Is my ECCR "safety critical life support engineering"?

UKSteve

Following on from discussion about how we perceive our rebreathers I am interesting to see other peoples perspectives.

Essentially what are your expectations? Do you expect it to look after you regardless and have fault tolerance, fail safe etc commensurate with the title of "Safety Critical Life Support Engineering" (in which case vote "YES")

or

are your expectations lower; you expect to have to manage the unit, make sure its switched on, is working correctly and cross check it using other skills such as O2 or Dil flushes (in which case vote "NO")

Please note: Try to answer this "AS IS" rather than what you would prefer a future purchase to be. Consider your mind set when you actually purchased your current unit.

Steve

lizardland

Somehwere in between. I can live with failures if they give a clear signal that the failure occurs AND that I get a warning in good enough time that I can do something about it. What is not acceptable is components and systems failing due to the manufacturer's shoddy production/assembly/design which then lead into a spiral of serious events that can either go unchecked, happen so quickly that they can't be stopped. Basic self-responsibility is one thing but that only works when the manufacturer has made an effort to make the system as reliable as possible. Having a component not fail is good but also having a component fail but not lead to bad chain of events is a good second best.

__________________
Can you imagine drifting along in the sea with your mouth open and a load of f***ing plankton going in? You'd like it, would you?

www.westons-cider.co.uk

Azerbaijani Association of Technical Divers Publicity Officer and Goat Wrangler

Gilles

I was and remain a firm NO.

Like the motorcycle training I am now doing, I expect(ed) training to bring me to an adequate level of competance, commensurate with the degree of risk taken.

__________________
Gilles
http://www.dirrebreather.com

TR300

Hello,

in my opinion no human build equipment who bring us out of our normal "life" is save. It is a car where we can drive with over 100mph or a parachute or an airplane. So even a rebreather is a system who supports us in a mankind enemy environment. what I will say, no system is 100% "save" we have to deal with failures. Education is one goal to manage this, another is experience. but we can teach/learn any resolving from problems, also the experience can help us either.
we have to play with the chance to die with the system. I, for example build my own systems and thinking all the time what can I do, to make it better and better and I can't say it is a realy "safety critical life support engineering".
Remembering the moonflight project. they have to deal with realy "critical life support" and remeber Apollo 13 or the Spacshuttle. It is really no problem of money, time or engineering it is when the mankind will go in an environment where he can't life without "a life system" he went over a border where the "unlikely environment" will kill him.

My answer is "NO". it is not possible

regards
Holger

__________________
If it makes bubbles it means its brocken
Visit: www.tr300.com, Missions: www.rebreatherteam.de

mixedgas

NO!

Abbo

Maybe I'm being thick, but to me the question seems unclear, perhaps deliberately. Do I trust my rebreather? No, absolutely not: anyone who does shouldn't be allowed to own one, touch one or even come near one. Do I feel that we have a right to expect a higher level of safety than we are getting? No question: absolutely. So I suppose a fairer, though no less loaded question, could be:
What should we be able to expect of a rebreather manufacturer?
a) That they manufacture units that bring us home alive;
b) That they manufacture units that bring a proportion of users home alive; or
c) That manufacturers have no duty to us whatsoever.
When I fall when climbing, I feel I have a right to expect that the ice axe holds together and the shaft doesn't splinter. Sure, I shouldn't have fallen in the first place. Sure, I should have checked the ice axe before attempting to fall on it. But if it disintegrates, I shall be making a present of it to the manufacturer rectally. Here in Asia, people seem to believe in kharma or 運命destiny: they seem to have a grim acceptance of sudden death. Is that what people on this site have? Is it all in the hands of the Gods? Or is it just that I don't understand, and that rebreather diving is a test of machismo, where you win brag rights if you dive and come home alive? Here's what I believe in: dangerous sports and safe equipment. And the user's right to complain, percussively.

UKSteve

I assure you there was no deliberate intent to be unclear - maybe my poor wording thats all. What I am interested in is what people think they are buying. Much is said on posts about the application of a plethora of EN standards and SIL levels for software and hardware - most of which sails way over my head. I was just wondering if this is a commonly held belief / expectation....or are some people demanding / expecting an unrealistic level of sophistication, testing and capability from civilian / sports ECCR equipment?

Steve

aainslie

I think it's a great point. I certainly bought what I felt to be a reasonable compromise - and spent another $4k or so ($7k if you include computers) modifying it the second I got it. I never expected the raw unit to be sufficiently safe - and come to think of it, never will, that's why I take a whole quasi-independent OC system around with me whenever I dive.

__________________
Andrew Ainslie

Joe

I figure it's like strapping a scorpion on my back.

Do everything right and all is OK. Make one slip up and it will sting you.

None of these units are "safe" by conventional standards and the only way they even remotely approach "safe" is if the operator is anal retentive in his approach to diving it.

I dive mine manually and use the electronics as a fail safe back up. I never blindly trust the sensors and I dive low ppO2's (midrange) so the +/- parameters of the sensors will be in a safe range even if they are reading incorrect.

I always assume it is trying to kill me and I never trust it.

mempilot

No.

The diver is the driver, not the passenger.

__________________
Eric Stadtmueller, otherwise known as, MEM "Da Pilot"