printable copy of dive tables?

[Ndfishee]

Any chance anyone here know if civilian organizations except us navy diver logs as “official dive counters” for civilian use? Looking at random jobs for dive shops requesting proof of dive logs for experience thru NAUI, PADI etc. trying not to ask them first to avoid “dumb questions”

 

[lowwall]

Any chance anyone here know if civilian organizations except us navy diver logs as “official dive counters” for civilian use? Looking at random jobs for dive shops requesting proof of dive logs for experience thru NAUI, PADI etc. trying not to ask them first to avoid “dumb questions”

Scuba or standard dress

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

I don’t get all the contempt for tables.
And to say how clueless people were back in the old days because they relied on tables, there were no computers that were easily available or affordable at the time. If you wanted to dive that’s what you used.
Learning tables is not going to corrupt a young impressionate mind and clutter the mental
capacity to use a computer. That almost made me spit my coffee!
@baggins_69 if your wife wants to learn tables just out of curiosity and maybe to at least just see what kind of NDL exposure times are allowed, I don’t see any problem with that. It’s NOT going to corrupt her mind! And it is not a waste of time. There are a lot of other things that are a much bigger waste of time in life.
If anything it will give her a total appreciation of how computers work by giving credit for shallower portions of the dives and increasing bottoms times. I think any gained knowledge is good knowledge.
In fact, why not study all the different tables and see what the differences are? They are all sort of watered down versions based off the original Navy tables that were developed a long time ago.

 

[tursiops]

In fact, why not study all the different tables and see what the differences are? They are all sort of watered down versions based off the original Navy tables that were developed a long time ago.

No, the PADI RDP is not based on the Navy tables, except for the mode of presenting the data. And there are a number of other tables also not based on the Navy tables, for example DCIEM from Canada and several European tables.
But I do agree there is no harm in learning how to read them. My wife sees the whole ongas-offgas thing like charging on a credit card; the more you spend (BT and depth), the more you owe. And you can surface and pay off some debt (with a SI) but if you don't pay it all off then your credit card limit (NDL) is reduced on successive dives.

 

[tursiops]

Any chance anyone here know if civilian organizations except us navy diver logs as “official dive counters” for civilian use? Looking at random jobs for dive shops requesting proof of dive logs for experience thru NAUI, PADI etc. trying not to ask them first to avoid “dumb questions”

What does this have to do with dive tables?

 

[boulderjohn]

They are all sort of watered down versions based off the original Navy tables that were developed a long time ago.

The PADI tables were developed after thorough independent published research. That research led to much shorter surface intervals and made the modern 2-tank dive schedule possible. Here are the three key factors in that change.

1. The US Navy had created the 120-minute compartment and then made it the basis for determining surface intervals without really doing any research in support of that decision. PADI's research showed that was far longer than necessary. PADI used the 60 minute compartment.
2. They shortened the NDL's for first dives, which also helped shorten surface intervals.
3. The nearly doubled the number of pressure groups, which dramatically decreased the amount of rounding needed for second dives.

 

[tursiops]

The nearly doubled the number of pressure groups, which dramatically decreased the amount of rounding needed for second dives.

Interestingly, they did this by putting all 26 letter of the alphabet (i.e. pressure groups) into the non-deco part of the table since they were explicitly NOT publishing deco tables. The US Navy had spread the 26 pressure groups across NDL and lots of deco options.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

No, the PADI RDP is not based on the Navy tables, except for the mode of presenting the data. And there are a number of other tables also not based on the Navy tables, for example DCIEM from Canada and several European tables.
But I do agree there is no harm in learning how to read them. My wife sees the whole ongas-offgas thing like charging on a credit card; the more you spend (BT and depth), the more you owe. And you can surface and pay off some debt (with a SI) but if you don't pay it all off then your credit card limit (NDL) is reduced on successive dives.

So you’re saying that the RDP which was developed by DSAT had absolutely no input from information contained in the US Navy tables. So USN tables were in no way used as a spring board to develop the PADI RDP?
You know that to be absolute fact?

 

[tursiops]

So you’re saying that the RDP which was developed by DSAT had absolutely no input from information contained in the US Navy tables. So USN tables were in no way used as a spring board to develop the PADI RDP?
You know that to be absolute fact?

The presentation methods were utilized, not the numbers or algorithms.

Info Thread 'The DSAT Recreational Dive Planner (RDP), 1994'

Feb 20, 2024

Document Name: Development and validation of no-stop decompression procedures for recreational diving: The DSAT Recreational Dive Planner
Authors: R.W. Hamilton, Raymond E. Rogers, Michael R. Powell, Richard D. Vann, with Richard Dunford, Merrill P. Spencer, Drew Richardson

Attached is the 1994 report from DSAT on the Development of the Recreational Dive Planner (RDP).
It used to be available on the Rubicon site, which is now defunct.

Filename: DSAT_1994_The_Recreational_Dive_Planner_OCR_opt
File Format: Adobe PDF
Size: 14,323 kB
Pages: 126

• tursiops
• Replies: 1
• Forum: ScubaBoard Download Library

• 
• 

 

[boulderjohn]

So you’re saying that the RDP which was developed by DSAT had absolutely no input from information contained in the US Navy tables. So USN tables were in no way used as a spring board to develop the PADI RDP?
You know that to be absolute fact?

They obviously knew about the tables, and they knew all about the research that leading up to that. They were not starting from scratch in that regard.

But they did all their own research to determine the depths and times, etc. They were the first to use doppler bubbling imagery to check for venous gas emboli. Yes, divers got bent in that research.

As I indicated above, the biggest discovery was that the US Navy tables required far too long surface intervals because of their use of the 120-minute compartment to guide those intervals. The 120-minute compartment did not even exist at the time--the Navy created it and made it the guide for multiple dives, doing little research for that decision. PADI's research indicated that for the great majority of dives, the 40-minute compartment would work, but they ultimately decided to play it safe and use the 60-minute compartment. The exceptions are for multiple dives to the NDLs, for which they created the WX and YZ rules.

This had a tremendous impact on dive operations. Following those tables allowed for that we now know to be the standard surface interval for 2-tank dives.