Lessons for Life - June Issue of Scuba Diving

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

TheRedHead:
My LDS had several copies of that article laminated and displayed on their counters today.
Yes. If you don't buy your gear form them, you will surely die.
 
CIBDiving:
but isn't your LDS the one that loves to screw anybody who has gear they didn'y buy from Them?

They treat me just fine and I bought only a small portion of my gear from them. I bought my Apeks regs from them because I like Apeks regs. They lent me a set of doubles today to use in their pool. I thought that was pretty nice of them.
 
miketsp:
I have to disagree with this. I don't have any access to a pool and even if I did I'm not sure what a 2metre dive is going to prove in comparison with a good visual inspection & surface testing.

If you don't feel ready to handle any sort of equipment failure at depth then get more training or get a better buddy.

My first dive with my new equipment was cautious and multi-level but I never considered "pool testing" it before diving. A few posts make it sound like a pool test is SO obvious. Nobody in my training, at my LDS or my internet stores made any reference to this pre-dive process.
 
RonFrank:
Anyone read this?

To summarize newish diver buys a Reg online. The first stage is defective, has metal shavings in it from manufacture, and blows out.

Diver freeflows, freaks, rockets to the surface and panics at the surface. Diver is OK after a rescue by the Boat Mate (DM).

Lesson - Don't buy your stuff online (in so many words). Actually to be fair they did indicate that some online dealers do check out the equipment before they sell it. However based on the underlying tone, it's very obvious that the message really is.. don't buy online.

But what the Ell?? :confused:

The manufacture has NO responsibility in making sure that the equipment they sell works, and is NOT defective?

I've never been clear on why it would be an LDS responsibility to ensure that brand new equipment works? When I buy most ANYTHING, it's is NOT the responsibility of the retailer to open the box, and test it before a sale.

But did this blowout occur while the diver was riding his bike underwater?
 
In case anybody wants to know, they couldn't bother to reply...
 
cerich:
In case anybody wants to know, they couldn't bother to reply...

I wouldn't expect them to. I've emailed them about a couple of different articles in the past and there was never much of a response. They don't get it, they're not going to and they publish article after article that proves it.
Good job anyway though.
 
cerich:
In case anybody wants to know, they couldn't bother to reply...

They will be in Boulder on their ten city tour in the area. IF (and it's a very big if, Boulder is not all that close to me) I do get there, I will make a point of discussing this with the Editor if he is there. I met him last year (nice guy). I seriously doubt the conversation will go anywhere. :D

Certainly if the don't have people monitoring this site, they are just plain foolish....:10: :11doh:
 
This has nothing I mean NOTHING to do with buying from online....duhhhh
 
LOL, pardon me. I've been in the continuous manufacturing and processing industry for 21 years, the last 1/2 of which has been in the manufacturing of software and technologies that provide the very benefits I mentioned. The software, tools, and products produced by the companies I've worked for control 90% of all the manufacturing in the world. First off my comments were not intended to focus only statistical process control, a fine foundation thought it may be.

The "test step" isn't separate as it once was, thanks to modern advances. As you correctly pointed out measurments are necessary. As the instruments and software improve in this area the line begins to blur. In the industry I specifically used in my previous example, electronic component manufacturing, the process no longer requires interruption, makes continous live improvements and corrections. The point I was making was comparing modern methodologies to the old fashioned approach of pulling items from the line for labs, or in some cases shutting down the process to make corrections.

Regarding your comment "SPC ... has not and never will negate the need for in process audits " likely you are regurgitating some statement from a mentor or instructor, but I won't presume, just saying that is most likely. Possibly we are talking about the same thing but misundertanding each other. The advances being made do not separate these functions, they are more innate. Some widgets are now able to TELL YOU when they need corrections, I've helped design some of them. And others make self-corrections. I consider myself an evangelist of sorts and am passionate about overturning such misunderstandings. I will never see the 'testing' and 'auditing' processes as seperate or independant from the continuous manufacturing process and the teams I work with work each day, with every advancement, to blurr past "lines" of ignorance and misunderstanding once drawn. Such strongly entrenched things are however difficult admittedly to overturn.

MikeFerrara:
As a manufacturing engineer of 15 years, where do I start? No...you couldn't be more wrong. 6 sigma is, for lack of a better description, a problem solving methodology that applies statistical tools that have been around just about forever.

The wide spread implimentation of statistical process and statistical quality control has not and never will negate the need for in process audits or the incomming insprction of recieved components. In fact without those instections (measurements) there won't be any statistics. Additionally, regardless of the SPC used or the measured capability of a product or process 100% functional testing of safety related products and components is still standard oporating procedure.

As some one who has been more than a little involved with 6 sigma implimentations and SPC, I'd love to see any data you have that shows a process or product that is thousands of times less failures than before such buzz words were around for us to fill our BS bingo cards with.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom