Terri Skiles suing Diverite?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jj1987

Does the unit warn you when the voting logic is in place? Seems a bit absurd to rule one out and not tell the user, so I'm assuming it does. If so, are CCR divers taught to bail out when the logic takes place, or stay on the loop?

---

Your brain is the voting logic, for lack of a better description. Yes and no that it alerts you. If one cell is voted out, it tells you on your handset. Problem is, most people run their units off the HUD (heads up display) which may or may not tell you of a cell failure. Also what if 2 cells fail, but only one is reading correctly, how do you know? You would learn all of this in a rebreather course.

Given that Lamar and Wes were close personal friends for many,many years, I would assume (as many others are doing) that Wes helped Lamar develop the Optima and also helped write the manual. If that is the case, the seekers of a C-card or training credentials are looking at this from a totally incorrect perspective. Of course this will be examined quite a bit in Palm Beach County someday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TONY CHANEY

Humm, totally understand and it makes sense. So, should she file a lawsuit for the, we'll call him 3rd party, for letting him use a unit he was not certified for. I would not, would you?

---

No, because Wes took the risk of diving the unit without training. How can you blame someone for lending it to him, it just seems absurd (no offense intended Tony).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fno

Given that Lamar and Wes were close personal friends for many,many years, I would assume (as many others are doing) that Wes helped Lamar develop the Optima and also helped write the manual. If that is the case, the seekers of a C-card or training credentials are looking at this from a totally incorrect perspective. Of course this will be examined quite a bit in Palm Beach County someday.

---

Actually he didn't help develop it. Juergensen Marine developed the unit with input from Dive Rite, you are making a totally incorrect assumption.

Have you read the O2ptima manual and do you know who wrote it? I know who wrote the thing.

Edit: Here is the manual for everyone to read http://www.xtremescuba.com/docs/manu...ima_manual.pdf

Here is what is on the manual - "The O2PTIMA is a fully closed-circuit diving apparatus which functions in a manner distinctly different from traditional open-circuit scuba. Do not attempt to use the O2PTIMA without proper professional instruction from an authorized O2PTIMA Instructor and without a thorough and complete working knowledge of the material contained in this manual."

Bingo, the lawsuit should be thrown out at this point. It doesn't matter if the gear failed on him or not at this point, he wasn't trained on the unit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TONY CHANEY

I really cannot, not for the life of me, figure out why several members on here are making hasty generalizations that the entire lawsuit is simply bogus. What if something was wrong with the unit, how the inspection was handled (pages 69-71 of the hyper link I posted), etc. Sometimes these lawsuits result in recalls and prevent other accidents. i.e. Toyota recall. I drive so I take the risk of having an accident, I accept that but not having an accident due to gear failure. BTW I drive a Toyota and was very concerned about the recall not just for my safety but also for my my wife, 2 daughters and fellow drivers. I know that we are engaged in a sport that has risk but I really need the deck stacked in my favor to include well functioning gear. Why not let it run its course and then decide based on the outcome. Hell this lady is looking for answers for her husbands death, why drag her thur the silt?

---

Gear fails all the time, it is a question of what we are trained to deal with. The Toyota recall involved something happening that a reasonable driver would not expect to happen, even in an emergency situation. If my (properly maintained) manifold is poorly made and blows up behind my head, that is not a situation I am trained to expect or deal with and there could be basis for a lawsuit. On the flip side, if a second stage freeflows I am trained to deal with that situation, and if it kills me it is my fault. The question then is, did something malfunction the unit in question that was beyond was a reasonable, trained CCR diver would expect? If the answer is yes, then the suit may have legs. If not, then it should be dismissed. The unfortunate thing is that this suit may be settled without answering any of those questions, which is too bad.

My question is how can Dive Rite be blamed for inspecting the unit and saying it was safe to dive, and then a year later be held liable for it still? That is like me taking my car to the track and having the inspectors sign off on it and then a year later go to a different track where they have no inspectors and wreck only to sue the original inspectors who said my car was safe a year ago. My analogy may not be the best, sorry.

Why all the talk in the link about the OPV spring? It seems like they are trying to state that two separate issues at once caused the problem. Am I missing something? I am sure I am so sorry for the stupid questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcook

Your brain is the voting logic, for lack of a better description. Yes and no that it alerts you. If one cell is voted out, it tells you on your handset. Problem is, most people run their units off the HUD (heads up display) which may or may not tell you of a cell failure. Also what if 2 cells fail, but only one is reading correctly, how do you know?

---

This is kind of what I'm getting at-- I would assume that (so long as you were alerted to the issue) you could flush the loop with o2 for a quick moment while you're on bailout so it's a known ppo2 and see which cell reads incorrectly? I don't understand the need to guess here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcook

You would learn all of this in a rebreather course.

---

I like reading the accident forums instead-- it's cheaper than a CCR class, plus this seems to get updated bi-weekly so it's more current than the manuals anyways.

It really bothers me to agree with Jordan, but there is a big difference between training and certification. Many posts ask about whether Wes was trained on the Optima. I have no idea, but it would not be unreasonable to assume that the "lender" of the Optima went through its operation with him. Wes was an experienced RB diver, but AFAIK he did not do a crossover course resulting in certification as an Optima diver. The legal value of that certification will be up to the court to decide, and will clearly be related to how much instruction Wes got and from whom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jj1987

This is kind of what I'm getting at-- I would assume that (so long as you were alerted to the issue) you could flush the loop with o2 for a quick moment while you're on bailout so it's a known ppo2 and see which cell reads incorrectly? I don't understand the need to guess here.

---

Actually the procedure is to do a diluent flush, since that should be safe at all depths, after shutting off the O2. The Hammerhead electronics include an option that displays what the pO2 should be at the current depth based on the active diluent, just in case you are math impaired. I don't think you want to do an O2 flush at 50 meters even if you are on bailout. Cells are only linear in a fairly narrow range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jj1987

I like reading the accident forums instead-- it's cheaper than a CCR class, plus this seems to get updated bi-weekly so it's more current than the manuals anyways.

---

I stopped myself from adding anymore as I am not a rebreather instructor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kwinter

It really bothers me to agree with Jordan

---

Really Ken? I'm not Don, jeeze. ;) Everyone hates to agree with me today for some reason.