Mk VI fatality-Canada

[cameron]

I have developed a totaly safe car.

So safe a child can drive it.

OK I have sold only 300 and 7 chldren are dead so far but i asure you in every case it was totaly the childs fault.

THATS my problem with the Mk VI

ATB

Mark

That is BRILLIANT!!!

[Drmike]

thought you RETIRED .......

see nothings changed around here

[Garth]

see nothings changed around here

Actually now we are utilizing rebreather's that harness the technology of the Jolly rancher all crushed up into a scrubber material so that not only do we scrub out CO2 we breathe the best tasting air EVER!!

So much has happened in the few months you were gone.

[Jeppe_E]

I have developed a totaly safe car.

So safe a child can drive it.

OK I have sold only 300 and 7 chldren are dead so far but i asure you in every case it was totaly the childs fault.

THATS my problem with the Mk VI

ATB

Mark

Right... So the key question here is why YOU have a problem with the MkVI. Are you the kind of guy that go through life with an half empty glass maybe?

I can understand that it easy for you to rant about it, but your comparison is both inaccurate and displays a bad taste.

The child still needs a driver license...

[ChrisBrown]

Its really easy to knock another unit. However I think you should either:

a) have owned one
b) have trained on one
c) at least have done a try dive

before you can make the kind of assumptions about a unit, its credibility, its design and build, its safety record, its training programme and the people who own them before you make the kind of comments we have seen here and in other threads.

Otherwise, it cant really be informed, unbiased and from a stand point of experience can it?

[Ben Field]

<snip>
Otherwise, it cant really be informed, unbiased and from a stand point of experience can it?

Do we need to dive a Voyager MCCR to know its a deathtrap, do we need to dive the MkVI to know what looks unfinished is unfinished, do we need to dive a Meg to know having the on/off switch inside is moronic, do we need to dive a SK to know the scrubber is borderline past 40mtrs?

No, "some" thing can be devised by applying a common sense analysis of design features, materials choices and experience.

Selling something as "foolproof" when you cannot define the fool is foolish


FWIW, I have had the good fortune to take a MkVI apart, its got some nice touches but for safe diving in UK/Europe it needs alot of changes IMVERYHO. For me the whole system is too exposed and fragile to be given to the average diver.

[ChrisBrown]

FWIW, I have had the good fortune to take a MkVI apart, its got some nice touches but for safe diving in UK/Europe it needs alot of changes IMVERYHO. For me the whole system is too exposed and fragile to be given to the average diver.

I get your point and dont necessarily disagree. But Im talking more about general commentary that we have had around:

- the safety of the unit
- The sensor validation system (which some people are clearly not informed about - but gave their expert opinion anyway:)
- The training (especially PADI - where some people have been WAY off the mark and clearly have no clue whats involved)
- The kind of people who dive the unit (as some people have never seen a MKVI apart from perhaps at a demo day or at a dive show) how on earth can they comment on the 'kind of individual' that frequents the MKVI or indeed the state of 'recreational CCR divers' when they have never even seen one.

Sorry, too much armchair internet observation going on on this topic for me to give it any merit.

All my posts on unit specifics over the years on all these forums tend to be mainly focused on AP products, VR products, rEvo and a bit of ISC /Jergensen. These are the units I have experience of. I never comment to a similar extent on the Azimuth, RB80, Nautilus, Explorer etc as I have no experience of them personally. Ive heard plenty, sure. But I dont have any first hand knowledge.

So whilst everyone is entitled to an opinion, I dont see how people can spout such strong observations and opinions when they havent even owned / trained or been diving on said unit! Maybe its just an internet thing??

[Mark Chase]

Right... So the key question here is why YOU have a problem with the MkVI. Are you the kind of guy that go through life with an half empty glass maybe?

I can understand that it easy for you to rant about it, but your comparison is both inaccurate and displays a bad taste.

The child still needs a driver license...

Take away the marketing blurb and just call it a CCR and id say the wrong people are buying it or the training is wrong.

Take the marketing blurb into account? and id say they are going out of their way to attract the wrong sort of diver. The sort of diver who is too heavily reliant on the unit to keep them safe. Thats the sort of diver who makes the type of mistakes that have been made.

I have no axe to grind with anyone. I stand back and look from the perspective of a reasonable level of experience with CCR and i have my view on the relevant issues. I personally think your too bias and too quick to jump to the defense of something that clearly needs a re think. Not necessarily in terms of the unit design but more in terms of marketing and training.

I have been openly critical of some aspects of every unit I have ever owned and dived. I have been openly critical of some aspects of training on ECCR. I do not single out the MkVI for special treatment. It just happens to be the topic of this thread. It is however unique in so far as its the way its sold rather than specifically the unit its self i am criticizing.




ATB

Mark

[mike0396]

Take away the marketing blurb and just call it a CCR and id say the wrong people are buying it or the training is wrong.

Take the marketing blurb into account? and id say they are going out of their way to attract the wrong sort of diver. The sort of diver who is too heavily reliant on the unit to keep them safe. Thats the sort of diver who makes the type of mistakes that have been made.

I have no axe to grind with anyone. I stand back and look from the perspective of a reasonable level of experience with CCR and i have my view on the relevant issues. I personally think your too bias and too quick to jump to the defense of something that clearly needs a re think. Not necessarily in terms of the unit design but more in terms of marketing and training.

I have been openly critical of some aspects of every unit I have ever owned and dived. I have been openly critical of some aspects of training on ECCR. I do not single out the MkVI for special treatment. It just happens to be the topic of this thread. It is however unique in so far as its the way its sold rather than specifically the unit its self i am criticizing.




ATB

Mark

I think Mark may have a partial point here. I personally don't think its the training so much (and certainly not the unit design) but possibly the psychology of SOME of those attracted to the MKVI? Whether that's the fault of marketing OR a simple result of it is debatable. I'm also not sure that's worthy of blame or whether it's a real issue or not. Too early to jump to conclusions IMHO.

Mike

[ChrisBrown]

I think Mark may have a partial point here. I personally don't think its the training so much (and certainly not the unit design) but possibly the psychology of SOME of those attracted to the MKVI? Whether that's the fault of marketing OR a simple result of it is debatable. I'm also not sure that's worthy of blame or whether it's a real issue or not. Too early to jump to conclusions IMHO.

Mike

Trained tech divers (you know - the right sort of people for RBW members)have died on tech CCR's by not turning on their gas, ignoring alarms, diving them broken and diving them knowingly unfit.

Whats the difference?