DIR- GUE Is it worth taking Fundamentals this late in the game?

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!

He right tho
Meh.

First, understand that I have never used 80%--my response here is from someone who has always used 100%.

Maybe 5 years ago, we had a thread on ScubaBoard in which some people argued for the merits of 80%. Some of what they said made sense to me. None of those strong arguments appear in George's list. When you read through that list carefully, you will see that a number of them are repetitive.

If I were in a situation in which I had to use 80% for one reason or another, as in pure oxygen was not available, I would use it without a second thought. I think oxygen is better, but 80% is no big deal, and I don't understand the reason for all the venom.
 
I don't do deco yet, but I do dive as & with GUE.

To me this seems like the Nitrox vs air thing. GUE teaches that Nitrox is better than air for the dives where you would use either, and hence recommends that's what you should normally use. I don't think I know anyone who would refuse to dive on air if that was all that was available, but equally, if both are available the choice is easy.

I suspect the situation is similar here. If 80% is all that's available I don't think it would be an enormous blocker to most, people would adapt if they want to dive. However if you can choose 80% or 100% and plan accordingly, why go with 80%?
 
George Irvine's take on it is pretty famous. Be sure to read #13.
He didn't say it was a "sin", just an indicator of "poor decision making". :) You also dont see poodle jackets, cobra guards, stuffed long hoses, etc.
 
If I were in a situation in which I had to use 80% for one reason or another, as in pure oxygen was not available, I would use it without a second thought. I think oxygen is better, but 80% is no big deal, and I don't understand the reason for all the venom.
It's not the specific gas so much as the mindset. Obviously it's possible to dive with any sort of screwy deco gas mix whether it's 80% or 69% or whatever and make it work. No one has disputed that and we can all do the math if we have to.

The deeper point is that it's a "tip of the iceberg" thing. When I spot a diver using odd gasses or convoluted gear, those superficial issues are typically symptoms of more fundamental problems such as muddled thinking or credulousness or exposure to low-quality training or obsessive focus on trivial issues. If you see one obvious minor problem then there are going to be multiple non-obvious major problems lurking below the surface. This is somewhat of a stereotype but in my experience 100% accurate. While it can be entertaining to debate with such divers online, it the real world it's best to stay far away lest we get caught up in a safety incident (i.e. "Rule #1").

To draw an analogy with software development, when I see a code module with sloppy formatting I can safely assume that it's riddled with defects. While formatting doesn't directly impact functionality (at least not in most programming languages), any developer who doesn't get the superficial details right usually screws up other more important stuff as well. And while their code might seem to work well enough for simple test cases it tends to break in complex production environments. I avoid working with such developers because constantly dealing with the fallout from their mistakes is a miserable work experience.
 
He didn't say it was a "sin", just an indicator of "poor decision making". :) You also dont see poodle jackets, cobra guards, stuffed long hoses, etc.
No he didn't use the word "sin." All he said was, "Only a card-carrying stroke would do something like this, and showing up with 80/20 is no different than wearing a sign on your back saying "I am a stroke, and have the papers to prove it". It announces to all the world that you have no clue, kind of like wearing clip-on suspenders or having dog dirt on your shoes."

That's a world of difference.
 
No he didn't use the word "sin." All he said was, "Only a card-carrying stroke would do something like this, and showing up with 80/20 is no different than wearing a sign on your back saying "I am a stroke, and have the papers to prove it". It announces to all the world that you have no clue, kind of like wearing clip-on suspenders or having dog dirt on your shoes."

That's a world of difference.
That one still cracks me up! Say what you like, the man was entertaining!
 
I don't do deco yet, but I do dive as & with GUE.

To me this seems like the Nitrox vs air thing. GUE teaches that Nitrox is better than air for the dives where you would use either, and hence recommends that's what you should normally use. I don't think I know anyone who would refuse to dive on air if that was all that was available, but equally, if both are available the choice is easy.

I suspect the situation is similar here. If 80% is all that's available I don't think it would be an enormous blocker to most, people would adapt if they want to dive. However if you can choose 80% or 100% and plan accordingly, why go with 80%?
Oh yes!

(Although, let me be honest, I have never been in a situation where 80% was available and 100% wasn't... while air vs. NX happened relatively often)
 
Certainly 80/20, as in Trimix 80/20, seems like a somewhat ... unusual mix.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/
http://cavediveflorida.com/Rum_House.htm

Back
Top Bottom