Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 100,000 divers from around the world discussing all things related to Scuba Diving. To gain full access to ScubaBoard you must register for a free account.
As a registered member you will be able to:
Participate in over 500 dive topic forums and browse from over 3,000,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from 80,000 user submitted images.
Gain access to our free classifieds marketplace to buy, sell and trade gear, travel and services.
Use the calendar to organize your events and enroll in other members' events.
All this and much more is available to you absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the ScubaBoard Support Team.
Basic Scuba DiscussionsHave a Scuba related question? Get a Scuba related answer here. Please note: This forum has special rules. This forum is intended to be a very friendly, "flame free zone" where divers of any skill level may ask questions about basic scuba topics without fear of being accosted. Please show respect and courtesy at all times. Remember that the inquirer is looking for answers that they can understand. This is a learning zone and consequently, any off-topic or overly harsh responses will be removed.
Please note: The last reply in this thread was more than 4 month(s) ago.
Originally Posted by CoolTech Venice Beach... Single HP 149. 4 1/2 hours. The only reason I surfaced... I got hungry. I still had 1,500 PSI left in the tank.
Yeah right.
I love people from out of state, who don't know the dive at Venice Beach, but certainly put their 2 psi in...
__________________
I'm the dude playing a dude that's disguised as another dude...
GSDMan, it's commendable that you are working through the calculations. You and your dive partners are safer for it. Looking back through my PADI training, I just can't understand why this topic is not thoroughly covered. "Just take a class" doesn't work when the curriculum has gaping holes.
Having said that, a big thank you to the experienced divers and instructors that stoop to teaching us lowly recreational divers how to count our bubbles.
.79 for a SAC seems way way high. on a bad day I might hit .55 and generally amin in the .3 to .35 range.
on a shallow dive an al80 will last me over 2 hrs with 750 left at the surface. A deeper dive to 140ft on a standard 80 I take about 9-10 minutes bottom time before starting back and always get back in the boat with well over 1000psi even after some minor deco obligations and a multiple stop ascent.
this particular profile seems far to conservative for even me and I generally fall on the overly conservative side. Just follow thirds and tables or a computer (or better yet use both). take the limiting factor to turn on. If you hit thirds before a suunto calls your dive or before even a standard table limits you there is an issue somewhere.
__________________
I am gear hunting for some hard to come buy items. If you are wishing to sell any of these things feel free to contact me.
Scubapro MK17's (prefer DIN), Scubapro MK2+ (prefer DIN), Scubapro S600's, Scubapro brass Yoke adapters, tanks, reg tools, Solus lights, etc...
GSDMan, kudos to you for working through this kind of problem.
I'm just back from a trip and a little short on sleep, but going through your math, I see that you are using 3 cfm as your gas consumption for your rock bottom. Why is this? It looks as though you are mixing up rock bottom with rule of thirds. We were taught to use a stressed gas consumption rate for calculating rock bottom, on the theory that someone who has gone out of gas and is having to ascend on someone else's supply may be blowing through gas as a result of adrenaline. What we use is 1 cfm for each diver; you might, at this point, want to use a bit more, simply because your unstressed SAC rate is so high, but I doubt you need to go to 3 cfm. However, what you have learned from the exercise is that rock bottom for significant depths in a small tank is a HUGE proportion of the gas you are carrying.
The bottom line is that both safe gas management and staying within decompression limits result in very short bottom times in the 100 to 130 foot range. As Mike Ferrara has often said, such dives are better planned and executed as staged decompression dives, with proper equipment and training, so that you can actually get a chance to enjoy what you went down there to see.
I agree with everything until the end. A dive to 130 feet can be made using nitrox, no-deco, an 80 cu-ft tank and you should probably take a pony bottle for redundancy. I sometimes make 3 dives a day to that depth and generally do no acrue decompression and if I do, it is usually less than 5 minutes.
Drawing the line at 100 feet for requiring staged decompression is way off track. With nitrox you can do a bunch of diving around 100 feet. I think I might be able to get around 29 minutes of no deco time on my computer at 100 feet with nitrox?
__________________
SCUBA Diving: The only sport where grown men will brag about how low their sac is.
I see that you are using 3 cfm as your gas consumption for your rock bottom. Why is this?
Like you said, I started with 1.0 cu.ft. for my self and 1.0 cu. ft. for my buddy. Then, after thinking about my SAC being at .79, I began to think 1.0 cu. ft. for myself might be a bit low so I added another cu. ft. for good measure. Total - 3.0 cu.ft. on the ascent and safety stop. I'm sorry, I should have been clearer on how I got to that number.
No, there is no harm and it will probably help you understand more...
Apologies for your question getting the off-track hijack... I didn't expect some would attempt to discredit me because they didn't agree with my statement (Then, find a single post from the past... which is correct and accurate, in an attempt to do just that without knowing the dive site...) Then, others would take my responses to the person (I quoted in the response, and one answer that was sarcasm... ) and attempt to use them as some answer to your original post.
So, please accept an apology for myself (and others) not allowing your question to continue on track.
No apologies are necessary, but are accepted none the less. Thank you.
Actually, the arguments, while not terribly helpful with the original question, are quite useful. They help me decide whose opinions and advice I will take seriously and who's just taking up room on my screen.
Linear Mode
