Scubapro parts for life program update

[rhwestfall]

Given I've never met an exception tech yet (maybe I'm just not in the right circles,) much, much better than a crapshoot.

I have... 2, maybe 3 different shop's "techs" over 20+ years....

wrong parts, missing parts, recieved with broken parts, not serviced.... seen all of these.

Yep, you are "blessed"

 

[traveler218]

Typically that is one reason to dive with a buddy. In case of total failure you have someone to turn to for help/support.

The failure mode was total cessation of air to both of his regulators and BC. There was still 1000psi remaining in the tank.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

 

[halocline]

I can't understand how one can say to anyone who's diving at 120 feet, pushing no deco with a typical sport diver's rig and has a first stage blowout "it is very silly" to think what just broke isn't life safety equipment? And what ARE the most basic tenants of dive safety? Really.

If someone is diving at 120 feet pushing NDL as you said, and does not have an alternate air source, like, oh I don't know, HOW ABOUT A BUDDY, then that person is not diving safely. Would you disagree with that?

I'm amazed at how this extremely simple idea confuses people so. Buddy system, technical training that involves alternate air sources and solo diving techniques, etc....these are all foundations of dive training. Then along comes a dive shop salesman who says "you'll die if your regulator fails, better get an expensive one..." and people fall for it, over and over again.

In some ways it would be better if regulators really did fail frequently. At least that might inspire divers to actually dive safely. Instead, the type of regulator 'failure' that results in immediate loss of air is almost unheard of, so people routinely get away with all sorts of risky dive practices. I admit it, I do it too, although probably not to the extent that many do, based on what I've seen.


BTW, what do you mean by a "first stage blowout" and have you ever seen one or are you just making it up? No offense.....

---------- Post added January 8th, 2013 at 11:47 AM ----------

I talked to a guy yesterday who, while diving at 100 feet had his first stage fail. In his case the Alternate Air Source was useless since it runs off the same first stage. This was also true of his BC inflator. His dive duddy (dive shop dive master assigned to him for the dive) abandoned him, so he essentially drowned. He was very lucky that the boat captain was in the water with gear on and happened to seem him floating at 80ft. The Coastguard told him he was the only drowning victim diver they had ever resuscitated who did not suffer permanent brain damage.

So yes, I consider my regulator as a piece of life saving equipment and think it should be treated as such.

The obvious problem here is that a diver was at 100 feet solo diving without an alternate air source. Blaming the regulator for this accident is wrong. If the events occurred as you described, the DM was clearly at fault, for abandoning his dive buddy.

 

[traveler218]

If someone is diving at 120 feet pushing NDL as you said, and does not have an alternate air source, like, oh I don't know, HOW ABOUT A BUDDY, then that person is not diving safely. Would you disagree with that?

I'm amazed at how this extremely simple idea confuses people so. Buddy system, technical training that involves alternate air sources and solo diving techniques, etc....these are all foundations of dive training. Then along comes a dive shop salesman who says "you'll die if your regulator fails, better get an expensive one..." and people fall for it, over and over again.

In some ways it would be better if regulators really did fail frequently. At least that might inspire divers to actually dive safely. Instead, the type of regulator 'failure' that results in immediate loss of air is almost unheard of, so people routinely get away with all sorts of risky dive practices. I admit it, I do it too, although probably not to the extent that many do, based on what I've seen.


BTW, what do you mean by a "first stage blowout" and have you ever seen one or are you just making it up? No offense.....

---------- Post added January 8th, 2013 at 11:47 AM ----------
... the DM was clearly at fault, for abandoning his dive buddy.

Can't argue with that but I still think treating my regulator like my life depends on it is a good idea. Proper care and maintenance might have prevented the incident.

 

[redacted]

Typically that is one reason to dive with a buddy. In case of total failure you have someone to turn to for help/support.

The failure mode was total cessation of air to both of his regulators and BC. There was still 1000psi remaining in the tank.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

Can you identify the regulator and the specific fault that occurred?

 

[traveler218]

Can you identify the regulator and the specific fault that occurred?

No, it was rental equipment and he was in the hospital for 4 days. Not even sure if anyone ever validated the failure mode.

 

[redacted]

Can't argue with that but I still think treating my regulator like my life depends on it is a good idea. Proper care and maintenance might have prevented the incident.

I do not consider my regulator to be life support but as a component of a system that may be considered life support as they do allow me to enjoy long visits to the UW world. So how do you think you treat your regulator(s) any differently than I treat mine? Mine are tested often, Inspected before and during use, cleaned and inspected after use, and serviced when needed. I always dive with a redundant air source; whether it be an independent tank with regulator, a good buddy, or a readily accessible surface; or some combination for the three.

---------- Post added January 8th, 2013 at 01:10 PM ----------

Can't argue with that but I still think treating my regulator like my life depends on it is a good idea. Proper care and maintenance might have prevented the incident.

Or an encounter with all too common inept service may have caused it.

 

[elan]

I also try to service backup and primary at different times so I already have some fly time on one of the regs when the second one gets out of the service. This ensures that at least one reg has been tested.

---------- Post added January 8th, 2013 at 04:06 PM ----------

I have... 2, maybe 3 different shop's "techs" over 20+ years....

wrong parts, missing parts, recieved with broken parts, not serviced.... seen all of these.

Yep, you are "blessed"

If you are on the north side of the border I can give you a tech that has never screwed up for me and thats the only guy that I trust to work on my regs when I need to. He is in GTA.

 

[akeegan2]

Treating your reg as a life support on the surface is not dangerous. Its dangerous when you train and build the dive plan based on that assumption

Enlightening post. Thanks.

 

[halocline]

Can't argue with that but I still think treating my regulator like my life depends on it is a good idea. Proper care and maintenance might have prevented the incident.

I'm all for caring for and maintaining regulators, in fact I'm a bit obsessive about it. But that has nothing to do with safety, it's just a hobby that I enjoy, and I'm way too cheap and stubborn to be able to live with paying someone else to screw up my gear, which did happen and is what sent me down the road of DIY regulator service.

If it makes you feel better to think that decisions your make about regulators are life-and-death, fine. It's just semantics, really. Here are the two big problems with the 'life support' label as I see it.

1) It is commonly used by the dive gear industry to sell expensive regulators and to restrict access to parts and product information.
2) It directly contradicts the most basic elements of safe dive training, both recreational and technical; specifically buddy system practices, teamwork, and contingency planning. Solo diving in technical scenarios, like a cave system, are somewhat different in that multiple gear failures really could cause death. However, that's VERY specialized training and, regardless of training and/or experience, far higher-risk activity than other types of diving.