So says the Department of the Navy:"If disclosed, (this information) is likely to cause a substantial harm to Force Fins competitors." "The small, flexible, non-vented fins have the lowest energy cost." "The smaller, more flexible fins compromised neither speed nor force underwater." By Chris Kostman A version of this was originally published in aquaCORPS, February/March 1996.
BE: Well, standard issue for the US Navy has, for years, been Rocket Fins. But back in 1988 or 1989, our distributor in Finland started selling our fins to the Russian Navy. So I got on the phone and called the Pentagon and said 'This is ridiculous. The Russian Navy is buying Force Fins and our Navy Seals are still using Rocket Fins? I mean, give me a break.' So this Commander Deitrich at the Pentagon who was becoming head of procurement for the Navy says 'let's send your fins down to Panama City and have our guys look at them.' Then almost a year goes by and I'd heard nothing, so I called again and said 'What the heck's going on with your guys in Panama City?' So it turns out that to test our fins, the US Navy testers went to Disneyworld and swam four laps in Typhoon Lagoon! Most of the testers said 'these fins deserve further study' but one tester said he 'felt like he could swim faster barefoot.' CK: You've gotten some bad press over the years because of questionable studies. Was this related to that? BE: Yes! But the Navy diver didn't say he could swim faster barefoot, just that it felt that way. In other words, he couldn't feel the fins, just like anyone who jumps in a pool and does a subjective analysis of our fins is going to discover. Well, Undercurrents had published an article called 'A Clear Winner, a Clear Loser,' based on a totally bogus study done by UCLA, that said our fins were no good. So of course we were combating Undercurrents. Well, when they heard about the Typhoon Lagoon 'test.' they thought 'OK, now we'll really get them. UCLA says the fins are no good and now the Navy says they're no good.' Unbelievably, someone in the Navy in Panama City had called Undercurrents and gave them the actual code number on that one page so that they could request it under the Freedom of Information Act. Then after they requested it, the U.S. Government contacted us and told us about this request because they are required to tell anyone who can be harmed by information that is released. We explained how damaging this page would be to us if produced out of context and so they put a stay on it until we could procure the complete Navy test results. Then the Navy told Undercurrents 'back off!' CK: So when did the Navy do the study that you cite in your brochures? SC: Following the recommendation of the majority of the divers at Panama City, Naval Sea Systems Command requested the researchers at the University of New York at Buffalo School of Medicine to include Force Fin in the tests they were conducting on fins as part of a complete reanalysis of training technique and equipment recommendations for the Navy. In that study, held in 1990 to 1992, 200 subjects participateds in the tests of 35 different kinds of fins. This was part of a four year research contract under the Department of Naval Research. CK: How did you know this was going on? SC: They had bought our fins directly, and we had been in contact with Dr. Pendergast about the study as it was progressing. Then later we tried to request the results of the study, in order to combat the misinformation that was coming out within the dive industry. We knew the UCLA study made no sense, so we decided to get some real research to publish. So I called up the researchers, and although they had the release from the Navy to publish the results, they didn't feel that they should just release the results without the Navy's permission. But they were kind enough to put me in contact with the Navy supervisor. They did tell us that both our original and pro model fins were in the top three to four overall, and other than the top five to six fins, the other thirty or so fins were really inefficient. CK: How were these tests run? SE: This was a test of efficiency under varying speeds held constant in a current flume tank. It was done at Buffalo in a donut-shaped flume tank, so they're able to simulate open water conditions very accurately. They were also measuring actual oxygen consumption. Every single person who participated in the study believed that the most efficient fin was the one they felt the most, in other words, the longer, stiffer fins. And paradoxically, the study revealed that, at all speeds, the most efficient fin was the smaller, more flexible fin, specifically, the Force Fins. You see, when you 'feel' your fin, it gives you a lot of security. We're terra creatures. Our whole frame of reference for moving forward on land is resistance points on our feet. But when you're moving efficiently in the water, as with Force Fins, you don't actually feel your fins working for you. You have to use other independent cues or frames of reference to know that you're moving efficiently. Force Fins are the only fins that you don't feel when you're using them, because they're the only ones moving the force vectors off your legs and onto the blade of the fin. So the paradox is that you have to use other cues to feel your momentum instead of the resistance points on your feet. The two types of people that adapt to Force Fins right off the bat are either people who have been competitive swimmers or people who don't swim very well. The reason is that Force Fins are very easy and natural to use. Neither individual is disoriented by having their feet freed up in the water and not being able to feel them. That's what they want. CK: So that's what that Navy diver was talking about when he said he thought could go faster barefoot? SC: Right. So in order to combat the misinformation that was going around the industry about our fins, I decided to hold up the results of the real Navy study. It was a really scientific study, whereas UCLA had done things like use 50% of the data on Force Fins and compare it to 100% of the data on the other fins. Basically, somebody was out to get us. It was a set-up. We even looked into where the funding came from at