Quote: (Originally Posted by
diverklondike)
Hmmmmmm......
Maybe the poll should be "Should Dummies be allowed to dive Rebreathers?"
If the answer to this were "No", that would be unfortunate for me, and at least 94% of the population.
Quote: (Originally Posted by
Mark Chase)
...
How about some other questions
Should we remove all safety devices and solenoids from CCRs thus making the units more reliable and the divers totaly responsible for their own survival?
Solenoids aren't really safety devices. Removing them (without replacing with a leaking valve) would really put people on a narrow ledge.
Quote:
Should new CCR divers be forced to do at least 100hours on MCCR before being allowed to dive a ECCR?
That deserves merit IMV
Quote: (Originally Posted by
Ben Field)
Should known Rebreather deisgn failings be removed as much as is technically possible? Yes.
Should future designs learn from mistakes of the past and attempt be be "more" idiot proof? Yes.
These statements ring true as well.
I voted both options, as both are correct.
Rebreather's should work with an adequate amount of human engineering design. On the other hand, this can only be achieved by learning and evolving from past experience and designs. Evolutionary process (i.e. competition, choice, and survival of the fittest) should be encouraged.
Litigation and regulation has to be applied in a limited manner, applying only to obvious cases of negligence or worse. Open forums (such as this one) facilitates the info-spreading, discussion, and learning process, creating significant offset to the need of litigation (IMV). Rebreather's are getting better, and those of us here who participate in these forums are all learning better practise, better units, etc.
IMV there's too many bureau-rats out there that are not obliged to create value to maintain their existence, but only to remain politically correct and follow their little due process. CE will make Rebreather's legal, but will it actually make Rebreather's better
?