Reaching Greater Depths

[AdivingBel]

Stuart, IMO you're chasing a false limit. There are too many variables from dive to dive for your narc limit to be black and white. There is enough science and anecdotal evidence to suggest that as you dive deeper you increase your chances of being narced. When planning your dive, if you're concerned, it should be a topic of your communication with your dive buddy. Until you have built up your experience, you have the experience of generations of divers before you, so you are forwarned. You don't have to unnecessarily endanger yourself/dive buddy (admittedly a bit over the top) and more importantly spend valuable time that can be used to explore the new world you've worked/paid to gain admittance. Why waste time reinventing the wheel? At this stage you're a recreational diver, key word recreational. Fortunately diving within recreational limits doesn't require "full bandwidth." As others have said, getting narced isn't like walking off a cliff from "full functioning" to "babbling idiot," otherwise there would be a lot more diving fatalities. Enjoy yourself, dive. If you use your training and common sense, you'll find your limits in due time while making the most of exploring your surroundings. At some point if you want to exceed those limits, get the necessary training as TSandM, Dr. Lecter, and others have done. IMHO. Good diving.

 

[Storker]

I have a nasty feeling that we're

But I'd still like to pull up one of the first threads I read here on SB, one that taught me a lot about my own early experiences with narcosis: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/basic-scuba-discussions/362711-narcosis-insidious-subtle.html

 

[boulderjohn]

When I think of the most clearly I have been impaired, in each case poor memory was a key factor.

1. I watched two dive companions go through a hole in a bulkhead in which a pipe was sticking down from the upper right corner. It would be easy to catch your regulator hose on that, I thought. One of them did, and he pulled it down to free it. When I went through and caught my regulator hose on it, I wondered which hose I had caught, and I wondered whether I had to pull it up or down to free it.

2. My buddy flashed me to get my attention. He wanted to know why I was breathing off my alternate. I could not remember why I had switched.

3. I looked around the hold in the San Francisco Maru, looking for the--what was it again?--that we were told were there. I was luckily next to the videographer so I could check later and see what it was I had seen.

4. Doing exercises in cave training, I frequently struggled to remember the few skills I had been told to do in the dive plan.

I always felt fine.

 

[Dr. Lecter]

When I think of the most clearly I have been impaired, in each case poor memory was a key factor.

1. I watched two dive companions go through a hole in a bulkhead in which a pipe was sticking down from the upper right corner. It would be easy to catch your regulator hose on that, I thought. One of them did, and he pulled it down to free it. When I went through and caught my regulator hose on it, I wondered which hose I had caught, and I wondered whether I had to pull it up or down to free it.

2. My buddy flashed me to get my attention. He wanted to know why I was breathing off my alternate. I could not remember why I had switched.

3. I looked around the hold in the San Francisco Maru, looking for the--what was it again?--that we were told were there. I was luckily next to the videographer so I could check later and see what it was I had seen.

4. Doing exercises in cave training, I frequently struggled to remember the few skills I had been told to do in the dive plan.

I always felt fine.

To make this more useful for the topic, what depths are you talking about here?

 

[tomfcrist]

I'm sure he will answer but I know the SF Mary is 150'-200'+

 

[stuartv]

Stuart, IMO you're chasing a false limit. There are too many variables from dive to dive for your narc limit to be black and white. There is enough science and anecdotal evidence to suggest that as you dive deeper you increase your chances of being narced.

Well then, obviously, nobody should dive deeper than 10 feet!

I also add that every single thing I have said about it has included an acknowledgement that the depth of getting narked varies for an individual.

Also, I have said repeatedly that I want to get Deep certified EVENTUALLY. When I and my instructor both feel like I'm ready. It won't be any time real soon. And I won't be diving deep until I have gotten the appropriate training.

 

[AdivingBel]

Well then, obviously, nobody should dive deeper than 10 feet!

