RBW Traitor

Abbo

If there is a 0.7% probability of a fatality per year then the probability of the 'breather killing you over a 20 year period is 13%. That means that if you set up a rebreather club with 100 people, over a 20 year period you're going to have to deal with a lot of grieving widows. Consider a drug that people take for 20 years straight: the birth control pill for example. If a 20 year-old girl had a 13% probability of the pill killing her before she was 40 there wouldn't be a discussion about whether the pharmaceutical company needed to be allowed to hike prices to afford better R&D: heads would roll in the drug company and the FDA that approved it. Nobody would say "sure they killed a lot of people, but it's OK because they were selling the drugs pretty cheap so what can you expect". 13% is broadly one in eight: there are 6 chambers in most revolvers, so I suppose the odds are marginally better than Russian Roulette, but it doesn't inspire confidence. When two pedestrians bump into each other in the street they both say "sorry, sorry, my fault", but when two cars bump into each other they both say "your fault!" Then they need policemen and courts to arbitrate. More than 150 people have died diving rebreathers for a community of barely 7,000. I'm certainly not saying makers need hounding out of existence. But I am saying that if a family member dies you are likely to feel a level of emotion requiring a court to arbitrate. Products don't stay on the market long when they have that bad a fatality rate.

UKSteve

Interesting.. I clicked the red blob button but then saw what is said... "This is ONLY to be used to report spam, advertising messages, and problematic (harassment, fighting, or rude) posts." [Added - OK..I was wrong...see below]

I clicked red because..like your first post that started all this off... I think it is a load of rubbish. I think it is scare mongering and self righteous nonesense that has no place on this forum in my very limited opinion. It slurs someone with no actual evidence, just supposition and interpretation leading to conclusions I totally dissagree with.

Is it not possible for someone who has a passion for something to approach it from two different directions at once? Alex has been open about his OR design philosophy...wonder how many of the other CCR manufacturers have taken more than a passing interest in his publications. He has also been extremely open about his availability to help others who might feel they have sufferred due to problems he percieves with existing units. That his unit is not at market yet perhaps indicates the amount of time it takes to get it right?

None of that appears to be a reason for a red blob according to the guidelines however so I thought I should write it here instead.

Steve

ADDED: OK...thanks for those who have PMd me pointing out my error. I now know how to do a red blob (dissaprove) as opposed to a red blob (report post)!! Obvious really.. click on the green button that says "add to reputation"!!

Having posted this earlier though I will leave it up in lieu of a red blob (dissaprove).

chunter

How about alcohol or cheeseburgers?

The main thing here is that it is rarely, if ever proven to be a manufacturing fault when a death occurs. Even with all of the posts on this forum dealing with fatalities, I have yet to see a definitive conclusion as to what causes the death. Are we to make rebreathers dummyproof as well as mechanically sound? Even if you look at open circuit deaths (and there are plenty of them), you can't rule out equipment failure without actually being there when trouble starts.

How can you ever really say that user error isn't the cause of death? Is an O2 valve turned off a user error, or should all units have alarms built into them for this?

On one occasion, I rescued another rebreather diver (who had years and many dives under his belt) who freaked out when his diluent valve was turned off on his way down. He flooded his loop, and came to me with his eyes wide open gasping for air. I was able to get him gas and drag him back to the anchor line, but I am certain that he wouldn't have survived without my gas. This guy also had a bailout tank on him that he "forgot" about when the situation happened. So...if he had died...what would the cause of death been? He was well trained (originally) and his unit was working fine (nothing the manufacturer could have really done better). We would have found his body on the bottom with a flooded loop. Would his family have been justified in filing a claim against the manufacturer? I think not.

There are lots of situations where statistics don't tell the whole story. They take into account relationships and numbers, but not often cause and effect. I hold the opinion that 99.9% of rebreather deaths are user error (even in the case of equipment failure). I always assume that my unit is trying to kill me, but not many of the people that I have had the pleasure of diving with do the same. I hope to hell it doesn't kill any of them.

Aloha,
Charlie

__________________
"Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." - Emerson

"Hobgoblin is a cool word."
- Charlie

silent running

Hi Ron, I'm all fine with and support pushing back against full on nannyism. And frankly, I don't believe that Alex can deliver on all the foolproof stuff he claims to have on the drawingboard and I have said so. I believe in some measure of personal responsibility in CCR diving and life in general.

