Do you think computers encourage risky diving in new/ young divers?

[boulderjohn]

I agree that new divers should learn the basics of nitrogen absorption and its relationship to NDL. However, I don't believe it makes them any safer than divers who don't know those basics. Compare two divers: one who knows the basics and the other who knows nothing except what the NDL display is telling him. To be clear, the s

It is inexcusable for new divers not to know the relationship between nitrogen loading and NDL. it is part of the curriculum they are supposed to learn.

If they are taking the computer version of the PADI course, they are given access to a computer simulator that allows them to move a diver through the dive, with the simulator showing how those levels change during a dive and how the generic computer in the simulator indicates it.

 

[descend]

As a new and young diver myself, I'm of the view that dive computers are simply tools that can be used with whatever mindset the diver has. Risky diving seems to come from the sort of folks that can't be taught to keep themselves safe until they injure themselves, at least as far as I can tell from the classes and few dives I've been on.

The PADI computerless classes that I took (no idea why those were the ones my LDS gave us) emphasized the risk of injury several times, and further reading on Scubaboard and elsewhere inspired caution in me and my partner.
Dive computers are our most efficient tool to manage our dives in a way that keeps us safe and will alert us if we're doing anything that would put us in danger. Obviously that is on top of training, proper planning, and knowing one's own limits.

You can't force people who ignore common sense to be cautious, though, at least not easily. I feel like every extreme(ish) sport attracts some of those, and the equipment isn't at fault. More teaching about how their computers calculate tissue loading would just be more info for them to ignore.

If only they didn't put the people around them at risk, too.

 

[EFX]

I agree that new divers should learn the basics of nitrogen absorption and its relationship to NDL. However, I don't believe it makes them any safer than divers who don't know those basics. Compare two divers: one who knows the basics and the other who knows nothing except what the NDL display is telling him. To be clear, the s

It is inexcusable for new divers not to know the relationship between nitrogen loading and NDL. it is part of the curriculum they are supposed to learn.

If they are taking the computer version of the PADI course, they are given access to a computer simulator that allows them to move a diver through the dive, with the simulator showing how those levels change during a dive and how the generic computer in the simulator indicates it.

And I agree with you completely. I don't want to be misunderstood. I am not advocating that learning basic information about nitrogen loading and NDL should not be required or is not necessary for safety. I am saying that it is not the minimum knowledge needed for safety.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

And I agree with you completely. I don't want to be misunderstood. I am not advocating that learning basic information about nitrogen loading and NDL should not be required or is not necessary for safety. I am saying that it is not the minimum knowledge needed for safety.

and I hope I am not misunderstood either! That's why I said "more safely" instead of just "safe" (which isn't possible without staying out of the water - as there is always some risk.

My own personal belief is that if new divers understand the basics of NDL, nitrogen absorption, and how that information is provided on their dive computer, then they should not be panicking if they approach their NDL limit at a particular depth, to ascend to a shallower depth where they will have a longer time buffer. I think we are in agreement on that. Again, I'm blown away and not about John's experience with a DM panicking.

 

[boulderjohn]

and I hope I am not misunderstood either! That's why I said "more safely" instead of just "safe" (which isn't possible without staying out of the water - as there is always some risk.

My own personal belief is that if new divers understand the basics of NDL, nitrogen absorption, and how that information is provided on their dive computer, then they should not be panicking if they approach their NDL limit at a particular depth, to ascend to a shallower depth where they will have a longer time buffer. I think we are in agreement on that. Again, I'm blown away and not about John's experience with a DM panicking.

I think part of the problem is that we make students terrified of DCS, which makes them afraid of violating NDL, but we don't do enough to teach what to do if they do violate it. The PADI computer-based course teaches them to do what the computer tells them to do, but that phrase in this current sentence is about the extent of their training. I think they need to understand much more about what it means to be in decompression and what they need to do if they get there.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

I think part of the problem is that we make students terrified of DCS, which makes them afraid of violating NDL, but we don't do enough to teach what to do if they do violate it. The PADI computer-based course teaches them to do what the computer tells them to do, but that phrase in this current sentence is about the extent of their training. I think they need to understand much more about what it means to be in decompression and what they need to do if they get there.

That's fair. I think part of the fear is based on scuba instructors having to not be dragged into court (my guess). As we all know, there are several factors that contribute to DCS risk. Teaching them what to do once they hit deco is getting into technical training, though I understand that BSAC does address this (anyone from BSAC please correct anything I'm saying that is wrong) in their training.

I learned about interference theory from you, so I'm not sure how to best address this. I'll have to think about it.

 

[Edward3c]

That's fair. I think part of the fear is based on scuba instructors having to not be dragged into court (my guess). As we all know, there are several factors that contribute to DCS risk. Teaching them what to do once they hit deco is getting into technical training, though I understand that BSAC does address this (anyone from BSAC please correct anything I'm saying that is wrong) in their training.

I learned about interference theory from you, so I'm not sure how to best address this. I'll have to think about it.

There is nothing technical about teaching BSAC Sports Divers how to plan and conduct dives with mandatory deco obligations. It’s part of the core syllabus.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

There is nothing technical about teaching BSAC Sports Divers how to plan and conduct dives with mandatory deco obligations. It’s part of the core syllabus.

Yes, but it seems (as I am not intimately familiar with it) that BSAC's open water course (called Sports Divers) is far more extensive than most mainstream agencies' open water courses. Give the model for quick and dirty for the bulk of the market (not judging, just reality), I am not sure that agencies are keen to adopt more thorough training. I'm not saying that as a critique of BSAC. Far from it. I just live with the reality of low standards and how to add to create safe(r), competent, and confident divers for my local area. Due to agency constraints, I can't teach open water divers to plan decompression dives.

 

[NAM001]

It is inexcusable for new divers not to know the relationship between nitrogen loading and NDL. it is part of the curriculum they are supposed to learn.

If they are taking the computer version of the PADI course, they are given access to a computer simulator that allows them to move a diver through the dive, with the simulator showing how those levels change during a dive and how the generic computer in the simulator indicates it.

could it be that they learn it for the duration of the course to pass the test and nothing more. The dont experience the need for the N2 level in a OW class so there is really no needed reinforcement. there is a meaningful percentage I speak to that treat the nitrogen loading gage like a gas gage green good red bad, but dont really know how to effectively apply the info. some what like ndl is the edge of a cliff.

 

[W W Meixner]

Something I've been curious about. If I exceed NDL my computer will tell me to stop at X depth for Y minutes. After that it will tell me next stop depth and time. I have not tried it but my understanding is that it will show one stop at a time. It will not tell me all stops ie, will not tell me the air needed in total.


Do you experienced divers think that the fact that the computer will "get you out of deco" in any way encourages newer/younger divers to exceed their training and experience?

FN...

I haven't read through any of the threads...but you do not need a dive computer to tempt you beyond your level of training and experience...

Modern computer algorithms are designed and aligned with your level of training and experience to keep you safe...

Know and fully understand all of the functions of your computer...stay within the range of your training/experience...don't gamble with ''deco'' if deco is beyond your level of training and understanding...

There are lots of great instructors available that can fulfill all your training level wants and desires...attempting to ''self instruct'' is like the accused choosing to represent himself/herself in a court of law...''you have a fool for a client/student...

W...