Article: Is the Dive Watch Dead?

[doctormike]

I agree with you about the watch, but I think analogue gauges are more reliable than their electronic counterparts and offer vital information.

People say that all the time, but I have never seen any data to back it up. I have had one data-device failure in over 1000 dives and it was a brass and glass SPG. Not to say that I don't consider them to be reliable.

I guess if you don't keep up with changing or charging the battery, then electronics would be less reliable.

 

[AfterDark]

New diver here but can I assume that people who use a dive watch as a backup would not switch from a computer to a watch/table/spg mid dive if the computer fails but rather it's a backup only if the computer were to fail before the dive commenced?
Even if you wanted a mid dive backup I don't see how a watch could be any more useful than a cheap gauge mode computer.
I think mechanical watches and analog gauges are really neat but they don't seem all that practical for diving to me.

I'm not sure about that, I managed to dive 35 years with a watch, depth gage and tables without any issues.

 

[AfterDark]

People say that all the time, but I have never seen any data to back it up. I have had one data-device failure in over 1000 dives and it was a brass and glass SPG. Not to say that I don't consider them to be reliable.

I guess if you don't keep up with changing or charging the battery, then electronics would be less reliable.

I never had to change a dead battery on my analog depth gage or SPG. My last SPG lasted 30+ years with one spool valve replacement. Any PDC out there 30 years old and still working? No, and there never will be.

 

[doctormike]

I never had to change a dead battery on my analog depth gage or SPG. My last SPG lasted 30+ years with one spool valve replacement. Any PDC out there 30 years old and still working? No, and there never will be.

I have no idea if current dive computers will still be working in 30 years, but I don't see why most of them wouldn't. Most people replace their old dive computers because they want new models with new features, not because they physically wear out. And while some people assume that digital devices are less reliable than analogue, I haven't seen any ACTUAL data regarding the reliability of analogue vs. digital. I accept your personal experience of no problem with your analogue depth gauge, as long as you accept my personal experience of the reverse (with one serious SPG failure), and realize that they are both single diver anecdotes. I buy gear that is the best tool for the job, not because I want to make sure that I will never have to buy another one again over three decades.

The downside of having a PDC over a depth gauge and timer is that you have to keep the battery working.

The upside is that virtually every diver gets more bottom time on a given dive (since most dives aren't square profiles), that it records your actual, exact profile for logging and accident analysis. It knows what you actually did, not what you thought you were going to do ahead of time, or gusstimate during the dive. It lets you sync this data with an electronic dive log, which some people like. It makes it easy to recalculate your N2 loading on the fly if your dive changes for any logistical reason, based on what you actually did on your dive so far. It tracks your ascent rate in case of inadvertent violations. And it lets you adjust accurately for personal fitness and/or risk acceptance, which you really can't do with a table.

The vast majority of divers today chose to use a PDC because of these advantages. It's fine to stick to analogue if that's what you like, but I don't see how overall it's better in any way. I'm sure that you know all of this, but just making the point for any new divers who might be reading...

 

[boulderjohn]

It knows what you actually did, not what you thought you were going to do ahead of time, or gusstimate during the dive.

As I have mentioned many times in the past, two friends of mine got bent on a dive. They were not using computers to guide them on that dive, but one of them was using a computer in gauge mode as a bottom timer. They therefore had a log of their dive, and it showed they had done a dive that was quite different from the one they thought they had done.

 

[Akimbo]

I have no idea if current dive computers will still be working in 30 years, but I don't see why most of them wouldn't....

I have trouble thinking of any piece of electronics that has a functional life anywhere near 30 years -- especially if it has a battery. That is one of the reasons I am reluctant to replace my 1985 diesel 190D. About the only electronics is a digital temperature display and the radio; both of which have failed.

 

[Jamesdclxxv]

I'm not sure about that, I managed to dive 35 years with a watch, depth gage and tables without any issues.

what I mean by that is that you could not easily swap from diving with a computer to diving tables during multiple dives. If you like diving strictly with tables that's fine but I would think in most cases if you were using a computer then a watch would make a poor backup device.

As a new diver just getting in to the sport it would seem the advantages of a computer are many and the only advantage of a watch is the cool factor. I like dive watches but I think of them as a throwback to diving history not modern dive equipment. As for replacing a battery once a year that's just part of the required maintenance. Mechanical watches and analogue gauges all need servicing too.

 

[boulderjohn]

what I mean by that is that you could not easily swap from diving with a computer to diving tables during multiple dives. If you like diving strictly with tables that's fine but I would think in most cases if you were using a computer then a watch would make a poor backup device.

In the past couple of months I have responded to people who say they use a watch and tables for backup in case the computer fails by posting a typical first dive (multi-level) profile of mine and asking them what they would do for a second dive after the computer failed. In each case, the response is along the lines of, "OK, in that case you would not be able to do a second dive." That is because the typical multi-level dive takes you off the tables because of the longer bottom times.

As a new diver just getting in to the sport it would seem the advantages of a computer are many and the only advantage of a watch is the cool factor.

I was once in a workshop in which the speaker said that in modern diving, the only purpose of a dive watch is so that people will notice it at parties, think you are cool, and start a conversation about diving. That was 15 years ago.

 

[AfterDark]

doctormike, agree 100% I own 2 PDC and sometimes dive with both but mostly I use one at a time but rotate them to even out the battery wear and replace them at the same time. But I'm of the same mind as Akimbo when it comes to electronics. I'll never know as I don't have 30 years of diving ahead of me!

james175, I'll admit to a lack of multi level diving. I agree if a diver is on dive #4 of the day and has a PDC failure mid-dive and has not tracked the 3 earlier dives with tables and doesn't have a handle how long they have been down is truly in deep. In that scenario the only option is to end the dive. I would also use most of my remaining air for a very long safety stop.

In 2013 during the 1st dive of a week long dive trip my only PDC failed. It froze/lockup and only displayed 95FSW 58minutes.
After a 12 minute safety stop I missed my second dive. Now I own 2 PDC and use a NDL cheat sheet on my slate when I'm on diving trips. My diving here at home is all NDL 2 dives at most; a PDC failure is covered by my watch and depth gage 100% for most of my regular diving scenarios.
It all comes down to planning and taking what you need to execute the dives you planned.

 

[ams511]

As I have mentioned many times in the past, two friends of mine got bent on a dive. They were not using computers to guide them on that dive, but one of them was using a computer in gauge mode as a bottom timer. They therefore had a log of their dive, and it showed they had done a dive that was quite different from the one they thought they had done.

They violated the old adage of "plan your dive and dive your plan" and paid the price. I hope they both fully recovered.