Is CCRX of any true value?
- Thread starter Randy Thornton
- Start date
Baron015
Member
Well we both agree on that.
Mike Ferguson
WTF is that?
did you get your £25 back when it was sold?
Baron015
Member
lizardland
Active Member
Having seen up close some of the Chinese & Indian shit that gets passed off as engineering I'm actually quite happy that CE exists.
The problem with CE & rebreathers isn't the standard but the people who tried to use the standard as a way of closing the market to everyone else. A better example of self-interest would be hard to find. Another good example of why you don't let the fat man run the chip shop.
CE is a small price to pay for having less lawyers in the UK. However, if Mercedes or BMW could develop a tragically fatal design flaw in some of their high end vehicles then we could reduce that number even further with a considerable amount of irony.
The problem with CE & rebreathers isn't the standard but the people who tried to use the standard as a way of closing the market to everyone else. A better example of self-interest would be hard to find. Another good example of why you don't let the fat man run the chip shop.
CE is a small price to pay for having less lawyers in the UK. However, if Mercedes or BMW could develop a tragically fatal design flaw in some of their high end vehicles then we could reduce that number even further with a considerable amount of irony.
Mr fish
Active Member
matt
Well-Known Member
I don't think CE, per se, is required for the rebreather market - but I do think it is valuable. If I buy a unit with CE I know it meets a basic standard of safety for a wide range of tested parameters (where the parameters are known and indeed in many cases very aggressive). Beyond that I need to look at how the unit actually works and if it works for me. For example the Meg has a CE mark, but I still don't like the gas orientation, nor the way the battery is isolated, but I can be sure it's safe nevertheless.
Units that don't have CE must work harder to convince me they are properly tested, and for those I'd like to see how they were tested, what the parameters of that test are and who confirmed the result. If that's done then I can start to compare and evaluate. I don't count very highly the units that don't have this sort of testing and would not purchase one myself based on internet opinion saying they are great and that their owner has had no issues.
That of course is all part of market choice.
Matt.
Units that don't have CE must work harder to convince me they are properly tested, and for those I'd like to see how they were tested, what the parameters of that test are and who confirmed the result. If that's done then I can start to compare and evaluate. I don't count very highly the units that don't have this sort of testing and would not purchase one myself based on internet opinion saying they are great and that their owner has had no issues.
That of course is all part of market choice.
Matt.
The value of testing to standards was highlighted to me in the mid 80s. i was 16 at the time and due to financial constraints bought myself a second hand sherwood blizzard. My purchase was influenced by many of the experienced divers in the club who told me that the sherwood blizzard was a great regulator.
A couple of years later I discovered when diving past 30 m that breathing became a tad less easy and I remember thinking on many dives that I was glad I wasn't working too hard.. But that was probably just me right...
Then the ansti regulator tests came out published by diver magazine for the first time and most of the manufacturers really didn't do so well including the blizzard that was surprise surprise rated to around 28 metres.
Off the back of this I bought an apeks t50 which was rated to 50 m+, which I still use now. Subsequently all the regulator manufacturers upped their game massively
In retrospect, one of the reasons that I think my instructor liked the blizzard was that, it never free flowed and was pretty reliable, however performance wise it was rubbish.
I think to a degree we are in a similar boat with rebreathers except there are many more criteria and ergonomic functions that cloud the issues, plus the caveats that the kit is set up correctly and tested properly before diving
I believe that the ce measures do cover the minimum performance criteria ie wob and duration, but maybe there needs to be some system of scoring softer measures (even if only a buyers guide) eg
Ease of set up, ability to put things together wrongly, reliability of kit, redundancy, mass testing of warning alarms etc etc - ie all the stuff that is currently more touchy feely and too subjective
A couple of years later I discovered when diving past 30 m that breathing became a tad less easy and I remember thinking on many dives that I was glad I wasn't working too hard.. But that was probably just me right...
Then the ansti regulator tests came out published by diver magazine for the first time and most of the manufacturers really didn't do so well including the blizzard that was surprise surprise rated to around 28 metres.
Off the back of this I bought an apeks t50 which was rated to 50 m+, which I still use now. Subsequently all the regulator manufacturers upped their game massively
In retrospect, one of the reasons that I think my instructor liked the blizzard was that, it never free flowed and was pretty reliable, however performance wise it was rubbish.
I think to a degree we are in a similar boat with rebreathers except there are many more criteria and ergonomic functions that cloud the issues, plus the caveats that the kit is set up correctly and tested properly before diving
I believe that the ce measures do cover the minimum performance criteria ie wob and duration, but maybe there needs to be some system of scoring softer measures (even if only a buyers guide) eg
Ease of set up, ability to put things together wrongly, reliability of kit, redundancy, mass testing of warning alarms etc etc - ie all the stuff that is currently more touchy feely and too subjective
Last edited:
Garth, agreed.
What it has is the ability to assist the manufacturer during the test process identify what about the design is potentially unsafe! or just not at the minimum performance level required... The manufacturer then has the option to improve the design so it passes the test or they can opt to have it CE marked albeit not to any standard!
Wol, This is no different to what will occur in the rebreather market in the future once folks stop fighting the need for it to have occurred. With the caveat that a lot of this data on performance to each test required for CE has historically deliberately not been conducted by the respective manufacturers or is deliberately concealed as its less good than it is marketed to be or is published albeit not to a standard convention.Wol said:
If anyone doesn't believe me, just try and get the WOB and scrubber duration data for your favorite five CCRs for direct comparison against each other. If you want to cheat, use the Apoc for one of the 5 units as it has WOB and scrubber durations published for lots of different criteria.
