YD Scuba Diving Forums banner

1 - 20 of 84 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
oh dear if only he'd kept to talking about his product and not slagging various people off. It would read alot better then.
ah, it does not matter

anywone knows that you can write as many 'fairy-tales' in your owns books as you want

we also know that he never did an endurance test himself... so it is clear for us who knows what it's about... :)

a new test is running, with the plug o-ring pushed into the EAC: now there is not 'base PPCO2' at high ventilation rates
 

·
Diving is expensive, live with it!
Joined
·
1,215 Posts
Nothing new there then, for anyone that has read YD in recent weeks. Shame.
 

·
Diving is expensive, live with it!
Joined
·
1,215 Posts
Anybody know OSEL's new owner?
That was an interesting comment. Alex had said a few months back that DL had bought out OSEL. He never mentioned an almost immediate sale (or I missed that).

AFAIK, DL own OSEL, so Alex (or his nominees) own both companies.
 

·
You think I know nothing....and I do!!
Joined
·
562 Posts
result of repeated test at CE conditions, now plug pushed inside the EAC to avoid any leak

1.6l STPD, 40 RMV, 2liter tidal, 40m depth, 4°C

5 mbar 49 minutes 20 mbar 68 minutes

if anyone is confused, because of all the fog that has been created here, between the 5 mbar end of inhale and the max 20 mbar VWA, take a look at the standard:

chapter 5.6.6: scrubber endurance is given when the end of inhale inspired partial pressure reaches 5mbar: the end of inhale gas is the same gas as in the inhale lungs, as after the complete inhale breath, the mouthpiece is completely rinced with the inhaled gas coming from the inhale lung: you also see this in the breath by breath graphs

why sample the gas from the inhale lung: simple: to get far more accuracy: the max % you reach in the inhale lung at break trough is 0.1% at 40 meter, and 0.4% at 20 mbar: so we use a CO2 sensor with a max span of 0.5%, calibrated with a 5000PPM gas
in the mouthpiece, the % peaks to 10/20 times higher easely, so to measure there, we take a 5% or 10% span CO2 sensor
everybody knows that exactly measuring 0.1% with a 10% span CO2 meter is... bad laboratory practice


there is a second requirement:

chapter 5.6.1.5: max volume weighted inspired partial pressure of CO2 may never reach 20mbar, during any stated endurance: this is to avoid big mouthpieces
for normal sized mouthpieces, this is never a problem as when reaching the endurance limit of 5mbar, the VWA in the moutpiece is maybe between 6.5 and 7.5 mbar, depending on the dead volume and shape: so this one never limits the endurance

so all the fuzz about people that state false endurance because of sampling gas in the inhale lung, and not taking the VWA from the mouthpiece.... once again, all fuzz, nothing more....

anyone cares to show the graphs, mail me, I will PM them
Paul, have you posted this on the wrong thread??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
From page 5-
"Once again the attempt at providing answers to our customers and the public in general has
been drowned out by individuals who have no intention of purchasing one of our products. There is
now a list of people who cannot offer approved instruction on the Apocalypse or any of our future products
ever, so the commercial interests are wider than they may appear on the face of it.
"

Seems Alex has invented a web linked mind reading time machine too!!!
He can tell through the internet if people are ever going to buy his products in the future and ban them if he catagorises them as a Naysayer! Interesting policy...

Goods news they've shipped all the O2-CCR's though, I can't wait to see one in the flesh :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,794 Posts
Seems Alex has invented a web linked mind reading time machine too!!!
He can tell through the internet if people are ever going to buy his products in the future and ban them if he catagorises them as a Naysayer! Interesting policy..
Yes, I sniggered a little when I read that bit too!

but then he is.....The Doctor :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
205 Posts
So, having failed to effectively debate many of his points on various recent threads and having made an art form of simply dropping the discussion when his arguments are discredited (see the EACs thread for an example), it appears that Alex will now stoop to slagging people off from the relative safety of his own "newsletter".

I think that since I got my own section, that gives me some sort of right of reply.

The first line reads:

"We have noted Dr Simon Mitchell's posts maligning one of our rebreather products after we declined to consult with him".

Allow me to translate, what he really means is:

"We have noted Dr Simon Mitchell's commentary on our numerous mistakes and misinterpretations and we have pretended to ignore this whilst repeatedly correcting the problems he has pointed out and claiming that it was our idea to do so".

