You don't think having a Gas Time Remaining calculation done for you, that you can see in real time, is a "real benefit"? I do. Not everyone needs it. But, there are a lot of features on many dive computers that I think are a benefit, but that not everyone has a use for.
Why is it a problem to not want to go back to using an SPG? I don't want to go back to using an SPG. I have several extra transmitters as backups, so that I (hopefully) won't have to go back to an SPG. What is wrong with that?
In Steve Lewis' book, The Six Skills, he has a whole chapter on Trim. In their, he defines trim at its highest level of performance to include having a neat, tidy, uncluttered rig. You don't take anything in the water that you don't need.
I wholeheartedly agree with the concept of not taking anything in the water that you don't need.
If you are doing recreational (sport) dives and you have AI, then you do not need an SPG (but you MIGHT need a better, more reliable AI...). Further, anyone should be able to recognize that, minor as it is, having a hose coming off your first stage running down to a clip on your waist belt, or around to a clip on your chest, is an entanglement hazard. When you don't have AI, it's a necessary evil, as it were. So necessary and, for so long, with no other real option that our community accepts it without question (generally). But, if you think you could get hung up on something by having a little bungee cord on your wing, then surely you could get hung up on a hose that is 24 or 26" long (or longer) and runs from tank valve down behind your arm?
My first tech instructor called me out in class once for saying, during a presentation of a dive plan, "I didn't do XYZ because I was just being lazy and I thought it was not necessary for this exercise." He said that not doing something because I was being lazy is the worst thing he ever heard me say, as a diver.
I truly think the notions of entanglement hazards, streamlining, and failure points as they are often stated on SB are way over-blown. I agree in principle with the notion that one should leave behind what they do not need for the dive, but folks typically do not articulate that as their reason for getting rid of hose, they typically site being more streamlined....and secondarily they seem to site the need to be more streamlined is because entanglement hazards....it is hard to take these concerns seriously when the basic shape of dive equipment has not changed much in decades. If one was seriously concerned about entanglement hazards and streamlining they would be looking at mounting fairings around the tank valve and 1st stage to make them less snag prone. The issue is not that folks are making personal choices but they seem to make statements about gear configurations from an almost dogmatic standpoint and the statements seem to make sense....until you probe the depths of these statement (no pun intended), and like I said previously folks will point to certain things as "failure points" while actively ignoring similar aspects of their kit or diving in general because it would be inconvenient to them if they did. For instance, the notion that having an spg and transmitter adds an unnecessary failure point that somehow increases risk and is best avoided, argued by a diver who engages in cave/wreck penetration for leisure. If one is so risk adverse that they consider it too risky to have that SPG hose with all those failure prone o-rings and the entanglement hazard of the extra hose then I would think that one would assess overhead penetration diving as too risky in general as well...but that would be inconvenient.
I am not against the notion of folks choosing the type of diving they want to enjoy, and I am also all for folks figuring out the gear they want to use and how to configure it...what bothers me though is the fear laden personal propaganda proffered up regularly as sound advice.
-Z