All divers are must be willing to accept a certain amount of risk when diving. The wisdom lies in the proper analysis of exactly what and where the risk is. DIR principles have an excellent safety record whereas the "choosing to draw your own line" method is very dependant on individuals and their education, experience, etc. For those who have access to RB technology to support their mission analyzing the cost/benefit curve is not black and white. Even with extensive support that military, commercial, and some other projects are able to provide, diving RBs may never be "safer". With very few exceptions most missions and profiles CAN be completed OC. Weigh some of the following : Cost - Consumable parts, Repair parts, Absorbant, Gas, INITIAL INVESTMENT Profile - Gas volume availability, Restrictions on deco obligation, Absorbant times Thermal - He vs N2, Active vs Passive warmth systems, Loop humidity Risk management - Training, Bail-outs, Redundancy, Maintenance requirements, Standardized and followed procedures Mission - Exhaust reqs (all, some, or none), Stage gas availability All provide varying grey area to consider when choosing RBs. US military with some other countries following, generally use CCo2R for Shallow, SCR for Intermediate, and CCR for Intermed - deep, for missions that require their use (EOD/MCM, NSW/SOF etc.) Commercial RB use is primarily restricted to Saturation/Chamber systems and Gas reclaimation for deep water Bailout. Both could benefit from all "Extended Range" dives being conducted with RB technology but choose more reliable -read "Safe" - systems. Even a CCo2R has many more failure points and procedure requirements than conventional OC SCUBA. I see the most common use in recreational mission oriented diving is the true "Extended Range" dives. Dives O/W or Overhead Penetration that cannot be cost or environmentally acceptable to use Surface Supplied systems and require more stage gas than would be feasible. Deeper dives, longer runtimes, or both combined has led to a requirement for RBs. Personal opinion - I think that selling someone on RB technology because of some of the less significant reasons (Gas cost, Photo benefits, being the only kid on the block with 70s military technology) is similar to someone selling an O/W student on EANx because you feel better diving it. All are valid points but before someone puts their life in the hands of having the Apollo 13 mission on their back they need to be educated enough to be able to make that choice informed of the cost/benefit they are accepting. Like all High Risk activities, if you dont have the money for the proper equipment and the time to dedicate to the proper training then you shouldnt be doing it. If anyone has had some outstanding RB training please comment. >From: "Sean T. Stevenson" <ststev@un*.co*> >In light of the recent demise of Eric Reichardt, I would like to get the >rebreather divers on the list to perform a very simple risk/benefit >analysis. Just ask yourself the following questions: > >1) Can this dive be performed on open circuit? > >2) What advantages are gained by using a closed circuit apparatus? > >3) Are these advantages safety issues, or are they merely >convenience/aesthetic concerns? > >4) Do these advantages outweigh the additional risks involved? > > >Personally, if the answer to #1 was yes, I would consider that the end of >the debate. I urge you all to carefully re-evaluate your priorities. > > >-Sean > > > >-- >Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. >Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
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]