gianaameri
gian @ gian.ameri.name
Do you have any conflicts to declare, Sir?
Functional Safety, Human Factors and General Safety Discussion (Moved from Mk VI)
- Thread starter psmedo
- Start date
Do you have any conflicts to declare, Sir?
Chris Brown
Official CAMRA ale tester
Nope. I just want the thread to be free of noise. You are actually creating the most currently. Across the whole board in fact.
I am MKVI instructor however, which is not unusual and hardly puts me on the red phone to the board in Gothenburg.
Perhaps you have an agenda you would like to declare?
Again, in the interests of full disclosure to the CCRX members, they should know you were banned from The Deco Stop and RBW on good advice. That may still be the case.
Im sorry, but I wont sit by and watch a good board ruined by a couple of individuals who are not acting in the best interests of its members. this is a community, not a soap box
hoffi
Member
Can't you see how you vaporise the points you endlessly are trying to make by the sheer amount of posts you shoot per hour?
I for one can't read your posts anymore beyond the first line since months and its annoying to have it in almost every thread.
If you dive like you cyberdive I visualize a supercavitating torpedo,
therefore I would want to stay in safe distance :big:
Does bulletin give the ability to restrcit users to, say five posts per day or week.
Gian needs some help to boil down, he seems to be not capable to do it on his own.
hoffi
Last edited:
gianaameri
gian @ gian.ameri.name
You mean because I mentioned that rebreathers lack Functional Safety?
It is quite pertinent to the MKVI Fatality.
I quote:
"Our Poseidon Discovery MK VI rebreather meets the key features of a Type
R rebreather and has successfully undergone internationally recognized thirdparty
testing against CE Standards (EN14143). We have checked the Type R
requirements against our Poseidon Discovery MK VI rebreather
performance and found that it meets PADI's Type R standards in full."
Would this post get me banned now?
GLOC
real name: Gareth Lock!
....
This thread has been generated from the April 2013 Mk VI fatality thread. Some of the conversation may be a little stilted because the other parts of the conversation are in the other thread.
If you want to talk about the Mk VI Fatality specifically, use that thread. If not, stay here.
Regards
This thread has been generated from the April 2013 Mk VI fatality thread. Some of the conversation may be a little stilted because the other parts of the conversation are in the other thread.
If you want to talk about the Mk VI Fatality specifically, use that thread. If not, stay here.
Regards
Last edited:
Paul Haynes
CCRX Supporter
The military are trying to stop civilians diving rebreathers! What country are you referring to Gian because it is not the UK. Also the French military, like all militaries have suffered a number of fatalities on rebreathers over the last 30 years.
Paul
To be entirely honest, whats far more likely to kill the industry is litigation/costs.
Personally I dont give a flying f*ck if someone else wasnt diligent enough and died from ignorance, after all they do it every day on our roads. What does bother me is that through the actions of a vocal few I might struggle to get supplied with decent o2 sensors, or even lime.
Having said that, I do think things could be improved;
- CCR design
- Training
- Operational procedures
- Personal responsibility
Im not against any of those items being improved, but fundamentally taking any of those 4 in isolation is being a little naive. All too often the ccr world sees crusaders.....and its not always beneficial to us ordinary folk who just want to dive.
Last edited:
gianaameri
gian @ gian.ameri.name
I read a report from the French saying the opposite.
Can't always trust the military.
Found any WMD in Iraq lately?
Sent from my HTC Desire C using Tapatalk 2
Last edited:
Yeah, right.
Annexe 3- Recycleur Analyse de 96 accidents répertoriés dans la Marine.pdf
96 accidents (about 1/6000 dive) and 3 deaths between 1979 and 2002 (I'm aware of a more recent report, but that'll do).
Interestingly, they mention as possible reasons for the "low number" strict safety procedures, including buddy lines and g... mouthpiece straps, and rigorous maintenance.
Cheers,
Matthieu
gianaameri
gian @ gian.ameri.name
"Les trois décès à déplorer sont survenus par noyade et ne
sont pas imputables aux accidents précédemment décrits.
Il s’agit d’un binôme de nageur de combat resté incarcéré
sous un ponton flottant et d’un plongeur au MIXGERS
qui est resté accroché au fond."
The French have ZERO rebreather fatalities.
At any rate, this is my last post on CCRX, and won't bother reading it either.
Bye!
GLOC
real name: Gareth Lock!
No! They have had 3 rebreather fatalities but those deaths have not been directly caused by the rebreather.
From the English report [1] "Three fatalities were ultimately reported; these concerned 2 CS students using the OXYGERS 57 who were unable to return to the surface, caught under a barge, during an attack swim and another accident in which an MCD was trapped in a deep wreck with no visibility during a dive using a MIXGERS apparatus. CNS oxygen toxicity for the CS and insuffi cient gas associated with panic for the last decedent were identifi ed as the disabling agents in post-mortem investigations....However, the diving procedures imposed by military regulations (mouthpiece strap, buddy team with link, and diving instructor with open circuit to lend assistance if necessary during training) have greatly limited life-threatening complications, ie, drowning, which are too often recorded in recreational technical diving."
