Yet statistics show that accidents overall, specifically accidents resulting in deaths are one their way down! How can anyone argue that driving is not safer than it used to be... even with the "idiots" and the computers in vehicles that are supposedly making us worse drivers?
Link to statistics
I can't help but think with some level of confidence that rebreathers will follow suit as have other sports/industries - freediving and skydiving being two of which I would say are on the same plane as rebreather diving and also two sports that are enjoying better safety rates over the last few years because of standardized instruction and arguably a lower bar of entry. I would also say that TECHNOLOGY has something to do with the increased safety - that could come from better equipment for the sport, better equipment for STUDYING the sport etc.
Hello Josh,
Your post neatly articulates the crux of the issue, but not in the way you intended.
The link to the motor vehicle statistics showing declining per unit (vehicles, mileage etc) fatality rates merely serves to highlight the lack of such comparative data for CCR diving. While limited data for number of fatalities may exist, there is no denominator data from which CCR fatality rates can be reasonably determined. For example relative fatality rates for mCCR, eCCR, hCCR or total CCR usage.
Some people may have access to manufacturer sales data, but how many of those units are still in use, how many dives per annum, depth/overhead etc?
Is mCCR diving safer than eCCR, or SCR and eSCR safer than CCR? I don't believe anyone can give a definitive answer, though we all may have an opinion.
The foregoing leads to the second assumption in your post that more/new/simpler technology leads(or potentially leads to) to a safer/better diving experience.
While such technology can lead to an easier diving experience (machine does tasks which previously were done manually), it is not necessarily any safer because user reliance/dependence on technology may result in attitudinal (e.g. complacency) or behavioural changes (e.g. don't need to look at handset because its
always stable) which expose diver to increased risk when technology fails or has unintended outcomes.
My comments above are not directed to arguing an elitist view of SCR/CCR only for the tech gods, but to suggest that if one wishes to create better learning paths for OC divers into rebreather diving, that a lower technology solution e.g. mCCR may be a better approach than eSCR.
The answer to the question of making entry level rebreather diving more affordable, is quite simple, people buy a second-hand unit. We don't have to build a new shining mouse-trap, if the old one can be cleaned up and given a proper service. Just as with rebreathers, both will kill just as effectively.
Regards,
Tony
