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
I think this is a misinterpretation of a recreational table. Those aren't built for deco, have "exceeded ndl contingencies" that often involve staying dry for a prolonged period. It could also be a carry over from military practices (though unlikely).
OP: Many/most deco divers do repeated deco diving. I've done four deco dives in a day and frequently do two.
I think this is a misinterpretation of a recreational table. Those aren't built for deco, have "exceeded ndl contingencies" that often involve staying dry for a prolonged period. . . .
Add Mustard Dave's clarification that this applies to table diving, not computers.
Perhaps the question could be more clearly worded as: "Why should a diver stop diving for at least the rest of the day if, on a dive that was planned as a "no-decompression dive," the diver inadvertently exceeded the no-decompression limit, thereby requiring an "emergency" or unplanned decompression stop?
The PADI computer-based OW program tells students that if they accidentally violate no stop times on the computer, they should follow the computer's plan for decompression. This means, of course, that divers should know how the computer will guide them before they get in the water with it. That is a real value to the course. It specifically identifies the functions on dive computers that students should understand when they get one. That allows them to look for specific critical information in their manual when they get it.I haven't seen the OW manual since the program allowed computer diving with no table / eRDP planning, so I'm not sure what they have to say, but I do still suspect the myth about not diving after a decompression dive has it's origins in dive planning using no decompression tables.