Sorry, don't know how you gleaned that from my post. It wasn't my intent. Hey, the beauty of diving is there are no scuba police. Once you have your OW you can grab a couple of tanks and go try to raise the titanic, if that's what you want to do. I believe there's a thread going on right now discussing that. http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/basic-scuba-discussions/495235-deco-time-needed-diving-titanic.html Happy diving.

 

[stuartv]

Sorry, don't know how you gleaned that from my post.

Quite simply. All of my posts in this thread have been along the lines of suggesting that if you get some experience with being narked, it would help you avoid getting narked in the future. And, in all of them, I included acknowledgement that the depth that an individual gets narked will vary based on other factors than just depth.

So, when you state that I am seeking a false limit and that there are too many variables, the only logical conclusion to be drawn is that you are saying that, for example, an individual could dive to 130 feet 100 times without getting narked and then dive to 10 feet and get narked.

Now, that doesn't sound right to me. As in, so unlikely as to not be entertained as a realistic possibility.

What does sound reasonable to me is, for example, if a diver has gone to 130 feet 100 times in all different conditions, and they've never gotten narked, and they are planning a dive to 100 feet in good conditions, they can be pretty darn confident that they're not going to get narked.

Similarly, if a diver has gone to 100 feet in really good conditions, 10 different times, and they've gotten narked every time, then they would be pretty darn sure that when somebody proposes a dive (on the same gas mix they have been using) to 120 feet they should decline because they will almost certainly get seriously stupid.

If you agree, then your statement about seeking a false limit seems (to me) to have no merit.

 

[Dr. Lecter]

Just go diving already. When you're ready to go deeper, you'll know. If you're wrong about whether you were ready once you're at whatever deeper site you wind up diving...well, you might find out or you might not.

 

[dumpsterDiver]

Quite simply. All of my posts in this thread have been along the lines of suggesting that if you get some experience with being narked, it would help you avoid getting narked in the future. And, in all of them, I included acknowledgement that the depth that an individual gets narked will vary based on other factors than just depth.

So, when you state that I am seeking a false limit and that there are too many variables, the only logical conclusion to be drawn is that you are saying that, for example, an individual could dive to 130 feet 100 times without getting narked and then dive to 10 feet and get narked.

Now, that doesn't sound right to me. As in, so unlikely as to not be entertained as a realistic possibility.

What does sound reasonable to me is, for example, if a diver has gone to 130 feet 100 times in all different conditions, and they've never gotten narked, and they are planning a dive to 100 feet in good conditions, they can be pretty darn confident that they're not going to get narked.

Similarly, if a diver has gone to 100 feet in really good conditions, 10 different times, and they've gotten narked every time, then they would be pretty darn sure that when somebody proposes a dive (on the same gas mix they have been using) to 120 feet they should decline because they will almost certainly get seriously stupid.

If you agree, then your statement about seeking a false limit seems (to me) to have no merit.

No this is not necessarily true. I think a lot of people are narced at 100 ft, but most of them probably don't know it or can't feel it. If they get a little buzzed at 100 ft, diving to 120 probably will give them a little more buzz, but it does NOT mean they are gonna be 'seriously stupid". It just isn't like that.

if you are gonna learn to dive deep, you are gonna have to learn to dive in a somewhat impaired state.

Depth matters- a lot. Today, I did two dives with my teenage son. First to 80 feet. i doubt either of us feel any narcosis, but the depth is significant enough that it brings an atmosphere of seriousness to me- maybe that perception is also narcosis a tiny bit. I don't know, I've done it so many hundred of times, but 80 feet has a certain "feel" to it.

Our second dive was in 40 feet, We almost never ever scuba dive this shallow, but the whole feeling is entirely different for me. I have considerably less concern for his safety and if he gets out of my field of view (say behind some wreckage) I really have zero worries, as long as I see bubbles coming up. I am comfortable diving in 140 feet or more, but I am definitely MORE comfortable in 40 feet.

People say to not chase depth as a goal. I figure diving to a particular depth is as valid of an objective as most any other diving goal.. like seeing some particular wreck. Depth matters, a lot.