Air integrated computer and tec diving

[The Chairman]

Most people who dis AI as well as wireless AI haven't really given them a fair shake. They rely on fears, myths and claim it's all 'written in blood' when they've never really tried it. The same can be said about PDCs.

OK, your dive just changed from your plan. You're not digging the crappy vis, so you're headed up early. All you have are tables based on your predicted dive and possibly another one to include a bit longer dive. Now you're stuck doing more deco than you need or want. With a PDC, I just head up and it compensates for it on the fly. I blow a stop by a minute or so, and it adjusts for that as well. I tell it I'm going to oxygen at 40 ft and it has a conniption on my wrist.

Look, you can be swayed by the GI3s of the world posting that everything has to be their way or you will surely die. Or you can take a more reasoned approach and not live your life in constant fear of technology.

John, if you put in a negative conservancy on that HelO2, you'll be in line with most the other PDCs of the world. I think it's the only Suunto with that ability.

 

[PfcAJ]

OK, your dive just changed from your plan. You're not digging the crappy vis, so you're headed up early. All you have are tables based on your predicted dive and possibly another one to include a bit longer dive. Now you're stuck doing more deco than you need or want. With a PDC, I just head up and it compensates for it on the fly. I blow a stop by a minute or so, and it adjusts for that as well. I tell it I'm going to oxygen at 40 ft and it has a conniption on my wrist.

Are people REALLY creating tables with just one or two possible ascent schedules? Are people REALLY that unfamiliar with the relationship between bottom time and deco that they're crippled when a piece of kit breaks?

Good grief.

 

[DevonDiver]

Are people REALLY creating tables with just one or two possible ascent schedules? Are people REALLY that unfamiliar with the relationship between bottom time and deco that they're crippled when a piece of kit breaks?

Good grief.

Good grief indeed.... Better spend $800+ bucks to save 30 seconds knocking out some minus / bailout plans on v-planner.

There really is little need for a tech computer. I dove tech more than 10 years before I bothered to invest.

Sometimes, I just run deco on my watch and old analogue, wrist mounted depth gauge... it was eases the boredom when teaching back-to-back tech classes. The Petrel is still there, but it's more fun to follow a runtime with a ticking second hand...

There something kinda soothing about watching a needle as your hold depth... It's nice and 'organic' lol

I normally have an immediate bailout... for those days the shot misses... Maybe at 5 minute increments thereafter. I record bottom time for key decision points also... when calculated deco equals minimum deco, when deco is no longer possible on bottom gas..

I don't count this as anything 'old school'... Because planning decision points and understanding your increasing deco obligation over the course of the dive is part of prudent planning. I still do it, even now, wearing tech computers.

BTW.... LOL.... Never expected to hear anyone griping that a PADI course philosophy was too much GI3... Those damned PADI folks... they're way too hardcore and inflexible ha ha ha

 

[Nasser]

Bottom line - LEARN THE BASICS.

Learn to read tables, cut tables, follow Run Times, and master the skills of dive planning. Then if you want to go out and use a computer and ride it within your profile, use an AI, have redundant SPGs, or whatever tickles your fancy, then do so... as long as you are making an informed and educated decision based on experience and the proper training.

Build a foundation first - then experiment if you are so inclined and have the chops to do it. Fortunately there is no Tech Dive Police... unfortunately there is no police for dumbasses or ignorance either.

 

[The Chairman]

Are people REALLY creating tables with just one or two possible ascent schedules? Are people REALLY that unfamiliar with the relationship between bottom time and deco that they're crippled when a piece of kit breaks?

Here's the thing... everyone 'breaks' when they go deep. Those who rely on 'feelings' to know when they are narced are only fooling themselves. PDCs just don't get narced. They are a far superior way to monitor and adjust your dive to reality, not some fantasy you had during the planning stages. The hubris that believes that humans are somehow superior to PDCs because they don't have batteries, fails to take any of this into account.

Good grief indeed.... Better spend $800+ bucks to save 30 seconds knocking out some minus / bailout plans on v-planner.

You keep missing the point. Given the cost of tech gear and helium, I can't believe you're worried about such a sum. Given this is your life on the line, I really can't believe you're worried about the cost. If you can't afford the gear, find another hobby. What's even sillier, whether you're using v-planner or a Tech computer, you're still relying on electronics! You're still relying on a PDC. Sadly, you're relying on the computer that has no feedback about your actual dive.

There really is little need for a tech computer. I dove tech more than 10 years before I bothered to invest.

You're proud of being the last? That's not leadership. Never let your phobias stop you from keeping up with the latest developments.

BTW.... LOL.... Never expected to hear anyone griping that a PADI course philosophy was too much GI3... Those damned PADI folks... they're way too hardcore and inflexible ha ha ha

Your aim needs to improve as you missed the point again. I don't think you want to see this point. I'm sure that PADI has ever used the term "written in blood" in its manuals. GI3 was famous for his scare tactics too.

 

[AJ]

You keep missing the point. Given the cost of tech gear and helium, I can't believe you're worried about such a sum. Given this is your life on the line, I really can't believe you're worried about the cost. If you can't afford the gear, find another hobby. What's even sillier, whether you're using v-planner or a Tech computer, you're still relying on electronics! You're still relying on a PDC. Sadly, you're relying on the computer that has no feedback about your actual dive.

