Comprehensive list of all accidents

iain-hsm

Alex.
Dont waste valuble time, or be distracted here, this work your doing is just too important.

Remember Demosthenes as youth in ancient Greece, Demosthenes had a severe speech impediment, and people jeered at his stuttering when he addressed his first large public assembly.
He was orphaned when 8 and little was left when poor Demosthenes came of age. Seeking justice, he successfully pleaded his own case and won damages. To improve his elocution, he talked with
pebbles in his mouth and recited verses while running along the seashore over the roar of the waves. In the end he was imprisoned but escaped. When his final effort to obtain freedom failed, he swallowed poison from his pen and died. LOL

CeeBee

Hey mate, that list is too long. And every diver on it is known or belongs to the members of this board; which is why WE as a community are so fired up. WE, not just DR Deas, want to prevent anymore divers being added to that list where it is preventable. Which is why with the best intentions, the community has done what it can to fill in the blanks and make information available to DR Deas, all personal agendas aside. It is not a list of blame, nor should it be construed as one. It's a list that may keep some of the people reading it now alive in the future. If you have a problem with that, your intentions are less honourable than you insinuate those of this board to be. Something tells me though that you will make of it what you will.

__________________
"In Ceebs We Trust. All others pay cash." Denz 1973-2007 King of the One-Liners


www.justgiving.com/markginsberg1

AD_ward9

Thanks Iain, and I see that you are right as usual: Link Demosthenes

Cheers,

Alex

CharlieT

The majority view expressed by RBW members themselves (not claiming to be experts) during the two years I've been a member is that most deaths are a result of human error, of one kind or another.

What does this prove other than that we all make mistakes and that rebreathers are generally less forgiving than open circuit.

I hope that Alex has moved on from his anti-Martin Parker days. I think he understands most RBW members were unhappy about the use of this website as a media to air his personal grievances.

The secrecy surrounding most rebreather deaths is extraordinary and I can only hope that everyone who can help reduce this will consider a change in heart.

Is it acceptable that another death occurs from the same problem, poor diving practice or proceedure once that issue has been identified as having brought about the very first death?

If what is Alex is doing helps to bring about a reduction in fatalities then we should all support it.

As for Alex's occasional past role as an independent expert, is this appropriate anymore?

Can you be close to bringing to fruition parts of or an entire rebreather system of your own and remain impartial and independent?

Charlie

AD_ward9

Just to be clear, I have never had anything against the gentleman personally. Ever. You are just more sensitive because you dive an APD product

I have always had a strong view in regard to safety. I do what I can when I see a safety issue. This means I rattle cages whenever any unit has enough accidents to stand out.

Let us focus on getting the mining the data so our O.R. units do not allow repeat fatal accidents to occur (our primary motive in this), and to ensure that safety information is available to enable all other companies to do the same. Keeping personality issues to the rear is of benefit in that end.

This is a community effort, of which you have helped also. The weak areas are the SCRs, so let us pass on the eCCR issues for now, and get the data on the SCR accidents.

Alex

schford

Let me be very clear, Rebreather World does not prove or disprove anything it is a community of like minded individuals. In my view the only person that can say why someone died is a coroner anything else is conjecture.

The members, like Cee Bee so eloquently stated are supporting this to help improve safety - Alex has already stated in a previous post that there are no ulterior motives.

__________________
Bailout and Kit Management account for Murphy's Law

The only bad question is one you did not ask and later wish you had.

Use of RBW is subject to the Rebreather World Terms & Conditions of Use

Drmike

Mr Rich thanks you for your words of wisdom No 23 added
I draw your attention to no.18.

Alexs motivation whatever it may be has no relevance on the number or cause of death. (he is not God)


Re: CCR Fatality Statistics
GUIDE TO Rebreather REVIEW

by Oster Rich


1) Its ok to have a weakness in the design because so do other rebreathers

2) Its ok to have a weakness in the design because users are taught in training how to prevent that weakness from killing them (see 3)

3) Users always follow their training

4) If a user doesnt follow his training and a known design weakness kills them the unit is not at fault

5) No point trying to address all known weaknesses in the unit design because we can never make it idiot proof

6) Relying on user training and following protocals is always safer than making a design as foolproof as possible (see 3)

7) Its ok to accept some possibly fatal weakness in a design if there are other weaknesses that are more obvious or more likely to kill you.

8) Increasing safety automaticaly means increasing complexity

9) Increasing complexity automatically means reducing saftety

10) Increasing safety automatically means increasing cost

11) KISS is always safer (see 8, 9 and 3)

12) No point even trying to make unit idiot proof because idiots will always find a way around it

13) Relying on users following protocals to avoid a weakness in the design is safer than engineering out the weakness in the 1st place

14) Mechanical systems are always safer than electronic systems

15) Electronics can never be made foolproof or safe

16) Previous experiences (unreliable electronics) will aways be repeated

17) Engineering out weaknesses will result in reduction in user need to follow protocals (that were in place tio overcome weakness) and that will result in overall reduction in safety

18) Reviewers bias (if any) automatically has a bearing on the existance or validity of any weakness they report

19) Something to do with 747s, or was it trains...- I forget

20) attempting to make a Rebreather as safe as possible is a mistake because people then trust it and relax their safety mechanisms

21) attempting to make a Rebreather as fault free as possible is a mistake because humans design them and use and maintain them - and humans are prone to faults

22)The fix is NEVER going to happen so deal with it. Nobody making a ccr has to follow strict safety specs

23) No point promoting mnf try to follow strict safety specs beacuse 2 things will STILL happen.

1) people will buy other brands not spec approved
2) people will die on a brand that meets every spec you demand of it.

24) No point promoting mnf to try to follow strict safety specs because the rebreather world is small, and it will never happen.

25) We shouldnt atempt to review and list cause of rebeather deaths because that info may be used to show that a particular rebreather is dangerous and has killed people and that could possibly be used in court by those who have lost their loves ones using it

__________________
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

Hk101gr

Nice list Mike... LOL!!!

EBT

So, now everyones had a chance to pet their personal hobby horse, Im assuming this thread can go back to what it was originally doing.

Well, actually, thats a lie (no, not mere marketing)... Im not just assuming, since if it doesnt we'll moderate it


Thanks with sugar on top etc

__________________
Eagles May Soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines!

RBW Terms of service

UWSojourner

Thanks for your efforts. Much appreciated.