Yes we can, Rob,
Curt and I fortunately sorted our disagreement out in PMs so we can move on without any differences in that regard.
Testing fo CE certification is a quite different than the testing the Prism has undergone.
If you want to test any rebreather, you can go to any number of testing houses and have tests performed. That includes DERA (I'll stay with that name if you don't mind, it's familiar and easier
) as well as NAVSEA (where the NAVY's EDU is located). At least in theory, if you have the money and they have the time. That's what NOAA did when they submitted an Inspiration and a MK-5P to be tested.
If any entity submits UBAs for testing they can choose the protocol, their own for example, or CE's if they pursue that certification. The early Prism's were submitted that way to DCIEM in Canada for testing. (NAVSEA does apply their own safety protocols if someone wants manned testing to be included).
NAVSEA tested the Prism to the NAVY's protocol, which is rather stringed and includes batteries of tests that were either not performed at all on the Inspiration (due to their relevance for military usage only) or requirements must have been lower for the Inspiration to pass. IIRC loop gas analysis is not part of the CE protocol, if it is the requirements must be lower, as the Inspiration was sorted out before any manned testing was done.
I don't know what testing procedures they continously run on their ANSI testing station, nor what the results are. I do remember them privately promising people to analyze the loop gas, did you ever see any results?
APD has always been pretty vague when it comes to test results. I've never seen anything but the CE approval statement, reference that DERA performed the tests, and my favorite, that the Inspiration's setpoint controller is the most accurate DERA ever tested (on their booth at DEMA - oh do I wish I had a picture of that one).
The question is what does it actually tell you?
Do you know which other units were tested by DERA?
I look at printouts from a VR3 comparing stock and HH electronics' setpoint control and I'm not impressed. Well, not by the most acurate setpoint controller DERA ever tested, anyway. Pretty obviously they haven't tested the Hammerhead yet. While I'm aware that the VR3 data is probably not the most accurate data out there, and the dives were actual ones rather than controlled dives in a wet chamber, that's all I got.
APD doesn't release test data, and I wonder if that sort of performance is the reason. Same with the promised loop gas anaysis. Did they test it, did they get the same results as NAVSEA?
As to which of the two reabreathers actually ended up having more testing done, we both guesstimate.
More as in higher number of different tests?
More as in more testing hours?
More as in more man hours?
Quite simply, we'll probably never know. APD refuses to give the actual information,
SMI will give you as much as they're allowed to but are barred from disclosing some.
So you'll probably keep believing that the Inspiration has undergone as much if not more testing and in APD's vague statements, while I'll put my trust into civillian and military personel at NAVSEA and the actual data SMI shares with the public and its customers.
Stefan
Disclaimer: It is not my intent to step on the shoes, booties or fins of the Inspiration fans out there, nor to provoke or insult anyone. It's my opinion, part knowledge, part believe. Not more, not less. Please take it that way.
Thanks.
) ....stepping in saying "What about the PRISM?"....