I think you are missing the point here. The real question is: who controls the diveplan? You or your computer? Techies like to be in control due to pre-planning en adjusting while diving (yes, even with help of a computer). Recies are relying on their computer to make the decisions for them while diving (they like their computer to think for them). It's not about electronics, price or whatever. It's about responsibility and control during the dive.

There's nothing wrong with either approach, it's just very different and everyone should be very aware of the consequences of their descision related to the dive they make.

 

[packrat12]

I think you are missing the point here. The real question is: who controls the diveplan? You or your computer? Techies like to be in control due to pre-planning en adjusting while diving (yes, even with help of a computer). Recies are relying on their computer to make the decisions for them while diving (they like their computer to think for them). It's not about electronics, price or whatever. It's about responsibility and control during the dive....

Once you start your ascent, your pre-dive planning no longer matters or is the controlling factor. Your deco obligations are the controlling factor, which your computer will have an accurate representation of it, as good or correct as any of the algorithms used both pre-dive and during the actual dive on the computer. You may think you were control during the pre-planning phase but due to depth/time discrepancies, your plan is not accurate to your actual dive. You truly are not much different at this phase than a Rec diver making their ascent. You may have a piece of paper telling you depths/times or a ratio method but either way, the most accurate representation of your dive is on the computer.

 

[Nirvana]

Most people who dis AI as well as wireless AI haven't really given them a fair shake. They rely on fears, myths and claim it's all 'written in blood' when they've never really tried it. The same can be said about PDCs.

OK, your dive just changed from your plan. You're not digging the crappy vis, so you're headed up early. All you have are tables based on your predicted dive and possibly another one to include a bit longer dive. Now you're stuck doing more deco than you need or want. With a PDC, I just head up and it compensates for it on the fly. I blow a stop by a minute or so, and it adjusts for that as well. I tell it I'm going to oxygen at 40 ft and it has a conniption on my wrist.

Look, you can be swayed by the GI3s of the world posting that everything has to be their way or you will surely die. Or you can take a more reasoned approach and not live your life in constant fear of technology.

John, if you put in a negative conservancy on that HelO2, you'll be in line with most the other PDCs of the world. I think it's the only Suunto with that ability.

I can say that my dislike for AI has nothing to do with pre-conceived ideas. I am vey much in favor of taking advantage of technology and, im fact, my first computer had wireless AI. I liked having my gas consumption logged, and in particular analyzing how it varied throughout the dive. But it also had some drawbacks.

My computer frequently failed to synchronize to the transmitter. Other times, it didn't fail altogether, but took a long time to complete the process. It annoyed me enough to decide to abandon wireless AI in favor of an analogue SPG.

In doing it, I realized how much simpler it is to asses the origin of a problem with a traditional SPG. It can fail, and I have seen it fail, but the problem diagnosis is much simpler than with AI. Basically, you check the valve is open, that the SPG's hose is attached to the cylinder you thought it was, and you try to look for air leaks or another physical problem with the gauge.

When your computer doesn't register the pressure from a transmitter, you have to add the steps of trying to determine if the transmitter is in fact synced to the computer, if it is correctly labeled (i.e., if "transmitter 2" is the one attached to cylinder A), if the transmitter's battery has charge, if it is working, if the computer's antenna is working. That is, in case of a problem, it's solution is potentially much harder than with an analogue SPG.

For me, poor reliability of the unit I had, harder problem diagnosis and little gain for the price all summed up to make me abandon wireless AI.

 

[Nasser]

Once you start your ascent, your pre-dive planning no longer matters or is the controlling factor. Your deco obligations are the controlling factor, which your computer will have an accurate representation of it, as good or correct as any of the algorithms used both pre-dive and during the actual dive on the computer. You may think you were control during the pre-planning phase but due to depth/time discrepancies, your plan is not accurate to your actual dive. You truly are not much different at this phase than a Rec diver making their ascent. You may have a piece of paper telling you depths/times or a ratio method but either way, the most accurate representation of your dive is on the computer.

Your controlling factor will be your gas supply. Regardless of your deco obligation if you have not pre-planned accordingly (with contingent plans built in) and you run out of gas, then you have a choice.... risk getting bent or drowning. Pre-Planning will always matter in whatever phase of the dive you're at.

 

[DevonDiver]

Once you start your ascent, your pre-dive planning no longer matters or is the controlling factor. Your deco obligations are the controlling factor, which your computer will have an accurate representation of it, as good or correct as any of the algorithms used both pre-dive and during the actual dive on the computer. You may think you were control during the pre-planning phase but due to depth/time discrepancies, your plan is not accurate to your actual dive. You truly are not much different at this phase than a Rec diver making their ascent. You may have a piece of paper telling you depths/times or a ratio method but either way, the most accurate representation of your dive is on the computer.

I guess you have a different concept of 'precision' in diving a plan and following a runtime...

Assuming we're talking about OC tech in OW... and not, bailouts or contingencies either,.. why would your pre-dive plans become obsolete. Your pre-dive planning should predict, very closely... or exactly, what you computer will subsequently give you.

It does for me.

If your pre-dive deco plan became obsolete (because you didn't follow it).... then so does your gas planning. That can't be justified by any means...

This is why tech divers are best educated by following run-times on tables. It develops precision and an ability to 'plan the dive, dive the plan'. Computers should only be used once this core competency is developed... otherwise they're likely to prevent that learning ever occurring ...

Just a thought... Packrat12, did you learn tech on tables/run-times or by diving computers?