So, back to the question I asked you. How many of the 280 or so rebreather fatalities are down to the rebreather? You can't say all of them because you do not have the evidence...
Regards
[1] Gempp, E., Louge, P., Blatteau, J.E. & Hugon, M., 2011, Descriptive Epidemiology of 153 Diving Injuries With Rebreathers Among French Military Divers From 1979 to 2009, Military medicine, 176(4), pp. 446-50
From the English report [1] "Three fatalities were ultimately reported; these concerned 2 CS students using the OXYGERS 57 who were unable to return to the surface, caught under a barge, during an attack swim and another accident in which an MCD was trapped in a deep wreck with no visibility during a dive using a MIXGERS apparatus. CNS oxygen toxicity for the CS and insuffi cient gas associated with panic for the last decedent were identifi ed as the disabling agents in post-mortem investigations....However, the diving procedures imposed by military regulations (mouthpiece strap, buddy team with link, and diving instructor with open circuit to lend assistance if necessary during training) have greatly limited life-threatening complications, ie, drowning, which are too often recorded in recreational technical diving."
So, back to the question I asked you. How many of the 280 or so rebreather fatalities are down to the rebreather? You can't say all of them because you do not have the evidence...
Regards
[1] Gempp, E., Louge, P., Blatteau, J.E. & Hugon, M., 2011, Descriptive Epidemiology of 153 Diving Injuries With Rebreathers Among French Military Divers From 1979 to 2009, Military medicine, 176(4), pp. 446-50
Last edited:
Mr fish
Active Member
diving procedures imposed by military regulations
i don,t think you will see or get a few 100 military frogmen doing 80m for 180 mins week in week out ,
let,s get apples for apples , m8 , :glug: work is work / pay
play time is , no pay fun passtime , free from regulations and BS
i don,t know a ccr military diver . but i know a few ships divers , and they are not v good . id say a BSAC sport divers would run rings round them
the military guy don,t get to pick what kit or gas to dive with , they are told , what to do/use . some one other than them run the show ,
i don,t think you will see or get a few 100 military frogmen doing 80m for 180 mins week in week out ,
let,s get apples for apples , m8 , :glug: work is work / pay
play time is , no pay fun passtime , free from regulations and BS
i don,t know a ccr military diver . but i know a few ships divers , and they are not v good . id say a BSAC sport divers would run rings round them
the military guy don,t get to pick what kit or gas to dive with , they are told , what to do/use . some one other than them run the show ,
Last edited:
lizardland
Active Member
Wasn't there something in the last couple of years as well with the Stealth? IIRC one of the Divex units had its use severely restricted after some incidents>
Igor
Ingemar Lundgren
An interesting point of this report is that it seems the use of mouth retainer straps prevented drowning in all but 3 cases if i have understood it correctly. It is pretty remarkable that out of 53 loc divers only 3 drowned.
alexasigno
Member
It certainly does. Incredible statistics, it made me buy one. I'm sure the team diving element was another significant factor.
Igor
Ingemar Lundgren
http://www.scubamagazine.net/videos..._HD_Interview/2008 Stone Interview part 2.mov
Interview with Bill Stone. Explains Mk6 in depth for us that don´t know much about it. It has some interesting features i think. The corrugated hoses seems to be interesting. Very flexible and smooth inside like a cooper hose. Anyone know the diameter of them? Would they work on a JJ? Are they as good as he claims?
Other then that my picture of the unit is confirmed.
Interview with Bill Stone. Explains Mk6 in depth for us that don´t know much about it. It has some interesting features i think. The corrugated hoses seems to be interesting. Very flexible and smooth inside like a cooper hose. Anyone know the diameter of them? Would they work on a JJ? Are they as good as he claims?
Other then that my picture of the unit is confirmed.
Last edited:
Absolutely, but the same applies to that list of 280, right? So if it's 280, then it's 3. If it's not 3, it's not 280 either.
That's the one I was thinking of. Thanks
I don't have it, but the stats from that one are available in this instead: http://www.ancplongee.fr/wp-content/uploads/MEMOIRE-IN-Accidents-en-recycleurs-Laurent-Marcoux.pdf
Hypercapnia 62
Hyperoxia 26
Hypoxia 16
DCS 20
Pulmonary barotrauma/pulmonary oedema 12
ENT barotrauma 13
Caustic burn 4
Worth noting as well: 50% of incidents occur during training. And while training there's always an instructor on OC.
No s**t
On O2 rebreathers the buddies dive tethered. And they use these a lot.And, of course, there's the small detail that they have surface support we can only dream of.
Cheers,
Matthieu
Last edited:
Mark Chase
ATB=AlwaysTalkingBollocks
I was dragged kicking and screaming into CCR diving by my passion for deep wrecks and my limited funds.
