"failing" vs. "condemning"

[padiscubapro]

This is one beef I have with the LDS, they want more to do a VIS (which is next to zero work or time) than the Hydro which does require a lot of equipment, and MUCH more effort and time..

BS a propery done viz takes time.. Threads have to be carefully examined, any pitting has to be measured, and worse of all if there are ANY stickers on the tanks they all must be removed to properly conduct a visual.. This is the biggest PITA... If your shop is not removing the stickers they arent performing visuals properly..

 

[RonFrank]

BS a propery done viz takes time.. Threads have to be carefully examined, any pitting has to be measured, and worse of all if there are ANY stickers on the tanks they all must be removed to properly conduct a visual.. This is the biggest PITA... If your shop is not removing the stickers they arent performing visuals properly..

Enforces standars on Visual inspections at the LDS?

My oldest tank is an AL80, from 1999. It has the original manufacture sticker on it? In addition it has a Nitrox band, an O2 clean sticker, and a Vis. That's four stickers, and the Manufacture label has NEVER been removed with the Nitrox band looking like it may have not been as well.

IMO the DOT standards are the ONLY standards that stand the test of law, and it is obvious that LDS's all have different standards.

As to the time it takes to do a VIS, if the tank is in good shape it takes very little time at all. I've watched our LDS do vis on tanks, and it's a 15 minute process at best, and IMO not even needed if the tank just came out of Hydro.

From my experience personal use tanks are generally in VERY good shape. It's the LDS tanks and DiveOp tanks that would appear to need a more careful VIS.

You will need to provide more details than "BS, it takes time" to convince me that LDS's have a solid standard that they ALL conform to in doing Visual inspections. Also, my point stands in regards to tanks coming out of Hydro, why is an ADDITIONAL Visual inspection needed at that point?

 

[JeffG]

My oldest tank is an AL80, from 1999. It has the original manufacture sticker on it? In addition it has a Nitrox band, an O2 clean sticker, and a Vis. That's four stickers, and the Manufacture label has NEVER been removed with the Nitrox band looking like it may have not been as well.

Then they are doing it wrong.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

Ditto! When we vis everything gets replaced including the nitrox band. This may be pushing it but a thorough inspection would seem to require it. Although most of our customers use air, not nitrox. When they want nitrox they usually rent one of ours.

 

[JustinW]

when a DOT technician does a hydro, the tank must also pass a vis before and after the actual hydro test. Therefore, when a tank comes out of hydro and passes, it has also passed a visual inspection, as a tank failing visual cannot be tested until it passes a visual.

 

[rgbmatt]

My oldest tank is an AL80, from 1999. It has the original manufacture sticker on it? In addition it has a Nitrox band, an O2 clean sticker, and a Vis. That's four stickers, and the Manufacture label has NEVER been removed with the Nitrox band looking like it may have not been as well.

Old stickers can hide serious pits and dents - it's necessary to remove them so you can see the whole exterior of the tank (this is common sense). Your dive shop isn't required to do it, but it's still a good idea.

IMO the DOT standards are the ONLY standards that stand the test of law, and it is obvious that LDS's all have different standards.

There are no real "standards" for visual inspections. Groups like PSI have tried to standardize things and provide solid guidelines for inspectors to follow, but the procedures aren't mandated by law. Therefore, it's perfectly normal that various shops do things different ways (but not always good).

Also, my point stands in regards to tanks coming out of Hydro, why is an ADDITIONAL Visual inspection needed at that point?

Because the guys at the test facility are often in a hurry, and are not always trained to look at scuba tanks properly. They spend most of their time looking at stuff like fire extinguishers and commercial gas cylinders.

At the hydro place, the test process is carefully controlled so that if a tank does fail, nobody gets hurt. If a tank fails in a dive shop, people can get killed and property destroyed. This is why the shops want to look at the tanks themselves.

I do not trust tanks that have just been through hydro. Last month, I had to condemn two tanks that I'd just gotten hydroed. I'd even given them a quick once-over myself before sending them off; the tanks went through 3 "visual inspections" before I had the chance to properly look at them them (and find serious problems with the threads).

 

[RonFrank]

when a DOT technician does a hydro, the tank must also pass a vis before and after the actual hydro test. Therefore, when a tank comes out of hydro and passes, it has also passed a visual inspection, as a tank failing visual cannot be tested until it passes a visual.

