GUE training and deep diving

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!

So the NOAA tables tell you to stop at 50% of max depth and then do a series of stops to the surface?
No, min-deco is composed of several components. Just like the NDL is some other agency.

The base table is from NOAA, which tells you what the limits are where you can use this approach. the ascent profile is a way of practicing a critical skill, it's basically just changing where the decompression is occurring, but it's a similar time to running an multi-minute safety stop.
 
No, min-deco is composed of several components. Just like the NDL is some other agency.

The base table is from NOAA, which tells you what the limits are where you can use this approach. the ascent profile is a way of practicing a critical skill, it's basically just changing where the decompression is occurring, but it's a similar time to running an multi-minute safety stop.
So, it is either based on the NOAA tables or Deco Planner, but there is still no precedent for the multiple stop feature. How do we know that distributing those stops like that provides an advantage or is even the same as the traditional approach? Is it just a whim?

I really do want to know for research purposes.

A year or so ago I stepped briefly into a FaceBook discussion on this. The owner of the site and his fellows were in the process of ridiculing the traditional agencies that still followed what they believed to be an archaic system for NDL dives rather than a deep stop system, especially GUE's min deco system, which they said was proven superior. Why, they asked, their tone filled with mocking derision, are those agencies so far behind the times? I stepped in to ask what research suggested the superiority of this approach, and I was massively insulted as a no-nothing for asking such a question. I replied that insulting people was different from providing research, and that ended my ability to learn from that discussion, since the owner of the site deleted my comments and removed me from all participation.

So I am still trying to learn.

BTW, I was taught min deco as a UTD student, and back then, the explanation was all about the superiority of deep stops.
 
Thank you all for your inputs.

Any ideas on the following 2 that went unanswered:
There are lots of options to look at...............Xdeep, Dare to Dive, Apeks etc. Most plates and wings will do the job just fine.
I'm confident that when you complete GUE training you'll want to continue with GUE. Granted doing Rec 3 will cost more than a simple Deep diver course you will gain so much more from it.
 
So what effect does redistributing the stops to favor a deep stops theory have on decompression? Research over the past decade on decompression diving found that distributing decompression time to favor deep stops is not all that good for you. What makes you think the same distribution theory will work better in NDL diving than it does in decompression diving?

So it is the same process that created the deep stops process applied to NDL diving, except with one minute stops. Is that correct?

Could you point me to the research that says this is advantageous?

Actually, there is a pretty fair amount of research out there that points to a significant difference in those factors. That research is giving people a pretty good idea.

Are you saying that after well over a century of study and countless people getting bent during research, no one has any idea, and so any ascent strategy is as good as any another?
I think you're correct about the process.

20/85 was chosen because it mimics VPM+2. Nothing magical about those GFs other than that. VPM+2 because its in the middle of the conservatism range for that algorithm. At the time all this was established, VPM was the hotness.

As for data to support the min deco ascent? I think you'd be hard pressed to find anything. Now, there IS data to suggest that in general, deep stops are not efficient uses of ascent time. The point of data is to help guide practices, and to me, that would mean not doing the min deco ascent as prescribed by GUE. I think (and my opinion is worth what you're payin' for it) 1 min stops starting at 50% of your max depth is too deep. I don't do them on rec dives. I also don't think its truly significant either way. But if we're searching for "optimum", that's my opinion.

I think GUE is missing the boat in regards to gradient factors. The old argument of "well its been working" is a poor one, because it really hasn't been working all that well. Just about everyone I know who has done a bunch of technical diving using 20/85 has had some sort of DCI symptoms, just (luckily) not severe enough to warrant formal treatment.
 
Thank you all for your inputs.

Any ideas on the following 2 that went unanswered:
I think Rec 3 is a bad course. Its got all the parts of technical diving (doubles, deco bottle, helium, mandatory decompression) without requiring the same skills that technical diving courses demand.

Rec pass...why? If you can't hold stops wtf is someone doing diving that demands holding stops?

"Ascent gas"...why? Because the diver doesn't have the skills to make a gas switch to a proper deco gas like 50%? Do you really think that diver should be doing decompression diving and switching to a different gas if they dont have the skills or abilities to switch to a proper deco gas?

The gear is the same as what's required for Tech 1, so no difference there. You can either manage it, or you can't. Or wait... can you not manage it, hence the rec pass requirement....

130' depth limit...why 130'? To keep up with PADI? Your PADI buddies won't have helium, so what's the point in mirroring other orgs.

Tech 1 class dives are like 150'. Is there that much difference between 130' and 150'? When you're breathing 21/35 and carrying a deco bottle, there really arent many differences at all.

Rec 3 is a clear money grab to take advantage of people who lack the skills or confidence to take Tech 1. Then, when you do want to take Tech 1, you're on the hook for yet another class. Its a bamboozle.
 
I think you're correct about the process.

20/85 was chosen because it mimics VPM+2. Nothing magical about those GFs other than that. VPM+2 because its in the middle of the conservatism range for that algorithm. At the time all this was established, VPM was the hotness.

