Re: NITROX or not

morgand@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:

> ...and
> there's me hardly had time to sit down and take a break. So shorter SI is
> not what i am looking for........

I think you are looking at this from the wrong perspective.

It's not about the time, it's about the safety. In the same amount of
time, you have much less to off-gas if you're diving Nitrox.

Dive safe,

/Don

Don Ward <dwward3863@nospam.sbcglobal.net> pounded away at his
keyboard resulting in:
:It's not about the time, it's about the safety. In the same amount of
:time, you have much less to off-gas if you're diving Nitrox.

Only if you have the same bottom times and surface intervals as you
would have done on air.

Dan Bracuk
If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Dan Bracuk wrote:
> Don Ward <dwward3863@nospam.sbcglobal.net> pounded away at his
> keyboard resulting in:
> :It's not about the time, it's about the safety. In the same amount of
> :time, you have much less to off-gas if you're diving Nitrox.

In just two lines, Don managed to contradict himself!

Of coures it about the time! If you have much less to off-gas,
then it takes much less TIME for the "mandatory" SIT for the next
dive.

>
> Only if you have the same bottom times and surface intervals as you
> would have done on air.

That's a secondary nit.

-- Bob.

Dan Bracuk wrote:
> Don Ward <dwward3863@nospam.sbcglobal.net> pounded away at his
> keyboard resulting in:
> :It's not about the time, it's about the safety. In the same amount of
> :time, you have much less to off-gas if you're diving Nitrox.
>
> Only if you have the same bottom times and surface intervals as you
> would have done on air.
>
> Dan Bracuk
> If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.

I stand by my comment. Go back and read it in the context of Morgand's
comment (the context in which it was written).

Dive safe,

/Don

Don Ward <dwward3863@nospam.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> It's not about the time, it's about the safety.

More like "safety trade-off".

True, you can dive Nitrox on air tables and not approach the deco limits
as closely and thus be "more safe". However, the risks from Ox-Tox and
the risks of someone pumping the wrong mix are increased, so its really
just a big safety trade-off.


Besides, if your BC isn't O2-cleaned, it can spontaneously explode


-hh

H Huntzinger wrote:
> Don Ward <dwward3863@nospam.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> > It's not about the time, it's about the safety.
>
> True, you can dive Nitrox on air tables and not approach the deco limits
> as closely and thus be "more safe".

No table or EAN is "safe" for grossly obese (short of morbidly obese)
and physically unfit specimens like Don and his Fascist Dictator and
Censorship pal Nick Simicich of Scuba-L.

-- Bob.

Thus spake H Huntzinger
<{NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}rec-scuba2005@huntzinger.com> :

>Don Ward <dwward3863@nospam.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> It's not about the time, it's about the safety.
>
>More like "safety trade-off".
>
>True, you can dive Nitrox on air tables and not approach the deco limits
>as closely and thus be "more safe". However, the risks from Ox-Tox and
>the risks of someone pumping the wrong mix are increased, so its really
>just a big safety trade-off.
>
>
>Besides, if your BC isn't O2-cleaned, it can spontaneously explode
>
>
>-hh

What if you're diving dry and you "off gas"? Does the increase O2 %
increase the risk of an explosion?

--
dillon
Linux, it's not just an OS, it's a way
of life.

And a damn fine one, at that.

"Dillon Pyron" wrote

>>True, you can dive Nitrox on air tables and not approach the deco limits
>>as closely and thus be "more safe". However, the risks from Ox-Tox and
>>the risks of someone pumping the wrong mix are increased, so its really
>>just a big safety trade-off.

You don't have to dive Nitrox on air tables to decrease the nitrogen loading
in your system. You can, in fact, dive beyond what your computer would
allow on air and still have a lower nitrogen load.

As for the toxicity, while the risk certainly moves to a shallower depth
when you dive with more than 21% oxygen, the risk of O2 toxicity is just as
real on air as on nitrox. You simply stay above the MOD for the gas you're
using.

>>Besides, if your BC isn't O2-cleaned, it can spontaneously explode

8^)

> What if you're diving dry and you "off gas"? Does the increase O2 %
> increase the risk of an explosion?

Methane and a high percentage of oxygen could be a dangerous combination,
but would probably require a spark to set it off. Assuming you don't fart
sparks, the chance of an explosion is low.

Lee

In article <G8tEe.2482$lX2.833@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>,
dwward3863@nospam.sbcglobal.net (Don Ward) wrote:

> It's not about the time, it's about the safety. In the same amount of
> time, you have much less to off-gas if you're diving Nitrox.

I understand all that................i was merely commenting on the "you
get shorter SI"............



Dave Morgan @ Work in the UK
Take out the "goes diving" bit....
Trip photos on line at www.morg.co.uk

In article
<{NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}rec-scuba2005-220478.08314224072005@news.giganews.com
>, {NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}rec-scuba2005@huntzinger.com (H Huntzinger) wrote:

> Besides, if your BC isn't O2-cleaned, it can spontaneously explode

So on a muli location trip and where one operator where you dive does not
have nitrox your kit would have to be "cleaned" before you could go on to
your next location where they did do nitrox ???????



Dave Morgan @ Work in the UK
Take out the "goes diving" bit....
Trip photos on line at www.morg.co.uk