choose to follow the letter and the spirit of the law, others use them to protect themselves, while thumbing their noses at them when it suits them. Don't damn the countries and manufacturers who behave themselves because of the actions of those who don't. That needs tackling, not using as an excuse to ignore standards put out there with very good intentions.

Have you ever talked to anyone trying to sell equipment into a different market? I don't dispute that CE is hard, but all countries have standards that can be difficult to understand and meet for manufacturers from other countries (remember all the mods that used to have to be made to European cars to meet US standards in the 70s and 80s?).

And I never said otherwise. The principle is good, but the implementation, in this case, needs improvement. It didn't trap the issues in the early Inspiration Classics and it shuts out units that are demonstrably safer than ones that pass. No-one, least of all me, could argue otherwise.

Right, having responded to an old chestnut on here in a moment of weakness after coming off a grumpy conference call, I'm vowing never, ever, to get involved in the CE testing debate again.


FWIW, I think Paul R is doing exactly the right thing - testing his unit to the available standards and publishing the results. All credit to him (and it looks a lovely unit). Now, where can I test dive one?

Have a lovely weekend all.

Cheers,

__________________
Phil (WSKD 0001)

I have always felt that the dive I am on is not nearly important as the dives I plan to be on the rest of my life. Tom Rose, 2007

The person who gets the farthest is generally the one who is willing to do and dare. The sure thing boat never gets far from shore. Charles A. Lindbergh

www.hugsac.org.uk