And I dive a unit which requires the user to turn on the unit, but which also doesn't need any power to monitor PO2, which puts me squarely in the middle of the debate about how much diver responsibility one must have.

But it's hard to argue that any ECCR that depends entirely on powered displays and has so much hardware to begin with, should not go the distance and at least make sure the damn thing turns itself on when it hits water. In other words, if your all-singing-all-dancing ECCR can't at least do the waltz, then it should get off the dance floor, IMHO.

As for Alex's intent, that's a hard question to answer for me as I think
people can have many different and in fact, conflicting motivations, all at the same time. So is Alex a selfish, evil scheming genius, greedy person, or a crusader for CCR safety? I don't know, my best guess is that given his consistancy, he's more well intentioned than not. And more importantly, what difference does it actually make what his motivations are? The system will eventually sort things out, as it always does. He will be cross examined, his product will be scrutinized and if he's a some sort of perfectionist, idealogue, crank that will come out too. If he can really deliver a numpty proof ECCR that puts everybody out of business-by far the least likely scenario-people will either rejoice, or will opt out of the system and home build or find a way around the nanny. Either way, I'm not too worried as by far the most likely scenario is that we will get something in between which will be an improvement safety wise. -Andy

Abbo

You obviously eat a lot more hamburgers and drink a lot more pop than I do! I don't think one in 8 of my peer group at university has died from drinking alcohol over the couple of decades since I graduated.

Brainx3

Hi,


Batteries problems can be avoided by using good batteries and by cleaning the battery compartments and contacts routinely

Cells problem can be avoided by replacing the cells in time and have additional cell with additional cell monitor connected to the unit

Loop leakage can be avoided by checking O-Rings before each dive and replacing them annually

Divers' confidence and attitude can be increased by keep training to run manually even after courses

Closed valves problems can be avoided simply by pre-breathing the unit for a couple of minutes JUST before actually jumping in water

Manufacturers always develop something new which is intended to be safer although nothing in life is perfect so why are you expecting this to be otherwise? We as users do help manufacturers by pin pointing the problems so they can work on it. They are slow sometimes but which other industry is faster?

Bottom Line: Units' problems can be avoided by simply by: Right Training, Right Inspection and Service, Right Attitude, AND BUDDY CHECK!!! (If diving with another CCR diver). The same logic applies in anything, if you suspect that your unit might have any problem then DON'T DIVE IT until you get a full inspection, identification and solution of the problem. Would anyone drive his/her car is suspecting that the car's breaks cable is about to be cut?

I think this thread has become "Who's going to score over whose point"



Best Regards. Wael

__________________
The depth of life cannot be measured in Bars, nor can the sea of lies, that lies within.

Sooner or later I'll be cracking your market and end your game.

I don't take crap for an answer...

Andy M

Yeah, I think this thread has run its course. The same arguments are being hashed out again and again and its getting boring.

__________________
Know your PO2 at all times

Drmike

Sorry, I forget, how many people died on Rebreather over last week or so? Yes I do think 1+ death a month is dropping like flies. As an engineer I dont agree that better fault free design = higher cost. What cost a better battery box, what cost different sensor position, what cost better OPV?
I do like facts - I believe the sample size of mccr is too small to draw that conclusion. Its not possible statistically to draw the conclusion mccr is safer given the small sample size. I do however agree with your point and taken further you could get rid of the O2 and make it even safer make it SCR, or better still go one step further and get rid of the scrubber - make it OC

and there we have it. Much safer, less deaths, infinitely more reliable and guess what? Its even cheaper! lol!

