You have GOT TO BE KIDDING!- New Aqualung BC

[MikeFerrara]

This is from the website...
Quote:
CONVENIENT
Unlike a traditional inflator at the end of a floppy hose, the i3 never moves. It is stationary at the same location where your left hand normally rests. It is always in the right place at the right time.

Who's hand normally rests there? Who says that the ability to move the inflator isn't a convenience? Not mentiopn the convenience of having the power and oral inflation from in the same place with no additional deployment necessary.

RELIABLE
The i3 does not utilize pneumatics or hydraulics to activate the Flat E-Valves. Therefore, there is no possibility of failure due to leaks. Using push-rod technology, as found in aircraft, the design remains simple and robust.

My BC doesn't use pneumatics or hydrolics either. Having the actuation of each dump independant is simpler and even more rebust needing no push rods. Adding push rods to do something that doesn't need doing in the first place doesn't sound like it improves reliability. There's no reason to need them all actuated at the same time. If they didn't put the inflator in such a strange place, they could do away with the push rods completely.

The oral inflator is easy to deploy and use. It can easily be removed to provide a access port should you ever need to rinse the inside of your BC

How easy? Easier than using the oral inflator on a standard inflator?


So, they went putting things in illogical places for no good reason and then they had to add a bunch of moving parts to get it to work at all. No doubt, a true engineering marvel...more like an engineering abomination and useless marketing gimick.

 

[HowardE]

So, they went putting things in illogical places for no good reason and then they had to add a bunch of moving parts to get it to work at all. No doubt, a true engineering marvel...more like an engineering abomination and useless marketing gimick.

I guess we know what NOT to get Mike for his birthday

 

[mdb]

Why all the fuss? If you don't like it don't buy it. Seems like the same folks are going back and forth on the same issues w/o even seeing or using the BC in question.

 

[HowardE]

Why all the fuss? If you don't like it don't buy it.

me? I don't have a problem with this BCD. Read the thread.

 

[Diver Dennis]

Does anyone who has ever dived in the kelp forests disagree that the lever could be entangled in kelp and that the lever would likely operate in some direction as the diver moved through it such that air would be added or released from the BCD?

Post #52...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diver Dennis
"I have not...and will not"? Are you that closed minded? So basically you are saying anything that may be hanging off of a BC, like a reel, is an entanglement hazard? How about a snorkel or a console? What about the knife? You think using this product id so risky that you would not try it?

Yes, anything hanging off of a BCD has the potential to become entangled in kelp. Heck, I see fins get entangled in kelp by divers frequently. When diving in kelp (unless I am teaching) I don't wear a snorkel to avoid entanglement and I wear wrist mounted gauges to minimize the chances of entanglement as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diver Dennis
Have you seen this BC? The knife on the side would be just as much of an entanglement hazard, would it not? In fact it looks even more exposed than the lever.

The difference here is that if I entangle my knife, I get stuck temporarily. If I entangle the lever, then I unintentionally add/or dump air from my BCD which has the potential for a more significant problem than a simple entanglement.

Now I have to say that I've never been diving in thick kelp so maybe this might be a problem but you used kelp as just an example of something that could possibly become entangled. You statement was that in general it was an entanglement hazard, just like a knife or snorkel some things diver use all the time. Again, without seeing it how do you know how much of a hazard it is? Was your original post for kelp divers only?

 

[Diver Dennis]

Who's hand normally rests there? Who says that the ability to move the inflator isn't a convenience? Not mentiopn the convenience of having the power and oral inflation from in the same place with no additional deployment necessary.

My BC doesn't use pneumatics or hydrolics either. Having the actuation of each dump independant is simpler and even more rebust needing no push rods. Adding push rods to do something that doesn't need doing in the first place doesn't sound like it improves reliability. There's no reason to need them all actuated at the same time. If they didn't put the inflator in such a strange place, they could do away with the push rods completely.

How easy? Easier than using the oral inflator on a standard inflator?


