Why the dislike of air integrated computers?

[knotical]

... Time it takes is about 5 minutes IIRC for a full tank, so it can get you in trouble easily if you're at the end of your bottom time if you're diving without redundancy. ...

This widely cited article: Life Ending Seconds • ADVANCED DIVER MAGAZINE • By Curt Bowen says it's more like 20 minutes. Recall that the high pressure port only has a tiny opening since it's not typically intended to deliver volumes of gas.

 

[Patoux01]

Correct. Wonder where I got those 5 minutes from.

 

[ajduplessis]

Will be interesting to see the responses. Some tech divers seem to really push their beliefs, opinions and gear choices onto everyone including recreational divers. I appreciate them sharing information, but sometimes it's a bit much when they start insulting gear choices that differ from theirs.

Pushing beliefs onto rec divers I think you are missing the point, its about mitigating risk!!! I have never ever had a SPG fail, but I have had AI fail. Knowing your remaining gas volume is critical in order to calculate next actions especially when things go south. But I am sure you have a plan to deal with this.

I prefer equipment that less prone to failure and a SPG is one of those.
AI is a $$olution to a problem that never exsisted.

 

[eelnoraa]

Never seen that either. The transmitters all have unique serial numbers and if that particular serial number is not listed in the computers set up it will not recognize it.

This is true for Oceanic/Aeris/Hollis computer. But for Suunto, it is not the case appearantly, at least not for the D9 I have borrowed before. It seems the link and registered by approximately sensor. Once the link is made, nearby transmitter won't interfere. However, once the link is lost, which can happen, it can pick up nearly transmitter. In my OW, I have seen my instructor's D9 pickup DM's transmitter

---------- Post added July 2nd, 2015 at 01:18 AM ----------

ATR reading from all AI I have used is dangerous. If you don't trust ATR and do you gas planning yourself, why even use AI? The very high additional cost seems only benefit air consumption data logging, which with some training, very easy to estimate it yourself. I am not willing to pay so much for data that I don't care.

 

[scubadada]

It seems a recurring theme that air integrated is readily dismissed by advanced and tech divers and I was wondering why. I could see it being another failure point or "crutch," but with a backup SPG the benefits outweigh the risk of failure in my mind.

Just wondering what some of the concerns with AI are.

I am not a tech diver but likely qualify as an advanced diver. I've dived AI computers since 2002, about 1000 dives, first with an Oceanic Pro Plus then a Pro Plus 2. For the last 5 years/550 dives, I've used a hoseless VT3. I've never had a computer failure. I've not lost sync for longer than 30 seconds. I've generally not been aware of these rare events but they show up on the download graphic and table for review. Oceanic computers pair with transmitters with unique serial numbers, I think there is little risk for mispairing.

That being said, as I am loathe to miss a single dive or interfere with a series of dives, I dive with a backup Geo2 computer and a SPG. I have never needed the backups but am glad I have them. Many tech divers dive with a backup computer for the same reason and/or carry a bottom timer and tables. I have an SPG on a short hose on my pony also, as I want to know how much gas I have there. I've never had to deploy my pony in an emergency either, but am glad it is there.

I am aware of many tech divers dislike for AI computers, both hosed and hoseless, and am tolerant of their philosophy. To each their own, do what's right for you

---------- Post added July 2nd, 2015 at 03:39 AM ----------

ATR reading from all AI I have used is dangerous. If you don't trust ATR and do you gas planning yourself, why even use AI? The very high additional cost seems only benefit air consumption data logging, which with some training, very easy to estimate it yourself. I am not willing to pay so much for data that I don't care.

We have recently had the ATR debate, just as we have frequently had the AI debate. Oceanic ATR is quite accurate for a single diver, assuming you satisfy the assumptions. Personally, I do the majority of my diving solo and would not apply the ATR to a buddy situation. Just like all computer functions, the diver is responsible for understanding how it works and what limitations it has. ATR does not replace gas planning, an activity I find quite easy, knowing my SRMV under a whole range of conditions for the last 550 dives.

