It was meant to be 10FSW. I was referencing my earlier post. I won't spell out the intent. It appears some folks don't like it when others debate arbitrary END limits.
Deep Air
- Thread starter Rhone Man
- Start date
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
It was meant to be 10FSW. I was referencing my earlier post. I won't spell out the intent. It appears some folks don't like it when others debate arbitrary END limits.
Blackwood
Contributor
Ah. I thought you really meant zero.
All limits are arbitrary. Where I live, you can't drive until you're 16, smoke or vote until you're 18, drink until you're 21, etc..
100 END is arbitrary, but on average seems to work well (though I've been noticeably narced shallower).
You make a good point. I think there can be no doubt that narcosis can add an element of risk to a dive that could be mitigated by using HE.
I think the risk posed by narcosis can also be mitigated by adapting the dive to suit the limitation, in other words to lower the ambition level of the dive so you don't have work (so hard) at depth.
The risk can also be mitigated to some extent by experience. Although the narcosis itself may not be significantly affected, the diver's ability to cope can be conditioned to some extent.
I could go on, but my point is that the risk posed by increased narcosis can be managed in more ways than one. Diving trimix is one way among several.
I also find it interesting, with all due respect to present company, that some of the most vocal opponents to deep air diving have little to no experience with it and therefore, frankly, have practically no idea how it feels to be in that position. (I'm not talking specifically to you, LiteHedded but to the group at this point). To me it sounds a bit like people who don't drink telling us that they know all about what it feels like to drink and drive...
Another aspect of this topic that gets buried under the arguments about risk is that some people simply dive deep because it's fun for them. It may be risky but if they're aware of what they're getting into and willing to take personal responsiblity for running that risk then I wonder how "judgemental" we really ought to be about it. People ski, cycle, drive, etc etc too fast too because it's fun and it doesn't seem to spark such intense debate as this does. Taking "calculated" risks is also part of human nature.
R..
Which was in fact the point I was trying to convey. I feel narcosis is subjective and based on the individual when considering what is a "deep air" dive limitation.
Blackwood
Contributor
Certainly.
My response would be:
After all, you never know how your body will react to the pressure until you're already down there breathing the gas.
I certainly agree with what you've said and falling directly into the limited experience category I'll still express my thoughts on the matter and I've only based those thoughts on my own personal experiences to date. I find it amusing that you would assume because someone has not done a lot of "x" they they should not voice a differing opinion. God forbid we have a conversation
Next thing you know they'll start a forum and get all SORTS of opinions. My opinions may change with experience and training or they may not. Either way I do enjoy the wealth of knowledge and lack thereof on here.
Pushing Narcosis limits is not smart. Pushing ppO2 limits is just barnyard animal stupid.
Tom
Tom
walke121
Contributor
This is a double edged sword. People have gotten in trouble due to the fact they had a clear head and took a risk that they may not have due to the fact that they had no narcosis. I'm just saying that a little narcosis makes me think things through more than when I have a clear head. Narcosis isn't the only thing that gets people killed.
PfcAJ
Contributor
How one "feels" is an exceedingly poor indicator of personal performance. You may "feel" just fine at whatever depth, but what matters is performance.
Back to our favorite narcosis analogy, drunk driving. The drunk person says things like "I'm fine, I've only had a few drinks! I feel fine to drive"...into a pole. Let's go ahead and dismiss "feeling" as a method of judging how narc'd one is.
Typically, with routine tasks that one performs regularly, there won't be too much loss in performance. Where it gets tricky is when a new situation is presented to you (some sort of emergency or problem underwater). Why stack the odds against you when a better alternative is available?
People have has real close calls and even lost their lives over this stuff. Its a foot on the banana peel that just isn't needed.
Back to our favorite narcosis analogy, drunk driving. The drunk person says things like "I'm fine, I've only had a few drinks! I feel fine to drive"...into a pole. Let's go ahead and dismiss "feeling" as a method of judging how narc'd one is.
Typically, with routine tasks that one performs regularly, there won't be too much loss in performance. Where it gets tricky is when a new situation is presented to you (some sort of emergency or problem underwater). Why stack the odds against you when a better alternative is available?
People have has real close calls and even lost their lives over this stuff. Its a foot on the banana peel that just isn't needed.
There seems to be a slew of training agencies and divers that aren't diving helium and live. I won't concede that it's purely luck nor will I deny that deep divers benefit from helium. All I'm stating is that the depth a dive is considered "deep" on air should be defined more by high ppo2 more so than narcosis.
Similar threads
