Tyler, I basically agree with your PM, but I like to keep these discussions in the thread. It may help some & drive others mad. I find both to be worthwhile pass times.
No, I have no experience with either Hamilton-Kenyon algos. Are you using the Nautilus Dive Planner.
SC, yes, faze means the same thing here as it does there. I tend to abuse the F/PH convention at times though, & rite things like fone & phuk on the odd occasion. Thanx for the PM.
Just curious about the Hamilton-Kenyon stuff. I actually was looking at Nautilus more for curiosities sake.....I've already got jDeco, MVPlanner, V-Planner, and a couple others.
Fair enough........the "driving others mad" part is why I PM'd you as I realized we may have been getting off topic, even if it is related. For others to see, here is what I wrote to him in a PM:
"Thanks for the discussion. What I was getting at with the Oceanics using the Buhlmann derived Z+ algo is that they'd probably be suitable for mild deco dives, even if they don't mirror a bubble model or allow the use of GF's. Reason being what I would define as a mild deco dive.....100-125ft with 15-20 minutes of deco. With that small of an obligation, I imagine a pure Buhlmann wouldn't be too different from VPM or Buhlmann using something as radical as 10/85. However, even with that dive profile, Pelagic's DSAT would still be a bit too old-school.
By any chance do you have experience with the following?
Hamilton-Kenyon (DCAP) 11F16 Matrix
Hamilton-Kenyon Bubble Model (HKBM)"
People, feel free to chime-in. Makes me feel like a dork that there's only 3 people on SB that I've ever conversed with over deco algorithims. I guess I am a dork......my girl is taking me out to dinner on Saturday where the owner is a diver. She told me to bring extra wine and cash so she can go get a pedicure next door while we bore her.....
She'll learn. In time.....she'll learn.