I was convinced id die on a CCR due to not being vigilant enough.
I made it my mission to analise all the CCR fatalities and see where the big problem was.
Before id finished Mod1 i decided a primary cause of death was low 02 due to failure to monitor the hand sets. I decided a HUD was essential so I fitted one and was told by most in the CCR world that I'd die soon as a result of reliance on a HUD.
The HUD saved my life in 2006 when both hand sets shut down on my Inspo Classic mid dive without warning.
With the growth of knowledge in the area of current limited cells I decided that a green is good red is bad HUD is simply not good enough as a primary monitor so i switched to a Sheerwater HUD with Smither's Code displaying actual PP02 on each individual cell
In 2007 I learned about the real issues with C02 something that was hammered home by the death of Dave Shaw and invaluable analysis from Simon Mitchell.
This prompted not only the use of a BOV as a must have, but also striving for lower WOB and planning lower friction lower PP02off board large volume bailout gas.
During the years I have also discovered what its like to flood several CCR and how serious / or not that is.
Despite continuing to try an analise CCR deaths, in recent years i have failed to come up with any new strategies in order to improve my chances of survival. In all the CCR deaths where i have managed to get some background information the deaths have been as a result of diver error be that very poor contingency planning, panic or just having a bad day and screwing up when the gods were against you.
In many of these incidents there seems to be a electronic warning device that should have helped. However in truth most of the divers died on units with a plethora of buzzers and flashing lights which either failed or did noting to save them.
The Poseidon is right up there in terms of automated safety features and yet by my counting, it has a simply appalling safety record so far in terms of deaths / unit sold.
The Poseidon is perhaps the most obvious unit where low intensity training is supposedly being balanced by automation.
To me this screams that low intensity training and poor training is a serious issue and that automation alone hasn't reached the level it needs to be at to compensate for lack of training.
Sorting out the automation issue will be complex and very expensive.
In the short term sorting out the training issues would be simple and cheep.
To make this work there should be a generic CCR training course free of industry / manufacturors bias, followed by a cross over course to the unit of choice.
No doubt the manufacturors cours will gloss over issues they think they have covered with electronics (which is exactly what i think they do now) but hopfulley the generic CCR course can realy focus on key issues.
ATB
Mark
I was convinced id die on a CCR due to not being vigilant enough.
I made it my mission to analise all the CCR fatalities and see where the big problem was.
Before id finished Mod1 i decided a primary cause of death was low 02 due to failure to monitor the hand sets. I decided a HUD was essential so I fitted one and was told by most in the CCR world that I'd die soon as a result of reliance on a HUD.
The HUD saved my life in 2006 when both hand sets shut down on my Inspo Classic mid dive without warning.
With the growth of knowledge in the area of current limited cells I decided that a green is good red is bad HUD is simply not good enough as a primary monitor so i switched to a Sheerwater HUD with Smither's Code displaying actual PP02 on each individual cell
In 2007 I learned about the real issues with C02 something that was hammered home by the death of Dave Shaw and invaluable analysis from Simon Mitchell.
This prompted not only the use of a BOV as a must have, but also striving for lower WOB and planning lower friction lower PP02off board large volume bailout gas.
During the years I have also discovered what its like to flood several CCR and how serious / or not that is.
Despite continuing to try an analise CCR deaths, in recent years i have failed to come up with any new strategies in order to improve my chances of survival. In all the CCR deaths where i have managed to get some background information the deaths have been as a result of diver error be that very poor contingency planning, panic or just having a bad day and screwing up when the gods were against you.
In many of these incidents there seems to be a electronic warning device that should have helped. However in truth most of the divers died on units with a plethora of buzzers and flashing lights which either failed or did noting to save them.
The Poseidon is right up there in terms of automated safety features and yet by my counting, it has a simply appalling safety record so far in terms of deaths / unit sold.
The Poseidon is perhaps the most obvious unit where low intensity training is supposedly being balanced by automation.
To me this screams that low intensity training and poor training is a serious issue and that automation alone hasn't reached the level it needs to be at to compensate for lack of training.
Sorting out the automation issue will be complex and very expensive.
In the short term sorting out the training issues would be simple and cheep.
To make this work there should be a generic CCR training course free of industry / manufacturors bias, followed by a cross over course to the unit of choice.
No doubt the manufacturors cours will gloss over issues they think they have covered with electronics (which is exactly what i think they do now) but hopfulley the generic CCR course can realy focus on key issues.
ATB
Mark
paulraymaekers
Active Member
I fully agree, but in my opinion that's what is on the market now!
the first full course a user takes, is a general rebreather course, plus a unit specific part, for the unit he trains on
then for a new unit, there are cross over courses...
so what's the difference ?
btw.... unless I'm mistaking.... in many other posts you were against the mandatory cross over course when going to a new unit....