Is there any reason to do a Nitrox 'course'?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

A certification card serves as a proof of training, encompassing all requisite knowledge and skills. Nitrox suppliers will, quite naturally, want to see some proof of training before exposing themselves to the liability of providing you with a diving gas that has defined risks. They may also feel that they have an ethical obligation for the same reasons.

How exactly can you provide 'proof of training' when self-taught without a defined syllabus?
 
First, I like Nitrox. I also think that you should get certified because there are some risks that you need to clearly understand.
 
Basically, the jist of what I learned in my PADI Nitrox class is

how to calculate P02 with x blend at x depth

Ox Tox is bad

Signs of Ox Tox

Planning dive profiles with Nitrox mixes

All in all, the class material took 3 hours of an afternoon to complete, and I would say that- yes, it is worth it. Especially in the rec-diving world. As well as the Wreck-diving world that I spend so much of my time in.

The Advanced Nitrox class I took as part of my beginner tech-training went into much better detail on the matter.
 
[/COLOR]Re needing Nitrox, following the reading I've been doing I must say I can't see why - other than the additional cost of fills - I'd ever dive with air! It seems to be much safer with regards to on-gassing...

Cost is a factor. Other then empirical evidence of "feeling better" or what seems common sense that you are "adding conservatism" has there ever been a case study that concluded it was in fact safer? IOW a lower incidence of DCS?

My training said the answer was no. Is that no longer true?

---------- Post added June 10th, 2013 at 01:32 PM ----------

I like nitrox as an extra level of conservatism. It never hurts to take on less nitrogen. In case a stop has to be blown off... I know a couple of divers who dive nitrox on air NDL's for this reason.

Sure, it doesn't hurt... but can you prove it helps? My training 12 years ago said the answer was no. Has this changed?
 
I just came to the conclusion after reading, doing the calculations and looking at the tables...
 
Last edited:
I just came to the conclusion after reading, doing the calculations and looking at the tables...

It's an obvious conclusion.... but as far AFAIK there is no evidence to support it. Maybe that is out dated but I doubt it. You could probably get just as good if not better results by being very dutiful at executing proper ascent rates and stops.
 
As a blanket statement, diving nitrox isn't necessarily any safer than diving air ... you're just trading one set of potential risk factors for another.

Depending on how you dive, it can be much safer than diving air ... if your profiles remain the same, and if you don't push your MOD or O2 limits.

The whole point of a class isn't so much to teach you what these differences are ... as acknowledged, you can get that part by reading ... it's to help you comprehend why it matters ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
 
has there ever been a case study that concluded it was in fact safer? IOW a lower incidence of DCS?

My training said the answer was no. Is that no longer true?

Sure, it doesn't hurt... but can you prove it helps? My training 12 years ago said the answer was no. Has this changed?

Can I ask what training stated that?

There are several agencies that heavily promote, or even stipulate, the use of nitrox over air (in training).

Less nitrogen uptake has a direct impact on DCS risk mitigation. There are obviously other issues that can raise risk, such as; pre-disposing factors (dehydration/fatigue/obesity/cold/ exertion etc) as well as dive-related issues like fast ascents or insufficient decompression. However, in all cases a lower absorbed amount of nitrogen corresponds directly to the relative DCS risk in any given scenario.

Consider nitrox use from the perspective of EAD (equivalent air depth). Would you say that a dive of X duration at 30ft presented less DCS risk than a dive at 47ft depth?

In some (all?) training materials, agencies are quick to specify that "nitrox isn't safer", but that is because it balances lower DCS risk against the risk of oxygen toxicity. Quite simply, from a safety perspective there are pros and cons to nitrox use. They are not saying, however, that "nitrox isn't safer from a DCS perspective"... that would be a wrong interpretation of the training.
 
Changing the subject slightly....

Do you even need nitrox? Do you find yourself doing dives where you have plenty of gas left but you are out of NDL?

I'm EANx certified and have dove it plenty over the years but for my local diving in Lake Travis I don't have much reason to spend the extra money on fills. ( $12 vs $4 )
2 dives a day isn't worth it. If you're on a liveaboard doing 5 dives a day its money well spent.
 

Back
Top Bottom