Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
> The entire quotation was not used in the story in AquaCorp. I was asked > about the degree of complexity of CCR versus OC. I said LEARNING to dive a > CCR is MORE like learning to fly an airplane in the sense > that there are more than a couple of gauges and valves to keep track of in > addition to those devices a diver is familiar with in OC diving. You > certainly do not need to have the skills of a fighter aircraft pilot in > order to successfully dive or own a rebreather. I know, I know - I was just giving you a hard time (hence the "smiley"). > Rich, in matters of life > support, I've noticed that some individuals (not you) who have unique skills > and equipment, OFTEN overemphasize the degree of difficulty in developing > the skills and using the equipment because it enhances their status as > being one of the few who can do it. You see this in the general diving > and in the tech. community and certainly see it in the rebreather marketplace. > Not only that, fear of the unknown often exagerates and distorts reality > for the novice. I agree. But on the other hand, there are two misconceptions that do scare me: 1) that learning to dive on a rebreather is as easy as learning to dive on scuba (it is not - on scuba if you can breathe, you'll probably be OK. On a rebreather, that may not necessarily be the case. Furthemore, there are more variables that have to be monitored than just depth, time, and cylinder pressure); and 2) that you need tons of open circuit scuba experience to be a good rebreather diver (you don't - the right attitude is way more important than OC scuba skills). Rod, I agree that rebreather diving is not rocket science - but it's not as easy as scuba either. I found it took me much more time to go from mixed-gas OC diver to shallow-water rebreather diver than it did for me to go from air scuba to mixed-gas scuba. The time involved with rebreather training is in practicing the skills on simulated bailouts. Maybe you've decided to trust your abilities - and maybe it's a safe gamble. But I want to be damn sure I can reflexively respond if the shit ever hits the fan. > Some may take advantage of both components to market > rebreathers at exorbitantly high prices, to require very expensive training > before purchase and to require mandatory periodic expensive factory > refurbishing of the units- when in fact none of these need be. Maybe, maybe not. What makes you or I qualified to know that? I don't know about you, but I haven't interacted with Joe- or Jane-avarage scuba diver in a long time. I have no idea what their skills are. But in case you haven't figured it out already, a lot of the high costs and extreme training requirments have more to do with protecting manufacturers from the lawyers and the loved ones, than they do with making sure a diver is qualified to dive on a rebreather. I'd be willing to bet that no other piece of gear in the history of diving has ever had as mich liability overhead as rebreathers do. The manufacturers are trying to cover their ass in a courtroom just as thoroughly as I try to cover my ass when I go underwater with the breather. > There > is no argument that safer is better but there is no doubt that the > concept has often been distorted to gain market share of products inside > and outside of the diving industry. There is no question that rebreathers > are more complex life support than OC scuba. They do require good units, > competent training and regular use to become and maintain proficiency-JUST > LIKE OC SCUBA. Maybe the same as OC scube fundamentally, but they are different in degree. Rebreathers require *more* of the above than scuba does. > With my personal rebreather, I am as comfortable diving it > after a months layoff as I am after diving it regularly for days. I'm finding the same is true for me - but what about 6 months layoff? How many holiday warriors are going to be buying rebreathers? I don't think the manufacturers are worried about guys like you or George or half the people on this list - they're worried about the wealthy yahoos who won't keep up their proficiency levels. There is less margin for error regarding forgotten skills on rebreathers than there is on OC, and people can more easily get into more trouble on the breather than they can on standard OC scuba. > The > same is true for me on OC. And I am not unique in this. What I gather > from all of your excellent posts on rebreathers and on the CisLunar is > that the Cis Lunar is vastly different in complexity than the BioMarine > system (I have never used the Cis and I am sorry that I didn't have the > time to do it in New Orleans when you offered) Yeah - what happened to you? fifteen minutes after I talked to you I was ready to let you go for it (and I wanted to try yours, too) but I couldn't find you. > and as such requires > constant training to maintain competency even for the brightest of > divers. I suggest that this factor, the extremely high cost of the unit, > the extremely high cost of training, the mandatory retraining schedule, > the mandatory factory recall and the apparent complexity of the unit > takes the CisLunar of reach of ordinary tech divers and puts it in out > there for only those good enough to be fighter pilots. Whether or not this is actually true of the unit, it certainly seems to be the case from their training philosophy. The feeling I'm getting from them is that they're extremely paranoid about liability issues, and that they feel one bad lawsuit is worth several lost sales opportunities, so they're willing to accept the fact that their requirements (whatever they turn out to be - I honestly don't know) will turn more than a few people on to other rebreathers. I guess they're just willing to accept that loss of sales. I can understand that - and you should too. It wasn't long ago that you cautioned me about sticking my neck out on a lawyer's chopping block for providing specific methods of deep decompression stops. Imagine if I was trying to sell rebreathers. > Given that > scenario, it is no wonder that the CisLunar- as a production unit for > tech divers- has achieved distinction as the longest running science > fiction project in the history of diving. There is no question that on > paper it is a highly desirable unit for some applications. Recreational > tech diving is not one of them. Rod I'd hardly consider the Biomarine a "recreational" unit either. I'd also hardly consider our 30+ new species science "fiction". But I'm not gonna go into that. As G always likes to suggest, the proof will be in the pudding. Aloha, Rich
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]