# New US NAVY dive tables-will Doxa change bezel?



## SeaHunter (Feb 13, 2006)

Hello all,

Just saw this on the Dive Watch Forum. Different no-deco times at some depths than the current Doxa bezel. Will Doxa change?

Just for those of you that dive, the new Rev. 6 of the USN Dive Manual has hit the streets and can be found at http://www.supsalv.org/00c3_publicat...0c3&pageId=3.9

ALL of the decompression tables have been modified with substantial changes to the No Decompression obligations.

Not sure how all of us are going to re-calibrate our computers or watches, but anyway, here is a snapshot of the changes to the No D table:


----------



## T Bone (Feb 18, 2006)

Thanks for posting this. Personally, I don't expect Doxa to change the bezel. As to our computers, etc. these all run on algorithms that have been tested/researched by the various makers. To change them now based on new Navy tables (for Navy divers) would seem rather pointless, as the algorithms are presumably not based solely on tables, but on other research and testing.

While many limits have changed substantially, the two I see that would impact Sport Divers the most are 70 and 80 feet (two minute and one minute reductions respectively).


60 feet at 60 minutes remains unchanged, as do the limits for 90 through 130 feet, also unchanged. 


What I noticed the most was the large reduction in NDL at shallower depths. Didn't really surprise me though. I've long heard speculation the the NDL for shallower dives might be excessively liberal for, but would not be as likely to affect Sport Divers. 

The 50 foot limit changing from 100 to 92 minutes is a very substantial change, and 40 foot going from 200 to 163 minutes is huge. But when was the last time you heard of a non-working diver being down at these depths for this amount of time?

With the advent of re breathers, use of multiple tanks, surface supplied air or (the most likely) repetitive dives, it is possible for the recreational diver to break these new shallow limits. And I'm sure it has/can be done. But I think it's much more the exception than the rule.

As to the Navy tables, we recreational divers must all remember, we may not nec. fit their physical profile. Someone in their 40's/50's, perhaps over weight, has no business relying on (and pushing) tables made for 19 year old well conditioned military divers, without throwing in a substantial adjustment to compensate.

Just my thoughts, YMMV.


----------



## Caribbean Soul (Oct 31, 2007)

As Dr. Pete notes in his Doxa "bible", and Francois has posted, the Doxa bezel was not strictly an exact match before to the earlier U.S. Navy tables:



Francois Boucher said:


> Here's a table I compiled a few years back, when I was trying to understand the origins of the Doxa ND bezel table. I completed it with the recent update of the USN tables.
> 
> It might be useful to the ongoing discussion.
> 
> ...


Personally, I'm happy with the bezel the way it is. b-)

--Keith


----------



## patriot021 (Feb 18, 2008)

This is a fascinating topic. At the very least, since DOXA has moved forward with their new FLAGSHIP 5000 series, they should at least consider new bezel markings on any future, brand new dive watch models. Keep moving forward! Don't look back, (Except to do a reissue...)


----------



## SeaHunter (Feb 13, 2006)

Imagine this scenario: you're scuba diving and you get the bends. You say you were using official US Navy no-decompression tables on your Doxa Bezel. That stampeding sound you hear is thousands of lawyers rushing to be first in line to take your case!!

DOXA- what do you think?

Cheers. Gary


----------



## T Bone (Feb 18, 2006)

SeaHunter said:


> Imagine this scenario: you're scuba diving and you get the bends. You say you were using official US Navy no-decompression tables on your Doxa Bezel. That stampeding sound you hear is thousands of lawyers rushing to be first in line to take your case!!
> 
> DOXA- what do you think?
> 
> Cheers. Gary


Not likely. First, remember some certification agencies have their own tables. Second, if you're not an 18 year old in prime physical condition, you don't have any business using the tables without a wide margin for safety.
Third, most of us are taught to factor in a good margin regardless of age/conditioning and,
Fourth, the majority of times on the bezel at Sport Diver depths are identical or nearly so to those printed on the bezel. We're looking at a max difference of one to two minutes in most cases.

That combined with the thought that the old Navy Tables were the standard for the last 35 years, I just don't see it happening. How would the diver "prove" their case, that they'd not exceeded the NDL? And if they didn't, that means (technically) they began their direct ascent to the surface within the published NDL.... and if they did a "safety stop", it must be included (note "direct ascent to the surface").

Beyond all this knit picking, the bottom line is this. Divers can, have, do and will get bent diving within the no decompression limits. The tables have never guaranteed freedom from DCS. It is an inherent risk of the sport, and the tables are only one of a host of tools to help minimize that risk. so are responsible dive planning, physical condition, responsible behavior on a dive trip (excess alcohol consumption, insufficient sleep and dehydration are but a few factors that can tip the scales against the diver).

Nope. I just don't see it. Interesting question though. Thanks for posing it!


