26 replies to this topic

[scubafanatic]

Most people on this board are smart people. I have known most for them for a long time. Most of them can "do-the-math" well enough to realize that going to the chamber and possibly ending their diving career because their computer is too liberal for their skills (most are not tech divers nor wish to be) is far more expensive than missing a few minutes on the bottom. In fact most of them go on vacation for fun, not to maximize their bottom time. I have yet to meet one that cares for their bottom more time than their buddies safety also. I can point a few on some other scuba boards but not here. If dive buddies don't work out here we just change them around and every one is generally happy.

Excellent viewpoint.

As a matter of fact, I dive a conservative computer ON PURPOSE. The reasons stated above are exactly the reason for this. I do not want to get bent because my computer thinks it's OK to go for 50 minutes at 100 feet.....

And if anyone were to ask me if I get enough bottom time.... well I get plenty of bottom time... averaging around 75-80 minutes per dive for my last 250 dives .... That's plenty for anyone.

Regarding Kamala's post, I imagine that the people with bottom time issues were on air. T + C divesites are rather deep, and diving on air would limit anyone not on Nitrox.

Nope.....ALL divers on this trip used Nitrox.......'air' wasn't the culprit. Again, if you dive a more liberal computer, you can always control how far to push the envelope....and on some computers you can user adjust the conservatism level (Cochran is one such brand that does that). Now as far as determining who's computer/algorithm is 'right', well, you're happy with your computer choices, and so am I, so it's all good, up until the point at which your choices intrude into my dive plans (or my choices intrude into your dive plans), then we may need to go our separate ways.

[Parrotman]

Most people on this board are smart people. I have known most for them for a long time. Most of them can "do-the-math" well enough to realize that going to the chamber and possibly ending their diving career because their computer is too liberal for their skills (most are not tech divers nor wish to be) is far more expensive than missing a few minutes on the bottom. In fact most of them go on vacation for fun, not to maximize their bottom time. I have yet to meet one that cares for their bottom more time than their buddies safety also. I can point a few on some other scuba boards but not here. If dive buddies don't work out here we just change them around and every one is generally happy.

Excellent viewpoint.

As a matter of fact, I dive a conservative computer ON PURPOSE. The reasons stated above are exactly the reason for this. I do not want to get bent because my computer thinks it's OK to go for 50 minutes at 100 feet.....

And if anyone were to ask me if I get enough bottom time.... well I get plenty of bottom time... averaging around 75-80 minutes per dive for my last 250 dives .... That's plenty for anyone.

Regarding Kamala's post, I imagine that the people with bottom time issues were on air. T + C divesites are rather deep, and diving on air would limit anyone not on Nitrox.

I agree completely!


(all of the divers at T&C were diving nitrox.)

[scubafanatic]

Its like driving 55MPH in a 65MPH zone. Yeah, you can probably drive 70 and never get a ticket or have an accident, but if someone feels more comfortable at 55, its their choice and I can't criticize them for getting there 5 minutes later.

Actually the example I used would be more like 2 divers diving regardless of speed but going the same speed, doing the exact same dive/drive and yet one running out of bottom time/gas before the dive/drive was over while the other did not. They started with the same amt but the gauge read differently and they had to follow the gauge assuming it was accurate.

However to your point many divers do feel 'better safe than sorry' and will accept that their computers make them come up sooner than other computers. And in the end it hurts nothing...but if you don't have to why?

I think it's hilarious that generally smart people (smart enough to hold jobs that pay well enough to afford to do numerous spendy multi-thousand $ each dive trips) can't seem to do-the-math and understand the true costs of a 'inaccurate'/cheap computer. Just for fun, take the total net cost of a dive trip in $, divide that into the # of dives one does on that trip to come up with a 'cost per dive'. then go one step further and calculate the 'cost per minute of bottom time'. Additionally, subtract out the 10 or 15 or 20 minutes of hang time at 15 feet you had to do per dive to deco (that's NOT bottom time). This will help you understand the opportunity cost of going cheap/inaccurate on your computer selection. Multiply this by all the trips/dives over which you've used/will use your cheap/inaccurate computer and you begin to get the picture of the TRUE cost of your computer selection. It's interesting people will spend major time/effort investing $/planning for a nice trip, but completely ignore the impact their computer choice will have on said trip.