As for data to support the min deco ascent? I think you'd be hard pressed to find anything. Now, there IS data to suggest that in general, deep stops are not efficient uses of ascent time. The point of data is to help guide practices, and to me, that would mean not doing the min deco ascent as prescribed by GUE. I think (and my opinion is worth what you're payin' for it) 1 min stops starting at 50% of your max depth is too deep. I don't do them on rec dives. I also don't think its truly significant either way. But if we're searching for "optimum", that's my opinion.

I think GUE is missing the boat in regards to gradient factors. The old argument of "well its been working" is a poor one, because it really hasn't been working all that well. Just about everyone I know who has done a bunch of technical diving using 20/85 has had some sort of DCI symptoms, just (luckily) not severe enough to warrant formal treatment.
Thank you. That makes sense.
 
Great, Ken!

I have asked countless times for the decompression theory behind minimum deco, and I have not gotten an answer. The last time I asked it, I was definitely told that there was no actual decompression theory behind it, but it was instead a training exercise to enable the diver to practice doing decompression stops during an NDL ascent. I find that hard to believe, but I have had no better answer.

Min deco ascent is the numbers deco planner spits out running at 20/85 for dives within the NDLs. It also keeps everyone on the same page as to how fast were going and where we’re stopping.... plus that 9m/min bit at the start is great fun
 
@David Novo

As far as the stress, I wonder if narcosis and CO2 had something to do with it. You mentioned you were stressed out only on the ascent and worrying about your gas would certainly do that. It's possible that the initial anxiety started in the 25-30m range while breathing air/EAN32 and seeing your SPG reading falling made it worse on the way up. Once you start breathing heavily (combination of stress and CO2) it's not the easiest thing to get back under control even once you start getting shallow and the narcosis reduces. I found this to be true especially early on in my dive career. Just hypothesizing on this as everyone experiences narcosis differently and I don't know what kind of conditions you dive in.

If you want to get a cert to 40m/130' for insurance reasons only as you have stated, Rec 3 is not what I would recommend. Fundies is not going to help either as it doesn't increase your depth rating in itself. Right now, go with whichever course is offered by an instructor that you like - seems like PADI Deep is that course in your case. After you dive some more and get more comfortable, you can re-visit whether you want to do Fundies or not or you may even decide you want to do tech/deco. Trust me, there's a strong chance it will change. Ask me how I know :wink:

If you're interested at all in the GUE route, read on. If not, the main takeaway I would like you to get is to fulfill whatever legal or insurance requirements you have now, get some more diving experience and then evaluate where you are in your diving skills and where you want to be before you sign up for any expensive classes.

============= GUE and "deep" diving specific stuff below =============

Fundies is the practical prerequisite to everything meaningful in the GUE ladder so obviously you start there.

I did Rec 3 and would agree with the points @PfcAJ made about R3 vs T1 and R3 not being the best option for divers who actually want to dive to the stated depths using trimix and performing mandatory deco. T1 is for sure the way to go for that.

The value of R3 for me was in improving my ascents and mid-water skills in doubles+drysuit and also learning how to use a stage bottle (not just for deco/ascent but as a bottom stage with a DPV and everything that entails). The divers in my GUE community used to hire our local instructor to go over whichever of the above they were most interested in working on. I guess it got to the point that enough divers were requesting the same combination of skills to be covered and spending the same amount of days as R3 that he recommends it now instead of the separate 1-2 day clinics, depending on what you say your goals are.

You could also learn all the skills needed to do all of the above by diving with experienced buddies and getting mentored after Fundies but how effective that is depends on how quickly you learn and what your baseline is. I found I stagnated that way and was getting super frustrated so decided to go with hiring the instructor who recommended R3 instead of separate clinics. In contrast, my buddy who I will be doing Cave 1 with in November went straight from Fundies to successfully completing T1 less than 9 months later with no additional coaching in between. So, obviously, that's possible too and lots of divers go that route.

I'm repeating myself here but the main thing is to honestly judge your own skills and decide from there how much refinement you want or need. At the most, you may have to hire an instructor for a day to get an objective viewpoint but it's well worth it compared to paying for an expensive multi-day course and ending up disappointed.
 
Any ideas on the following 2 that went unanswered:

Any recommendations for a good BPW setup that is not Halcyon and available in EU? (importing from outside is not an option due to VAT)

Why not Halcyon? You can get quite good prices for Halcyon, especially if you are buying a set. Look at deepstop.de
Otherwise there are a lot of options. Tecline was not mentioned previously.

Rec 3 is a clear money grab to take advantage of people who lack the skills or confidence to take Tech 1. Then, when you do want to take Tech 1, you're on the hook for yet another class. Its a bamboozle.

Passing Rec3 also includes earning your tech pass. Thus it is a route to train towards tech pass with an instructor for those who don't want to do fundies again or did fundies in rec configuration. Kind of makes sense for someone who has taken fundies very early on their diving career and did it in rec equipment. Expensive prehaps, but probably fun and people who want or have to be cheap often go to other agencies anyway. For the talents who go to courses only to get evaluated it is unnecessary.
Rec3 is also ISO 24801-3 certified Dive Leader/Dive Master equivalent. It is strange, but that is how it is.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Back
Top Bottom