BSAC avoids annual VIP

[Magnus Lundstedt]

In my area it is fairly simple. There is no dive center filling tanks. I do my fills at the local club, and the one checking that the tank is in hydro and in the recommended 1years O2 clean is me, myself and I, I know the state of my tanks and I am responsible, no stickers needed.

 

[Magnus Lundstedt]

If you think annual vip is an issue, don't bother owning tanks in Australia. We require annual hydro and visual. And if you want o2 fills or partial pressure mixing (how about half the shops do nitrox or trimix), that's annual too. All up ends up being about $100/year/tank.

Interesting discussion, down here in Aus tanks require a hydro every year., $40-$50 each.

That would make it a good deal to get your own compressor.

 

[boulderjohn]

You would have to appeal to the Pope of PSI-PCI and since they have built an entire industry around this it is unlikely they would decide to make their business irrelevant. They have even managed to get their name written into some federal regulations but if someone wanted to start a competing training agency they could probably sue the feds for illegal restraint of trade and have PSI-PCI changed to "PSI-PCI or equivalent standard."

My question was primarily rhetorical, and the responses indicate my ironic point. This is an industry standard with no one with any authority to make the change. The agencies are unlikely to do it because they have no incentive of any kind to do it. As for PSI-PCI, I have that certification and have been recertified enough to have no illusions that an agency that requires its inspectors to pay big bucks to get recertified every 3 years will advocate that inspections be done every 5.

At the same time, I have seen a real change in the content of the certification process each time I renew. Each time the sense of urgency is lessened. The last time I did it, I got the overwhelming impression from what I was reading that there really is no need for an annual inspection.

 

[boulderjohn]

Just to add to what I wrote before....

Let's say you own a dive shop, and you tell your employees not to fill any tank that comes in without a current one-year VIS sticker. Then you hear that this really isn't necessary--people in the UK are now going 5 years. Even though it is an industry standard to do it every year, you decide that, by golly, the people in the UK are right--5 years is good. That becomes your shop rule.

So, a tank that is three years past its last visual inspection explodes, and your employee is killed. You will be sued, and you will have to defend your decision to allow your employee to fill that tank even though the industry standard says he should not have done so. If it were in the UK, you could point to an official document to justify your opinion, but in the USA....

 

[Charles2]

I would think that if a manufacturer were to advertise and specifically state that all of their new tanks complied with the Department of Transportation's requirement of a five (5) year hydro/visual inspection, it could be used to boost sales of new tanks. At least I would buy one if for no other reason than to support the manufacturer's efforts.

 

[txgoose]

How often are tanks tested that are used out in the oil fields? Crazy filthy working conditions at times. Do the DOT standards cover every other tank in the US unless it has been attached to a scuba reg? Or do some other “pressure vessel” groups also require a more frequent inspection? Damage issues aside.

 

[shurite7]

I would think that if a manufacturer were to advertise and specifically state that all of their new tanks complied with the Department of Transportation's requirement of a five (5) year hydro/visual inspection, it could be used to boost sales of new tanks. At least I would buy one if for no other reason than to support the manufacturer's efforts.

Luxfer has given its input on page five regarding visual inspections.
https://www.luxfercylinders.com/img/rm_img/blog_img/455/attachments/1/scubaguide.pdf

Catalina also has a posting pertaining to visual inspections on its website:
Thread and Neck Inspection Criteria for SCUBA Cylinders | High Pressure Aluminum Gas Cylinders | Composite Cylinders

In my area the Fire Department conducts visual inspections, annually, on all tanks filled at their location. Recently a couple people balked about it and the Fire Department decided not to fill any type of tank for anyone, except tanks used with the Fire Department.

 

[Diving Dubai]

hen you hear that this really isn't necessary--people in the UK are now going 5 years.

John (and @tbone1004) This is incorrect (refer to Edwards Post #37

In the UK BSAC and PADI fought to keep the existing inspection criteria

Visual 2.5 years and hydro every 5 years thus every second inspection has a Vis & hydro - which is what was reported incorrectly in the original blog (sloppy reporting)

BSAC had a page explaining their rational here

 

[Diving Dubai]

With my metalligust "head on"

I fundamentally disagreed with BSAC's position on not adopting the 1 year vis. 5 year hydro is acceptable .

They use phrase's like

" [They ]believe that an increase to annual visual examination is disproportionate and would have a negative impact on the participation in our sport."

and

"is a socially acceptable risk"

In the UK most divers use Steel cylinders. they dive very infrequently, 20 dives a year would be good going. Thus most cylinders are stored for the vast majority of the time. It only need one bit of moisture to ingress into a cylinder and it will have a huge impact. Especially in 2.5 years.

Their real bone was saving divers the cost of an annual vis. In the great scheme of things not a huge cost. Especially when most clubs can inspect cylinders "in house" for free.

While it will reduce the cost for the diver, it mean that they won't be going in to their local dive shop so frequently. Double edged sword

Here we use the 1 year vis and 5 year hydro and I'm more than comfortable with that.

While BSAC does have a lot going for it, it's club model has as many problems as it does advantages.

 

[KenGordon]

With my metalligust "head on"

I fundamentally disagreed with BSAC's position on not adopting the 1 year vis. 5 year hydro is acceptable .

They use phrase's like

" [They ]believe that an increase to annual visual examination is disproportionate and would have a negative impact on the participation in our sport."

and

"is a socially acceptable risk"

In the UK most divers use Steel cylinders. they dive very infrequently, 20 dives a year would be good going. Thus most cylinders are stored for the vast majority of the time. It only need one bit of moisture to ingress into a cylinder and it will have a huge impact. Especially in 2.5 years.

Their real bone was saving divers the cost of an annual vis. In the great scheme of things not a huge cost. Especially when most clubs can inspect cylinders "in house" for free.

While it will reduce the cost for the diver, it mean that they won't be going in to their local dive shop so frequently. Double edged sword

Here we use the 1 year vis and 5 year hydro and I'm more than comfortable with that.

While BSAC does have a lot going for it, it's club model has as many problems as it does advantages.

In the U.K. with the existing rules it is practically unheard of for people to get hurt by diving cylinder failures. So how many people would be saved by annual inspections in the U.K.? Approximately none.

Indeed, people have steel cylinders which are their own and relatively little used, when compared to resorts. Thus it makes sense to treat them differently to a bunch of ali80s getting two or four fills a day for a year.

Clubs don’t need extra stuff to do. Not all clubs have compressors and people with time to burn doing the work that belongs to shops.