HUD Mask

I bought an Aeris Compumask a few weeks ago, and am hooked. I dived with it in a variety of environments, and it has spoiled me in the span of about 25 dives. I never need to look at my gauges (I have redundant spg & computer at the moment), and can keep my bouyancy to within a foot while swimming over open water. I no longer lose bouyancy while looking through the viewfinder of the camera to take pictures (busting coral in the process). One sweet feature is it allows me to stay at depth for the maximum time, calculating how much air and/or NDL time I have left (based on my air consumption), and I only need to ascend when my bottom time reaches zero - it takes into consideration that I must make a controlled ascent and a 3 minute safety stop, getting me to the surface with 300 psi. Accordingly, I no longer need to calculate on my own how much air I'll need to ascend and make a safety stop - it's all done for me. The one drawback, of course, is the price, but once you get past that part, it is awesome.
I know that many will say they do not need to stare at a depth guage to maintain depth, or that they do not need a HUD to know how much air is in their tank, or they can calculate air consumption or air needed for ascent on their own. To those of us with a HUD, those people sound like the same ones who use to bemoan laptop computers or cell phones. The HUD will likely become as prevalent as standard dive computers are now. Buy one and you will be hooked too (unless you lose it - I would advise against losing it).

All I can say is: I WANT!

wow ....you managed to not mention the ONE thing that makes the HUD different than everything already in the market, but still poo-pooed in advance any potential critics. Not bad.

So what good is that HUD of yours if you still have hoses hanging from your 1st stage?

And how long you guess it is going to be before it becomes "as prevalent as dive computers are now"? which by the way, I'm surprise dive computers in general are NOT as prevalent as many of us think. I'm wondering because it has been well over 2 years since I got mine and I wasn't among the first ones

fellowtraveler44:

....I only need to ascend when my bottom time reaches zero - it takes into consideration that I must make a controlled ascent and a 3 minute safety stop, getting me to the surface with 300 psi. Accordingly, I no longer need to calculate on my own how much air I'll need......

Click to expand...

So hitting the surface with 300PSI is your idea of a safe dive?
You want to eliminate all dive planning and follow the computer to the edge?
You are an instructor?:depressed:

Edit: I am glad you like your HUD. It is the logical progression of integrated computers and if you are fond of this type of thing, knock yourself out. What I am commenting on is the idea you seem to endorse that one can follow a computer to the bloody edge without thinking. I believe this to be foolish, dangerous and a poor example for an instructor. Sorry for the rude tone.

Ana,
First of all, I indicated I am redundant (with a hose) "at the moment." That may change once I am confident I no longer need an analog spg. So far I have have never been without my HUD display, but I want to be sure I can rely on it before I ditch redundant gauges, etc. I may never ditch them, but I no longer need to reach for them, or even wonder what they say. The data remains in my field of vision all dive long.
Second, I have already heard the critics. The criticism I have heard, however, is from divers who have never tried a HUD mask. I have yet to hear criticism from someone that has actually dove with a HUD mask. I would be interested to hear if anyone has bought a HUD mask and is unhappy with it.
Third, on an apparently unrelated topic, are you saying that dive computers are not prevalent? Most dive agencies now make tables optional in the open water class, and are replacing that with instruction on computer diving. I have been diving a computer for about 12 years. Maybe I misunderstood what you bought 2 years ago, but I think most divers use computers these days. A survey on that would be interesting.
Back on point - if you want to disregard my review of the Compumask, go ahead. I am simply sharing my experience with it, which has been great.

Grumpyoldguy,
I am not setting an example for anyone here. I am reporting on the features of a mask, which has as a default setting of 300 psi at surface. (I assume it is adjustable, but am comfortable with the default setting.) I made several dives last week, surfacing with 300 psi. If you think having the computer get you to the surface with 300 psi is "foolish, dangerous and a poor example", I suggest you contact Aeris which made that its default setting - you obviously know much more than they do. You want to surface with 500, go right ahead. You want to begin your ascent before the bottom timer reaches zero, go ahead. Surfacing with zero psi would be pushing to the "bloody edge", but surfacing with 300 is hardly death-defying. I gather you have never done that. Good for you.

fellowtraveler44:

Grumpyoldguy,
I am not setting an example for anyone here. I am reporting on the features of a mask, which has as a default setting of 300 psi at surface. (I assume it is adjustable, but am comfortable with the default setting.) I made several dives last week, surfacing with 300 psi. If you think having the computer get you to the surface with 300 psi is "foolish, dangerous and a poor example", I suggest you contact Aeris which made that its default setting - you obviously know much more than they do. You want to surface with 500, go right ahead. You want to begin your ascent before the bottom timer reaches zero, go ahead. Surfacing with zero psi would be pushing to the "bloody edge", but surfacing with 300 is hardly death-defying. I gather you have never done that. Good for you.

Click to expand...

The key issue I see is you keep saying how it calculates how much air YOU use and will get YOU to the surface safely. I don't see anything about your buddy. Does it take that into consideration? Does it take into any consideration for reserves at depth, deep stops, etc... 300PSI is not much of a reserve at 4 or5 atm. How accurate and reliable is the transducer in the system, is 300lbs really 300, or is there a 5% tolerance and it might be 150lbs? This are all things I would hope an instructor would consider before recommending a system.

To be fair, this are issues with all A/I computers, not HUD mask. I really don't have a problem with A/I computers (except $$$), but I want to know that they can account for all the issues I think about before and while on every dive before I trust them without thinking. So for now, I avoid them.

grumpyoldguy,
I have compared the HUD mask readings with the analog spg, and the two have always coincided. That is not to say the could not both be a little off, but the readings appear reasonably accurate. I have not allowed the Aeris bottom timer to tick down to zero while at 4 or 5 atm, as I usually ascend to shallower depths near the end of the dive, and then ascend further for my safety stop. I think your questions are valid, but accusing me of being "foolish, dangerous and a poor example for an instructor" based only on some questions you have seems wholly inappropriate.

The Aeris mask does allow me to see data from more than 1 transducer, so I could keep tabs on my buddy's air, etc., although I have not gone that far yet. Right now, it requires periodic communication with my buddy on his remaining air/bottom time, just like any other spg/computer. I do not think that makes the HUD display inferior. I assume you periodically inquire into your buddy's remaining air, as I do. Mine simply helps figure out how long I can remain at depth before I need to ascend. Of course, you can ignore that feature and ascend earlier if you want to, but knowing that I have enough air to slowly ascend and still reach the surface (with 300 psi) is a nice feature. Try it sometime and I think you'll agree. Maybe not, but I like it.

I apologize for my offensive remark, they were excessive.

These remarks were however based not on my questions, but on the poor diving practices you appear to endorse in your first post with statements like "...and I only need to ascend when my bottom time reaches zero" or "I no longer lose bouyancy while looking through the viewfinder of the camera to take pictures (busting coral in the process)." When I read these and see the "INSTRUCTOR" sign, I jump to conclusions. My bad.

So back to the questions - does the computer account for rock bottom reserves to allow you and your buddy enough gas to safely ascend? If it does, what are the parameters for this and how does it work?