VR3 BUH or VPM

Drmike · 9th April 2008, 04:23

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

Drmike · 9th April 2008, 04:25

Quote: (Originally Posted by rossh)

. So kindly Mike, stop trying to make us all feel guilty about VPM-B/E. .

er just who is the US you reffer to?

Why/how could/am I making anyone feel guilty about anything???

Quote:

Many divers are using a hybrid plan now, they do it for extra safety and comfort, and any time additional prudence is required

they do it because if they followed VPMa or b they would have a much higher risk of getting bent!

Your point about hybrid plan is true - yet totally has no relevance to this discussion.

1) Its clear to anyone who can read or use a comp that VPM has 'evolved' over a short period of time and that that was done because the number of bends was high.

2) Its clear to anyone that VPMB/x has not had anywhere near the amount of validation/studies done as Buh

3) Its clear to anyone who can read that your VPM dive list is inaccurate (dives not done using VPM or different depths)

I would be interested to hear your counter arguments against my points 1-3 above?

Lancer4545 · 9th April 2008, 04:41

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.

Hey Ross,

Thanks for the input so far.

My question is that if I run a computer (VR3) one with BUH and the other with VPM and follow the most conservative stops, the VPM has the deeper stops whilst the BUH stops start somewhat higher. When I get to the last 6m stop the BUH computer holds me there for an hour longer on this particular dive.

Which computer should I be following.....the VPM or the BUH or keep doing what I have been which is using a combination of both??

I have attached the dive profile generated in V-Planner and this very dive I was down for a total time of 275mins the BUH computer held me for an additional 60mins after the VPM had cleared all stops.

Thanks,

Lance

Dive Profile.jpg

Dive Profile 1.jpg

Drmike · 9th April 2008, 04:50

Quote: (Originally Posted by Lancer4545)

Hey Ross,

Thanks for the input so far.

My question is that if I run a computer (VR3) one with BUH and the other with VPM and follow the most conservative stops, the VPM has the deeper stops whilst the BUH stops start somewhat higher. When I get to the last 6m stop the BUH computer holds me there for an hour longer on this particular dive.

Which computer should I be following.....the VPM or the BUH or keep doing what I have been which is using a combination of both??

I have attached the dive profile generated in V-Planner and this very dive I was down for a total time of 275mins the BUH computer held me for an additional 60mins after the VPM had cleared all stops.

Thanks,

Lance

Attachment 8850

Attachment 8851

Lance your question would better be answered by someone who is qualified and learned in the area of decompression theory

Im not, neither is Ross he just made a nice user interface

Lancer4545 · 9th April 2008, 05:07

Quote: (Originally Posted by Drmike)

Lance your question would better be answered by someone who is qualified and learned in the area of decompression theory

Im not, neither is Ross he just made a nice user interface

Fair enough......

As you can see by the discussion so far it is very difficult to get any sort of answer that you can base your deco on.

The interesting part of it all is had I only had the one computer be it BUH or VPM, I would have followed it and would only have padded the stops if it appeared to vary from my original dive plan and not questioned it.

It was only when I took the 2 computers with different deco software that I nearly shit myself when one wanted me to stay on the last stop for an additional hour.

Still not convinced.......But not bent either!!!

Lance

Drmike · 9th April 2008, 05:17

Quote: (Originally Posted by Lancer4545)

Fair enough......

As you can see by the discussion so far it is very difficult to get any sort of answer that you can base your deco on.

The interesting part of it all is had I only had the one computer be it BUH or VPM, I would have followed it and would only have padded the stops if it appeared to vary from my original dive plan and not questioned it.

It was only when I took the 2 computers with different deco software that I nearly shit myself when one wanted me to stay on the last stop for an additional hour.

Still not convinced.......But not bent either!!!

Lance

lol! I know how you feel Im often sat at 6m deco station bar in the same situation looking at the conflicting TTS and enjoying the 'chicken bone' and 'empty beer can' shower as my buddies on boat above enjoy the afternoon BBQ

I think both VR3 versions are conservative but if in doubt I guess you can do half the difference seeing as (for reasonable depth time dives) its only really the last few stops that are signif longer ones between the two.

My 'guess' (and it is an uneducated guess so likely bollocks) is that the vr3buh is on one hand penalising you for the slower ascent (due to deeper and more deep stops) and at same time not accounting for the benefit derived from those deep stops - hence the penalty its giving you. Be interesting to see how TTS changes if at all on vr3buh if you follow or dont follow vmpvr3 deep stops

rossh · 9th April 2008, 05:25

Quote: (Originally Posted by Lancer4545)

Hey Ross,

Thanks for the input so far.

