Apocalypse Rebreather
- Thread starter zirk
- Start date
Iain3
Big Member
I know they publish the specifications, you talk about them all the time. I just don't trust you or Dias to give an unbiased view, your responses are too fanatical. I don't know of any negatives of the Albov as I don't know anyone who dives one, and as I am perfectly happy with my current BOV I can't be bothered reading pages of data, much of which I will admit I probably wouldn't understand anyway.
When I say fanatical I mean the way you defend the Apoc at every opportunity, with massive ambling responces attacking the competitors and denouncing everyones opinions with obscure measures and CE references that mean nothing to the majority of readers...
...it seems petty. And it's not just you, Alex used to do it, Gian Ameri used to do it, for a long time I thought Gian was a fake user setup by Alex, and I thought the same of you for a while, you all sound identical to me.
If a completely neutral person was given an Albov, a JJ BOV, a shrimp, an AP BOV (and any others) stuck them all on the one unit (a REVO or Boris or something) and ran a variety of tests on them, then I would be interested to hear the results. If the Albov is as good as you seem to think then a bit of fair, unbiased, easily comparable testing from a totally neutral figure would probably do more good for Deep Life in my eyes than all the posts you, Gian or Alex have ever written.
Paul Haynes
CCRX Supporter
Last edited:
Paul Haynes
CCRX Supporter
Last edited:
Brad,
You and I have had interactions on other boards where I was quite in favor of the rebreather. I have no issues with the work that they have put in. I have issues with their horrific customer service. If you ask OS about the customer whose rebreather was ready to ship, but refused to take delivery because they would not apply the cancelled electronics order to the o2 rebreather order, despite repeated promises that they would do so in writing, they will validate that I am a real customer.
My comments as such are related entirely to their horrific customer service and constant double speak. And any other reading of said comments in any other light by you is being used as marketing material to divert the topic. As evidenced by this, where I made no mention of standards or the quality of their product, which I cannot speak to since I did not take delivery of life support equipment from a company that would not stand behind the written word of their employees.
Please do not distract from my comment, it is unwelcome in the context of what was posted.
The facts are that the company refused to stand behind the word of one of their representatives acting on their behalf in an official capacity. I would never recommend another person should purchase an item from said company, and find it to be a civic duty to this board to warn potential customer of my experience, regardless of how frequently I visit this board.
Paul Haynes
CCRX Supporter
Yes a grey area open to interpretation eh - the answer to which I am unsure. As you cite correctly 'if fitted', however a previous face piece (mouthpiece) requirement is the need to minimise the ingress of water during normal use and in the event of a diver falling unconscious or having a convulsion. Unless used with a FFM I'm not sure how the latter part of this requirement one can be achieved without a retaining strap of some description?
iamyourgasman
Member
I don't have a BOV as I have yet to find a problem in MY rig doing MY diving which it would solve. YMMV. So can't answer the question. If and When I'll be doing stuff which in my assessment requires BOV to mitigate risks I'll revisit this. As I said having seen one in flesh I would not rule out an Apoc version to be included in my original "to look at" list based on the technical details. The sad fact is that the surrounding noise is not pushing it high on the list. I'm not entering into a discussion on that as it is opinion based...
Paul Haynes
CCRX Supporter
I'm not part any Brad / Apoc tag team. What has given you this idea or have I missed something here?
Mark Chase
ATB=AlwaysTalkingBollocks
Is it a bit like if my car has a spare wheel it must be "road leagle" but if it dosent have a spare wheel, then obviously its not relevent. And its not against the law not to cary a spare.
Then thers a whole section under tyres as to what defines "road leagle" but basicly if I dont have one (as i dont on two of my cars) then that section only refers to my normal wheels & tyres.
I know APD now offer a gag strp but its hardly capabul of preventing water ingress in the event of an unconscious diver???
Personaly I am not convinced anything this side of a FF Mask would do that?
