Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Couldn't agree more.
If electronics fail underwater it will be through a catastrophic failure
caused by broken connections, battery problems or seawater influx (leading
to the first two problems). All of the above (and more) can happen and will
affect electronic bottom timers just as easily as computers.
The only difference between the bottom timer and the deco computer is the
level of sophistication in their driver software. Seawater is a great
equaliser in this - regardless of the level of sophistication. If the unit
goes, it goes.
Case, to follow your argument, we would all have to dive with wind-up
analogue bottom timers or bezel watches and bourdon tube gages like we did
in the mid 80's. Even then, these failed for different but equally probable
reasons. The answer??? We took two.
Personally, I don't like the wrist mounted deco computers for any dive
encurring staged stops as they can make you sloppy. The table cutting, gas
planning and deco contingency planning disciplines enforced by pre-dive
planning can get easily missed out.
I have an Aladdin Nitrox which I use only for non deco air or nitrox diving.
No doubt about it, for the 0 - 20m depth range and variable ascent dive I
use for lobstering they are just fine. If I plan to do stops, I leave it at
home.
John, I would suggest that if you feel you need to do dives requiring stops
using one of these things. Get two. If you have one then you need to do
all of the table cutting anyway for a backup, so what's the point!
Jim
Case, to follow your argument
----- Original Message -----
From: <bigvon@be*.ne*>
To: Case <diveman@cy*.co*>
Cc: <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Sent: 16 May 1999 00:13
Subject: Re: Abyss Explorer Nitrox
> Aren't bottom timers an "electronic" device?
>
> Case wrote:
>
> > Guys....we're forgetting THE MOST important reason why I'd rather dive
> > tables than a computer ..... electronic devices can and will fail
> > underwater! I believe the question was posed as "What is the difference
> > between following a deco schedule produced from a set of
> > (computer-generated) tables, and following a deco schedule produced by a
> > computer on your wrist?" That's easy....if your 500 MHz Pentium III
> > running Z Plan fails while calculating your dive information, chances
> > are, you're not underwater in a life threatening situation.... When (not
> > IF...but WHEN) your CockRing, or NiTEK (I hate that name!), or any deco
> > computer fails in the middle of the dive, you're left with either backup
> > tables and a timer, or pulling deco out your butt....
> >
> > since electronics do fail underwater, why not just skip that whole step
> > and rely instead on the computer between your ears and a set of good
> > tables....?
> >
> > -Case
> > diveman@cy*.co*
> >
> > Frank Riffel wrote:
> > >
> > > "Taylor, John" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear List,
> > > >
> > > > Please enlighten me:
> > > >
> > > > What is the difference between following a deco schedule produced
from a set
> > > > of (computer-generated) tables, and following a deco schedule
produced by a
> > > > computer on your wrist? (Apart from algorithm differences and that
the
> > > > computer produces a schedule for the dive you actually did)
> > >
> > > Basicaly none. But you cannot account for deco related issues that are
not
> > > addressed by the implemented algorithm. I mean which schedule would
you
> > > follow if you got into strong current and had to expend some work? A
table
> > > would give you at the chance to select the next deeper/longer schedule
a
> > > computer won't.
> > >
> > > My impression is that a computer is nothing worth without a proper
planing, but
> > > then where is the advantage? You have to select the right gases, make
a gas
> > > volume planing, make the deco calculations and tables in any way -- or
do you
> > > want to dive without having a contingency table?
> > >
> > > A thing I worry about is that computers will make divers more slopy.
They allow
> > > users to shift away from the "Plan your dive, dive your plan!"
paradigm.
> > > Also computers give more information than required. Hell, why do I
need to know
> > > the current pO2 or CNS% ? There is enough task loading we don't need
such an
> > > information during a dive! You select your gases _before_ to stay out
of any
> > > tox. problems!
> > >
> > > Greetings, Frank
> > >
> > > --
> > > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to
`techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> > > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to
`techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
> >
> > --
> >
> > \ \
> > ^_ \ \ Case E. Harris
> > \ \ { \ US Deep Wreck Diving Team
> > { \ / `~~~--__ diveman@cy*.co*
> > { \___----~~' `~~-_
> > \ /// ` `~. ___ Oo
> > / /~~~~-, ,__. , /// __,,,,) (___)o_o
> > \/ \/ `~~~; ,---~~-_`~= file://====--//(_)
> > / / \\ ^
> > '._.' Deep...Professional...The Standard!
> > --
> > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
>
> --
> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
>
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]