I finally get it (or, gauges and why they make sense)

[limeyx]

and how many of these methods are from people actually "trained" to do decompression diving? minimum deco doesn't count. last time i checked, fundies isn't a deco class.

you can do a lot of random stuff on no-deco, minimum deco and even easy tech 1 dives situations and get away with it...

...so Whats the prescription then Dr Laura ????

 

[gsk3]

No worries, even if I had tried to give you specific advice (which I didn't), you'd probably be best served by not listening to it.

My only point is don't get too hung up on the specifics "Got to have a 2 min 30 sec stop here, got to have a 93 min SI there" and try to find something you are happy with.

Dive however you like.

Yes, but without comparing your rule-of-thumb of choice to some known standard, you have *no idea* whether you're diving aggressively or conservatively. Dive however you like sounds great, but it actually takes a decent bit of work to figure out how it is that you're diving.

 

[limeyx]

Yes, but without comparing your rule-of-thumb of choice to some known standard, you have *no idea* whether you're diving aggressively or conservatively. Dive however you like sounds great, but it actually takes a decent bit of work to figure out how it is that you're diving.

True, but what are you going to use as the standard ? Buhlman ? VPM (with some arbitrary conservative factor ? Buhlman with gradient factors ? RGBM with some various inputs ?)

When you find such a standard, let me know, then when you have figured out how conservative *that* is (compared to what ?) we can all agree on the "one true way"

 

[rjack321]

* Well, actually, they're designed around something >90th percentile of physiology.

Where did you get this from? Wait you made it up because Nick's statements about SIs seem so aggressive to you...

Carry on with your 90 vs. 120min SI discussion, most of us have found rules like these completely irrelevant to our diving.

 

[DiverLaura]

Nick, no need to be an ass here. i'm not referring to you here. it just seems that at times a lot of people who've only taken fundies suddenly become experts and jump up and talk about decompression theory. I hear rumors that Michael Lang gave a great lecture at the last GUE conference, that specifically addressed computers and recreational diving. I have not yet read the transcripts, but I think I know a little bit about his philosophy.

...so Whats the prescription then Dr Laura ????

 

[limeyx]

Nick, no need to be an ass here. i'm not referring to you here. it just seems that at times a lot of people who've only taken fundies suddenly become experts and jump up and talk about decompression theory. I hear rumors that Michael Lang gave a great lecture at the last GUE conference, that specifically addressed computers and recreational diving. I have not yet read the transcripts, but I think I know a little bit about his philosophy.

I'm not trying to be an ass (and aren't personal insults against the TOS, don't worry, I will choose not to take it personally

I agree with you (well in this manner but i will take it further. I don't feel qualified to teach anyone about decompression. I can only relate what seems to work for me, and the people I dive with.

if we really wanted to find out how aggressive or not we were, I guess we would have to all go out and bend ourselves then back off somewhat.

What I am trying to do is offer some points to think about for divers, not any kind of solution (hard & fast or not)

There are many many ways as you say to make deco work.

For instance, how many tens of thousands of recreational dives are made here in SoCal, the vast majority probably following a computer of some kind?
And how many people end up in the chamber (very very few)

I'm not trying to be cavalier, but I dont think there is enough data, and it may not be practically possible to even gather that data that shows us how aggressive or not we really are (especially given that that may change person to person or day to day)

 

[ScubaFeenD]

Where did you get this from? Wait you made it up because Nick's statements about SIs seem so aggressive to you...

Carry on with your 90 vs. 120min SI discussion, most of us have found rules like these completely irrelevant to our diving.

I dont think SI time frame was meant as an attempt at decompression calculation, only a way to figure out a MDL dive plan without the need to memorize a table or have one on you. With lowely MDL dives the 2hr SI or 90min surface interval "rule" isn't irrelevant to me, or my buddies that have found it useful. Why be condescending about it?

Nick, no need to be an ass here. i'm not referring to you here. it just seems that at times a lot of people who've only taken fundies suddenly become experts and jump up and talk about decompression theory. I hear rumors that Michael Lang gave a great lecture at the last GUE conference, that specifically addressed computers and recreational diving. I have not yet read the transcripts, but I think I know a little bit about his philosophy.

and how many of these methods are from people actually "trained" to do decompression diving? minimum deco doesn't count. last time i checked, fundies isn't a deco class.

you can do a lot of random stuff on no-deco, minimum deco and even easy tech 1 dives situations and get away with it...

Its decompression THEORY, and since the same books are available to us lowely fundies divers as to you tech divers, the theory can be discussed safely and with even emotions, dont you think?

Further, it didn't seem that we were claiming to be experts on decompression nor were we trying to discuss mandatory decompression schedules. Where did we claim this? Instead, it felt like a discussion meant to get a feel for planning and executing MDL dives and make them safer without be wed to a PADI OW table. The GUE Rec 1 manual suggests investing time to memorize the tables, but using a "rule" or principle that works ~90% of the time would greatly enhance my enjoyment, why not discuss it here?

It was nice to have a level headed discussion about different viewpoints and experiences, because it can facilitate thought about what we do and help guide future decisions. I guess that had to end sometime...I mean it is SB isnt it.

 

[gsk3]

True, but what are you going to use as the standard ? Buhlman ? VPM (with some arbitrary conservative factor ? Buhlman with gradient factors ? RGBM with some various inputs ?)

Any standard you want. The point is not having one standard for everyone, it's that for someone who doesn't have thousands of dives to know what they can personally get away with, knowing where you stand in relation to some validated model is a good idea. Again, the fact that one person can get away with a given profile doesn't mean that anyone can.

 

[ScubaFeenD]

Any standard you want. The point is not having one standard for everyone, it's that for someone who doesn't have thousands of dives to know what they can personally get away with, knowing where you stand in relation to some validated model is a good idea. Again, the fact that one person can get away with a given profile doesn't mean that anyone can.

It seems like it is popular to compare the two predominant models and err on the side of caution. I dont have decoplanner, but I was under the impression that the ability to compare models side-by-side is one of the strengths of the program

 

[ScubaFeenD]

Any standard you want. The point is not having one standard for everyone, it's that for someone who doesn't have thousands of dives to know what they can personally get away with, knowing where you stand in relation to some validated model is a good idea. Again, the fact that one person can get away with a given profile doesn't mean that anyone can.

I wonder if there is data on which standard model is correlated with the lowest incidence of DCS. Is anyone aware of such a study? If not, Ill have to root around in the rubicon.