ATB
Mr fish
Active Member
That would be the same Paul Haynes who is also the lead instructor on the Apocalypse hence his dealings with Alex and is/was the Military rebreather sales rep/trainer for Divex and is a senior technical instructor in the BSAC system?
Regards
Brad
maybe i have the wrong paul ,
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&r...ns2Gj8ibfhQYmcS6JbeygPA&bvm=bv.59378465,d.ZG4 page 7page 8 2012
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...pKoKV1Sy8Bwewhw&bvm=bv.59378465,d.ZG4&cad=rja
Last edited:
Charlie, what about that Apoc hasn't got to market? The Apoc itself is out there being dived and orders would appear to being shipped!
Sure some of us are still waiting for the iCCR elecs we ordered but the last I heard on that it was still very positive although rather drawn out.
Ben, That would be why it would be interesting to see the other half of the cert. That said the CCR comment might be a marketers misquoted advertising speak as can't recall any reason why an eSCR is any different to CCR as far as 14143 is concerned, at the end of the day they do the same thing. Its a quite clever concept.
Ben, how about we tweak that a little, "All rebreathers should first have good paperwork so we can then buy a good rebreather from that selection".
Iain, Thats the crux of the matter. There are a lot of diamonds in that data. The difference is with the Apoc you nearly always can see what those diamonds are and for other units most comparative points all a big unknown.
As far as Alex Deas goes its been something he has been working on for 13 odd years. As far as I am concerned I just want a safe RB to dive that meets a couple of simple criteria and 4 years later I still haven't found an alternative....
Dude, I want to buy another rebreather other than my Apoc that meets the same standard!
Alex Deas would probably still be posting about rebreather design if he hadn't been banned. Its a bit of a pity as he has a lot to pass on that you can't get elsewhere but that said i would rather him be concentrating on getting me my iCCR so I guess i can't complain about that. As far as Gian, his story is rather interesting and as far as me, I just want to avoid being in the position that both Alex and Gian were with a poorly designed RB. Oddly enough the same brand IIRC.
Iain, I agree with you 100%
Finding a completely neutral person who can do that level of unmanned testing could be a challenge. Someone would have to sponsor the $$$$$....
As far as the testbed unit for something like that we probably would all want a dinosaur like the Mk15 used. Its had testing done that you can independently confirm the WOB etc as a baseline and its non-commercial.
Of course, the other alternative in the interim is that the manufacturers simply publish the WOB for their respective BOVs to the CE standard....
bored@6, Thats very interesting as its the polar opposite of what I am aware of. When did you last speak to OSEL? AFAIK the latest order shipping from OSEL based on a post I read by the guy who ordered it is an mCCR Apoc fitted with an AV-1 instead of the original iCCR elecs so they can dive now rather than continuing to wait for the iCCRs release.... If your not a sock puppet quoting an anonymous ref number for your order isn't hard.
Dave, It will be interesting to see how it goes. The JJ-BOV having CE can only be a good thing.
It will be interesting how you or they interpret "It shall also minimise the ingress of water during normal use and in the event of a diver falling unconscious or having a convulsion." and "The facepiece harness shall be designed so that the facepiece can be donned and removed easily. It shall be adjustable or self-adjusting and shall hold the facepiece assembly firmly and comfortably in position." and not have some form of retaining strap for the diver?
I know the military use both and are happy with both as fit for purpose options for the same end goal. The difference is mission specific as opposed to diver safety. It would be nice to have some research done on the capabilities of both with regards prevention of drowning....
Something though has to be better than nothing....
Regards
Brad
SoggyBottoms
CCRX Supporter
Brad, I think you Team Apoc fellah's need to rethink your marketing strategy as everytime you post it's another nail in the Apoc coffin.
I think it's bloody shameful the amount of people caught a cold dealing with Mr D
I think it's bloody shameful the amount of people caught a cold dealing with Mr D
Paul Haynes
CCRX Supporter
That would be the same Paul Haynes who is also the lead instructor on the Apocalypse hence his dealings with Alex and is/was the Military rebreather sales rep/trainer for Divex and is a senior technical instructor in the BSAC system?
