Reliability of Hoseless Computers?

[RAWalker]

My 2 computers are both Oceanic products a Atom 2.0 and a VT3 both can monitor multiple bottles. I have yet to use this feature but soon will as my wife has passed her OW checkout.
Not only do I feel that we hear about the problems but not the pleasures, but of the problems how many are user errors? How many times will the lack of maintainence (replacing batteries) be the cause of a called dive.
I purchased a used Atom 1.0 that had a supposedly dead transmitter only to find that the original user installed a speck of dirt with the transmitter battery and nothing was wrong with it. (the best $150 I've ever spent) (Now upgraded to the Atom 2.0 for another $150)
This is a case in point of the original owner not knowing enough about the device he was using to maintain it properly. He replaced it with a different model which eventually will need a battery and he may be in a similar situation.
How many users of computers can't make it through the manual that came with the device? Maybe the first page should state something like if you don't understand this manual fully do not use the computer intil you do. Like many tech devices some of these computers are beyond some users abilities to use properly. Maybe manufacturers should have training courses available.
I wonder how many computers get sent in for service that don't really need service?

 

[vladimir]

I started using air-integrated computers with the US Divers Monitor3 around 1995. It would lose transmission often, usually when my strobes cycled, and start beeping to add insult to injury. The UWATECs were a big improvement in reliability, starting with the Air-X and then the Nitrox-Z. Neither computer had transmission drops that I noticed. I now have a Suunto D9, which has never had a dropped transmission that I noticed. I am not sure whether you can turn off all of the audible alarms, but I have never heard mine beep.

I do have a mechanical SPG, because I don't see any downside to that, and I think the oft-cited "extra hose" issue is a red herring. Then why have a gas-integrated computer? I find the ability to glance at my gas pressure without removing my grip from my camera to be a convenience worth the expense, as it is not unusual for me to stalk macro subjects for 10 minutes or more.

 

[mruseless]

Part of "the problem" with the reporting of "problems" is that people don't report LACK OF PROBLEMS with the same frequency (eg: no one posts "went diving yesterday and my computer didn't fail") so your perception that "many people are apprehensive" and that "there are too many stories" is potentially skewed.

OK, I did a little diving yesterday with my wireless AI computer and it didn't fail

 

[Izu]

A year ago I switched my Versapro and brass SPG for an Atom 2 with an extra transmitter to keep an eye on the missus. The unit has worked flawlessly for me however it is a pain to get her pressure unless we are almost shoulder to sholder. I soon removed her transmitter and went back to hand sigs for pressure checks. I am now considering the transmitter for my pony.

 

[peterbj7]

I stopped stocking Uwatecs in my shop, all models, when they hit a failure rate "in the box" of 50%.

 

[divewithjay]

I know many divers are apprehensive about going hoseless because of reliability issues. Too many "was diving when my computer went blank" stories.

Please share your good/bad experiences with hoseless (transmitter type) computers.

I've been using an Aeris CompuMask for about 3 months now with no problems whatsoever.

 

[runway1]

Part of "the problem" with the reporting of "problems" is that people don't report LACK OF PROBLEMS with the same frequency (eg: no one posts "went diving yesterday and my computer didn't fail") so your perception that "many people are apprehensive" and that "there are too many stories" is potentially skewed.

I'm not following your logic. I, you and every other diver gets feedback from other divers. To say that not reporting "went diving yesterday and my computer didn't fail", doesn't folow any logic. I'm not concerned about the non-failures, that's not the issue. It's the failures.

If my brand new wetsuit dives perfect for 49 dives and on the 50th dive it splits open, am I happy I got 49 dives without failure?

 

[runway1]

Not only do I feel that we hear about the problems but not the pleasures, but of the problems how many are user errors? How many times will the lack of maintainence (replacing batteries) be the cause of a called dive.

How many users of computers can't make it through the manual that came with the device? ..... Like many tech devices some of these computers are beyond some users abilities to use properly. ....I wonder how many computers get sent in for service that don't really need service?

I think that's is a very good point. Would remove a large percentage of "failures".

 

[vladimir]

I'm not following your logic. I, you and every other diver gets feedback from other divers. To say that not reporting "went diving yesterday and my computer didn't fail", doesn't folow any logic. I'm not concerned about the non-failures, that's not the issue. It's the failures.

If my brand new wetsuit dives perfect for 49 dives and on the 50th dive it splits open, am I happy I got 49 dives without failure?

What he was pointing out is that by paying attention just to the failures--which are much, much, more likely to be reported--we can lose sight of the sample size. If you hear from 10 people who tell you their Suunto malfunctioned you might not buy one. Because you don't know about the 999,990 people with flawlessly operating Suunto computers, for an admirable 99.999% reliability. So, yes, we do need to concern ourselves with the non-failures.

 

[tfsails]

I have an Aeris 750GT. One of the main attractions of an AI computer to me is its ability to let me know how long I can stay at this depth with this gas consumption and still hit my target on air left in the tank at the end of the dive. On a dive off Hatteras one day, it failed to communicate with the transmitter until I was at about 80' depth and about two breaths from aborting the dive. After that, it worked flawlessly the rest of that dive. The same thing happened the second dive of the day.

After that incident, I bought a used SPG and put it on my rig. Now, it's not such a big deal if your computer fails to communicate with its transmitter.

A year or so later, after getting my stuff serviced (this was before I got into the service business), the computer wouldn't talk to the transmitter at all. I sent it back to Aeris who told me that they'd identified a communication problem with the 750GT and they could either replace it with a refurbished unit for $225 or I could buy a whole new computer at retail price. Since mine was out of warranty by this time, I swallowed hard, spent the $225 and got a refurb'ed unit, which has never given me a moment's trouble. However, I still have the SPG and will always have one.

The only "problem" that I have with my setup is that my computer reads ~250psi low throughout the pressure range and my SPG reads about 100psi high, as compared to my flow bench's input pressure gauge. However, just about all computer transmitters read that low and almost all gauges read low, too. I'd rather have a low reading than a high one any day. I think I've seen two SPGs read high, and unfortunately, one of 'em's mine.