Cold Water regulator standards

[Fidelis]

When the military comes up with their “list of approved“ anything, that list is contingent on what price the military can get these items for and the service contracts that are associated with them. Having also retired from the military, it was very uncommon to have better general equipment than what can be obtained by civilian counterparts. While a number of other regulators most likely passed the tests, they were not picked up because the money side of the equation did not work out. There is much more going on behind the scenes than just what regulator performed better. I realize it’s a great selling point but being endorsed by .mil is not all it’s cracked up to be.

I was in the military as well, and understand this view point, and normally I would agree with you.

But they actually provide evidence.

How they test:
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1014698.pdf

Test Results for 5 regs (including XStream)
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA549745.pdf

Test results for Mares Abyss 22:

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA561760.pdf

 

[DAJ]

Again, they only provide evidence on what they have to chose from, this study represents a fraction of what is commercially available. They only selected a very small number of regulators for the testing. This is from their selection process.

”Four commercially available regulator models and one combination regulator from three regulator manufacturers were selected as candidates for testing.”

Here is another note about them basically testing what they have and not picking a wide range of regulators that while commercially available, they are not available under contract to the military.

”Since it is currently in fleet inventory, it was initially selected for testing. But before testing began, this regulator was determined to no longer be in production, and since very few remain in fleet inventory, this model was not tested.”

Not arguing that the test does not show the difference in their test group but the sample size is too small to have any bearing on whether or not other regulators outside of the test group could perform better or worse under the study.

 

[Fidelis]

Again, they only provide evidence on what they have to chose from, this study represents a fraction of what is commercially available. They only selected a very small number of regulators for the testing. This is from their selection process.

”Four commercially available regulator models and one combination regulator from three regulator manufacturers were selected as candidates for testing.”

Here is another note about them basically testing what they have and not picking a wide range of regulators that while commercially available, they are not available under contract to the military.

”Since it is currently in fleet inventory, it was initially selected for testing. But before testing began, this regulator was determined to no longer be in production, and since very few remain in fleet inventory, this model was not tested.”

Not arguing that the test does not show the difference in their test group but the sample size is too small to have any bearing on whether or not other regulators outside of the test group could perform better or worse under the study.

There were other tests that I did not link to because they did not cover the current list. You are welcome to search the DTIC website for the rest.

In addition, at one point NEDU has supported the testing of Poseidon, Apeks, Mares, Aqualung, Zeagle, and Sherwood in 134 test dives under Antarctic conditions at one point.

Unfortunately, the Smithsonian is not subject to FOIA or I'd be trying to find those test results.

Link: Testing in Antartica

 

[azstinger11]

I’ll stick with the only the only regulators approved for Nation Science Foundation ops in McMurdo down in Antarctica, the Sherwood Maximus SRB 7600 first and second stage. Or any of the multitude of better regulators on the market. DoD spec stuff is usually garbage, artificially constrained bids won by the lowest bidder. I escaped that junk after I retired.

I trust them to purchase and test gear about as well as I trust lead weights to float.

 

[Fibonacci]

<Are there any official standards that are more severe than this? Kinda .>

What about the Norwegian NORSOK U-101 standards?
Way more rigorous than EN-250, the Poseidon XStream was certified under U-101 to 200m.

This NORSOK standard applies to design and testing of breathing apparatus for use in manned underwater operations down to a depth of 400 meters. This standard may also be used for evaluating breathing apparatus used at depths exceeding 400 meters.

This NORSOK standard may be applied for testing and assessment of all breathing equipment for diving.

Diving Respiratory Equipment | standard.no

 

[DAJ]

You are welcome to search the DTIC website for the rest.

No need to search a website as I have no interest in the topic. I only responded to provide a viewpoint that military studies are not as reliable as they may appear.

Information in this post is only as good as the date of this post

If you like the reg you are using, and are comfortable with the amount of risk you are assuming, more power to you…I am making it for the benefit of others to better help then choose the degree of risk they want to assume.

The information from your post is only as good as the date in which the test results were published, not the day you posted it. One example you posted is 12 years old now. As you are basically saying that anyone using something not on this approved list is risking their life with inferior equipment is incorrect. It’s all good, do your own research and select what you feel is the best option for you as it’s your money and your choice. I already have my regulators and have used them in extreme conditions and have no reason to change them out even though they are not included in your referenced material.

 

[rhwestfall]

I guess I should stop using my USD PRAM under the ice....

 

[BoltSnap]

I guess I should stop using my USD PRAM under the ice....

You should...

 

[DAF]

Most of my diving over the last 40 years has been on shipwrecks in the Great Lakes in the 100 to 200 foot depth range and where the water temperature varies from 42 degrees to 33 degrees in Lake superior. In all of that time I have used only Sherwood Blizzard regulators. Only twice did I have a free flow/icing issue. Once on the stern of the Emperor at Isle Royale, depth 150 feet and on the stern of the Forest City at Tobermory Canada, depth again 150 feet. Both were on my octopus second stage not my primary. Diving in the St. Clair River in the winter where the current makes you work again presented no problems. People can say what they want but these regulators have worked out well for me over a long period of time and have proven reliable.

 

[ams511]

From what I remember from the Antarctic tests, the regulators used were modified Sherwood Maximus (I think they lowered the IP and added the fins from the Oasis to the second stage. A Poseidon regulator, I think it was a Cyclon but it could have been a Jet Stream, and an Aquamaster double hose which they stopped using because of lack of parts. When the Birdman did his Antarctic dives he used an old style Blizzard.