Regards
Brad
maybe i have the wrong paul ,
This is an interesting turn of events, Paul Haynes now part of the Deep Life/ OSEL tag team and Apocalypse lead instructor - promotion in the field eh, that should bring some traffic to my web-site (www.haynesmarine.com) ;-)
Yes 6 years ago I and another CCR IT were contracted to design a bespoke training programme for a new sport rebreather that subsequently came to be known as the Apocalypse. Providing the deliverables against this contract is where my involvement ended. If you go back and review my postings, it will be apparent that I am not, nor have ever been part of any such 'tag team' and your suggestion otherwise at the very least is unfair as I believe that until now, as far as I recall, I have never made any statement concerning the Apocalypse.
As you might be aware I run an independent defence and maritime diving business development, training and documentation consultancy - Haynes Marine Ltd and for the last couple of years have offered up to the forum membership what I believe to be impartial non specific rebreather advice based upon nearly 25 years of rebreather diving, instruction, development and testing. My advocacy of a mouthpiece retaining strap as a rebreather safety feature has no relationship to OSEL / Deep Life / Apocalypse, instead my support for the use of a mouthpiece retaining strap is an effort to enhance sport rebreather diving safety where I know and have first hand experience of its merit in preventing or restricting fluid aspiration following Loss of Consciousness (LoC) underwater, thus delaying drowning for what might be a sufficient period of time for an effective rescue to be executed. Alternatively loose consciousness, drop the mouthpiece and the next involuntary inhalation will immediately initiate the drowning process with death or an irreversible hypoxic cerebral injury assured within a couple of minutes. As a consequence historic and contemporary military rebreathers incorporate a mouthpiece retaining strap as a potential means of mitigating fluid aspiration following LoC and a number of sport rebreathers also - coincidentally including the Apocalypse.
Sport rebreather divers in the main are not dying from hypoxia, hyperoxia, hypercapnia, equipment failure our human error, these are incident triggers / disabling injuries. It is drowning that is the actual cause of death in over 90% of rebreather fatalities (DAN 2008). This is the single largest safety critical aspect of rebreather accidents, which to-date, with a few exceptions, in my opinion the sport rebreather industry has failed to adequately confront over the last 15 years. As a result what might in some cases be preventable drownings continue to occur. I have helped investigate a number of rebreather accidents and the witness statement "I noticed the mouthpiece was dropped" is common to many fatality reports. A means of limiting fluid aspiration following LoC underwater is therefore highly desirable. What the future of the Apocalypse is I have no idea, as a rebreather diver I hope it realises the technical promise offered all those years back - I guess we will all have to wait and see, however in the mean time I kindly request that the clear demarcation between my continued effort to promote rebreather diving safety through the use of a mouthpiece retaining strap and unrelated 'Apoc noise' is respected.
Safe diving
Paul
Last edited:
Iain3
Big Member
Generally I find most improvements in one area come with a compromise in other areas, for example improved OC WOB at the cost of CC WOB. I reckon if you focussed on really nailing the CE measures so on paper the product looked amazing, you could really have nailed it and produced something amazing or you could produce something that on non-CE measuremed aspects, and in actual use, is a bit of a lemon.
I think steering away from CE measures and WOB values, just finding a bunch of divers and getting them to do a series dives and rating them on very qualitative criteria, just as marks out of 10 for how easy to bail-out, how easy to breathe CC and OC, how easy to clean and maintain, etc. It will bring it down to significant differences and get to the actual stuff that matters to the potential buyers.
Last edited:
MeRodent
New Member
How about we tweak it even further, "In the real world where MOST of us live it would be nice to have paperwork backing up a good rebreather but we'd rather dive one that works and is available before we get so old that we can no longer dive anything".