From reports I've read, a surprising number of tragedies and near
misses have involved people who have had very extensive training.

There was a time when I was considering rebreathers, mainly for the
reported advantages in underwater photography (no bubbles!). The
casualty rate - and particularly the casualties involving divers with
extensive training and experience - was the most important reason I've
decided to put this on indefinite hold.

I can see that there may be military applications or other special
situatoins where rebreathers may be necessary, but the bottom line for
me is that I can do every dive I really need or want to do on air.  The
technology may be sound in principle, or not - I'm not qualified to
say.  But it does seems clear that the equipment available for civilian
use today is nowhere near robust nor safe enough for recreational
diving.

Enough divers have already been lost.  Worse, I'm concerned that
continued high fatalities could increase the likelihood that government
agencies may decide that diving and mfg of diving equipment needs to be
regulated, which could impact of us in very negative ways.

FROGFISH aka Robert Delfs



On Mon, 8 Oct 2001 17:24:04 +1000, David Strike wrote:

>Leaving the machine's peculiarities to one side, it's probably also fair to
>say that many of the tragedies - and near-misses - are a direct result of
>poor, or 'let's-suck-it-and-see', training.  Something, of course, that is
>seldom acknowledged by those who, having splashed out the money, want to run
>before they can walk!  :-)
>


Robert Delfs
Reply to:  <[log in to unmask]>
Tel:    +852 2812-6290
Fax:   +852 2812-6970