computer dependent divers...

[Keysdrifter454]

Hey Dweeb - are you upsetting people again!!!

I've known Dweeb for years.

He's just getting warmed up...

 

[underwater daphne]

But I think the point that Daphne is missing, is that the difference between your computer, and, say, your fins, is that your fins are not making decisions that can kill you. The computer is.

Passive vs active.

agreed. i didn't realise that was the subject? can miscalculating the tables kill you too?

hmm.

just b4 ppl call me magical and naive, i know the answer.

 

[dweeb]

Well dweeb, in the real world they do. Nobody expects you to like it but the real world just isn't that cut and dry man.

Show of hands, how many people here are on a committee empowered to change agency standards. Hmmm, looks like no one. So, all we are really doing here is discussing the way we each believe things should be, in our opinion. I am fully cognizant of agency standards, and the state of the industry, and if I wasn't, I could get the information. Your words only have value to me if they tell me something I can't learn without you, and that means telling me your own ideas, not observations I can make myself.

So, I know idiots are diving. Tell me something new - tell me if you believe that's a good thing, and why or why not. Tell me what you would change if you could. Don't restate the obvious, but express your thoughts on the matter.

You've totally forgotton what it's like to be a newbie, haven't you?

Not at all. You're assuming a lot about when I was a newbie.

 

[dweeb]

As long as we're being pedantic,

1. You incur a decompression obligation every time you dive. Every dive is a deco dive, and thinking otherwise is muddy thinking.
   
2. Your position is inconsistent. If it is possible to transition safely from a failed computer to the tables mid-dive, then it is possible to transition safely from a failed computer to the deco tables mid-dive. What is the qualitative difference?

Item 1 - that's sophistry. A decompression obligation is well understood to mean the inability to surface directly at the accepted normal ascent rate without violating the limits of whatever model you are using.

Item 2 - I never said it wasn't possible. However, within the NDL's it's trivial. When it becomes non-trivial, there is too much room for error to make it practical. If you can afford the training and equipment for decompression diving, there's no excuse not to have a second computer.

 

[dweeb]

magic? now you make it seem as if i'm crazy!

No, I think your approach is very normal, but that's a societal problem. There is a level of understanding, below which, anything is magic. When you understand the principles behind something, it's technology; when you blindly trust something you don't understand, it's magic.

i think we're totally misunderstanding each other. or you just want to misunderstand and misjudge me.

I understand you. What I want is to change your perspective.

btw i actually do have 2 comps. one of my wrist and one on my hose. but i've had enough of justifying myself to you.

No one asked you to. I commented; you responded.
We are having a discussion. I have no power to compell you to justify anything.

you're a good expert diver and i'm a dumb diver who believes in magic and lives naively. really, you must know how i dive and live. i don't like being judged by complete strangers.

I'm not judging you. You'll notice I started out by pointing something out, and recommending that you learn something. Learning is the best thing you can do.

 

[Diver0001]

Show of hands, how many people here are on a committee empowered to change agency standards. Hmmm, looks like no one. So, all we are really doing here is discussing the way we each believe things should be, in our opinion. I am fully cognizant of agency standards, and the state of the industry, and if I wasn't, I could get the information. Your words only have value to me if they tell me something I can't learn without you, and that means telling me your own ideas, not observations I can make myself.

So, I know idiots are diving. Tell me something new - tell me if you believe that's a good thing, and why or why not. Tell me what you would change if you could. Don't restate the obvious, but express your thoughts on the matter.




Not at all. You're assuming a lot about when I was a newbie.

Well dweeb you know these kinds of discussions only go in circles. I'm sure you don't give a rat's asss about my opinion as long as it gives you a podium to keep hammering at the newbies. Frankly that's not a game I like but since you asked......

I don't think that being able to use the tables is nearly as important as understanding the model behind them. If you understand the model I don't think it matters one tiny little bit how you calculate it. The only important thing is understanding what's going on. It's legitimate to ask how you can get some of the information across without teaching tables but you haven't asked this question nor do you look set to listen to the answer and/or discuss possibilities even if such a discussion were forthcoming....

Secondly I also think that tables are quickly becoming obsolete in recreational diving except in niche applications, like falling back from a broken computer. In tek diving it's a little different case because computer technology (software) hasn't caught up to practice just yet. And given that the tables are (or soon will be) obsolete, there is a legitimate discussion revolving around how much trust a diver should have in a computer (can we really ride the computer and if so how?) and procedures for dealing with a malfunction.

In the no-stop zone I just don't see all the big problems with riding the computer that you do assuming --and this is very important -- you learn what a safe profile looks like and why and you stick to that. If you don't understand how/why deco works then you must stick to the rules exactly.

Most of the doom scenarios I hear in these discussions about computers ahve to do with deviations/exceptions from the rule. It's good to think about it but a blanket answer to most of these scenarios is to abort the dive and go home. It may wreck someone's day but aborting or sitting out a dive because of what is essentially an equipment problem it isn't going to hurt anyone. Do I think these people should dive? Yes. I think they should dive a lot and get interested and want to learn more..... They have definite limitations because of their lack of understanding of deco theory and they can't do the dives that more advanced divers do because of that but when they've had enough of being held back by their knowledge gaps they'll become motivated to learn more all by themselves. Just like you did. Just like I did. Just like most advanced divers who grew up in the "Diving for Dummies" world had to do.....

