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

[NAM001]

After I posted the above I realized that although the second diver without the basic knowledge might be safe, she is not safer. The diver might think "what does it matter how close I come to NDL as long as I don't get it down to zero. Once knowledge is gained she might think "if I keep my NDL greater than 10 minutes I will be safer than I would be diving to within a few minutes of zero.

To answer the OP's question, I don't think PDC's create any desire for divers to run down their NDL in comparison to using tables. Divers who like to push the limits would look at the tables and say "Give me that time in that black box". The PDC just makes it easier for them to do that. No setting a dive watch or starting a bottom timer and carrying a separate depth gauge.

I also suspect that table users have to think a bit more using them and the impression of new divers is that the computer knows all the variables and as long as the computer is on they are 100% safe. Yea I have a N2 gage but the one that counts is the NDL one and the tank pressure.

 

[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.

Is that something recent in the past few years? Ill ask around as see how it was done for their class.

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.

Could not agree more.

 

[NAM001]

As far as teaching new divers what to do if they get into deco should have been addressed with the shallower than 60 rule. recommendation / policy what ever. IMO computer use beyond very basic should be hit hard in AOW provided they have suffecient time between OW and AOW if back to back including in AOW is becomes negated.

 

[boulderjohn]

Is that something recent in the past few years? Ill ask around as see how it was done for their class.

Every student taking the class since the computer version of the class was created was given access to the site from home. The extent to which it is dealt with in the classroom additionally is up to the instructor.

 

[Edward3c]

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.

One fundamental difference between BSAC and most agencies is we will dive with our students post qualification. We have no commercial pressure to pass or sign off skills if the competence level isn’t achieved.

My open water lesson sign off is around 65%, the rest are put down to practice.

 

[Saboteur]

Maybe. At a first glance, I'd say no as well, but it's really an empiric question.

As a counterpoint, consider helmets in American football. There is some ongoing research (and of course, controversy) about helmet use in the sport. The helmets are designed to reduce skull fractures, but are commonly believed to reduce concussions as well, which they don't. In fact, the research has the counterintuitive result that concussions have increased since helmet use became widespread. It could be due to the way the helmet changes the physics of a head hit, but this is unlikely. The most likely explanation is that hard helmets have given players a false sense of security, which has lead to more aggressive and dangerous behavior, hence the increase in concussion rates.

This is quite analogous to the question posed by the OP, and to your example of seat belts. I don't know the answer to any of the 3 cases, and if I were a gambling man I'd say computers are overall helpful (I use one myself, after all). My point is that questions like these are deceptively deep and complex, sometimes the obvious-looking answer ends up being incorrect.

Worth thinking about.. they used to use leather helmets back in the day. Players probably knew better that to use their head as a battering ram. Some on this blog may have experience.. . Aussie rules FB and rugby are full contact sports albeit a different style of game and no helmets. Wonder if head injuries are significantly different?

 

[NAM001]

Every student taking the class since the computer version of the class was created was given access to the site from home. The extent to which it is dealt with in the classroom additionally is up to the instructor.

thanks that explains what I have seen and heard so far. My thinking was classroom based. IM GIONG TO ASK A FEW COME TUESDAY anyway what the extent their exposure was.

 

[DBPacific]

Worth thinking about.. they used to use leather helmets back in the day. Players probably knew better that to use their head as a battering ram. Some on this blog may have experience.. . Aussie rules FB and rugby are full contact sports albeit a different style of game and no helmets. Wonder if head injuries are significantly different?

They are. Rugby gets significantly fewer head injuries and those that occur are less severe. The perceived safety leading to greater risks and injury is a well-documented phenomenon, not just with football.

I'm only 2 years out from my OW now and looking back on it, though my course didn't cover as much as I now think they should've, the students that wanted to get more out of diving than a guided tour to look at cool stuff showed that attitude from the get-go and got familiar with their computer, the risks, and looked up other resources to flesh out training.

I don't think that computers inherently encourage bad behavior but they and improved gear and advertising do seem to lower the perceived difficulty of diving so not only do you have the people who are very interested in diving science and want to know the ins-and-outs of gear and what happens to the body, but you also have the people who just want to romp around underwater. I've tried convincing those types of people that it's important to learn more about your instruments and your diving. If they don't want to, they won't and that extends to other parts of their life too, usually. It isn't a computer-generated thing.

 

[lermontov]

@boulderjohn touched on the issue with lack of understanding - you can still breach the M value on an NDL dive if you ascend too rapidly. Someone ascending too fast to stay inside NDL is classic

I think sometimes we expect too much, who amongst us finished or AOW course with the knowledge and understanding we think others should have. Everyone learns at a different rate and some are more inclined than others -it doesnt matter how good the training is you wont the able to produce 100 good divers out of 100 students . Like a trade course - not all will turn out A grade tradesman. I think the onus is on the instructor to ascertain if the student meets the MIN requirements -for there own safety

personally id like to see instructors give a probationary pass - if they are lacking in a specific skill they should go away practice and get re checked before handed a C card ( applicable for course after OW)

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

@boulderjohn personally id like to see instructors give a probationary pass - if they are lacking in a specific skill they should go away practice and get re checked before handed a C card ( applicable for course after OW)

That's a great way for an instructor to get themselves fired from a dive shop. Got to be independent for that (though some exceptions exist).