I am curious as to why there is an automatic assumption that people are diving with a "cheap" computer? I may not be diving with the same computer that you are anyone else is, but that does not mean that I am diving with an inferior or "cheap" product.

Jim

'Cheap" can mean a computer with substandard logic/algorithm...there are some computers that aren't cheap $ wise, but cheap in features/capabilities/engineering. If your computer is preventing you from achieving your own personal diving/trip goals, then I'm gonna call it cheap.

It would seem to me that if your computer lets you do whatever you want, ie: achieve your dive goals regardless of what your computer says, that has nothing to do with being cheap, that has to do with a person buying a computer that matches what they want not necessarily what is safe or wise.

I would much rather lose ten mintues off my dive than spend even one session in the chamber. I suppose any one can put value on anything that they purchase. I value a computer that helps me dive a safe dive without adding any undue risk. If a person puts value on a computer that lets you push the limits and increase the risk then that is there choice. This still does not mean that the conservative computer is "cheap" regardless of what you paid for it.

"adding undue risk" is a relative term, do we arm wrestle each other or do paper-rock-scissors to determine who's right? How many 'tech' divers use something like Sunnto ? They can't achieve their goals on that computer, so they use more realistic computer models to achieve their goals, which is different than the 'anything goes' computer model you seem to imply I'm referencing. If tomorrow Sunnto came out with a new computer, twice as conservative as their existing models, would you buy/use it ? It would be safer, wouldn't it ? A 15 ft dive for 15 min would no doubt be a pretty safe profile. I'm looking for accurate/realistic computer models, not 'conservative' or 'liberal', and I feel comfortable with my choices, if you are good with your choices, that's fine.

[Parrotman]

Its like driving 55MPH in a 65MPH zone. Yeah, you can probably drive 70 and never get a ticket or have an accident, but if someone feels more comfortable at 55, its their choice and I can't criticize them for getting there 5 minutes later.

Actually the example I used would be more like 2 divers diving regardless of speed but going the same speed, doing the exact same dive/drive and yet one running out of bottom time/gas before the dive/drive was over while the other did not. They started with the same amt but the gauge read differently and they had to follow the gauge assuming it was accurate.

However to your point many divers do feel 'better safe than sorry' and will accept that their computers make them come up sooner than other computers. And in the end it hurts nothing...but if you don't have to why?

I think it's hilarious that generally smart people (smart enough to hold jobs that pay well enough to afford to do numerous spendy multi-thousand $ each dive trips) can't seem to do-the-math and understand the true costs of a 'inaccurate'/cheap computer. Just for fun, take the total net cost of a dive trip in $, divide that into the # of dives one does on that trip to come up with a 'cost per dive'. then go one step further and calculate the 'cost per minute of bottom time'. Additionally, subtract out the 10 or 15 or 20 minutes of hang time at 15 feet you had to do per dive to deco (that's NOT bottom time). This will help you understand the opportunity cost of going cheap/inaccurate on your computer selection. Multiply this by all the trips/dives over which you've used/will use your cheap/inaccurate computer and you begin to get the picture of the TRUE cost of your computer selection. It's interesting people will spend major time/effort investing $/planning for a nice trip, but completely ignore the impact their computer choice will have on said trip.

I am curious as to why there is an automatic assumption that people are diving with a "cheap" computer? I may not be diving with the same computer that you are anyone else is, but that does not mean that I am diving with an inferior or "cheap" product.

Jim

'Cheap" can mean a computer with substandard logic/algorithm...there are some computers that aren't cheap $ wise, but cheap in features/capabilities/engineering. If your computer is preventing you from achieving your own personal diving/trip goals, then I'm gonna call it cheap.

It would seem to me that if your computer lets you do whatever you want, ie: achieve your dive goals regardless of what your computer says, that has nothing to do with being cheap, that has to do with a person buying a computer that matches what they want not necessarily what is safe or wise.

I would much rather lose ten mintues off my dive than spend even one session in the chamber. I suppose any one can put value on anything that they purchase. I value a computer that helps me dive a safe dive without adding any undue risk. If a person puts value on a computer that lets you push the limits and increase the risk then that is there choice. This still does not mean that the conservative computer is "cheap" regardless of what you paid for it.

