Reverse dive profiles

[Don Burke]

cornfed once bubbled... That doesn't change the fact that they still haven't detemined whether people were getting bent from diving reverse profiles within the limits of their table, computer, etc.

I need to reread the article but it seems devoid of information useful to the average recreational diver.

A reverse profile of the same dives puts you closer to the edge of any computer or table I am familiar with. That's the reason for the wishy-washy words like "hints at the potential".

The article is basically the output of a workshop with an attempt to make some raw chamber data mean something.

They say that 28.8% of some number I can't determine were reverse profiles. Without information on what portion of repetetive dives are reversed, it doesn't mean much.

I suspect there are many times more forward profiles executed than reverse (since dive boats run that way), however, nothing I have seen backs that up.

Without requiring a substantial number of divers to dive with a "black box", there isn't too much that we will learn from chamber statistics.

 

[Damselfish]

Common wisdom and the math indicate avoiding reverse profiles is the more conservative thing to do, it certainly doesn't hurt, and I think it's a good idea in general. On the other hand, things occasionally work out such that you would like to do one in order to see or do something specific on a later dive. So if there's a good reason I might occasionally do this and add in a degree of conservatism with the dive/safety stop/surface interval.

It's like diving deep in a way - doesn't make sense to do it just for the sake of doing it or even worse because you're not paying attention and found yourself there - you do it because you have a reason and plan to, and dive accordingly.