Honestly, .....George was right you know

__________________
Cave diving is a sport
Wreck diving is a sport
Diving in general is a sport

'Rebreather diving' is not a sport
its the delusional obsession with a highly dangerous and often inappropriate piece of equipment

Drmike

thats your belief not a fact. Hes not giving it away hes charging for it. What he has given away for free in past is safety data/findings to mnf to try to get them to improve design - how does that fit your theory? why would he do that if he wanted to send them bust? seems to me that supports his intent is just as hes stated on his site - to encourage mnf to improve safety standards.

no you havent established that - its your assumption
silly
funny - It looks like you think you can

Irelevant.

yes it does say a lot about respect for life Im glad to say - but not in your favour. I dont teach CCR because the deaths make it clear to me that in general humans cant be trusted to dive CCR (current models) safetly - we are too faliable.

but the people who have died have included a large number of experienced people who dont fall into that description - incl instructors - so how does that work?.

nonsense - Its not arguing for sake of arguing - I just hate ill informed bs

__________________
Cave diving is a sport
Wreck diving is a sport
Diving in general is a sport

'Rebreather diving' is not a sport
its the delusional obsession with a highly dangerous and often inappropriate piece of equipment

Tino de Rijk

Your and an earlier one by Dave sutton and Faceless’ remark “I guess it's time to start to adhere to the standards widely used in other industries like cars and aerospace” made me think about this, and I think it is far more relevant and equal than I thought before.

Consider this, for comparison:

• Despite all the FMECA stuff going on around small airplane design, we consciously accept that small planes have significant SPOF’s (e.g. a single engine & propellor), and/or are not produced following the latest insights or procedures: many sports planes are over 20 or even 30 years old;
• To cater/compensate for that, and still make things safe, there is:
  1. Formal, unified training by controlled instructors, with very limited possibility to get a flight license without really having gone through proper training;
  2. A significant amount of mandatory hands-on emergency skills training in the program;
  3. formal examinations, standardized as to minimum requirements;
  4. formally described (also black-on-white), unified “bail out” procedures (e.g. how to handle an emergency landing when engine fails, how to do mayday communication);
  5. typically (varying somewhat from country to country) a minimum number of hours you need to make per year to stay proficient, and even regular mandatory emergency skills demonstration;
  6. mandatory and regular maintenance, only to be done by a formally trained technicians (so not the local handyman, or the owner unless formally trained himself);
  7. A clear system to also revoke licenses, as you don’t want planes to fall down in crowded areas (may not apply to Rebreather’s, as they mainly “only” kill the owner).

So, with this safety catch system in place, flying a pretty old single engine airplane with outdated design is still a pretty safe thing.



Now, in contrast, look at us poor amateurs:

1. No formal, unified training. You can still get a quick and dirty “training” by a guy with limited experience, learning you outdated or wrong things. I’ve heard IMHO good instructors like e.g. Dave Thompson complain that they cannot compete against the cheapo’s anymore. Students do not want to put in the hours or money. Penny-wise, pound-foolish;
2. The amount of hands-on emergency skills training can AND does vary from instructor to instructor, and agency to agency;
3. No formal unified examinations across organizations, with minimum requirements;
4. No formally described, black-on-white, unified “bail out” procedures. Many views (when in doubt, bail out vs. when in doubt flush, as example);
5. No minimum number of hours/dives required to stay proficient, or regular mandatory emergency skills demonstration. You can keep your Rebreather in the closet for a few years, forget all your skills after initial training, and jump happily in again, hoping your memory serves you well….
6. No mandatory and regular maintenance; also not necessarily done by formally trained technician. Many users seriously overrate their own skills and knowledge. Look at the number of people ruining ADV by starting the disassembly on the wrong side. They don’t bother to read the maintenance book/diagram; just put in the magical allen key, apply some force, rotate the whole inner works, and then blame the design…;
7. No system to revoke licenses. Not deemed necessary, as an accident usually “only” kills the owner….

So yes, SO much to learn from other sports also considered dangerous. The same would apply to e.g. skydiving: far better regulated. Then again e.g. climbing is also poorly regulated – with many victims as result.

Government oversight is not always a bad thing. Even to a simple thing like driving a car (getting a license), many of the above applies, at least in terms of training and examination and revoking.

This is not a promotion to ignore insufficient designs, or constantly improve on things. Modern planes are probably better than 30-year old ones, and old ones do receive (some) updates/upgrades. It is just that it is an “and-and” situation, not an “or-or”, with responsibilities and part of the solution from both sides.

Alex made a remark to e.g. put a clock in a Rebreather to block it from starting up after 18 months of cell usage. A good idea, and one I know some mnf’s are actively working on. But still, with the current attitude, some users will fake a cell replacement, of find a “hack” to reset the clock without swap.
I’ve lost my optimism in that area…

Ciao,

Tino.