An age-old question: ways to 60m.

[boriss]

Some of this is a bit philosophical. I honestly think both sides make good points about risk. There's definitely a risk with using CCR - more failure points, regardless of dive profile. There's also more risk the deeper you go on air. I don't think it's an either or.

So what's the safest approach? Dive 21/35 mix to 60m. It'll give an END of about 35m.

The problem I see is that the "deep air proponents" say it's basically ok to dive air, because helium is too expensive. Despite it being possible, it shouldn't be recommended.

If your child/loved one asked you: is it ok to drive drunk? We'd all prefer that they didn't, we wouldn't recommend that they did, would we? Same thing here. We ultimately all choose how much risk we want to take and the type of risk we want to take. There's no free lunch. Let's stop beating a dead horse.

 

[Boarderguy]

If your child/loved one asked you: is it ok to drive drunk? We'd all prefer that they didn't, we wouldn't recommend that they did, would we? Same thing here. We ultimately all choose how much risk we want to take and the type of risk we want to take. There's no free lunch. Let's stop beating a dead horse.

Again with the drunk driving. Deep air and DUI (any kind) are now where near the same. Deep air endangers noone other than yourself. DUI endangers everyone around the driver and the driver is often unscathed in their accident compared to those they hit.

IF the driving correlation must be continued than it should be DUI on an enclosed track with no others on or about it. Drive, wreck, nobody else is hurt.

 

[scubaozy]

It's an amazing combo of whataboutism and goal post moving really. "Deep air is dangerous?! What about a CCR then? Huh?"

I suspect statistics would bear out that there are more deaths on a long hose than on the default rental PADI-style setup. I think it may be more dangerous to dive with a long hose than rental regulators! It's been a long time since we talked about the dangers of the long hose and primary donate. It wouldn't surprise me if a dry suit is also a risk factor.

Meh, how else do you assert deep air is dangerous? You look at fatality stats, you compare them with other disciplines like ccr, cave and rate/sort them. Imho you are discrediting the argument unfairly.

 

[boriss]

Again with the drunk driving. Deep air and DUI (any kind) are now where near the same. Deep air endangers noone other than yourself. DUI endangers everyone around the driver and the driver is often unscathed in their accident compared to those they hit.

IF the driving correlation must be continued than it should be DUI on an enclosed track with no others on or about it. Drive, wreck, nobody else is hurt.

This is why I try to stay out of threads like this. It turns into some nit-picky debate about something that has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

The analogy isn't to talk about who you pose a risk to, it's just to say that there's more risk. Period. To be clear, I'm not telling you what to do. If you want to dive to 100m on air and kill yourself (although maybe not, I've seen it done and people survived), that's your choice. My only point is that we shouldn't be recommending to others something which carries known, quantifiable, risks. If you wouldn't recommend something to your loved one, you shouldn't recommend it to a stranger either. Especially if they're "not endangering others" by diving solo. Which carries its own risk.

 

[flymolo]

just stop with the rational arguments and thoughtful responses i want to hear more about muh freedoms and hurr durr kool aid references and rebreathers r bad

 

[eightytwenty]

As much as I would love to pontificate about the dangers of diving a breather when compared to the relative safety of diving to 200 feet on air (give me a break), I'd also like to note that the statistics likely show that diving a machine is far safer than any dive conducted by an untrained wheezing moron who can barely stand up with a set of doubles and a deco bottle.

As much as I hope these people get what's coming to them, I'm also afraid that they'll screw it up for everyone else who has bothered to pursue proper training.

This thread serves as nothing other than a reminder that this website is full of dilettantes who can and will push straight up dangerous ideas that have killed people before and will kill people again under the guise of personal preference or to show off what tough guys they are because they don't feel narced at depth (or because the narc feels good, whatever that means) or whatever. This all would be hilarious in a vacuum, but because new divers who want to learn might read these threads, it's beyond terrifying.

The first three rules exist because of people and posts like these. Talking about being able to work around narcosis and gas density is akin to walking around with a sign taped to your forehead that says "I AM A STROKE AND I AM WILLING TO PROVE IT!"

 

[SelfDiver]

As much as I would love to pontificate about the dangers of diving a breather when compared to the relative safety of diving to 200 feet on air (give me a break), I'd also like to note that the statistics likely show that diving a machine is far safer than any dive conducted by an untrained wheezing moron who can barely stand up with a set of doubles and a deco bottle.

As much as I hope these people get what's coming to them, I'm also afraid that they'll screw it up for everyone else who has bothered to pursue proper training.

This thread serves as nothing other than a reminder that this website is full of dilettantes who can and will push straight up dangerous ideas that have killed people before and will kill people again under the guise of personal preference or to show off what tough guys they are because they don't feel narced at depth (or because the narc feels good, whatever that means) or whatever. This all would be hilarious in a vacuum, but because new divers who want to learn might read these threads, it's beyond terrifying.

The first three rules exist because of people and posts like these. Talking about being able to work around narcosis and gas density is akin to walking around with a sign taped to your forehead that says "I AM A STROKE AND I AM WILLING TO PROVE IT!"

I think you may have won the "Geroge" award in this thread.
A prestigious award given to the first person who unironically invokes the "stroke" term in context.
Congratulations!

 

[old frogman]

Supporting the other point about comparing apples with oranges @LFMarm made.

All CCR dives are technical dives (i.e. mixed gases, massive monitoring load, bailout requirements, etc.).
The "vast majority" of OC dives are recreational dives, i.e. limited in scope, kit requirements, lack of decompression stress, etc.

The stats you posted show greater 'incidents' with technical dives simply because they're much more challenging in just about every way: kit, dive profile, decompression obligations, physical and physiological stress, skill requirements, emergency procedures, diagnosis skills, etc., etc.

and because they are challenging dives with CCR they create the statistic. Numbers do not lie.

 

[old frogman]

Something else to contemplate regarding CCR, "safety remains a critical issue".

Rebreather Forum 4 2023 Report

1. An Overview of the Tech Rebreather Market: A Technologist's Perspective

Conclusion

"Rebreather diving safety remains a critical issue, with incident rates similar to those of 10 years ago. Safety remains a work in progress in and for the technical diving community."

Page 23. Author M2

 

[inquis]

Rebreather diving safety remains a critical issue, with incident rates similar to those of 10 years ago

Sounds like progress, as there are many more CCR divers today. The lack of a denominator is a widely acknowledged issue.