VPM B or B/E for OSTC

[Paolo Di Mario]

Followin up on the excess of oxigen, could be interesting looking at the following video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3lX67swZWk

If I think of how much diving I have done, I'm terrified!! Never mind.

[rossh]

Hello dmainou,

Please be careful when reading navy reports. The USN tests USN concepts for USN use only. They do NOT test real world Tech / Rec diving practices. If fact that study your alluding too, does NOT have any deep stops! They tried to 'simulate' a deeper profile with a stretched out standard shallow profile. In addition, the study was failed because the base line VVAL profile results were about to pass through the bottom limit and invalidate the entire study. The BVM test profile results were perfectly on track in the middle, as intended! Note how these realities seems to be omitted from the UHMS reports. Why?

The popularity of deeper stop profiles comes from anecdotal use over the last 12 years, its improved outcomes, and widespread use in training.

The hypocritical aspect here, is that almost the entire world is diving a deep stop style profile - VPM, RGBM, Ratio deco, Pyle stops, GF with small Lo values.... No one is diving a "human tested" shallow stop profile anymore - its all modified for deep stop use. To experience a real ZHL16 you need to set GF 100/100 with all the fudge modifiers turned off, and ascend accordingly - good luck with that.

Regards

Ross h



dmainou Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Paolo,
>
> Read this:
>
> http://underseaandh960.corecommerce.com/Decompress
> ion-and-the-Deep-Stop-Workshop-Proceedings-p13.htm
> l
>
> You'll be very surprised to find out that the
> poularity of VPM comes from internet forums like
> this one rather than been favoured any of the
> world navies or researchers.
>
> It is quite interesting to see the outcome of the
> actual research done by the scientists.
>
> If you wish to be more conservative with your GF
> simply lower the High factor to say 85 or 80.
>
> Plan your dive and dive your plan.
>
> D

[dmainou]

Hi Ross,

I did not refer to a specific study but to a collection of studies and discussions from leading researchers and real world divers.

I won't disagree with you around deep stops Theyseem to be here to stay although how we implement them may change over time. (how deep? how many? for how long?)

It is because most of these theories haven't been lab tested it becomes very complicated to say if your GF L/H profile is riskier than a VPM. It may come down to faith in the model? Further to this: Is vpm better at any depth with any bottom time with any dive profile?

Truth is we just don't know.

Therefore, those of us that choose to do deep diving can consider ourselves lab rats. We take our best guess, pray to our best guru (GF, VPM, RGBM, etc), jump into the water and pray for the best.

BTW, The most interesting bit I found on the transcription of the proceedings was the discussion/questioning of Weinke's methods as well the lack of straight answers.

D



rossh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hello dmainou,
>
> Please be careful when reading navy reports. The
> USN tests USN concepts for USN use only. They do
> NOT test real world Tech / Rec diving practices.
> If fact that study your alluding too, does NOT
> have any deep stops! They tried to 'simulate' a
> deeper profile with a stretched out standard
> shallow profile. In addition, the study was
> failed because the base line VVAL profile was
> about to invalidate the study by dropping through
> the bottom limit. The test BVM profile was
> perfectly on track in the middle, as intended!
> Note how these realities seems to be omitted from
> the UHMS reports. Why?
>
> The popularity of deeper stop profiles comes from
> anecdotal use over the last 12 years, its improved
> outcomes, and widespread use in training.
>
> The hypocritical aspect here, is that almost the
> entire world is diving a deep stop style profile -
> VPM, RGBM, Ratio deco, Pyle stops, GF with small
> Lo values.... No one is diving a "human tested"
> shallow stop profile anymore - its all modified
> for deep stop use. To experience a real ZHL16
> you need to set GF 100/100 with all the fudge
> modifiers turned off, and ascend accordingly -
> good luck with that.
>
> Regards
>
> Ross h
>
>
>
> dmainou Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Paolo,
> >
> > Read this:
> >
> >
> http://underseaandh960.corecommerce.com/Decompress
>
> >
> ion-and-the-Deep-Stop-Workshop-Proceedings-p13.htm
>
> > l
> >
> > You'll be very surprised to find out that the
> > poularity of VPM comes from internet forums
> like
> > this one rather than been favoured any of the
> > world navies or researchers.
> >
> > It is quite interesting to see the outcome of
> the
> > actual research done by the scientists.
> >
> > If you wish to be more conservative with your
> GF
> > simply lower the High factor to say 85 or 80.
> >
> > Plan your dive and dive your plan.
> >
> > D

[Neo]

Any idea on "where we are" for VPM-B/E for the OSTC 2N?

I would prefer we avoid debates on whether bubble models are good or bad; and just stay on track; since many people, including me, dive on bubble models.

[heinrichsweikamp]

Neo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Any idea on "where we are" for VPM-B/E for the
> OSTC 2N?

As far as I know, no one is working on a that for the OSTC.

regards,
Matthias

[sailor]

heinrichsweikamp Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi,
>
> We have considered it for the OSTC 2N a while ago
> but I doubt we'll integrate it into the code.
> Reasons are that the GF extensions allows similar
> profiles within the OSTC 2N depth range (120m max)
> and that the deco update rate it most likely
> reduced to about 20-30 seconds with the required
> calculations. V-Planner is definitely not coming
> to the 2N, sorry.
>
> regards,
> Matthias