Son of Deep Stops *or* Waiting to be merged with the mother thread...

[victorzamora]

Edited: On second thought, this wasn't a positive contribution so I'm deleting it.

 

[PfcAJ]

These dives have deco that starts 2.5 to 3 times deeper, and is 1/3 rd the deco time, vs the Nedu ones? Different ends of the dive scale.

Are you trying to show me that your stretched out chewing gum GF plan, is not consistent because you have used GF to override ZHL and make it all "fitted' to your idea of what ever you want today?

.

It's the same length as the vpm schedule except....dun dun duuuuun.... Shallower.

 

[C Dub]

It's the same length as the vpm schedule except....dun dun duuuuun.... Shallower.

Yeah, so why does Ross keep posting that chart that shows A2 running something like 210 minutes?

Is that his own home-cooked chart? He never references where it is sourced.

 

[David Doolette]

There is an interesting back story to that. In 2004 it was going to be as Bruce said, and it was going to be good - a real model comparison. At least that's how he explained it.

And then..... look what the nedu did instead. Two obscure shallow test models... that have no connection to tech diving (or any model for that matter) .

This is a revision of history.

Unlike you, Ross, I have access to all the presentations given at the 2004 Gas content versus bubble model workshop being referenced, and all the email correspondence between the organizers and those who attended (including Bruce Wienke). I can confirm, as I have in other threads, that the NEDU deep stops A1 and A2 schedules (as described in NEDU TR 11-06) are exactly the same schedules presented and discussed in excruciating detail at the 2004 workshop. The consensus of that workshop was the A1 vs A2 comparison (now described in NEDU TR 11-06) was a good test of the bubble model concept.

 

[rossh]

Why don't you post some confirming details David?

I don't have a bone in this fight either way. Don't care. But I know you guys tried to put a (not real) RGBM profile into the public domain, only to discover you did not add the runtime correctly.

But one thing is for certain, The NEDU and the LANL have been in an internal squabble / war ever since each embarked on different deco strategies and paths.

Of course government interdepartmental wars are nothing new, and clearly yours (NEDU vs LANL) is ongoing. Would anyone be the least bit surprised if one was quietly trying to undermine the integrity of the other? Of course not.

David, we don't care.

 

[PfcAJ]

Yeah, so why does Ross keep posting that chart that shows A2 running something like 210 minutes?

Is that his own home-cooked chart? He never references where it is sourced.

Different profiles.

The nedu ascent schedules were the same length but with different stop distributions. One shallower and one deeper.

My example is two ascent schedules with the same length, one shallower and one deeper.

The point is to show that the nedu test is absolutely relevant and does test "deep stops".

 

[oya]

So go look at 220 for 25, 15/55 bottom gas and 50% and oxygen for deco.

Compare vpm+3 and 40/70 gradient factors.

Lemme guess - those are both shallow stop schedules right?

Dammit AJ! Pay attention; you can't just pick random dives to compare!

You have to do exactly the dive that the NEDU did... or... maybe a totally different dive... or... I think... possibly only theoretical dives from behind a computer monitor? But you can't just randomly make things up and make comparisons to participate in this debate, that's for damn sure!

Look, it's simple. The rigidly controlled tests for specific physical manifestations of gas behaviors and physiology are irrelevant. This is science!!

 

[rjack321]

Different profiles.

The nedu ascent schedules were the same length but with different stop distributions. One shallower and one deeper.

My example is two ascent schedules with the same length, one shallower and one deeper.

The point is to show that the nedu test is absolutely relevant and does test "deep stops".

Not only that it controlled for temperature! Same exertion of the bottom to the watt. No thermocline, same exposure protection on ascent. If the reason the test divers got bent was temperature the hit rate should have been the same, not 5% and 1.6% and statistically different.

 

[David Doolette]

But take a look at this. Why did they quit the shallow stop test half way?? Answer: Because it was about to fail its rejection criteria test, and invalidate the whole effort:

Where is A1 headed ? Out the bottom, suggesting that the test model settings (derived from the massive navy database) were not properly calibrated to the test sequence...
.

Ross, I have pointed out your misinterpretation of this figure (which is an earlier version and drawn differently to the one in NEDU TR 11-06) every time you post it in one of these threads. The A1 yellow line had to cross (not touch) the stop-low boundary - the trial was ended at a planned interim analysis with 3 DCS/192 dives on A1, the stop-low criteria would not have been met until 3/257.

 

[rossh]

Ross, I have pointed out your misinterpretation of this figure (which is an earlier version and drawn differently to the one in NEDU TR 11-06) every time you post it in one of these threads. The A1 yellow line had to cross (not touch) the stop-low boundary - the trial was ended at a planned interim analysis with 3 DCS/192 dives on A1, the stop-low criteria would not have been met until 3/257.

I grabbed it off a slide presentation from DAN 2008 (I think). I can also look in my UHMS Deep Stop Workshop manual (p178): same graph.

What's the problem? It was destined to trigger a fail mode. Or would you say the A1 was about to trigger a bout of DCS catchup injuries?

.