Quote: (Originally Posted by
rossh)
Wrong again Mike....
VPM-B is just one single change to a single function, and this gives an ascent that has more curve to it. All the same science and gas properties are within VPM-B as VPM. The VPM-B revision was done by Eric Baker and Erik Maiken - two of the same group that gave us the original implementation. All models evolve and are revised. VPM was revised just once in 2003 to the current VPM-B in use today.
Its interesting that you use the word 'again' yet dont argue any of the counter arguments I made showing I was right lol! Spin spin spin
Indeed I find it telling that you only argue against this one and last point on my post out of all the far more important points I make (like lack of extensive model valiadation and your inaccurate reporting of VPM dives)
'more curve to it' means its changed! Why was it changed? Answer: because too many people got bent. What peer reviewed validation/testing was done to the 'revised' model? Anywhere remotely as much as has been done on Buh?
You can spin it all you want but bottom line is what I said before:-
Quote:
Buh is well tested and verified model - VPM (in comparison) simply is not.
And
Quote:
Its being constantly tweaked so as it doesnt bend divers
and in doing so is becoming increasingly - perhaps unsurprisingly, more and more like Buh
It has been 'tweaked' a lot since 1st version and it has become increasingly more Buh-esq