Posted by Kendall Raine on September 25, 2001 at 14:09:34:
In Reply to: some questions posted by joe chandler on September 25, 2001 at 13:36:35:
1. Yes and no. Depth averaging is mathmatically what your computer is doing anyway. By doing this, you are removing conservatism from the table since standard tables were originally designed for square profile, typical Navy or working, type exposures. If you average on a multi-level dive and use the schedule from your deepest point, all the time spent during the multi-level (shallower) phase is effectively padding your conservatism. That's one reason so few people got bent using the Navy tables which were designed to accept a 5% bends rate! So, if you're depth averaging off the Navy tables, you're a lot less conservative than if you're averaging off a more conservative set of tables (e.g. DCIEM). Personally, I average off RGBM tables. Averaging takes pratice, however.
2. Abyss offers RGBM. It still has bugs in it, though, so be careful. I know Bruce Wienke was working with NAUI but don't know if they've published anything. I'll ask some of the VPM code guys if they have a set published. I assume you're looking for air?
3. Decoplanner is a lot cheeper than Abyss. Abyss has fancy graphics. The Decoplanner modified Buhlman tables are close to the Abyss RGBM tables.