Rebreather World Traitor

RonMicjan

There does not exist a person on this forum that is not in favor of a safer CCR. Period.
There are many ways to promote safer diving, from selling your designs and software to existing manufacturers, to hiring yourself out to them, to becoming an instructor and teaching safe practices, to promoting those practices here on Rebreather World, and especially to be a good example while out doing the dives.

I believe that I have found the absolutly most despicible method of promoting "safety" that I have ever heard of, and its coming from one of our own colleages here on Rebreather World. Now, I went looking for a "mission statement" for RBW and was unable to find anything, but I imagine that it might go something like this.

"Rebreather World was implemented for divers to discuss and promote the various aspects of diving rebreathers with each other is a friendly manner. These aspects include technicques, equipment, design etc and especially safety."
if there is an official mission statement, could someone post it please?

All of us tend to "defend" our own choice of equipment, techniques, methods and even favorite divesites. This is normal human nature and is part of the fun of frequenting a discussion forum, I have had many interesting spirited discussions with many of the folks here. There may be many things we disagree on, and many more that we agree with, but the one overwhelming thing we all love to do is DIVE! Anywhere, anytime, for most any reason, its the binding thing that keeps us all animated.

I expect that all CCR manufacturers consider safety to be the most important aspect of thier designs. I gather this from reading thier posts, talking to them in person and reviewing thier units. I am, by far, not the most intelligent, nor enlightenend person involved in this industry, but I am certain that not a single existing manufacturer wants to have a fatality on thier units. Only a psychopath would. Henry Ford didnt put airbags in the first Model T and its only in the last few years that auto manufacturers have really begun to install serious safety features in cars, its been a long road and littered with broken bodies. The CCR manufacturers are all very intelligent folks, but most are limited in thier skills, typical required skills include: machine tools, physical design, eletronic design, software design, critical review, marketing, sales, accounting, management etc. No one person can be an expert at all of these skills and no team can have a perfect lock on them either. Its no wonder that CCR's fail and that occasionally divers die. Human error is the rule not the exception. But we all are trying, we all accept that our sport is not perfectly safe, even if our head is in the sand, all it takes is one read of the very first open water diving class liability release to see that ours can be a dangerous sport. We all accept that, or we wouldnt be here.

Now, I have come across a very disturbing statement from a member of Rebreather World, the statement is not on this forum, but on this persons website, that supposedly is dedicated to safety in CCR design. This approach is the most underhanded and industry defeating thing I have ever seen and I have lost all respect for the author. I feel that I need to share it with my colleagues.

This statement is an excerpt from the Deep Life website .pdf entitled "How rebreathers kill people" and is located here. http://www.deeplife.co.uk/files/How_...ill_People.pdf

here is the excerpt:

"Deep Life is campaigning for all rebreathers to be brought up to EN61508 as is
required by law in Europe: it demands basic competence in safety engineering. As
there is no-one else doing the policing, then for reasons of safety but also to ensure a
level playing field, Deep Life will provide technical expertise to lawyers claiming
damages that result from failure to meet these basic safety standards, to a maximum
of one case per year. We hope this is needed only short term to effect change."

Deep life is offering "technical expertise" to litigators sueing CCR manufactures for loss of life.

This from a company yet to release a CCR to the general public, who has not even completed a design that has been reviewed by its peers. Deep Life has gone beyond the "carpet bombing" stragety straight to biological weapons designed to remove all possible competition to thier entry into the CCR market. This is most the most despicable business behaviour I have ever encountered in diving and I suggest that we, as divers, act accordingly and boycott any product that is ever produced by Deep Life.

I am appalled, you should be too, and Alex should be deeply ashamed.

__________________
Ron
"Life is pain princess, anyone who tells you different, is selling something", The Dread Pirate Wesley.


www.tmishop.com Diving bits etc.

wedivebc

Ambulance chasing at it's worst

__________________
Cheers,

Dave....

Man is the only animal burdened with the knowledge he will eventually die

PCDiver

This certainly puts the postings that Alex made in a different light. I think he went after his biggest competitor first.

__________________
>>>>> www.submergeproductions.com dedicated to promoting technical diving
>>>>> Check out our dive show video interviews at http://www.submergeproductions.com/A...nterviews.aspx
>>>>> Wreck dive videos http://www.submergeproductions.com/A...omthedeep.aspx

PhilSiswick

I don't think that this is anything new, as he has been accused of bias and unethical motivations in a number of posts on a number of threads in the past to my knowledge. I guess, if you haven't read those threads, then it might come as a surprise.

I think that it is generally accepted these days that there is no such thing as an altruistic motive. Only time will tell what the outcome of this particular approach will be.

Cheers,

Phil

__________________
Phil

No comment on open circuit... it's an evolutionary dead end not really worth discussing here. Dave Sutton, 2007

I have always felt that the dive I am on is not nearly important as the dives I plan to be on the rest of my life. Tom Rose, 2007

www.hugsac.org.uk

Stephane

Maybe we can let Alex explain his position (if he wants to) before bashing him any further?

__________________
Stéphane
Hammer-rEvo powered!

Dutchy

This is hardly a surprise to active members here and honestly I don't care the least bit if that means rebreathers get safer. Will it win a prize in a beauty contest? Nope.

__________________
= This post is environmentally friendly. It is composed of 100% recycled electrons only. = SK #007

Drmike

Ron, Im curious,

Is it the fact that Deep Life is campaigning for all rebreathers to be brought up to EN61508 (as is required by law in Europe) that is bothering you?

or is it that Deep Life will provide technical expertise to lawyers claiming damages that result from failure to meet these basic safety standards? [to a maximum of one case per year. We hope this is needed only short term to effect change."] thats bothering you?


I think the former is a good thing dont you???

I think the latter could be seen two ways depending on your viewpoint, 1) commercial interest and underhand naughtiness or 2) trying to 'encourage' or effect change to save lives.


I dont know Alex personally so cant honestly say which motivation I think is more likely - but I really cant help but feel that even if his motivation is not so selfless that the end may justify the means if it helps reduce the terrible death rates

but as has been said - sure as hell wont win any beauty contest!

__________________
Get a girlfriend you sad twat - a Rebreather is an unfaithful mistress - dont blind yourself to her faults just because she goes down on you

Ben Field

Some comments-1. Not Ron's fault necessarily but this is "old news" in many ways, Deep Life's site and goals have been publicised openly by Alex (and others) for a while.2. I think the best person to tackle over this is Alex, coming straight onto the forum could perhaps be seen as "stooping to the same level" Afterall he's publically stated something and you've publically had a pop back... fair perhaps but surely PM'ing him first to confirm his position would have been fairer?No offence to either side, just seems a bit of a harsh opening barrage IMO when good intentions probably unpin both positions.

__________________

Beware Fridge Suck

Tino de Rijk

Uhm... that's Alex' position. Not everybody agrees with that, to put it mildy.
Suffice to say that Rebreather's that for 100% sure do NOT adhere to the EN61508, like the rEvo or Sentinel, have gotten CE approval recently, based on EN14143 (the one that is leading for Rebreather approval and "hosts" the actually rather inconclusive reference the 61508).
so the "required by law" on this particular one is an assumption. See last year's thread on this subject.

ciao,

Tino.

paulraymaekers

thanks Tino, but I suppose you mis-typed ... Evo and not rEvo :-)

at the moment rEvo has not got any CE approval

paul

(but thanks that you already put me in the CE camp :-)

__________________
www.rEvo-rebreathers.com

.... the earth is flat, Elvis is alive, and radial scrubbers give longer dwell time than axials...