So, they went putting things in illogical places for no good reason and then they had to add a bunch of moving parts to get it to work at all. No doubt, a true engineering marvel...more like an engineering abomination and useless marketing gimick.

My point again Mike, have you seen one?

My post #99...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeFerrara
I don't know how dangerous it is but it's very silly. If you're a good diver, I doubt that even this thing will actually get you hurt.

It's silly because we want to associate our decision to inflate or deflate with our need to be more positive or negative. In general positive/negative are inversly realted to our vertical direction of travel. We want to associate our decision about wehich button to use with positive/negative NOT direction. Further, I've taught plenty of people to dive and knowing which button to use has never seemed to be a problem so the whole design seems based on a false premis.

I agree that it would be better to call it Air In and Air Out. I just don't see any inherent problems using this system. To me it seems very simple but maybe I'm wrong and it will turn out to be dangerous in some way but until it does I don't see any problems with it. I just was reacting to some of the posts here calling it a bad design and less than safe with out any facts to back it up.

Please prove me wrong if it is dangerous, I would not hesitate to change my position if I see some evidence.
__________________
"Whether you think you can, or think you can't, you're right." Henry Ford

"Even death is not to be feared by those who lived wisely." Buddha

http://www.divephotofest.com/


And your post #105...


Originally Posted by Diver Dennis
I agree that it would be better to call it Air In and Air Out. I just don't see any inherent problems using this system. To me it seems very simple but maybe I'm wrong and it will turn out to be dangerous in some way but until it does I don't see any problems with it. I just was reacting to some of the posts here calling it a bad design and less than safe with out any facts to back it up.

Please prove me wrong if it is dangerous, I would not hesitate to change my position if I see some evidence.

I see one potential problem and it's one that I've seen on other, lets call them alternative inflator designes. On a normal inflator the position and the "feel" of the actuator makes it easy to administer short quick controled bursts. Some other designs that I've seen, especially the pneumatic oporated valves, this "feel" wasn't present and there was a delay in the response.
__________________

 

[Fordan]

I see one potential problem and it's one that I've seen on other, lets call them alternative inflator designes. On a normal inflator the position and the "feel" of the actuator makes it easy to administer short quick controled bursts. Some other designs that I've seen, especially the pneumatic oporated valves, this "feel" wasn't present and there was a delay in the response.

Are you referring to adding air, dumping air, or both? With my Mares Airtrim, I can easily add short bursts of air to the BC. Dumping air has a little less fine-tuned a feel to it, but no worse that pulling a dump valve is.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Why all the fuss? If you don't like it don't buy it. Seems like the same folks are going back and forth on the same issues w/o even seeing or using the BC in question.

No fuss at all. It's something to bat around the board on an extremely cold nasty Sat afternoon. As screwy as the design is and as ignorant as the advertising is you almost have to think they designed it just for our entertainment. It would be a shame to let it go completely to waste. LOL

 

[Diver Dennis]

I think that the thread would be more valuable if the merits of the equipment were discussed. However, it seems like there is a different agenda in operation.

If anyone wants to discuss the merits of my two points, I am all ears. If you want to tell me how to write my posts, then I suggest we split the thread into two with the latter thread being 'how to write a post that pleases everyone.' I'll be happy to read that in my free time.

I have been trying to discuss the merits of your points and if you read the thread you would see it.

However, it seems like there is a different agenda in operation.

What different agenda? You trashed this BC without even seeing it and I have repeatedly asked for some facts to prove it. I still have not seen any that cannot be discussed without pure speculation.

I've made my point over and over here. All the bad things I hear about this BC are not based on facts. I'd be happy to discuss it with you Otter but bring more than your opinion.

 

[Diver Dennis]

No fuss at all. It's something to bat around the board on an extremely cold nasty Sat afternoon. As screwy as the design is and as ignorant as the advertising is you almost have to think they designed it just for our entertainment. It would be a shame to let it go completely to waste. LOL

Yeah, it was -31C here this morning with a -42C wind chill...:shakehead