My question is that if I run a computer (VR3) one with BUH and the other with VPM and follow the most conservative stops,.....

Hi Lance,

Your VR3 does not have real VPM-B/E inside it. Instead it appears to have some simplified emulation that is close only sometimes (they made their own). Hence a VR3 will not align with the real VPM-B/E plans in V-Planner.

Which model do you use?.. your choice. Find the one you like and stick to.

Drmike · 9th April 2008, 05:30

Quote: (Originally Posted by rossh)

Hi Lance,

Your VR3 does not have real VPM-B/E inside it. Instead it appears to have some simplified emulation that is close only sometimes (they made their own). Hence a VR3 will not align with the real VPM-B/E plans in V-Planner.

Which model do you use?.. your choice. Find the one you like and stick to.

dont yah just love marketing

from your website:-

Quote:

2005

VPM-B/E model option introduced.
PDIC Brazil adds V-Planner and VPM-B model to its training.
GUE adds VPM-B model to its DecoPlanner program.
VR3 tech dive computer adds the VPM-B/E model name and emulates the VPM style output.

I think Lance is asking about differnce between VR3VPM and VR3buh not v-planner

rossh · 9th April 2008, 05:42

Three answers for you Mike...

Quote: (Originally Posted by Drmike)

1) Its clear to anyone who can read or use a comp that VPM has 'evolved' over a short period of time and that that was done because the number of bends was high.

VPM had one(1) revision.... Is that allowed? And it was done for valid reasons of mathematics.. not bends. VPM was not widely used in the first year. In fact, bends rates have been in decline since the dive community adopted any of the "deeper stop" planning methods, all the while tech diving has been rapidly expanding.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Drmike)

2) Its clear to anyone that VPMB/x has not had anywhere near the amount of validation/studies done as Buh

Almost no one uses a man tested dive plan today (Navy, Bulhmann, DCIEM). If fact the entire dive community has moved away from man tested data. A deco diver today has a hybrid of Haldane / Bulhmann with extended, padded GF'd or other custom add ons. Or they use a bubble model that does all those mods naturally. Or they use a simple relational math based plan. The point is... no one uses man tested data, and every method in common use today is all un-validated, just like VPM.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Drmike)

3) Its clear to anyone who can read that your VPM dive list is inaccurate (dives not done using VPM or different depths)

That's your opinion Mike. It's also an insult to those who made these dives.

Drmike · 9th April 2008, 05:54

Quote: (Originally Posted by rossh)

Three answers for you Mike...

VPM had one(1) revision.... Is that allowed? And it was done for valid reasons of mathematics.. not bends.

"valid reasons of mathematics" lol

vpm in its earliest form gave too short deco - period. That was fixed with vpmb and fixed again in vpmbe - none of those changes have anything to do with 'mathematics' or the price of banannas

Quote:

A deco diver today has a hybrid of Haldane / Bulhmann with extended, padded GF'd or other custom add ons. . The point is... no one uses man tested data, and every method in common use today is all un-validated, just like VPM.

the basis of current methods (other than VPM/x) is MAN TESTED models. Yes people have added conservacy but that is additional conservacy ontop of MAN TESTED models. This is not the case with VPMx where the underlying model hasnt had anywhere near the amount of validation/testing

Quote:

That's your opinion Mike. It's also an insult to those who made these dives.

Well lets see if your list is indeed inaccurate:-

1) Ben didnt use VPMb for Sra Kweo III he used zplanner. Hes a Hyperbaric chamber director and has no love for VPM as I know from our conversations on dive planning for our deep dives together.

2) CV didnt dive to 226m (or 240m or whatever it is now) as reported by Ben his dive partner - who was there and isnt mental and or deaf. (Perhaps you should read what the diver you referanced on the dive you referanced has to say about the dive? => The Deco Stop

3) The yamashiro dive was not to 190m as you quoted on your site - he dived to 176m (big difference at these depths to deco)

4) One of the dives you refferance the diver in question had a vpmb schedule however his ascent rate from depth (and it was a deep dive) was far far far slower than the ascent rate assumed in vplanner when the table was cut. Ergo (given that this was a deep dive) his whole schedule was wrong (by a matter of hours). The diver did the dive by following his original (now largey wrong) vpmb schedule up to around half his ascent then followed VR3buh to last stops then resorted to vpmb table stop times getting out the water hours earlier than VR3buh gave.....The diver was a bit bent (nothing too serious bit of surface O2 then was ok) but you have this dive down as an example of a successfull deep vpmb dive - when clearly its wasnt a vpmb dive (diver actual deco profile didnt match vpm and his dive profile didnt match what was used to cut vpm tables) or a wholey sucessful one (diver was bit bent).

