3 or 5 minute Safety Stop?

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!

I can sling an AL80 if wanted. I'm too cheap to buy more then one pony so I just make the 40 work.

I doubt I'll ever do tech diving or cave diving though...

An Al40 is a great deco bottle for cave diving, if you need more gas go with an Al80 or two, but most Cave diver I dive with do dives with Al40's but also have 80's for bigger dives.
 
That assumes a direct ascent is possible.

I would hope in a thread about safety stops that would be the case. Nonetheless you're absolutely correct
 
Probably more accurate to say that the number changes, rather than the calculation. ...//...

Yeah, that.

Same calculation, but the RB (estimate) constantly changes throughout the dive. I almost always have direct access to the surface, but never take that route. Most captains prefers that I come back up the downline. :eyebrow:
 
Seems to me to be a definition that allows for a little bit of common sense. Remember, this is recreational limits. By definition that means that safety stops are optional, and in this context, it actually means extra stops or extra times on safety stops are even more optional.

Actually, since its a recreational dive, that means that the risk on any given dive should be negligible. We shouldn't be placing ourselves at additional risk over that which is inherent in the activity.

So do I feel that it is required by the scuba powers that be to carry enough extra gas for extra safety stops and time for me and my buddy? No. Even if I had the gas (and with my SAC I probably would) would I hang out to share air for extra time beyond the recommended time in an OOA situation? No.

Since it is a recreational dive, you certainly shouldn't consider yourself as having a requirement to always do stops, and like I posted previously you should blow off stops in favor of not running out of gas. But by running your gas down you are putting yourself potentially into a situation where you *must* blow off all of your stops on a routine basis, in an emergency in order to get to the surface without running out of gas. You are also running more risk of running OOA if you are delayed at the bottom for any reason. This is a plan which is designed to put yourself at risk.

And it will work most of the time, right up until it does not work for someone. And this isn't breaking a 'rule' against the 'scuba gods', its simply an example of the normalization of deviance in an activity that has potentially lethal consequences. Like all the other examples of that, it'll work right up until the point where some day it doesn't, just like not wearing your seatbelt.
 
Lamont, I have read your response to my quotes several times and I admit I am confused and not sure how to respond back.

Actually, since its a recreational dive, that means that the risk on any given dive should be negligible. We shouldn't be placing ourselves at additional risk over that which is inherent in the activity.

By this are you stating that not doing extra stops is elevating the risk? Does this mean that you believe that deep stops and 5 min stops should be part of all recreation dives? Is this DIR? Because that is the only stops that I have suggested "blowing off" in an OOA emergency and the only calculation that I have suggested not including in rock bottom and then only at Dan's suggestion that routine inclusion of a deep stop in recreational dives would prohibitively increase the diver's rock bottom air needs, requiring doubles or at the very least larger tanks. I offered this as an alternative. And I still think the concept is viable.

Since it is a recreational dive, you certainly shouldn't consider yourself as having a requirement to always do stops, and like I posted previously you should blow off stops in favor of not running out of gas. But by running your gas down you are putting yourself potentially into a situation where you *must* blow off all of your stops on a routine basis, in an emergency in order to get to the surface without running out of gas. You are also running more risk of running OOA if you are delayed at the bottom for any reason. This is a plan which is designed to put yourself at risk.

What gas am I "running down?" Do you mean by not including extra stops into a rock bottom calculation that I am in danger of running out of enough gas to do the routine stops. I don't understand that math?

And it will work most of the time, right up until it does not work for someone. And this isn't breaking a 'rule' against the 'scuba gods', its simply an example of the normalization of deviance in an activity that has potentially lethal consequences. Like all the other examples of that, it'll work right up until the point where some day it doesn't, just like not wearing your seatbelt.

Again, what is it that will work until it doesn't work? Not including extra stops in rock bottom and not doing extra stops in OOA? Because, again, that is the two concepts the quotes are referring to.
 
I think Lamont is saying that gas trumps deco -- if you are low on gas or out of gas on a recreational dive, do not do stops that will put anybody at risk. But he's also saying that good gas planning means you will have plenty of gas to do stops, and that if you habitually run your gas too low to do them, you are walking too close to the line.
 
I think Lamont is saying that gas trumps deco -- if you are low on gas or out of gas on a recreational dive, do not do stops that will put anybody at risk. But he's also saying that good gas planning means you will have plenty of gas to do stops, and that if you habitually run your gas too low to do them, you are walking too close to the line.

Thanks for clarifying and that's more or less my take on it as well and i certainly agree. But I'm not sure what any of that has to do with my statements that he quoted.
 
-uncfnp has a very low SAC and she dives a small tank. Her dive bud has a high (normal) SAC and dives a larger tank............

Do you mean their combined SAC is lower than the team consumption used to calculate rock bottom and so there's always more air available than what would be strictly necessary to ascend?
 

Back
Top Bottom