Must I abort if computer fails?

[halocline]

But if the plan was to ride the computers then there was no plan.
Richard

Exactly. You've taken a problem in dive behavior, which is not planning, and tried to solve that problem just by adding another piece of gear.

 

[kanonfodr]

I use a computer, Aeris Elite T3 w/ AI but I always set it to gauge mode and carry a watch on my other wrist as a backup and dive the table I use (UTD Min Deco Table). That way I am constantly using my table and keeping track of the dive in my head thus there is no worry about having to revert to tables in case my computer fails.

Ultimately, however, it starts with planning the dive properly to include max depth/times. Whenever one of the conditions to end the dive is met (max MDL time, rock bottom, max depth, etc), the dive is over or at least the exit begins. Computers will feed you some wacky information and if you aren't paying attention to your diving you will find yourself roundly confused and, possibly, with a deco obligation that your computer will not like you diving with for the rest of the day.

As an aside, a local dive guide uses a Suunto computer which uses a very conservative algorithm. He regularly puts it into deco from his daily diving but when you look at his profiles they are fairly safe. IMO, if you are going to use a tool like that then you had best be committed to following it's instructions or get a better tool for your uses.

Peace,
Greg

 

[boulderjohn]

Exactly. You've taken a problem in dive behavior, which is not planning, and tried to solve that problem just by adding another piece of gear.

There are many viable ways to plan a dive. Not doing it the way you do is not necessarily diving without a plan.

 

[marcopalla]

so your point is:
do an accurate tables plan every given dive,
so if computer fails you havn't to abort?

sorry but it seems more logic to do the exact contrary:
don't give a **** about planning and bringing more stuff, if computer fails (1 in a billion?) 3' @ 15ft and finish.
(of course we are talking about no deco dive...)

 

[Blackwood]

The idea that you can take the computer pre-dive plan (if a diver even wrote it down) and somehow work into a pressure group seems problematic.

IMO, "pressure groups" overcomplicate things, as do wide arrays of multiple times at each depth. All this is much simpler with the MDL approach.

 

[Blackwood]

so your point is:
do an accurate tables plan every given dive,
so if computer fails you havn't to abort?

sorry but it seems more logic to do the exact contrary:
don't give a **** about planning and bringing more stuff, if computer fails (1 in a billion?) 3' @ 15ft and finish.
(of course we are talking about no deco dive...)

I believe the crux of this thread isn't finishing a dive during which a computer fails, but rather how to treat subsequent dives.

 

[boulderjohn]

I believe the crux of this thread isn't finishing a dive during which a computer fails, but rather how to treat subsequent dives.

Here is the OP:

I saw in a recent thread several posts saying that a dive should be thumbed if your dive computer fails.

I'm wondering...if you have redundant gauges, would it not be of benefit to have made a square profile "worst case" dive plan from the tables before the dive? That way if the computer craps out, you don't have to abort, just stick to the conservative worst case plan. (Assuming of course, that you know that your max depth had not exceeded your worst case scenario dive plan.)

Is it really always necessary to abort, or is my idea impractical, weighed against the remote chance that your computer will fail?

Although many posts have focused on subsequent dives, the OP was 100% focused on whether it was necessary to abort the dive under the conditions described. All my posts were limited to answering that specific question.

 

[Blackwood]

Although many posts have focused on subsequent dives, the OP was 100% focused on whether it was necessary to abort the dive under the conditions described.

My bad, I guess I just followed the thread as far as it went.

 

[SailNaked]

The really funny thing is that people believe that if they violate what the computer says they WILL get DCS. or if they do not sit out 24 hours because their computer is locked out they WILL die. It is 100% possible to think about what you are doing, realize that if you increase pressure you increase N2 loading on your body and when you decrease that pressure the gas will come out of suspension. the danger is big bubbles we use the tables and computers to LIMIT that risk not to prevent it. we can use any of the algorithms that have proved to be successful. you may even use one I invented and have never tried the Delta-Atm*Minute theory. Basically you multiply the difference in Atm times the minutes you stay there and then do the reverse on the way up subtracting from the total the difference in ATM from the bottom.

the tables are not Accurate, the computer does not take into account your particular body, and there are many algorithms that give different answers to the same question "how long can I stay at this depth?"


Point is you can use tables, computers and theory to make a plan to compensate for one or more failures in equipment, and you should use the most important computer the one that if it fails you are totally screwed so it does not mater after that what you do. after that you might get DCS even if you follow the latest theory, and you might not using my insane theory. (please do not use it, it is really just a metaphor).

 

[Reg Braithwaite]

There are many viable ways to plan a dive. Not doing it the way you do is not necessarily diving without a plan.

I'm confused. Do you consider "I will get in the water and dive until I reach some sort of gas limit or until my computer tells me I have reached my NDL" a dive plan?