Well two cases of different depths, and two cases of different deco (one wasnt even using VPM in 1st place)

..maybe our definition of accurate id different

Im not splitting hairs here. People (myself included) look at these scarce data points to help us plan our dives - its dangerous and irresponsible if depths, models and outcomes are incorrectly reported

9th April 2008, 04:23	#21 (permalink)
Drmike Custom Title Allowed! Current Rebreather/s: MK 15.X Ouroboros Other CCR Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Other CCR Home Build Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 3,128	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM 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 __________________ Get a girlfriend you sad twat - a Rebreather is an unfaithful mistress - dont blind yourself to her faults just because she goes down on you Last edited by Drmike : 9th April 2008 at 04:36.
(Offline)

9th April 2008, 04:25	#22 (permalink)
Drmike Custom Title Allowed! Current Rebreather/s: MK 15.X Ouroboros Other CCR Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Other CCR Home Build Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 3,128	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM Quote: (Originally Posted by rossh) . So kindly Mike, stop trying to make us all feel guilty about VPM-B/E. . er just who is the US you reffer to? Why/how could/am I making anyone feel guilty about anything??? Quote: Many divers are using a hybrid plan now, they do it for extra safety and comfort, and any time additional prudence is required they do it because if they followed VPMa or b they would have a much higher risk of getting bent! Your point about hybrid plan is true - yet totally has no relevance to this discussion. 1) Its clear to anyone who can read or use a comp that VPM has 'evolved' over a short period of time and that that was done because the number of bends was high. 2) Its clear to anyone that VPMB/x has not had anywhere near the amount of validation/studies done as Buh 3) Its clear to anyone who can read that your VPM dive list is inaccurate (dives not done using VPM or different depths) I would be interested to hear your counter arguments against my points 1-3 above? __________________ Get a girlfriend you sad twat - a Rebreather is an unfaithful mistress - dont blind yourself to her faults just because she goes down on you Last edited by Drmike : 9th April 2008 at 08:13.
(Offline)

9th April 2008, 04:41	#23 (permalink)
Lancer4545 Closed Circuit Divers Aus Current Rebreather/s: Megalodon Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Cairns QLD Australia Posts: 574	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM 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. Hey Ross, Thanks for the input so far. My question is that if I run a computer (VR3) one with BUH and the other with VPM and follow the most conservative stops, the VPM has the deeper stops whilst the BUH stops start somewhat higher. When I get to the last 6m stop the BUH computer holds me there for an hour longer on this particular dive. Which computer should I be following.....the VPM or the BUH or keep doing what I have been which is using a combination of both?? I have attached the dive profile generated in V-Planner and this very dive I was down for a total time of 275mins the BUH computer held me for an additional 60mins after the VPM had cleared all stops. Thanks, Lance Dive Profile.jpg Dive Profile 1.jpg __________________ You can run but you can't hide! ISC Appointed Megalodon Dealer for East Australia http://www.closedcircuitdivers.com.au info@closedcircuitdivers.com.au
(Offline)

9th April 2008, 04:50	#24 (permalink)
Drmike Custom Title Allowed! Current Rebreather/s: MK 15.X Ouroboros Other CCR Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Other CCR Home Build Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 3,128	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM Quote: (Originally Posted by Lancer4545) Hey Ross, Thanks for the input so far. My question is that if I run a computer (VR3) one with BUH and the other with VPM and follow the most conservative stops, the VPM has the deeper stops whilst the BUH stops start somewhat higher. When I get to the last 6m stop the BUH computer holds me there for an hour longer on this particular dive. Which computer should I be following.....the VPM or the BUH or keep doing what I have been which is using a combination of both?? I have attached the dive profile generated in V-Planner and this very dive I was down for a total time of 275mins the BUH computer held me for an additional 60mins after the VPM had cleared all stops. Thanks, Lance Attachment 8850 Attachment 8851 Lance your question would better be answered by someone who is qualified and learned in the area of decompression theory Im not, neither is Ross he just made a nice user interface __________________ Get a girlfriend you sad twat - a Rebreather is an unfaithful mistress - dont blind yourself to her faults just because she goes down on you
(Offline)

