ISC Remora or APECS controller wanted/needed

[Geo7]

It's ironic because for $5,000 you're essentially only getting solenoid control. A $5 splitter board and two analog devices provides equal monitoring redundancy. (There's discrepancy in that cost probably such as the cost of the OEM handsets and HUD)

The Meg 2.7 I converted to use a divecan board does so only to use the OEM HUD. The handset is monitoring only using analog. This lacks solenoid control.

However, there is an option for solenoid control in this hardware, I'm just not into it as I prefer the simplicity of the needle/cmv.

Anyways i was interested to see if the 15 handset would actually function on the dive can set up since according to Aren they should be compatible, or share a lot of the same architecture.

Yes, no argument that the upgrade is not cheap, and a good old Meg 2.7 does the job just fine (see the Pearse Resurgence dive by the Wetmules). And you have some impressive skills!

But ISC probably pays ca. 2k to Shearwater for the hardware, if not more. New housings need to be milled (and I bet the complex Pathfinder electronics box is a nightmare to design and CNC mill). Assembling the parts, testing it, adding some profit margin... I can see how they end up at 4.9k, but I am no expert.

The ISC CCR heads have a single delrin box for every component (or one complex one for the Pathfinder). We pay a few hundred bucks for an ADV, a BOV, but take those battery boxes for granted. These delrin components make these CCRs modular and fixable, in some cases even in the field. If and why the Classic and Meg15 conversions need new boxes, I don't know, but the Pathfinder needs a newly designed one.

Again, no argument from me, just trying to add some perspective (or rationalizing my expenses )

 

[Geo7]

That would make the most sense I don't see them custom cabling a petrol controller for this setup when they have already a formula or some already made with the ak-5 pin on them. I do wonder if you get the original plate back or if they just remount stub cables where the bulkhead connectors were previously. Scratch that song. You sent in a Pathfinder I would have to assume they would have to reuse the head assembly that you sent in in order to make it.

Technically each network has two connections on a 15 the way I recall. I sold mine maybe I should have held on to it.

I was told the old electronics box is not returned, and they fit in a newly designed one.

The old system Apecs 4 seems amazing, and I am sad I probably won't ever get to dive it. It's mind boggling to me that ISC has this tremendous intellectual property, owning a code that has gone through US Navy testing, yet they now use Shearwater controllers.

In the end though, perhaps that's what the market wants, and I for sure am happy that my backup Perdix operates the same as my new Petrel-3 controller will (makes things simpler for my slow brain).

The only thing I am not yet sure about is the HUD. I think the original Smithers code was brilliant. Sure, I understand that it was not optimal for using red color in non-alarm communications (I think Dave Sutton started that discussion), but the new Shearwater HUD with three LEDs in a row (and four lines of them) is not as simple. I gost used to the old one, and it's pure rythm and two colors. Now I wonder if I can distinguish the top row red (>1.6) from the bottom row red (<1.4). And if my near sight can tell if three or two LEDs light up. I'd stick with the classic SIC HUD and original Smithers code using one LED if I could (maybe add brightness settings. How do you guys like it? Oh, and I read the Shearwater HUD floods...

 

[211ratsbud]

I was told the old electronics box is not returned, and they fit in a newly designed one.

The old system Apecs 4 seems amazing, and I am sad I probably won't ever get to dive it. It's mind boggling to me that ISC has this tremendous intellectual property, owning a code that has gone through US Navy testing, yet they now use Shearwater controllers.

In the end though, perhaps that's what the market wants, and I for sure am happy that my backup Perdix operates the same as my new Petrel-3 controller will (makes things simpler for my slow brain).

The only thing I am not yet sure about is the HUD. I think the original Smithers code was brilliant. Sure, I understand that it was not optimal for using red color in non-alarm communications (I think Dred Sutton started that discussion), but the new Shearwater HUD with three LEDs in a row (and four lines of them) is not as simple. I gost used to the old one, and it's pure rythm and two colors. Now I wonder if I can distinguish the top row red (>1.6) from the bottom row red (<1.4). And if my near sight can tell if three or two LEDs light up. I'd stick with the classic SIC HUD and original Smithers code using one LED if I could (maybe add brightness settings. How do you guys like it? Oh, and I read the Shearwater HUD floods...

The shearwater hud is incredibly easy to read. The ISC version only use two colors for color blind people otherwise there was a single LED with two colors in it. I am red green color deficient and I use the shearwater in colorblind mode and it's far superior in my opinion anyways even though I don't feel like I have a hard time distinguishing colors.

Provides a baseline and you can tell which direction it is from there.

There is no red except for when you are out of the range of ppo2

 

[211ratsbud]

See this video for general operation in colorblind mode. I apologize I played the video at 2x rate speed up the process

 

[211ratsbud]

See this video for general operation in colorblind mode. I apologize I played the video at 2x rate speed up the process

Standard operation

 

[Geo7]

Thanks! I just slowed down the video 0.5x... The colorblind mode is of course superior, I did not consider that before.

I get the code, and I do like the idea of reserving red for alarms only. But all the videos are taken at an arm's length. I just hope it'll be as clear when it is used close to the mask. But I have not heard anyone complain.

 

[211ratsbud]

Thanks! I just slowed down the video 0.5x... The colorblind mode is of course superior, I did not consider that before.

I get the code, and I do like the idea of reserving red for alarms only. But all the videos are taken at an arm's length. I just hope it'll be as clear when it is used close to the mask. But I have not heard anyone complain.

Also wanted to add; just because that's what the market wants does not make it the better solution.

I think that point is overlooked a lot we think just because that's what people like that it's the better way. In reality we make decisions based on sometimes ideas that are not even relevant to the actual performance. Or overlook the performance of something because of an adjacent feature that we aren't in tune with don't see the need for or purely the shape of the box.

 

[Geo7]

There was a looong thread on the list RBW list in 2008 (still have the copied text) where Dave Sutton took everyone to school on alarm modes, arguing that red should not be used for normal conditions. He sure convinced me. I think Shearwater was listening and the result is this HUD.

But in standard mode the same color is used for high and low PO2, whereas on the classic ISC (original Smithers) HUD I had no doubt. I guess you diluent flush either way. But it'll be weeks before I get my CCR head back, and in the meantime this question is my only entertainment...

 

[Geo7]

Also wanted to add; just because that's what the market wants does not make it the better solution.

I think that point is overlooked a lot we think just because that's what people like that it's the better way. In reality we make decisions based on sometimes ideas that are not even relevant to the actual performance. Or overlook the performance of something because of an adjacent feature that we aren't in tune with don't see the need for or purely the shape of the box.

Absolutely agree, well said. People make purchasing decisions based on ideas as you said, and sometimes even emotions. This does not always lead to a good trade of. BMCL are an example where ISC just does not want to cave in and provide someting that has lower breathing performance than the current product.

The only advantage I see in catering to the masses is that standardization can make team diving easier. If I use the same Shearwater as my buddy diving a JJ, I can read his handset blinking red, and his HID more efficiently.

 

[211ratsbud]

Is there any training requirement for the new electronics?

That's like saying there's no crossover to go from a Meg 15 to a Tiburon if not.

There probably doesn't need to be anyways but that's just how the dive. industry is