Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

From: "Stuart Morrison" <divebimbo@li*.fr*.co*.uk*>
To: "Bartolucci, Ivan Jorge" <ibartolucci@wa*.fr*>
Cc: "TechDiver" <TechDiver@aquanaut.com.>
Subject: Re: Hugo's contribution
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 20:03:40 +0100
> As a deep air diver I think I can add my thoughts to the 'last deep stop'
> thread.

(Pause for comic effect)


> 
> First I don't see any need for deep stops for such a reasonnable profile,
> and in
> general almost any air profile except the most extreme way beyond the
> maximum PPO2 recommendations.

Deep stops are not for special occasions. Most tables work by bending you
then treating you on long shallow stops -- that is Haldanean decompression
theory!!! Deep stops are there to stop bubbles and microbubbles from
forming in the first place.

>(the main difference is the deco
> will probably be shorter)

Take a look at VPM models where deco starts a lot deeper and is much
shorter than regular tables.

> It won't make much difference in
> fatigue either, air being much more 'deco-friendly' than helium, for
which
> deep stops have been created. It's not because your software offers that
> option that it's wise to use it.

No difference in fatigue? Try Pyle stops. Helium is a far friendlier gas
than nitrogen too. If you had taken the time to read Richard Pyle's
original paper, where does he say the technique is for trimix diving? Isn't
nitrogen "inert gas" just as helium is? Software developers introduced deep
stops AFTER divers had started using it in the field as standard practice,
not the other way around. The practice came first, the software adopted it
later.

> 
> Second hovering at 6M seems to be problematic for some divers, the last
> thing I would recommend in this case is the use of pure O2. Such a lack
of
> skill represents some risk on air, and a serious one on O2.

Such a lack of skill is a serious risk on any dive, regardless of gas mix.

 
> strokes use 80%, but I think it would be much safer in this case,
> although I would use 50% myself for more versatility, at the expense of
some
> more minutes underwater.

Why? MOD for EAN50 is 22m, EAN80 is 9m. Why do you need such an added
range? What kind of profile are you diving that the contingencies are going
to push your first stop 13m deeper? I thought you didn't believe in deep
stops? Or is it so you can get in the water with no planning and do
whatever your computer says at the end of the dive?


> 
> Third for such a profile plan your dive on whatever software you want, so
> you know what to expect. Than dive whatever your Aladin Suunto Scubapro
> Zeagle etc... tells you to, you won't get bent, except if you try hard
to.

Why bother with the software at all? Most computers have a dive planner
function on them. Funny, but most divers who get bent thought they were
trying hard not to.

> See
> my point?
> 

No. Sorry. Dive deep on air, because nitrogen is friendlier than helium,
ignore your dive plan in favour of your computer, don't do any deep stops
because they are unnecessary, deco on as low an O2 mix as possible because
you can't hold a 6m stop... I think I've missed your point completely. Was
there one?

--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]