9th April 2008, 05:07	#25 (permalink)
Lancer4545 Closed Circuit Divers Aus Current Rebreather/s: Megalodon Other Rebreather/s: Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Cairns QLD Australia Posts: 574	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM Quote: (Originally Posted by Drmike) Lance your question would better be answered by someone who is qualified and learned in the area of decompression theory Im not, neither is Ross he just made a nice user interface Fair enough...... As you can see by the discussion so far it is very difficult to get any sort of answer that you can base your deco on. The interesting part of it all is had I only had the one computer be it BUH or VPM, I would have followed it and would only have padded the stops if it appeared to vary from my original dive plan and not questioned it. It was only when I took the 2 computers with different deco software that I nearly shit myself when one wanted me to stay on the last stop for an additional hour. Still not convinced.......But not bent either!!! Lance __________________ You can run but you can't hide! ISC Appointed Megalodon Dealer for East Australia http://www.closedcircuitdivers.com.au info@closedcircuitdivers.com.au
(Offline)

9th April 2008, 05:17	#26 (permalink)
Drmike Custom Title Allowed! Current Rebreather/s: MK 15.X Ouroboros Other CCR Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Other CCR Home Build Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 3,128	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM Quote: (Originally Posted by Lancer4545) Fair enough...... As you can see by the discussion so far it is very difficult to get any sort of answer that you can base your deco on. The interesting part of it all is had I only had the one computer be it BUH or VPM, I would have followed it and would only have padded the stops if it appeared to vary from my original dive plan and not questioned it. It was only when I took the 2 computers with different deco software that I nearly shit myself when one wanted me to stay on the last stop for an additional hour. Still not convinced.......But not bent either!!! Lance lol! I know how you feel Im often sat at 6m deco station bar in the same situation looking at the conflicting TTS and enjoying the 'chicken bone' and 'empty beer can' shower as my buddies on boat above enjoy the afternoon BBQ I think both VR3 versions are conservative but if in doubt I guess you can do half the difference seeing as (for reasonable depth time dives) its only really the last few stops that are signif longer ones between the two. My 'guess' (and it is an uneducated guess so likely bollocks) is that the vr3buh is on one hand penalising you for the slower ascent (due to deeper and more deep stops) and at same time not accounting for the benefit derived from those deep stops - hence the penalty its giving you. Be interesting to see how TTS changes if at all on vr3buh if you follow or dont follow vmpvr3 deep stops __________________ Get a girlfriend you sad twat - a Rebreather is an unfaithful mistress - dont blind yourself to her faults just because she goes down on you Last edited by Drmike : 9th April 2008 at 05:24.
(Offline)

9th April 2008, 05:25	#27 (permalink)
rossh New Member Current Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Other Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 99	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM Quote: (Originally Posted by Lancer4545) Hey Ross, Thanks for the input so far. My question is that if I run a computer (VR3) one with BUH and the other with VPM and follow the most conservative stops,..... Hi Lance, Your VR3 does not have real VPM-B/E inside it. Instead it appears to have some simplified emulation that is close only sometimes (they made their own). Hence a VR3 will not align with the real VPM-B/E plans in V-Planner. Which model do you use?.. your choice. Find the one you like and stick to. __________________ Regards, Ross Hemingway V-Planner VPM-B Nitrox Trimix CCR Deco planning for Technical Divers www.v-planner.com
(Offline)

9th April 2008, 05:30	#28 (permalink)
Drmike Custom Title Allowed! Current Rebreather/s: MK 15.X Ouroboros Other CCR Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Other CCR Home Build Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 3,128	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM Quote: (Originally Posted by rossh) Hi Lance, Your VR3 does not have real VPM-B/E inside it. Instead it appears to have some simplified emulation that is close only sometimes (they made their own). Hence a VR3 will not align with the real VPM-B/E plans in V-Planner. Which model do you use?.. your choice. Find the one you like and stick to. dont yah just love marketing from your website:- Quote: 2005 VPM-B/E model option introduced. PDIC Brazil adds V-Planner and VPM-B model to its training. GUE adds VPM-B model to its DecoPlanner program. VR3 tech dive computer adds the VPM-B/E model name and emulates the VPM style output. I think Lance is asking about differnce between VR3VPM and VR3buh not v-planner __________________ Get a girlfriend you sad twat - a Rebreather is an unfaithful mistress - dont blind yourself to her faults just because she goes down on you
(Offline)

