PADI dropping dive tables?

[Rex De Silva]

It could be my genes. Anyway, I use whatever works for me!

Rex

 

[Rex De Silva]

First: I think very important for a diver to understand how a computer works so learning the tables may be intellectually important.

Second: I never use tables underwater and I never dive a square dive. So I use my Archimede.

Third: Breaking down, crash...Yes...Like every human things...No? And In two LDS it was not possible to buy depth gauge and timer (not electronic ) they simply said: "Ho, we've not that, we sell so rarely..."

Conclusion: I suppose that PADI will make "lighter" the table training to be more realist. And I suppose that too: maybe it is only a rumor...

I hope you are in the tested group...Young, males, athletes, fit, overtrained and less old than 25 years. If not, those tables or de RDP...I choose the second.

Kindly.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and tables have always worked for me, (maybe it's my genes). No I'm not 25, actually I'm 69 and have been diving most of my life. I should clarify that I did not intend to be dogmatic, but merely mentioned what has worked for me. I am old and (hopefully) wise enough to appreciate that an individual is always the best judge of what works well for him/her. Hence, the old adage "To each his own" certainly applies here, and best of luck with whatever your choice (computer or tables) is.
Rex

 

[Willar]

With dive tables you are rounding your depth, assuming a square profile, and not accounting for any error in the rate of rise during the dive, or any error in the safety stop.

With any modern computer you are measuring your actual multi-level dive profile, accounting for nitrogen build-up based on actual depth, measuring the true rate of rise, capture any excessive rise rate, and measuring all actual stops. Most computers today use RGMB method that is scientifically based and well researched.

More accurate and safer? The computer. I'll keep my computer, you can keep your slide rule.

 

[tgsmith]

Most computers today use RGMB method that is scientifically based and well researched.

Respectfully, that's not the least bit true. Most computers today do not use RGBM.....very few use actual RGBM. Most that are marketed as RGBM are actually some ****ed up concoction the company made up and coined it "XXX" RGBM, like "Suunto RGBM" and the same with the Mares M2. Some Uwatecs use ZHL-8.......NiTeks use ZHL-16C, Oceanics/Aeris/Hollis use either Z+(a ZHL-16C that seems to resemble a GF setting of around 20/80 or so) or a Rogers/Powell data based Haldanian algorithm(DSAT they call it). If I were to danger an assumption, I'd say most computers on the market right now use DSAT or a similar model.

All algorithms are scientifically based, either by using the scientific method(how many goats got bent vs. a control) or by using a bubble model. There are other algorithms that are WAY more researched, in addition to having their inner workings openly released to the public than RGBM.

I'm not for or against computers, or RGBM, smiley faces, whatever you're all arguing about.......it's such a pointless argument to be having tables vs computers. Just stating some of the misinformation here for everyone's clarity.

 

[The Chairman]

Respectfully, that's not the least bit true.

There has been a lot of misinformation exhibited about computers. There is another thread about this and the people who are most against them seem to have the most of these misconceptions. Let's list a few, shall we?

• PDCs are based on tables.
• PDCs are prone to failure.
• Most PDCs are based on RGBM.
• Divers panic when their PDCs crap out.
• PDC failures are treated differently than depth gauge/watch failures.
• You can do anything with tables that you can do with PDCs.
• You can explain decompression with tables, but not with PDCs.
• Real divers only rely on tables, not PDCs.
• You can't plan a dive with a PDC.
• Computers rot your brain!

Perhaps if they simply got educated about PDCs, then they wouldn't have these cro-magnon attitudes towards technology. All I am saying is:

:caveman:
​

​

 

[scubafanatic]

There has been a lot of misinformation exhibited about computers. There is another thread about this and the people who are most against them seem to have the most of these misconceptions. Let's list a few, shall we?

• PDCs are based on tables.
• PDCs are prone to failure.
• Most PDCs are based on RGBM.
• Divers panic when their PDCs crap out.
• PDC failures are treated differently than depth gauge/watch failures.
• You can do anything with tables that you can do with PDCs.
• You can explain decompression with tables, but not with PDCs.
• Real divers only rely on tables, not PDCs.
• You can't plan a dive with a PDC.
• Computers rot your brain!

Perhaps if they simply got educated about PDCs, then they wouldn't have these cro-magnon attitudes towards technology. All I am saying is:

:caveman:
​

​

...I quite agree ! Folks, if you think about it a minute, we're only a step or two away from becoming ...BORG (remember those dasteredly aliens on the Star Trek series ? ) Computers are so interwoven into the fabric of our everyday lives/civilization that's it's completely silly to somehow decide computers should be 'quaranteened' away from diving, while computers are perfectly acceptable way to run all the other aspects of our lives/civilization.

 

[elmer fudd]

I just don't see the point of NOT teaching tables. They're very simple and can probably be thoroughly explained in 30 minutes of classtime. Afterward, give the students an hour or so of homework. That enables them to have a backup, should their computer ever fail and a primary method assuming they don't have the money yet for a computer, (very common for a new diver).

And tables also have a number of advantages all their own. If you do a couple dozen dives with tables, you'll probably find you have most of the first dive NDL's memorized. That means that without a table, computer or anything, you've got a pretty good idea of how long you can safely stay down at different depths without getting bent, and IMO, that's something you don't really develop from a computer. With the tables you have all that info right in front of you and you get more familiar with it with every dive.

I'm not saying that tables are better though. Computers are simpler, more convenient and give you longer dives, but tables have a few advantages of their own and should still be taught.

 

[islandah]

This argument is akin to saying that we should stop teaching kids to add, substract, multiply and divide, and instead just teach them which buttons to punch on the calculator. The vast majority of us use a calculator for all but the simplest numbers, yet I'd guess most of us appreciate knowing the underlying equations and the ability to identify an obviously wrong answer and in a pinch, how to actually do the math.

 

[ScubaSteve]

I just don't see the point of NOT teaching tables.

Nobody has given a suitable answer to this question (at least with strong enough arguments to change my mind). I do not expect anybody will be able to produce a strong enough case.

If any of my family or friends ever gets certified and I have the time to get involved, they will NOT be certified by an instructor that wants to cut corners in the content they teach.

 

[AfterDark]

I just don't see the point of NOT teaching tables. They're very simple and can probably be thoroughly explained in 30 minutes of classtime. Afterward, give the students an hour or so of homework. That enables them to have a backup, should their computer ever fail and a primary method assuming they don't have the money yet for a computer, (very common for a new diver).

And tables also have a number of advantages all their own. If you do a couple dozen dives with tables, you'll probably find you have most of the first dive NDL's memorized. That means that without a table, computer or anything, you've got a pretty good idea of how long you can safely stay down at different depths without getting bent, and IMO, that's something you don't really develop from a computer. With the tables you have all that info right in front of you and you get more familiar with it with every dive.

I'm not saying that tables are better though. Computers are simpler, more convenient and give you longer dives, but tables have a few advantages of their own and should still be taught.

There's nothing here to disagree with, tables are like the doughnut spare in your car. It wouldn't give you the best ride, but it'll get you home. Tables are not the most accurate method, you may want to add a little time on the last stop but, you'll get home.