 

[Diving Dubai]

I'm an AI convert. I chose to want all the dive info on my wrist. Yes I still have my SPG clipped off - generally it gets used to check the tank contents when I initially assemble the gear/change tanks. By habit I check my SPG when taking 3/4 deep breaths prior to jumping ensuring my tank is on (Yes I've caught myself a couple of times not having my tank on)

I dive the EOn Steel with new generation of tank transmitters (they call them pods) There are no complex power ups once the TX senses pressure the computer picks it as long as you assigned your S/no to your gas. Yes once I paired my wife's computer to mine on the dive deck (not paying attention - tanks 10-15 ' apart and it still picked up)

If Shearwater brought out a Petrel with AI you can bet there would be an uptake.

Redundancy and failure points. There is a great deal of BS "spoken" about this as a justification for dive gear choices. From someone who worked with Aircraft systems I fully understand about redundancy, failure analysis and risk mitigation, indeed if people here decided to apply their take on redundancy, and failure points to an aircraft then they wouldn't ever fly.

Everyone is allowed a choice. I get that some people are sold equipment they don't need whether it be AI or split fins, What peeves me is when people try to force their opinion and choices on to others because they have a personal bias or are a follower of a "fashion" (unless of course the person's choice is completely wrong for other reasons) thus believing their way is the only way. Listen to the B****cks spoken about BP/W (I'm a BP/W owner) THe vast majority of people dive regular Jacket BCD's maybe some choose BI but listen to opinion on the forum and you would think that that BP/W is the most popular and prevalent BCD.

Meh.
/rant

 

[PCoetzee]

The Original question relates strictly to OW and AOW sport diving so I'll try to give you answers from two perspectives:

AOW Sport Recreational Diving:
AI Computers are useful and fun to dive although the additional information does not really enhance your diving experience. As a failure point? Who cares! HP port or hose failures are rare and even if it does fail you should rely on your "buddy" pair to safely get back to the surface in a controlled manner. This is easily accomplished as we are not diving deep and remains within no-deco limits. Personally I prefer wrist computers to consoles. This however is personal preference in a sport diving context.
One of my friends occasionally installs his wireless transmitter on his son's (12 years old) rig. That way he can monitor his boy's gas consumption. I really like this idea and will probably do something similar when I have children.

Technical Diving:
There are many reasons why Technical divers doesn't use Air Integration:
1) We use multiple gasses and don't want to have many transmitters. The leading tech computer brands doesn't even have AI as an option as we do not want or need it.
2) I don't think a console (hose mounted) computer with decent deco algorithms even exist.
3) Console computers are big and generally in the way as technical divers carry a lot more equipment and needs to remain streamlined.

Hope this helps.

 

[dmaziuk]

Oceanic ATR is quite accurate for a single diver, assuming you satisfy the assumptions.

Messing with someone's ATR would be the obvious way to sabotage a wireless AI DC. Not that anyone would go to all the trouble of building a "rogue" transmitter and installing it on their victim just before the dive.

My problem with wireless AI DC is the price. A $200 DC does everything I need for my rec vac diving so paying an extra $1000+ for the ability to see my air pressure on the wrist and plot my AC real-time throughout the dive is just silly.

 

[Peter69_56]

I dive within AI computer along with an spg as a backup. I've had my computer, but never the transmitter, fail during a dive. Definitely a pain.

I understand the "extra fail point" argument in theory, but I've never heard of a transmitter blowing under water, so I'm not sure I buy that.

The best argument I've heard from some tech divers is that once you start getting into stage bottles, deco bottles, etc, the cost of a transmitter for each becomes prohibitive.

In the end I think it's a point of preference and what each person is comfortable with. For me as a recreational diver I like having the transmitter, but won't be getting rid of my spg any time soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When in Tonga I saw a transmitter blow the end completely off. Brand new transmitter too. Back to an SPG for him.

 

[Searcaigh]

Friend of mine uses her transmitter on a short HP hose as her first one got damaged somehow by boat crew using it as a lifting point when her rig was connected to a tank!

Now if Shearwater had AI for at least 3 tanks plus a Heads Up Display ......