Exactly. And yet the LDS in MANY cases will require a Vis if the hydro was not done through them. Ironically as the DOT vis inspections and Hydro's ARE regulated, one MUST question WHY the LDS wants a VIS? Even further suspect is the tank that is NEW and empty with a current VIS. Could it be that our LDS's are scamming people?

As for the Visual inspections between hydro's it seems to me that corrosion is generally inside the tank? That is where condensation builds up especially in humid salt water climates. So do stickers generally hide corrosion?

I seriously want things to be safe. However I also want things to be fair. My experience with the LDS's in our area lead me to believe that safety is a very good excuse for them to charge more $$ in the name of safety. Tanks that most personal use owners bring in are in MUCH better condition vs. tanks that the LDS uses.

In addition IMO the LDS visual inspection should be regulated under DOT standards. Enough of this one LDS does it one way, and another does something else. This lends itself to LDS pricing abuse which I have personally seen with NEW tanks that IMO should require NO or VERY little inspection prior to fill. The tank is NEW, it's HYDRO, and it HAS a vis from another LDS even if that is scubatoys.... WHY would that tank NEED a $20 VIS just because it is empty... answer... Greed.

 

[RonFrank]

when a DOT technician does a hydro, the tank must also pass a vis before and after the actual hydro test. Therefore, when a tank comes out of hydro and passes, it has also passed a visual inspection, as a tank failing visual cannot be tested until it passes a visual.

Exactly. And yet the LDS in MANY cases will require a Vis if the hydro was not done through them. Ironically as the DOT vis inspections and Hydro's ARE regulated, one MUST question WHY the LDS wants a VIS? Even further suspect is the tank that is NEW and empty with a current VIS. Could it be that our LDS's are scamming people?

As for the Visual inspections between hydro's it seems to me that corrosion is generally inside the tank? That is where condensation builds up especially in humid salt water climates. So do stickers generally hide coororsion?

I seriously want things to be safe. However I also want things to be fair. My experience with the LDS's in our area lead me to believe that safety is a very good excuse for them to charge more $$ in the name of safety. Tanks that most personal use owners bring in are in MUCH better condition vs. tanks that the LDS uses.

In addition IMO the LDS visual inspection should be regulated under DOT standards. Enough of this one LDS does it one way, and another does something else. This lends itself to LDS pricing abuse which I have personally seen with NEW tanks that IMO should require NO or VERY little inspection prior to fill. The tank is NEW, it's HYDRO, and it HAS a vis from another LDS even if that is scubatoys.... WHY would that tank NEED a $20 VIS just because it is empty... answer... Greed.

 

[RonFrank]

Then they are doing it wrong.

You say they are doing it wrong. Please show me where there is a regulatory standard, a law, or some DOT policy that requires them to do ANYTHING!

That has been my point all along.. LDS's do NOT answer to anyone unless something explodes, and than it's a bit too late.

The annual VIS required by the LDS is a industry made up standard, that is backed by nothing based on everything I've been able to find.

Please don't suggest that PADI is A STANDARD, because until EVERYONE is under PADI, in fact they are not, and they lack the teeth of a government agency like DOT.

 

[padiscubapro]

You say they are doing it wrong. Please show me where there is a regulatory standard, a law, or some DOT policy that requires them to do ANYTHING!

That has been my point all along.. LDS's do NOT answer to anyone unless something explodes, and than it's a bit too late.

The annual VIS required by the LDS is a industry made up standard, that is backed by nothing based on everything I've been able to find.

Please don't suggest that PADI is A STANDARD, because until EVERYONE is under PADI, in fact they are not, and they lack the teeth of a government agency like DOT.

The DOT states how a VIZ must be done at time of hydro, any reputable inpspector will follow these same guidelines when doing the yearly inspection.. If they aren't doing it correctly you need to find another LDS. By them doing an inspection they are legally saying that the tank is ok and they are taking responsibility for it..

You are paying to have the tank inspected it should be done properly, there are also very specific limits on what can be on the tank threads and how many must be continuous without flaws otherwise you are supposed to fail the tank..

I personally have EVERYONE who brings in a tank for inspection sign a waiver that authorizes me to condemn a tank that fails a viz that can not be corrected.. like pitting or gouges thats are too deep, improper number of good threads and SLC.. I will then XXX the dot markings on any tank that fails these, other failures like rusting don't require making the tank unfillable its up to the csr if they want it fixed or not..