Quote:
| Originally Posted by Mal Bridgeman
I used that one incident as an illustration of my point ... 1) the guy was not diving a recognised configuration set up in a correct way....ergo he had invented his own system ....whether by choice or accident.
In the 2007 report, two case of divers dying because they penetrated a wreck and ran out of gas .... they had not been appropriately trained to penetrate wrecks so were making up their own procedure for doing this ....either consciously or unconsciously.
Again 2007, two cases where divers were diving as a three, untrained in diving as a three so making up their own procedures.
Again 2007, a rebreather diver diving on his home made rebreather
I could, sadly, go on like this throughout all the reports but still it would not convince you I am sure.....but I would appreciate if you didn't call me a liar again.
This is not an exercise in mathematics, statistics or probability ....it's people's lives.
Mal
|
1) How do you know this and by what method are you judging it's recognition?
In the majority of incidents the only people who know the full story are those directly involved, you are wrong to assume/suggest that the answers can be found by following DIR/GUE and that by doing so they can be prevented......sadly human beings are fallible irrespective of their qualifications.
By your definition the ratio deco' procedure is obviously dangerous because DIR people on here have been bent by it, or could it be that the bent divers were just unlucky and in the wrong place at the wrong time ..... like many unfortunates in the reports you have used.
On that subject AFAIC there is nothing you've posted to back up your claim of people dying because of ''diving systems/configs/procedures they have designed/developed themselves" it is more complicated than that simplistic view.
Safe diving,
Steve