----------



## subkrawler (Oct 26, 2006)

T Bone said:


> We're looking at a max difference of one to two minutes in most cases.


Exactly...and with that said, I don't know why the Navy even bothered changing them for depths over 50ft. Like 1 or 2 minutes is going to make any difference.:roll:

It's also quite doubtful that anybody would use their bezel to plan a dive anyway. Especially in this day and time. Those on computers could care less, and those of us who aren't, use other methods.

Plus, these are air tables. Diving air is so yesterday.;-) If we want to talk about moving forward, then we should be talking about Nitrox and Tri-mix...not air.


----------



## SeaHunter (Feb 13, 2006)

I agree with you both......however, in our HIGHLY litigious society, phrases such as "not likely", "highly doubtful",hmmmm, if I was the manufacturer, I'd be nervous! The Doxa material reads like you could use the bezel and dive no-de limits according to it. And, some would think,"if the US NAVY dive these tables, they're good enough for me!" I grew up on US Navy tables and dove them for years in the early 70's. I trained on US Navy Heliox/Saturation tables.And remember, the US Navy tables have a built-in bend rate! I'm just saying,I think Doxa is in a precarious legal position with the tables on their bezels not matching the new ones.

Cheers.Gary


----------



## T Bone (Feb 18, 2006)

SeaHunter said:


> I'm just saying,I think Doxa is in a precarious legal position with the tables on their bezels not matching the new ones.


Well, again I disagree. But then I am not an attorney (nor do I play one on TV, or have I recently stayed at a Holiday Inn Express ;-)). You might be one, I do not know.

I think the vagaries already mentioned above would make the area so muddy and gray as to be indefensible as a plaintiff. As you state yourself, the tables have a built in "bend" factor. And as divers are trained, they are generally admonished not to "push" the tables. To dive conservatively. And as stated before, the diver takes a risk of getting bent even within the printed tables, so I think any liability someone tried to place on Doxa would simply not stick. Besides, going for deeper pockets, wouldn't a lawyer go after the agency that created the tables in the first place? The U.S. Navy certainly has a budget slightly higher than Doxa. _Just_ slightly.....

In this litigious society, anyone can attempt to sue for nearly anything. But most attorneys won't even attempt a suit without a. a reasonable hope of winning, or b. a hope of a decent settlement. I highly doubt this situation will ever arise over the minuscule changes we are talking about. I have been wrong before. But only once or twice. As far as I can recall. :-d


----------



## asche (May 18, 2008)

T Bone said:


> As to the Navy tables, we recreational divers must all remember, we may not nec. fit their physical profile. Someone in their 40's/50's, perhaps over weight, has no business relying on (and pushing) tables made for 19 year old well conditioned military divers, without throwing in a substantial adjustment to compensate.


This might be a bit of topic, but I thought I would share it with you anyway.

One of the other members in my diving club is a doctor in the navy and specializes in diving medicine He is one of the people who wrote the current diving tables for the Norwegian navy.
One of the things I learned from him is that there is no evidence supporting that age or physical shape increases your chances of getting bent.

On the other hand, physical excercise 12-24 hours befor a dive reduces the risk of getting bent.


----------



## jmoors (Feb 13, 2006)

Holy Crap ... My bezel index was off half a tick mark, and my watch is running 6 seconds fast a day ... and I got bent ... I need an attorney. Not my fault my watch is screwed up .... Just kidding around guys ... interesting topic but I have to agree with T Bone ....


----------



## T Bone (Feb 18, 2006)

asche said:


> This might be a bit of topic, but I thought I would share it with you anyway.
> 
> One of the other members in my diving club is a doctor in the navy and specializes in diving medicine He is one of the people who wrote the current diving tables for the Norwegian navy.
> One of the things I learned from him is that there is no evidence supporting that age or physical shape increases your chances of getting bent.
> ...


Seems fairly well on topic to me. And thanks for posting that, gives some hope that "fat old" guys like myself might enjoy safe diving for some time to come. :-d (Can't do anything about the age, but I really do need to lose some weight!).


----------



## Rogue884 (Dec 15, 2006)

Just a little reminder to all that Decompression Theory, whether DCIEM, Navy, Doppler Based, Buhlman or any of the modified forms are just that theory. There has been some research by the US Navy in regards to using Doppler to look at the bubbles, but outside that it,it is algorithims and theory using pressure ratios, and observing Decompression Sickness. Think about this, where was Decompression diving up until the early 1990's in the hands of the Navy, Research, and Commercial divers, There were no certification agencies teaching Decompression Procedures.


