Thread: Computers
View Single Post
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 06-09-03, 10:09 AM
Rob Evans Rob Evans is offline
Banned
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,389
Rob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annuallyRob Evans dips toes in sea annually
Imported post

OK - so what you're really getting at is your understanding of deco versus Buhlman then isn't it?

As the software packages that most of us use are based around ZHL16B using either GFs or Pyle stops, how does that preclude the VR3, which does enforce Pyle stops?
Admittedly Pyle stops are less optimal than GFs or RGBM in terms of bend and mend, but I can assure you the thing isn't all about getting up to 6m ASAP.  It also allows 99% deco gas, but more importantly (to me anyway) constant PO2 with the option of switching to 99% when I do hit 6m.

It's not an excuse that the VR3 saves me deco time, just a statement of fact.  Most of the wrecks I dive nowadays are unknowns.  We know the max depth, so plan for that.  However looking at a typical profile for one of these dives - over the course of 40-odd minutes at or around 70m I'm very seldom at the same depth for more than a few minutes - time on the bed, time on the hull, time in the hull. The variance will frequently be up to 10m. The pooter adjusts for that on the fly, and will typically take 10min off what I'd calculated on the surface

I'm all for doing an effective deco, but given that nobody's interested in spending more time in the water than they have to it works just fine for me.
Reply With Quote