UCLA, and according to UCLA's records department, the entire funding for what is supposedly one of the world's foremost dive equipment research institutes in the world is $7000 seed money from twenty years ago and $2000 from some PO Box company called Gulf Pty, Ltd. in Australia, and nominal amounts from some of the researchers themselves. All other financial records were either missing or non-existent. CK: You really thought it was a set-up? BE: Absolutely! Undercurrents even refused to let us run a rebuttal from us after publishing their article based on that UCLA study. Then sales rep's from our competitors used copies of the Undercurrents article to convince dive shops around the country not to sell our fins. And when you read an article like that one where the worst product gets more ink than the best product, you know there's something weird going on. We were mentioned like twelve times more than any other fin! So that was very devastating to us. CK: So then the real Navy study comes into the picture? SC: Yes. We decided we had better get ahold of the Navy study, because it was not affiliated with any company and it was done following scientific procedures. So the director of the study, Dr. Pendergast, gave me the contract number for the report and the name of the contact officer at the Department of Naval Research. I contacted the Navy and they instructed me to do a Freedom of Information Act request. So I did, and then it came back and they denied us access to the records because there may be trade secrets involved and the information contained in this research may be detrimental to our competitors! So I sent off an appeal, saying 'this was done at a public university, using public funds, and our product was involved.' I even said, 'cross out the competitors names. I only want the information about our fins.' CK: And did you get the study? SC: A couple of months later, a three inch thick packet arrives with no cover letter and no nothing with it! It's filled with all the original records and letters, including all of my letters to them. So everything was in there, including the graphs showing us to be among the most efficient fins. We started to cut and paste it and use it in our ads. Then two months later, an attorney from the Department of Naval Research calls me and says 'we're thinking of denying your Freedom of Information Act request.' I said 'what do you mean, denying it? You've already complied with our request.' He said, 'well, what do you have?' Then I said 'well, what do you have?' We played this game back and forth and finally he said 'we're thinking of classifying this information.' I say 'what do you mean?' He says, 'well, you know that everyone thinks a long, stiff fin is the most efficient? And you know that our research is bearing out that that's not true, and that actually the short, floppy fins are by far more efficient.' I say 'yes, that's why I want this research.' CK: So what was with the classification? SC: Well, next the Navy attorney said 'the reason we carry out this research is because we have combat divers and other countries have combat divers, and we don't want the enemy to find out that the short, floppy fins are the most efficient.' So I said 'hold on here. This is not privileged information here. We've been saying that for years. And don't get me wrong about where our sentiments are. We make our fins in the United States of America out of American materials and we sell them across the United States. We even add to the economy by exporting them overseas. But you're not going to tell me that I can't have this research because of a security risk when we have a letter from the Department of Commerce says that we are allowed to export our patented products, that's there's no national security risk or restriction involved. So you can't tell me you're going to now classify information about our fins, besides which I already have the research! Well, he says 'we think that was kind of a mistake, you receiving that information.' CK: Sounds like some serious political intrigue! SC: Yes, but it gets better! Next I got a call from his commanding officer and the first words out of his mouth were 'you have my file.' He was the naval attorney assigned to decide whether the study should be classified. But when he received his packet from the appeals office, where I'd written, the clerk had put his file in my envelope and then put the letter that was supposed to go to me in his file. It was just a clerical error that got me the file! At this point, the commanding officer says 'You have my file and that's classified information and I want you to box it up and send it back to me with a letter certifying that you've destroyed all additional copies.' Well, as Bob's darting out the door to make copies of the file, I'm thinking to myself 'does this man have legal authority to demand this?' I mean they sent it to me after I requested it, and it wasn't technically classified yet. So as I'm thinking this and hesitating, he says 'I guess you're not going to return the file, are you?' And so many people, at that point, might have gotten scared and done what he said, but I said 'no, I'm not going to send it back.' So in the end, he agreed to let us keep the file and he said 'it's in the Navy's best interest to keep you in business.' CK: Unreal! What happened next? SC: The postscript to this story is that Force Fins are now being used by Special Operations, Delta Force Scout Divers, Air Force, Navy Seals, and Marine Recon as a diver preference item*, and we're just one step away from being standard issue for everyone. In fact, we specifically came out with the black Tan Delta model because members of the Seal Team Five Bravo Company showed up at our door and they had been using the Pro Model in black, but wanted the Tan Delta in black. So we brought the smoke black out at their request. Like they said, 'it's in the Navy's best interest to keep us in business!' *The U.S. Navy does not endorse any specific product. For the rest of the Force Fin story, click here. To visit the Force Fins website, click here. |
|
 |
 |
CK: In some of your promotional material, you cite a US Navy study that found your fins the most efficient. Tell us about that.