----------



## T Bone (Feb 18, 2006)

> Think about this, where was Decompression diving up until the early 1990's in the hands of the Navy, Research, and Commercial divers, There were no certification agencies teaching Decompression Procedures


Those two statements are not completely true, though you do make an excellent point. The second, whether agencies were teaching decompression diving is at least partially true. When I was certified in the mid 1980's, it was "not recommended" by two of the agencies I certified with, PADI and SSI both essentially taught "abstinence". But the tables they produced were full decompression tables (they are not today, at least not PADI). They stated that we "sport divers" should not be doing it. Yet is was certainly happening, especially with many new found wrecks at deeper depths (technology in that area was advancing rapidly also).

Professional divers had been doing it all along (and typically had much more support for such operations) but amateurs were certainly diving beyond the no deco limits (and beyond the then recently accepted sport diver limit of 130 feet). In water decompression (often on pure oxygen) was something practiced by many of the "gonzo" wreck divers of the Great Lakes I'd come in contact with.

The advent of the dive computer increased the percentage that were strictly in violation of the tables on multi level dives, as before we were limited to max depth for timing no deco limits on the entire dive. One went to 80 feet to see the name on the stern for example, then spent the balance of the dive up near a superstructure at 57 feet, we were still strictly limited to 40 minutes before beginning of out direct ascent to the surface (and that would in the strictest theory still include any safety stop). The computer changed that proifile markedly, yet by the tables alone, one might now be in decompression mode.

But you are quite correct on the whole business-tables, computer's and all, being no more than theory. Which lends credibility also to the style of diving done by Subkrawler (still not fluent in it, I would like to pick up some training- Hey SK, is there a link to an agency or group you could post for those of us wanting more info?).

Still, back to the OP question, I don't see it as likely or even nec. for Doxa to change the bezel based on this "new info". I highly doubt computers will change based soley on this either. And I think Rogue884's post illustrates why.


----------



## subkrawler (Oct 26, 2006)

T Bone said:


> Hey SK, is there a link to an agency or group you could post for those of us wanting more info?).


The agency is Global Underwater Explorers(GUE) http://www.gue.com/

Most people think of them strictly as a Technical or Cave agency, but their "Fundamentals" course is extremely applicable to single tank, recreational diving. Even if someone has no desire for cave or tech, I highly recommend everyone who holds a c-card to take the fundamentals course. You'll come away from it with better buoyancy skills, a higher degree of buddy awareness, and the foundation for a rock-solid gear configuration. You may even pick up on some reasons fitness and good health are significant to diving.

With that said, I don't agree with the Norwegian doctor on the subject of fitness and diving. Maybe age, but not fitness.


----------



## T Bone (Feb 18, 2006)

Getting a 404 error (whatever that is) Link not found....

Okay, I fixed it... not sure why this worked and yours didn't, only difference is the forward slashes...)


----------



## subkrawler (Oct 26, 2006)

T Bone said:


> Getting a 404 error (whatever that is) Link not found....
> 
> Okay, I fixed it... not sure why this worked and yours didn't, only difference is the forward slashes...)


Thanks T, not sure what happened there. While perusing the site, make sure you check out the video. http://www.gue.com/?q=en/node/667


----------



## Rogue884 (Dec 15, 2006)

I will say that as an PADI Professional for the past 17 years it was not until the early 90's that certification agencies began to even venture into the world of decompression diving for sport divers and that was IANTD and PSA. Both of which were highly localized to Florida and did not have a national or international scope. Most, not all, but most amateur divers who delved in decompression diving were trained in the military, commercially, or through research organization such as NOAA.

I have been an avid cave and wreck diver since the late 80's and I was initialy trained in deco, trimix, and heliox at the Academic Diving Program at Florida State University. We were utilizing US Navy Tables, and had the benefits of the local cave exploration that was again a furtherance of research diving and the Naval Experimental Dive Unit in Panama City, FL. We had to seek out instructors that were not readily available to mainstream dive enthusiasts. A prime example of this was how we had to procur O2. The only Agency that had any formal training in Oxygen Administration was the YMCA, in the early 90's DAN was strictly for vacation insurance, and in the State of Florida you could not purchase 100% O2 without a medical license or a O2 certification. 

Agencies such as TDI, SDI, and GUE did not exist, NACD, NSSCDS, and IANTD were very small cloistered orgainzations, and the long time standards of PADI, NAUI, YMCA, and CMAS would not touch it due to liability. I am not including SSI only because they were more localized out west until the mid 90's, I am not slighting them by any means. 

You are very correct in the utilization of computers, but I was training my advanced students in multi-level diving and slower ascents before computers were readily available, and when they did become more cost effective and mainstream; remember their were only two or three that were on the market that allowed for decompression. If memory serves me correctly it was the US Diver Monitor II, Cochran,and the Beauchat Alladin. It is only in the last ten years that company's have begun to utilize the varying new algorithims like VPM and RGBM. What I do not like about computers is the use of them as a crutch. If there is not a good foundation to what you are doing the computer is more of a dis-service. Sadly though though certain training agencies only train with computers for begining divers. It is like giving a kid a car, then teaching him to drive after his first wreck.

With that all being said, there are distict benefits to each of the agencies training that is offerred. I have taken course through IANTD, TDI, NACD, NSSCDS, and GUE and the fundamentals are all very similar. If a diver cannot hold a deco stop without an ascent line because they do not have good buoyancy, and they do not understand the decompression theory they choose to utilze, then the diver should probably stick to looking at the pretty fish doing NDL. 

Fundamental, fundamental, fundamentals, whether you call it DIR or Hogarthian you have to have the fundamentals.


----------



## subkrawler (Oct 26, 2006)

Rogue884 said:


> If a diver cannot hold a deco stop without an ascent line because they do not have good buoyancy, and they do not understand the decompression theory they choose to utilze, then the diver should probably stick to looking at the pretty fish doing NDL.
> 
> Fundamental, fundamental, fundamentals, whether you call it DIR or Hogarthian you have to have the fundamentals.


Right on Rogue|>....and with all of that said, I guess I'm not the only one around here that thinks Fletcher and the Seahunters, look like an underwater train wreck.:-x


----------



## Rogue884 (Dec 15, 2006)

subkrawler said:


> Right on Rogue|>....and with all of that said, I guess I'm not the only one around here that thinks Fletcher and the Seahunters, look like an underwater train wreck.:-x


I bought that DVD, it is truly a train wreck waiting to happen. That is a prime example of commercially trained divers influencing sport divers.

Well said Sub Krawler.


----------



## KarlS (Dec 23, 2007)

Amen to that!


----------



## SeaHunter (Feb 13, 2006)

CRIKEY! You blokes have more faith in the insane US legal system than I do! 2 past news stories here in Oz to illustrate my point:

1. A burglar is crawling along a roof and comes to a skylight. While attempting to open it and BREAK IN he falls through the skylight. He sues the owner and WINS MILLIONS!!!

2. A hiker in a National Park comes to a rock slide. There are barriers in place and warning signs DO NOT ENTER_FALLING ROCKS. He enters, gets injured, sues and WINS MILLIONS!!!!

These are only 2 of HUNDREDS we here about Down Under! So stop arguing with me or I'll invite you over for some diving and leave you stranded in the water and take off back to port! 

Gary


----------



## asche (May 18, 2008)

subkrawler said:


> You may even pick up on some reasons fitness and good health are significant to diving.
> 
> With that said, I don't agree with the Norwegian doctor on the subject of fitness and diving. Maybe age, but not fitness.


The only thing he said was that fitness and DCS has no apparent connection.

There are lots of reasons for staying in shape when you are diving!

What has been observed, both on navy and recreational divers, is that physical exercise 12-24 hours befor a dive leads to a reduction in the formation of micro bubbles in your blood during the dive.
The reason for this is a physical change in the cells of the blood vessels. What happens is not yet fully understood, but it is clear that it is the actual exercise that gives the benefit, regardless of your physical shape.


----------



## subkrawler (Oct 26, 2006)

SeaHunter said:


> CRIKEY! You blokes have more faith in the insane US legal system than I do! 2 past news stories here in Oz to illustrate my point:
> 
> 1. A burglar is crawling along a roof and comes to a skylight. While attempting to open it and BREAK IN he falls through the skylight. He sues the owner and WINS MILLIONS!!!
> 
> ...


You still don't get it do you? The numbers on the DOXA bezel are DOXA's. They may be based on the USN tables, but they aren't the USN tables. They never have been, so why should they be now?

Oh, and about the guy falling through the skylight. If that would have been in my house....said intruder would have been rapidly ventilated. Dead men can't sue.;-)


----------



## SeaHunter (Feb 13, 2006)

subkrawler said:


> You still don't get it do you? The numbers on the DOXA bezel are DOXA's. They may be based on the USN tables, but they aren't the USN tables. They never have been, so why should they be now?
> 
> Hmmm..... from the Doxa specifications of its Professional: Bezel Solid stainless steel unidirectional bezel. Engraved with the US Navy maximum no decompression limit times in feet (NOT METRIC). [bezel operating instructions]
> Call me a crazy Aussie but it sure sounds like The US Navy No deco times to me( "engraved with the *US NAVY* maximum no decompression limit times"!)Unless it's some secret US code that when you have IN PRINT" US NAVY" it means something OTHER than US NAVY?
> ...


----------



## subkrawler (Oct 26, 2006)

SeaHunter said:


> subkrawler said:
> 
> 
> > You still don't get it do you? The numbers on the DOXA bezel are DOXA's. They may be based on the USN tables, but they aren't the USN tables. They never have been, so why should they be now?
> ...


----------



## SeaHunter (Feb 13, 2006)

No worries mate! Not worried about this issue, just curious.
On to other things Doxa! Cheers. gary


----------