Just to be clear, I will give any rebreather manufacturer free advice where it is appropriate, especially in the name of diving safety, but I have not and would never seek any sort of official "consultant" status with DL / OSEL. Alex is therefore free to deny "consulting" with me but this is more than a little funny because he has repeatedly corrected problems I have pointed out:

For example: the flaw in the design of his CO2 monitor, which he didn't even understand initially (go back and read the CO2 monitoring thread in RBW if you don't believe it), but which he now understands and claims to have fixed.

For example: the flawed choice of CO2 warning / bailout thresholds for his ALBOV, which he has now fixed.

The newsletter goes on to say:

"These posts are despite the Design Authority publishing extensive test data, method, and calibration"

Once again, allow me to translate. What he really means is:

"These posts are a response to the fact that the Design Authority has never published any test data, methods, or calibration that demonstrate our CO2 monitor actually works"

This is the pure and simple truth as many of the members of this forum well know. Do not be fooled by the documents Alex has referred to in this newsletter (and in the past). They don't demonstrate it works and Alex is playing everyone for fools by claiming otherwise. For some reason he just refuses to publish data that validates his method. He claims he is protecting intellectual property, but data that merely shows it works does not jeopardise this in any way. By the way, just for fairness and completeness and for the umpteenth time, I am NOT saying it doesn't work; just that we have seen no evidence that it does.

Finally, the newsletter claims:

"The detailed operation of the respiratory compensation appears to be the main area of interest from Dr Mitchell".

As I have stated many times on this forum I don't care how his respiratory compensation works. The fact is that whatever way Alex thinks he is doing it, it will be redundant within a few years . I think Alex is trying to imply some sort of industrial espionage. If that were the case, I can promise Alex that his rebreather is not the equipment I would be spying on!! The serious point though, is that one day (maybe) he will release this thing to divers, and what I do care about is that it does work. At present we have no evidence that this is so.

Simon M
 

·
Jesus don't want me for a sunbeam
Joined
·
13,407 Posts
There is
now a list of people who cannot offer approved instruction on the Apocalypse or any of our future products
ever, so the commercial interests are wider than they may appear on the face of it.[/I]"
It all sounds a bit anti-competitive. I really hope there is some bit of previously pointless EU legislation that this now contravenes. Oh how I'd laugh.
 

·
Diving is expensive, live with it!
Joined
·
1,215 Posts
As Alex has singled them out as a group, is anyone interested in a 'I'm an Apoc naysayer, ask me why' T-shirt? Alternative scripting could include 'The Apocalypse is not nigh' ;-)

Then, we'd know who we are and who can't ever instruct on any of Alex's future products. I'm making an assumption that I'm listed in that dossier.

Sponsorship by other manufacturers is an option - pm me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,714 Posts
As Alex has singled them out as a group, is anyone interested in a 'I'm an Apoc naysayer, ask me why' T-shirt? Alternative scripting could include 'The Apocalypse is not nigh' ;-)

Then, we'd know who we are and who can't ever instruct on any of Alex's future products. I'm making an assumption that I'm listed in that dossier.

Sponsorship by other manufacturers is an option - pm me.
Just out of interest, how many current instructors are on that list and why??
I can't remember any who have done anything to deserve that?

odd

Best
Paul
 

·
A VS Cash Cow
Joined
·
17,832 Posts
Then, we'd know who we are and who can't ever instruct on any of Alex's future products. I'm making an assumption that I'm listed in that dossier.
I hope I'm in that dossier but i hope he sexes it up a bit and includes allusions to WMD's cos that'll make my day. :)
 

·
Diving is expensive, live with it!
Joined
·
1,215 Posts
Just out of interest, how many current instructors are on that list and why??
I can't remember any who have done anything to deserve that?

odd

Best
Paul
It'd be interesting to know, but I think it's Alex lashing out rather than the application of any real thought.
 

·
Se a vida é
Joined
·
2,318 Posts
As Alex has singled them out as a group, is anyone interested in a 'I'm an Apoc naysayer, ask me why' T-shirt? Alternative scripting could include 'The Apocalypse is not nigh' ;-)

Then, we'd know who we are and who can't ever instruct on any of Alex's future products. I'm making an assumption that I'm listed in that dossier.

Sponsorship by other manufacturers is an option - pm me.
We have applied for CE on the design, so you can sod off!

Please note, our tshirt are one-use only as they're not so good in the water ............
 
1 - 20 of 84 Posts
Top