Degrees of FRC
The theory behind FRC seems sound but I still dont feel tempted to go that route because:
1) I have never come accross water warm enough that I could dive for more than 30 minutes without getting cold,
2) My recreational depths and times on full lungs are good enough for my purposes, and If I understand the FRC theory, it wouldnt give me longer bottom times anyway.
3) I dont have N or CO2 toxicity issues on even my deepest dives
4) I'm fearfull of a sub 15m blackout whilst recreational diving.
I'm just wondering if I'm misunderstanding something and if I could be convinced otherwise.
Also, if FRC is the way to go, could it then be implied that full lung diving without packing is preferable to full lung with packing. As I understand it, the long term benifits of FRC diving(increased haematocrit) come from the fact that one is diving constanly hypoxic. A full lung dive is hardly hypoxic, yet it is a degree of the same thing is is not? And infact all the benifits of FRC diving should also be evident, but to a much lesser degree of course in full lungs minus packing. If my reasoning is correct, how come most FRC divers used to prefere packing over not packing on full lung dives.
Personally I like the idea of minimising changes in bouyancy and expending minimal efford in the early stages of the dive. I plan to go back to diving without packing for a while and see how it goes. Also,I dont want to be doubting FRC diving because I dont understand it properly, so If any of you FRC divers out there have got the time to try convince us fence-sitters we're missing something, we're all ears
cheers
Bevan