9th April 2008, 05:42	#29 (permalink)
rossh New Member Current Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Other Rebreather/s: Not Bought Yet Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 99	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM Three answers for you Mike... Quote: (Originally Posted by Drmike) 1) Its clear to anyone who can read or use a comp that VPM has 'evolved' over a short period of time and that that was done because the number of bends was high. VPM had one(1) revision.... Is that allowed? And it was done for valid reasons of mathematics.. not bends. VPM was not widely used in the first year. In fact, bends rates have been in decline since the dive community adopted any of the "deeper stop" planning methods, all the while tech diving has been rapidly expanding. Quote: (Originally Posted by Drmike) 2) Its clear to anyone that VPMB/x has not had anywhere near the amount of validation/studies done as Buh Almost no one uses a man tested dive plan today (Navy, Bulhmann, DCIEM). If fact the entire dive community has moved away from man tested data. A deco diver today has a hybrid of Haldane / Bulhmann with extended, padded GF'd or other custom add ons. Or they use a bubble model that does all those mods naturally. Or they use a simple relational math based plan. The point is... no one uses man tested data, and every method in common use today is all un-validated, just like VPM. Quote: (Originally Posted by Drmike) 3) Its clear to anyone who can read that your VPM dive list is inaccurate (dives not done using VPM or different depths) That's your opinion Mike. It's also an insult to those who made these dives. __________________ Regards, Ross Hemingway V-Planner VPM-B Nitrox Trimix CCR Deco planning for Technical Divers www.v-planner.com
(Offline)

9th April 2008, 05:54	#30 (permalink)
Drmike Custom Title Allowed! Current Rebreather/s: MK 15.X Ouroboros Other CCR Home Build Other Rebreather/s: Inspiration Classic Other CCR Home Build Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 3,128	Re: VR3 BUH or VPM Quote: (Originally Posted by rossh) Three answers for you Mike... VPM had one(1) revision.... Is that allowed? And it was done for valid reasons of mathematics.. not bends. "valid reasons of mathematics" lol vpm in its earliest form gave too short deco - period. That was fixed with vpmb and fixed again in vpmbe - none of those changes have anything to do with 'mathematics' or the price of banannas Quote: A deco diver today has a hybrid of Haldane / Bulhmann with extended, padded GF'd or other custom add ons. . The point is... no one uses man tested data, and every method in common use today is all un-validated, just like VPM. the basis of current methods (other than VPM/x) is MAN TESTED models. Yes people have added conservacy but that is additional conservacy ontop of MAN TESTED models. This is not the case with VPMx where the underlying model hasnt had anywhere near the amount of validation/testing Quote: That's your opinion Mike. It's also an insult to those who made these dives. Well lets see if your list is indeed inaccurate:- 1) Ben didnt use VPMb for Sra Kweo III he used zplanner. Hes a Hyperbaric chamber director and has no love for VPM as I know from our conversations on dive planning for our deep dives together. 2) CV didnt dive to 226m (or 240m or whatever it is now) as reported by Ben his dive partner - who was there and isnt mental and or deaf. (Perhaps you should read what the diver you referanced on the dive you referanced has to say about the dive? => The Deco Stop 3) The yamashiro dive was not to 190m as you quoted on your site - he dived to 176m (big difference at these depths to deco) 4) One of the dives you refferance the diver in question had a vpmb schedule however his ascent rate from depth (and it was a deep dive) was far far far slower than the ascent rate assumed in vplanner when the table was cut. Ergo (given that this was a deep dive) his whole schedule was wrong (by a matter of hours). The diver did the dive by following his original (now largey wrong) vpmb schedule up to around half his ascent then followed VR3buh to last stops then resorted to vpmb table stop times getting out the water hours earlier than VR3buh gave.....The diver was a bit bent (nothing too serious bit of surface O2 then was ok) but you have this dive down as an example of a successfull deep vpmb dive - when clearly its wasnt a vpmb dive (diver actual deco profile didnt match vpm and his dive profile didnt match what was used to cut vpm tables) or a wholey sucessful one (diver was bit bent). Well two cases of different depths, and two cases of different deco (one wasnt even using VPM in 1st place) ..maybe our definition of accurate id different Im not splitting hairs here. People (myself included) look at these scarce data points to help us plan our dives - its dangerous and irresponsible if depths, models and outcomes are incorrectly reported __________________ Get a girlfriend you sad twat - a Rebreather is an unfaithful mistress - dont blind yourself to her faults just because she goes down on you Last edited by Drmike : 9th April 2008 at 08:01.
(Offline)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode