Exploding scuba tank kills one - Florida

[Brewone0to]

Pure oxygen to blame in SCUBA tank explosion?

OMG -- if you ever wanted to see news inaccuracy in action!

It reads like someone has melded a lot of different info from the internet boards.
This conglomerate of info makes little sense.
This info has all been covered over the last couple days though.
Really like the doubled burst disc comment best.
The way it is worded, you know the source really hasn't a clue to gear at all.

 

[Blue Sparkle]

At least one "expert" not happy about the online speculation...

I don't see what is wrong with Internet/forum speculation as long as it is clearly labeled as such -- which we do here. It's only natural to discuss what might have happened.

I'm more bothered by the numerous "authoritative" news articles that follow most incidents and are written by paid journalists. Oftentimes they are rife with mistakes, but, unlike Internet forum chatter, people presume they are correct.

In contrast it seems more obvious to assume that un-paid amateurs chatting in a forum might or might not be correct.

Blue Sparkle

PS: Reef_Haven, I realize you are just reporting about the feelings presented in the article, and I'm responding "to" them not you.

 

[gypsyjim]

Are you saying that the media might run stories they have no way of fact checking? :shocked2:

and folks might accept those stories as fact?

"It has to be true Marge, I saw it on MSNBC"?

 

[spoolin01]

http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-n...t-ruled-accidental-still-a-mystery-ar-257503/
Gresham said that under pressure, a typical 80-cubic-foot aluminum scuba tank contains 1.3 million foot-pounds of potential energy, enough to lift four 88-ton railroad locomotives one foot off the ground.
"Hand grenades are far less powerful," Gresham said.

Garbage. An 80 is about comparable to a hand grenade or two, if I recall, and in no way capable of lifting even one locomotive off the ground. He's mixing potential energy equivalence with explosive power.

 

[ROMO DIVER]

IMHO there is nothing wrong with the older AL tanks if properly maintained and inspected. I do not know of a single case of one of them failing if they have current hydros and are eddy current tested. You have less than 20 that have failed catastrophically and all were not eddy tested properly as far as I have gathered in my research. This is out of literally millions manufactored. Also, they take years to fail once the cracks have started which gives you plenty of time to catch the problem.

I know this goes without saying but someone please correct me if I am wrong.

As for this incident, I would assume that the tank in question would probably have had a current eddy vis inspection because the only dive shops I know that will fill one require that they do the test themselves which I think is perfectly reasonable.

 

[DebbyDiver]

Are you saying that the media might run stories they have no way of fact checking? :shocked2:

and folks might accept those stories as fact?

"It has to be true Marge, I saw it on MSNBC"?

True quote from a SoFla television news vet: "We never let the truth get in the way of a good story."

 

[Rick Murchison]

... sell the tank as scrap if I owned a 6351.

begin
They make lovely wind chimes... just cut 'em in two & hang 'em with something that'll bang against 'em in the wind...
end

Rick

 

[DandyDon]

IMHO there is nothing wrong with the older AL tanks if properly maintained and inspected. I do not know of a single case of one of them failing if they have current hydros and are eddy current tested. You have less than 20 that have failed catastrophically and all were not eddy tested properly as far as I have gathered in my research. This is out of literally millions manufactored. Also, they take years to fail once the cracks have started which gives you plenty of time to catch the problem.

I know this goes without saying but someone please correct me if I am wrong.

As for this incident, I would assume that the tank in question would probably have had a current eddy vis inspection because the only dive shops I know that will fill one require that they do the test themselves which I think is perfectly reasonable.

A new aluminum tank, new viz & hydro, cost $100-150 retail depending on size. A pro with a dozen tanks could replace them for much less, especially if he salvaged the old valves. How much are the current eddy tests and how often do you test yours? With the limits and risks, I just don't see the point of keeping them.

 

[Blue Sparkle]

IMHO there is nothing wrong with the older AL tanks if properly maintained and inspected. I do not know of a single case of one of them failing if they have current hydros and are eddy current tested.

I really don't have enough knowledge to judge the veracity of this report, nor to know whether it meets your criteria (was it eddy current tested?), but I was looking around the web today to educate myself a bit more on tanks/alloys, and ran across this site.

The Latest Victim of 6351-T6 Scuba Tanks

My apologies if for some reason it's not legit. From what I could tell it looked real.

Blue Sparkle

 

[jarias]

A new aluminum tank, new viz & hydro, cost $100-150 retail depending on size. A pro with a dozen tanks could replace them for much less, especially if he salvaged the old valves. How much are the current eddy tests and how often do you test yours? With the limits and risks, I just don't see the point of keeping them.

I am agree 100 percent with your thinking. Its just not worth the risk