What to do if your computer dies

[h90]

Reciently while doing a week of diving the "vandenburg" one of our group had his computer die. since we had simiular profiles we knew he had satisfied his computer. I gave him my redundant computer to use for our secound dive (I dive 2 computers) well to make a long story short ...the next day he used a different computer from the dive shop and the next day after that he used yet another computer from yet another dive shop. inspite of my warnings to stay with us(dive a simular profile) he chose to dive the full limit of the computers. I have elected not to ever dive with him based on his ignoring our repeated warnings . he is in his mid to late 60's and has logged well over 2000 dives. Am I wrong? BTW our profiles were 100 to 130 feet for all dives

If you have 2 computer and you dove the same profil, I don't see a problem if he continues with your second computer.
Changing the computer on the next day AND pushing the limits is crazy. It might be without problem because the safety margins are big enough but he may get a problem. I know one guy who got problems diving the limits every day for a week or two with only his computer.
As deeper and as more dives as more risky it gets. Continue with your second computer or waiting 24 hours and not pushing the limits would be right.

Add: I would not use him as buddy: At the end someone blame you that you should have known and talk him out of it. If he want to do something crazy he should do it alone.

 

[fire_diver]

I cannot condone his actions. Not something I would do. It's risky.

On the other hand, you were acting as a self-appointed "scuba cop" and I cannot condone that either. I would find that offensive.

You can make a suggestion. If he's not receptive, don't push the point.

How is he acting as a "self-appointed scuba cop"? Did he force the diver out of the water? Did he prevent him from making future dives?

Sounds to me like he was being a GOOD buddy and expressing concern for his safety. When those concerns were ignored, he opted to no longer dive with this person. Sounds like the OP is the very type of diver I want for a buddy.

 

[Charlie99]

Perhaps your buddy was just using the computers are a depth gauge/time and tracking his decompression mentally.

There are many that advocate doing that on a routine basis.

This is even more likely if he was diving profiles that he had done many times before.

If I had a computer failure, I would do very much like what your buddy did, except that you'd see me doing a lot of extra hang time between 30' and the surface to give a bit more margin of safety to account for my less precise tracking of N2 loading.

 

[Iceguy4]

Wow lots of replys here...Thanks so much for your time!! We plan our dives very informally. we were diving as a group of 4 with a husband wife team and me and "trouble" as the secound pair. we were diving to our computers limit on all dives. we would head up when our computers directed us that our bottom time was less then 1 or 2 minutes. generally surface intervals was slightly less then 1 hour...2 dives per day. we noticed the first day(with his replacement computer) that he had around 4 or 5 minutes more bottom time then us. I was the first to mention he was pushing it but others followed suit. We were on the line doing our 1/2 stop while he was at depth like it was OK.
As for my say on a dive boat, I realize I have little or no say in others dive profile ...that said I love it when the captain (like george of olympus {rest his soul} in NC) stopped a "Newbe" from diving his secound dive due to a boner on his first dive. (another story ...he exceeded his bottom time exsessivly on air). Allthough it has never happened as of yet to me...It has to be a major bummer to ride back from a dive with a bent diver or worst...a body.
I read in that 100+ page post on the cayman diver who died..."we planned to go to 200' but when we got there one of our guys waved us off...when we got back to the boat, his computer said he went to 310' after passing out and regaining consciousness" If he was part of our group, I'm not sure how I would handle that!!! I would be PISSED...thats for sure!!! I believe we have an obligation to our sport to be safe, but also to others also if we chose to dive around them.
This was the first time I have dove 2 computers. I just upgraded to the viper air from the plain viper computer and was slightly unconfortable diving my new computer alone. now I feel like its kinda nice having such redundancy.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

I would have questioned the diver about how he was accounting for the residual nitrogen tracked by the other computer on the previous day's diving. His answer would determine how much additional risk he was taking on and whether he was aware of that risk. As Charlie99 pointed out, there are certainly things that the diver could have done to increase the safety margin (increase length of safety stops, spend a longer time at shallower depths, etc.).

On a side note, it doesn't sound like you and "trouble" were diving as a buddy team, since you had chosen to ascend to conduct a deep stop while he remained at depth. Is that how you guys agreed to conduct the dive?

 

[markmantei]

I think the bigger problem here is that he was not diving as part of a proper buddy team. You should have both ascended when the first computer indicated aproaching NDL. "Trouble" did affect your safety when he chose to abandon his buddy and stay @ depth when you needed to ascend. What would have happened had either of you had an emergency while he was playing around @ depth?

 

[Rhone Man]

Grown men can make their own decisions about risks.

• Your friend can decide how much he wants those extra few minutes on the Vandenburg.
• You can decide whether you really want to dive with someone who assesses risks the way s/he does.

I wouldn't second guess either of you from my keyboard.

If it had been me, and I had borrowed by buddies back up computer, I would have set the nitrox level at about 2% lower than I was actually using (to partially compensate for possible differences in profile) and then kept using your computer for the rest of the trip. Might also double or triple my safety stops for good measure.

I sure as hell would not want to lose a day diving on the Vandenberg because of a computer failure. But I wouldn't risk serious injury to max out my bottom time either.

 

[Bedros A]

To start with it is a bit illogical for someone to dive with 2 different computers on 2 consecutive dives.

However, as Jax said earlier, a seasoned diver, with well over 2000 logged dives, would most probably know this and taken appropriate measures (which might not be known to you).

Then again, if something happened to him due to that miscalculated move, that would screw up your dives. I do understand your POV, and at the end of the day the choice of a buddy is solely yours.

Cheers

BA

 

[vinegarbiscuit]

It's not the way I would have played it. By switching to different computers not once but twice, he's effectively wiping out all history of his nitrogen loading. Nor does it sound like he erred on the side of conservatism in terms of his subsequent dive-planning. He would have been better off if he'd stuck to using your back-up, even if he was diving a slightly different profile as you...at least it would have had some nitrogen-loading data history, which is better than nothing (aren't back-ups marvellous? I always carry one, having had computers crap-out on me at depth before). Also depends if you were willing to keep loaning it out, since it would have left you without a back-up. The next-best alternative would have been to stick to the same rental computer for the rest of the trip and/or using tables with a depth gauge and bottom timer. In all cases, subsequent dives should have been planned with a fair bit of cushioning.

That said, the gentlemen in question is an adult and free to dive any way he chooses, providing he's not affecting other people's safety and well-being. Now, one could argue that his experience - and internal planning based on that experience - prevented anything bad happening...or maybe it was a bit of luck, too. I can't know what degree of planning he engaged in, since I can't ask him. While there's a great deal of research that's been accumulated on decompression sickness, doctors are still scratching their heads when it comes to figuring how and why different bodies can be affected (or not). A diver can "do everything right" and still get a hit...another diver can follow that same profile and come up roses. Anyway. You too are an adult and are free to choose your buddies. If his diving makes you uncomfortable - and it would have made me uncomfortable, too - don't dive with him.

 

[Blackwood]

we noticed the first day(with his replacement computer) that he had around 4 or 5 minutes more bottom time then us. I was the first to mention he was pushing it but others followed suit.

Different algorithms may result in that much of a disparity on a single profile, let alone multiple.

So which one is right? The one with the least BT? The one with the most? The one in the middle? All of them? None of them?

As has been stated by people far more eloquent than I, deco tables and computers are modeling theory, not actuality.

Was he using them as the manufacturers intended? No. Does that make him crazy or stupid? Not necessarily; it's possible he knows his physiology better than Roger Aeris or Peter Uwatec.