I’m waiting for the ANSTI-gate equivalence so that I can invoke the compulsory car-to-reg (-industry) metaphor and its “innovation”
Bad joke aside, if you don’t have to scrap/save/get nifty with resources, no innovation is gonna happen — being golden in market share doesn’t change much about it, ask all them VW peeps that needed to fake a required benchmark
SP does(did) innovate on a manufacturing level, they have the huge supply chain that enables cross compatible parts, material choices (late to the Ti train tho), lab-rating innovation “steps” across the lineup; and capitalizes on that by making this huge lineup where we get “distributed” mini-innovation, never an mk11evoT with a g260Ti and a sealing to mk17 upgrade kit (oh that’s a good idea, they should make these kits like Mares does), so we buy more of it all — good on them sucks for us
Sometimes they made a big gamble like the g500, the pilot, the c350, but then break hearts in another ways (I want that damn mk11T and cone o2 seats for the mk10)
There are no emission requirement (like incremental EU4-5-6 on diesel for eg) pushing a need to make regulators more efficient, beyond the brag, that push the bar just a bit up
CE testing (for OC) doesn’t cut it to require innovation, the extra A just opens up an extra sector on heat shielding 1sts — but our bodies also don’t need more efficient regs
For CC it’s probably gonna be an easy benchmark soon-ish (maybe in to 5-10 years most units would be CE capable), and probably stagnation will catch up to that industry another 5-10y after that
Between the 80s-00s, innovation in F1 translated to seconds gained on the lap as follows (on avg):
(the much more costly, but is the main motive) engine performance: 30-300ms/lap
(Cheap bi-product) Tire material: 0.1-1.5s/lap
So they were making them drop their turbos, smaller engines … with each drop a leap happened
Maybe if we invoke a SAC-tax, reg design would get a bit of a renaissance — but then we’ll just end up diving rebreathers only
(Tax aside, I think that’s what I like the future to be like)
Here’s an idea for a real new requirement(-ish): thermal exchange compliance to be part of CE stamping a reg; I want them to squirm and fit an efficient yet tiny heat exchanger (like the KM) into second stages, be damned that dry mouth; who do I petition for this
?
And this is what kinda really breaks my heart — Dive science offers some research opportunities on the medicinal side, but (not in my time) on the engineering side; huge chunk of innovation comes from students
Working engineers wanna innovative too, but are more realistic/bound by the market forces (yes I would have loved to do that for living instead of, well car stuff— it’s what it’s
)
(Damn that rant really got away from me and turned into a huge text wall, sorry y’all it I’m boring you)
wireless regulator sounds fly AF tho, I’d love a few, with built in PTT comms (and an off button) please
, with all the time on hand and no customer asking for their reg
(Clearly designed by a badass genius that had little regard for supply chain)
Bad joke aside, if you don’t have to scrap/save/get nifty with resources, no innovation is gonna happen — being golden in market share doesn’t change much about it, ask all them VW peeps that needed to fake a required benchmark
SP does(did) innovate on a manufacturing level, they have the huge supply chain that enables cross compatible parts, material choices (late to the Ti train tho), lab-rating innovation “steps” across the lineup; and capitalizes on that by making this huge lineup where we get “distributed” mini-innovation, never an mk11evoT with a g260Ti and a sealing to mk17 upgrade kit (oh that’s a good idea, they should make these kits like Mares does), so we buy more of it all — good on them sucks for us
Sometimes they made a big gamble like the g500, the pilot, the c350, but then break hearts in another ways (I want that damn mk11T and cone o2 seats for the mk10)
There are no emission requirement (like incremental EU4-5-6 on diesel for eg) pushing a need to make regulators more efficient, beyond the brag, that push the bar just a bit up
CE testing (for OC) doesn’t cut it to require innovation, the extra A just opens up an extra sector on heat shielding 1sts — but our bodies also don’t need more efficient regs
For CC it’s probably gonna be an easy benchmark soon-ish (maybe in to 5-10 years most units would be CE capable), and probably stagnation will catch up to that industry another 5-10y after that
Between the 80s-00s, innovation in F1 translated to seconds gained on the lap as follows (on avg):
(the much more costly, but is the main motive) engine performance: 30-300ms/lap
(Cheap bi-product) Tire material: 0.1-1.5s/lap
So they were making them drop their turbos, smaller engines … with each drop a leap happened
Maybe if we invoke a SAC-tax, reg design would get a bit of a renaissance — but then we’ll just end up diving rebreathers only
(Tax aside, I think that’s what I like the future to be like)
Here’s an idea for a real new requirement(-ish): thermal exchange compliance to be part of CE stamping a reg; I want them to squirm and fit an efficient yet tiny heat exchanger (like the KM) into second stages, be damned that dry mouth; who do I petition for this
?And this is what kinda really breaks my heart — Dive science offers some research opportunities on the medicinal side, but (not in my time) on the engineering side; huge chunk of innovation comes from students
Working engineers wanna innovative too, but are more realistic/bound by the market forces (yes I would have loved to do that for living instead of, well car stuff— it’s what it’s
)(Damn that rant really got away from me and turned into a huge text wall, sorry y’all it I’m boring you)
wireless regulator sounds fly AF tho, I’d love a few, with built in PTT comms (and an off button) please
I’m still trynna figure that one out
, with all the time on hand and no customer asking for their reg(Clearly designed by a badass genius that had little regard for supply chain)
