DIR- GUE GUE standard for gradient factors?

[boulderjohn]

Gradient Factors in a Post-Deep Stops World

Interesting article from GUE

In big bold letters in the middle of the GUE article it says:

"The emerging body of evidence against deep stops suggest common gradient factor setting should be modified to de-emphasize deep stops."

"However, since about 2005, evidence has been accumulating from comparative decompression trials that shows deep stops are not more efficient, and possibly less efficient, than shallow stops."

Although this article was published in the GUE Blog, it is a little confusing to use the phrase "from GUE," because it implies an endorsement. Not long after publishing that, they published this: Digging Deeper: A Fresh Case for Deep Stops

The title promises a "fresh case for deep stops" in decompression diving, the precise opposite of the Doolette position. The article then describes the untested and unpublished opinions of some researchers and references old studies on no-stop diving.

 

[JonG1]

I think this is the relevant work from Mark P, in so far as her references the findings from the study at NDAC.

In essence the 2 profiles resulted in lower bubble scores on the deep stops profile immediately on surfacing but slower reduction over time, and higher scores at surfacing on the shallow stops but decreasing quicker over time IIRC.

 

[boulderjohn]

I think this is the relevant work from Mark P, in so far as her references the findings from the study at NDAC.

In essence the 2 profiles resulted in lower bubble scores on the deep stops profile immediately on surfacing but slower reduction over time, and higher scores at surfacing on the shallow stops but decreasing quicker over time IIRC.

Nice presentation. If you want to skip the early theory parts and get to the conclusions, they start at about the one hour mark. As I understand current thinking among the majority of theorists, his conclusions are pretty much in line with them.