Lost another tank :(

[Zodiacdiverdave]

If you have never seen what an AL cylinder looks like after it explodes check out this link.http://www.safeairsystems.com/news-and-information-center/dean-vannest-scba-rupture/
ZDD

 

[Zodiacdiverdave]

If you have never seen what an AL cylinder looks like after it explodes check out this link.http://www.safeairsystems.com/news-and-information-center/dean-vannest-scba-rupture/
ZDD

Not sure why the link isn`t working, google dean vannest scba rupture.
ZDD

 

[duckbill]

Well see there you go, here is were we differ in opinions. I think one preventable death every 5 years is more then enough to justify 6K.

If you're going to try to use math to prove your point, then you need to keep the terms consistent.

You aren't talking about one death every five years per dive shop. If that was the case, then I would agree that it would be prudent for a dive shop owner to spend the $6000. At the least, I would think the insurance companies would insist.

Since you are talking about one death every five years for all dive shops combined, then let's be consistent with that. One dive shop directory site lists 1424 dive shops in the United States. If you combine Canada's shops to that, there would be even more. Plus, I'm sure that not every dive shop in the United States is listed on that site (Dive Shops.com - Dive Shops). To give you the advantage here, let's just use that number to represent the total of dive shops having one death every five years due to a tank failure. I don't know if one for five is an accurate number, but it is the figure you gave me to work with.

So, we aren't really talking about $6000 to save one life every five years, we are talking about $8,544,000. That's 8.5 MILLION dollars ($6000 x 1424 dive shops)! That's almost the population of New Jersey! If you were to take one dollar from every man, woman and child in New Jersey, you'd just cover the expense of outfitting all the dive shops in the country with one each of those containment vessels.

Now lets do some math,...

Yeah, let's do some more math!

Assuming a dive shop tank failure death rate of one every five years out of all of the 1424 aforementioned dive shops in the United States, and assuming that an average number of owner/employees per dive shop is three (Pretty conservative number, I think), then that works out to one death per 21,360 employee years, or .0468 deaths per 1,000 per year.

(1 death / 5 years) x 1000 / (1424 shops x 3 employer-employees) = .0468 annual deaths per 1000 due to in-shop tank failures.

Compare that to the average annual death rate in the United States of 8.38 per 1000.
(Latest 2009 figure: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=us&v=26)

Now do you see how infinitesimal the chances of an occurance are? And you are willing to burden the dive shop industry with an 8.5 MILLION dollar expense to save one person that would have been 179 times more likely to die by any means during that same period anyway?!!! Even if the tank explosion death rate were higher, and even though the containment vessels last longer than five years, that's a hell of a burden to put on private businesses for virtually no actual benefit.

I often find math fun, if not enlightening.

 

[vladimir]

Compare that to the average annual death rate in the United States of 8.38 per capita.

Not per capita, per thousand, obviously.

 

[duckbill]

Not per capita, per thousand, obviously.

You're right! For some reason I always thought per capita meant per 1000. Correction made. Thanks!

 

[knowone]

We have per annum hydro's despite, and far less ca pita's.

Fifty percent of those diving ca pita's could have their gear locked
away at a registered maintenance storage facility between diving.

Like at a range for firearms.

 

[flots am]

I Even if the tank explosion death rate were higher, and even though the containment vessels last longer than five years, that's a hell of a burden to put on private businesses for virtually no actual benefit.

It's only "virtually no benefit" for the shops that don't have an explosion. It's quite a lot of benefit for the guy doing the fill at one shop that does.

However this is all irrelevant, since doing nothing more than requiring a current hydro and an eddy current test every year on AL tanks would also prevent explosions.

I've never heard of a steel SCUBA tank that passed VIP and hydro, or a post-1989 AL tank that passed VIP, hydro and an eddy current test explode.

flots

 

[fire_diver]

If you're going to try to use math to prove your point, then you need to keep the terms consistent.

....
(1 death / 5 years) x 1000 / (1424 shops x 3 employer-employees) = .0468 annual deaths per 1000 due to in-shop tank failures.

....
I often find math fun, if not enlightening.

You did a lot good math there, but there are other factors as well.

First, yes there are LOTS more shops than those listed in your link. I just looked up for my state and there are at least half not listed. Since that appears to be a subscription service, most shops won't be listed. Second, not all the deaths have occured in the United States and not all the catastrophic failures happened in the U.S. either. You also have to discount the failures from tanks that were not inspected or hydro'd to standard.

Your rate per 1000 should be a lot lower in reality.

 

[captain]

But the containment system just makes you feel soooo good

 

[Zodiacdiverdave]

If you're going to try to use math to prove your point, then you need to keep the terms consistent.

You aren't talking about one death every five years per dive shop. If that was the case, then I would agree that it would be prudent for a dive shop owner to spend the $6000. At the least, I would think the insurance companies would insist.

Since you are talking about one death every five years for all dive shops combined, then let's be consistent with that. One dive shop directory site lists 1424 dive shops in the United States. If you combine Canada's shops to that, there would be even more. Plus, I'm sure that not every dive shop in the United States is listed on that site (Dive Shops.com - Dive Shops). To give you the advantage here, let's just use that number to represent the total of dive shops having one death every five years due to a tank failure. I don't know if one for five is an accurate number, but it is the figure you gave me to work with.

So, we aren't really talking about $6000 to save one life every five years, we are talking about $8,544,000. That's 8.5 MILLION dollars ($6000 x 1424 dive shops)! That's almost the population of New Jersey! If you were to take one dollar from every man, woman and child in New Jersey, you'd just cover the expense of outfitting all the dive shops in the country with one each of those containment vessels.




Yeah, let's do some more math!

Assuming a dive shop tank failure death rate of one every five years out of all of the 1424 aforementioned dive shops in the United States, and assuming that an average number of owner/employees per dive shop is three (Pretty conservative number, I think), then that works out to one death per 21,360 employee years, or .0468 deaths per 1,000 per year.

(1 death / 5 years) x 1000 / (1424 shops x 3 employer-employees) = .0468 annual deaths per 1000 due to in-shop tank failures.

Compare that to the average annual death rate in the United States of 8.38 per 1000.
(Latest 2009 figure: United States - Death rate - Historical Data Graphs per Year)

Now do you see how infinitesimal the chances of an occurance are? And you are willing to burden the dive shop industry with an 8.5 MILLION dollar expense to save one person that would have been 179 times more likely to die by any means during that same period anyway?!!! Even if the tank explosion death rate were higher, and even though the containment vessels last longer than five years, that's a hell of a burden to put on private businesses for virtually no actual benefit.

I often find math fun, if not enlightening.

Your logic is the same as some shop owners used when they were pushing the eddy current machines. Not enough deaths to justify the expense, but those little machines made money for the shops.

Mandating the use of containment systems, and it would have to be because shop owners wouldn't ever put out the money for one without it being mandated, unless of course they experienced an explosion of their own, would be a win win situation for the shops. Owners could justify an increase in air cost to the customers, the customers would be safer while they are in the shop as well the employees would be safer. After the cost of the unit was paid for in 1-2 years it would be a revenue generator for the shop, one that has very little maintenance and could last the life of the shop unless there is an explosion then the shop owner would be happy to lay out another 6 K for a replacement.
And besides it would add a professional look to their filling station at their facility rather then some filling stations I have seen, and I am sure you have seen them too.

And if that's not enough good reasons, you could also get your pre-1990 Catalina tanks and steal 72's charged at shops before all the shops outlaw them.
ZDD