Frankly I just don't see what the heart attack is all about. So some people have limitations....well gag me.... who cares! Some people are horrendously unfit, some people have an IQ of 85, some people have medical problems, some people are chronic risk takers, some people are distracted by fatigue or overworked, prone to narcosis, suffering from bad relationships and scared to death of the water..... but they all dive. Everyone has personal limitations. Everyone. Even you. Yours aren't the same as underwater daphne's but i cannot for the life of me understand why you think that's such a big bloody problem.

Not everyone is interested in doing complex dives not everyone is interested in deco theory and there are millions of puddlestompers out there who just want to look at the pretty fishes and have some fun. So keep them shallow, give them a nice computer to ride and teach them what they need to know to do that safely and send them diving.

And finally (I'm almost done so get your fingers warmed up) if I were the king of the world I would change a lot of things about the training. About this bit specifically I would teach deco theory instead of tables and introduce both tables and computers where they belong, at the end of the discussion as two different ways of crunching the numbers..... The way it's done now (table centric) comes across to me as learning how a calculator works before you're taught about arithmetic. IMHO this is the root problem and the reason most new divers don't have a clue what the tables and/or their computer are really telling them.

R..

 

[Scuba]

Secondly I also think that tables are quickly becoming obsolete in recreational diving except in niche applications, like falling back from a broken computer. In tek diving it's a little different case because computer technology (software) hasn't caught up to practice just yet. And given that the tables are (or soon will be) obsolete, there is a legitimate discussion revolving around how much trust a diver should have in a computer (can we really ride the computer and if so how?) and procedures for dealing with a malfunction. ..

I would agree in general, with the exception being tech diving. It is not so much the software thats lacking but the deco models. Advanced desktop deco model software allows divers to play lab scientist and lab rat all by himself. This is in fact what takes place, due to the experimental nature which diving remains today in regards to longer term deco obligations.

And finally (I'm almost done so get your fingers warmed up) if I were the king of the world I would change a lot of things about the training. About this bit specifically I would teach deco theory instead of tables and introduce both tables and computers where they belong, at the end of the discussion as two different ways of crunching the numbers..... The way it's done now (table centric) comes across to me as learning how a calculator works before you're taught about arithmetic. IMHO this is the root problem and the reason most new divers don't have a clue what the tables and/or their computer are really telling them.

This is an excellent point seldom heard. Decompression tables are a "tool" to calculate deco obligations just like a computer -not an explanation leading to an understanding of deco theory.
A while back in one of these discussions I described a dive computer as a tool which displays the tables in action. A static display or an active, changing updating one, does not explain what is taking place. The real time updating one provides visual feedback showing how much faster nitrogen loads at depth and how it unloads in the shallows.

All tools have positives and negatives. Fixating on only one aspect limits our ability to use it to its full potential and to understand its shortcomings.

 

[Scubakevdm]

That's all well and good, but what I find particularly frightening, and what has been very obviously overlooked in this thread is the percentage of computer dependant posters in this community. I'd say it's darn near 100%. Not once has anyone swooped through here and put a hand written sticky on my screen and whisked back out. I don't know if you people are unable to lift a pen, or if you're just too downright lazy to run here from Seattle or wherever you may be. It's scary, and God help you if your internet connection goes out or you lose power in the middle of a post.

 

[Kim]

LOL. Isn't that the truth!!
I was watching Discovery channel yesterday and they had a program about the evolution of fighter aircraft. These things are now totally unflyable by pilots - it's all done by computer - the pilot tells the computer what he wants and the computer actually does it. According to one pilot if the computers stopped working the plane would simply fall out of the sky - nothing the pilot could do about it!
Many things we take totally for granted these days are controlled by computers - we are all doing 'trust me lives' mostly without understanding anything at all about what is going on behind the scenes.
With diving you have far more chance of survival than in many other areas! If my computer fails I end the dive - simple. If I was already beyond the correct limits before the computer failed then I'd already done something wrong that wasn't the fault of the computer - if I was still within limits then I can always end the dive safely.

 

[Scuba]

In reference to the original post.

We have to consider the large number of casual recreational divers and those who are primarily vacation divers, along with the fact that probably most newer divers today use a computer

We can’t compare these divers to advanced experienced divers, just as a competent non-computer diver comparison to an incompetent computer diver is not fair, or vice versa.

A fair comparison is new, beginning, not well trained computer divers to comparable table divers and competent computer divers to competent table divers.

A diver with no interest in deco theory will likely blindly follow the computer since he has been told staying in the green will provide the safety he seeks to concentrate and enjoy the underwater wonders. If the computer malfunction or shuts down, he could get himself in trouble.

Likewise, a diver following the tables blindly for the same reasons may find himself in the same situation if he miscalculates or mis-tracks his dive profile.

In both cases there is an assumption the diver will actually understand how to use, and be capable of using the tool of choice, which is not always the case, for either table or dive computer users. I think some of you, who seem to be fixated on computer user shortcomings, neglect to realize there are many new divers who neither understand or know how to use the tables correctly. But, since they have a computer, they don't need to ask someone else how to calculate the dive for them.