I am a firm believer in nitrox and use it almost anytime it is available but if I was diving the profiles that After Dark is describing I doubt that I would bother.
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
You would have less bubbles if you did the same profile using nitrox.
Other than the small additional expense, I really don't see an advantage to using air instead of nitrox
It's no small additional expense here, my friend it is twice the price of air. That means I can make 2 air dives for the price of one nitrox dive. I've got maybe 5 years left before I hang up the regulator I made it this far without nitrox I can go the rest of the way no problem. I'd like to make it 7years for an even 60 years of New England diving.
Besides in about a week or 2 this will arrive on my doorstep and I'll be pumping my own air.
View attachment 594597
I don't consider the $5-10 per tank additional expense significant compared to what I spend to do a boat dive or the cost of travel and equipment I bought to do a shore dive.
Nice compressor setup. (But you know it's missing a nitrox stick, right?)
View attachment 594501
Lovely, I dived a wreck yesterday in terrible vis ( 2 feet) on the bottom. What a wash out I was thinking on my way to the 3 meter stop when I got this hanging under the boat.
If humans benefited from high amounts of oxygen why hasn’t millions of years of evolution ensured that we use more of it instead of exhaling it?
.002 and .003The quote I found talks about the total risk of DCS, and it does not differentiate between air and nitrox. Where is the quote that compares the two?
By the way, if the report says that there is a .02 chance of DCS with nitrox and a .03 with air, then nitrox drops the risk with ir is 50% higher.
Same ratio--and where is the quote that compares the two?.002 and .003