Blow a Safety Stop? Redescend ?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

The reason this topic comes up again and again is that there is no "bright line" dividing no-decompression diving from decompression diving. There is just a gradual slope, where the likelihood of DCS from a direct ascent at the prescribed speed increases. Note that there are three variables involved in determining the safety of any given profile: Depth, time at depth, and ascent rate. The purpose of a safety stop is to slow the ascent rate, and it is placed shallow because the mathematics of the Haldanian/Buhlmann model suggest that decompression time, in the absence of a lower nitrogen decompression gas, is best spent shallow to push the gas gradient for elimination of nitrogen.

If you spend thirty minutes at thirty feet, your likelihood of DCS on ascent is vanishingly low. If you spent thirty minutes at 200 feet, your likelihood of DCS with a direct ascent is very high. For depths and times in between, the risk varies, but it is safe to say that as depth increases and time increases, the risk goes up as well. Thus the "required safety stop"; if it is truly required, it is a decompression stop, and you are doing staged decompression diving. This places the dive outside of normal recreational limits.

The fact is that the DCS risk for a controlled direct ascent is still going to be low, and most people would advise that you not return to the water to do an omitted safety stop. Omitting required decompression is another story.

The bottom line is that, if you are going to do dives that push the limits of the tables, you should have the skills to spend some stable time in the shallows as a safety precaution. If you don't have those skills, you're much better off staying much further away from the NDL limits.
 
A required safety stop is an oxymoron, no matter how you cut it.
 
If I am still in the water, and have surfaced for less than a minute, I'm gonna gently descend and do a five minute stop, gas and conditions permitting.

While on my safety stop, I'm gonna review how I lost control and missed it in the first place!

If I am on the boat already, then I am done with that dive.
 
What yo are saying makes very good sense.
Along the years I've learned a lot about the chances of DCS. New divers may or may not accumulate more detailed knowledge about DCS depending on how much they care about it
.....but for their beginning it would've been nice to keep a few concepts consistent. For example: safety stop is a suggestion a deco stop is an obligation.

In my opinion, it is better to make your own tables if you feel the need to be "safer" than blurring the line between safety and deco stop; not because I dismiss the safety stop is because the odds of DCS are too great when messing with deco stops

As u say:

if it is truly required, it is a decompression stop,
 
I would NEVER redescend under the described circumstances, you're on the surface, you've not exceeded the surfacing ratio for any tissue, you are asymptomatic, if you're worried suck up the oxygen, but don't resubmerge for at least ten minutes, at that point you should be shifting your concern away from DCS to bubbling pumping, a potentially far more dangerous (on the order of AGE) phenomena.
 
A required safety stop is an oxymoron, no matter how you cut it.

It may be an oxymoron, but perhaps the drafters of the tables made up such fine terms as "required safety stop" to be less scary than "deco stop" for the recreational diver?
 
at that point you should be shifting your concern away from DCS to bubbling pumping, a potentially far more dangerous (on the order of AGE) phenomena.
OK, you got me. I just googled this and all it came up with was ScubaBoard (you) talking about this phenomenon. Can you point us to some good ol' research about Bubble Pumping? Does it, perchance, live under a pseudonym? Thanks in advance.
 
It may be an oxymoron, but perhaps the drafters of the tables made up such fine terms as "required safety stop" to be less scary than "deco stop" for the recreational diver?
Especially since TDI maintains that all dives are deco dives and no matter what you call it, stops are either mandatory (required) or not mandatory (optional).
 
OK, you got me. I just googled this and all it came up with was ScubaBoard (you) talking about this phenomenon. Can you point us to some good ol' research about Bubble Pumping? Does it, perchance, live under a pseudonym? Thanks in advance.

Once on the surface we will assume there are some bubbles present on the venous side of the circulatory system that would not be able to cross over to the arterial side because of their size and remain trapped in the lungs until absorbed and dissipated.

Descending immediately after surfacing can reduce the size of the bubble to the point it can cross over to the arterial side and reexpand on the arterial side as a form of AGE. I believe this can be defined as a form of paradoxical gas embolism.
I am sure Thal can provide a more technical explanation than I.
 
Interesting... do we have a study on it anywhere?

Would assume that we have this bubbling if this is an optional stop that is missed?
 

Back
Top Bottom