World's first full-face snorkel-mask standard reaches approval stage

[David Wilson]

The British Standards Institution has been developing a national standard for full-face snorkel-masks. The original proposal dates from October-November 2022 and the project has now reached the approval stage, with just publication to follow. The British Standard will be entitled "BS 8647:2024 Respiratory equipment – Full-face snorkel masks – Specification and test method". Details at BS 8647:2024 Respiratory equipment – Full-face snorkel masks – Specification and test method.

If I had known about this BSI project a year and a half ago, I would have contributed several suggestions for inclusion in the final text. One would have been that half-face snorkel-masks should have been included in the remit. This from the October/November 2022 proposal:

Scope. This British Standard specifies safety requirements in order to increase safety in the use of full-face snorkel masks (FFSM) for swimmers. This British Standard is applicable to full face snorkel masks, which allow the user to breathe at the water surface while floating with the face submerged. It covers full face snorkel masks used by swimmers.

Purpose. These products are being used in the leisure industry however serious accidents have occurred some resulting in fatalities. There is no standard or guidance for the manufacture of these products and cheap, sub-standard product is on the market. This standard will provide the benchmark safety standard for this equipment which will be taken into account by manufacturers in the design and production of the equipment and by consumers and users when deciding on the purchase of equipment. The production of equipment that meets the proposed standard will enhance user confidence.

 

[dcvf2]

Hi "David Wilson"
Standards are certainly a good idea, but users should be aware that safety training is more important, as I have suggested here : How to make a fullface snorkelmask safe by Achim Schlöffel message #10 and you gave me a Thanks

 

[David Wilson]

Hi "David Wilson"
Standards are certainly a good idea, but users should be aware that safety training is more important, as I have suggested here : How to make a fullface snorkelmask safe by Achim Schlöffel message #10 and you gave me a Thanks

As I wrote in a message preceding yours on that same thread : "There is no substitute for proper training and practice in the use of ANY item of underwater gear after its purchase". In the wrong hands, without supervision or prior training, even an ordinary half-face dive mask can be a contributory factor in a fatal accident:

​

It is easy to demonise one piece of diving gear when it ends up in the hands of vulnerable people who do not know how to handle it properly. The article above appeared in the September 1974 issue of the British Sub-Aqua Club magazine "Triton". The "dodgy masks" mentioned in the title were not combined snorkel-masks at all, but basic swim-masks whose misuse tragically contributed to one young person's death. I am sure we can agree that ANY item of underwater equipment can be dangerous, particularly when improperly used by an unsupervised non-swimmer of tender years.

As for those old-school snorkel-masks whose heyday was the 1950s, let us not forget that they were first developed to serve the adult underwater hunting community (see above). Back then, stand-alone snorkels sometimes came with rough mouthpiece flanges that rubbed the gums raw after many hours lying prone on the surface stalking prey; or the constant oral presence of a mouthpiece eventually triggered a gagging reflex. So snorkel-masks covering the eyes and the nose only were designed to allow nose breathing instead. Several full-face snorkel-masks were also available then, covering the mouth too, enabling mouth breathing, but they came with special chin-pieces and were fewer in number. The common factor was their price, out of reach to most parents buying for their children, but still affordable by jet-setting international spearfishing tourists with deep pockets and plenty of experience. Sadly, certain manufacturers later began making cheaper snorkel-masks for young people without providing even minimal safety instructions, which inevitably led to often fatal accidents, just as would have happened if, say, self-contained underwater breathing apparatus had ever come on open sale to young non-swimmers. There is no substitute for proper training and practice in the use of ANY item of underwater gear after its purchase.

 

[dcvf2]

Hi David
You wrote :
“There is no substitute for proper training and practice in the use of ANY underwater equipment after purchase.”
We are of the same opinion.

But the vast majority of FFSM lovers (I think) are allergic to any form of training even to strengthen their safety alone.

We must not forget that the success of the FFSM is… a problem of fog.

They rushed to the FFSM because they could not solve the problem of the fogging that they had with their traditional mask (for the vast majority I think).

 

[David Wilson]

Or certain users may have just craved the option to nose-breathe, dispensing with the intrusive constant oral presence of a mouthpiece while they swam or floated on the surface for extended periods watching the sealife below them. In which case, the following mouth-excluding snorkel-mask configuration might have offered a non-invasive alternative solution:

 

[David Wilson]

BS 8647:2024. Respiratory equipment. Full-face snorkel masks. Specification now published. Available in electronic form (PDF) or hard copy from the link provided.

 

[Bigbella]

Eh, no thanks. . . .

 

[lowwall]

BS 8647:2024. Respiratory equipment. Full-face snorkel masks. Specification now published. Available in electronic form (PDF) or hard copy from the link provided.

For 150 quid.

 

[David Wilson]

I have already complained to the British Standards Institution about the price of the publication (reduced to £75 for BSI members). £150 is their normal price for BSI Standards relating to any subject, however. I can only imagine that they usually sell to commercial companies with deep pockets.