"adding undue risk" is a relative term, do we arm wrestle each other or do paper-rock-scissors to determine who's right? How many 'tech' divers use something like Sunnto ? They can't achieve their goals on that computer, so they use more realistic computer models to achieve their goals, which is different than the 'anything goes' computer model you seem to imply I'm referencing. If tomorrow Sunnto came out with a new computer, twice as conservative as their existing models, would you buy/use it ? It would be safer, wouldn't it ? A 15 ft dive for 15 min would no doubt be a pretty safe profile. I'm looking for accurate/realistic computer models, not 'conservative' or 'liberal', and I feel comfortable with my choices, if you are good with your choices, that's fine.

I am comfortable with my choice of computers but I never implied that just because someone was diving with a different choice that they were not intelligent or that they chose a "cheap" computer.

[secretsea18]

"adding undue risk" is a relative term, do we arm wrestle each other or do paper-rock-scissors to determine who's right? How many 'tech' divers use something like Sunnto ? They can't achieve their goals on that computer, so they use more realistic computer models to achieve their goals, which is different than the 'anything goes' computer model you seem to imply I'm referencing. If tomorrow Sunnto came out with a new computer, twice as conservative as their existing models, would you buy/use it ? It would be safer, wouldn't it ? A 15 ft dive for 15 min would no doubt be a pretty safe profile. I'm looking for accurate/realistic computer models, not 'conservative' or 'liberal', and I feel comfortable with my choices, if you are good with your choices, that's fine.

What do you have against a Suunto? I purchased it based upon the reputation, and the excellent options it offered. It has been very reliable, consistent and fits well into my diving, which is recreational and never will be "tech". (I think enough when I am at work, and rather just look at and photograph the lovely critters in the sea, than figure out all that gas stuff.) I imagine that there are "tech" divers who use Suuntos as that is the market for using multi-gas computers, right? Maybe not you or your friends.... Us "rec" divers really don't believe that what a "tech" diver needs/requires is what a "rec" diver wants/needs/requires, so that comparison is not very meaningful.

My Suunto is a multi-gas Nitrox computer that allows you to switch to 3 gas mixtures up to 100% O2 in a dive It is user adjustable and has 3 choices for recording.... that is just recording the dive, not sampling the dive parameters which is up to every few seconds in my "Simulate dive", which shows the time, depth, etc for the entire dive. I get it you do not like the Suunto dive model. In my opinion it is an extremely accurate and reliable computer model that happens to be on the more conservative end of dive computers.

And I have no idea what you are all speaking about with clearing into "green" as my Suunto has no colored zones. Those probably are the lower cost models, and my Oceanic (backup) does have colored zones. Mine just tells you how many minutes of NDT you have remaining, or air minutes (I am hoseless air integrated) remaining.

Why do you need to ascend within the "green" zone if your computer is color coded? What is wrong with being in the "yellow"? It is not violating the computer and will not lock you out if you are in "yellow" when you get out of the water. Just as long as you do not violate a Deco stop, you will be fine, even if in yellow.


For what it's worth, I do 4 dives a day ranging from 75-100 minutes each going to 100+ feet for parts of the majority of the dives... not just 100 minutes at 15 feet (although I have done dives like that). My usual guide and buddy use an Aladin and our profiles are similar and we end up with similar SI times. My recent dive buddies and I, all equipped with Suuntos, recently were on a liveaboard/land trip in Indonesia. We had absolutely no restrictions due to our computers and actually were in the water the longest and deepest of the group (all very experienced divers except for one guy) aboard including the dive guides, our remaining nitrox in the tank was the only limiting factor for our dives. There was no limitation at all due to the gas model or the computer used.


We get it .... you think your Cochrain is the best in the world for your needs. Not everyone does. That is why there are different computer manufacturers.

And if there was ever discovered that there was one dive gas theory that was truly the "one" then all dive computer manufacturers would use that model in their computers. It is still all theory with different opinions, and thus we have various computer gas models. You believe the Cochrain theory is best, so use that. I and many others are happy using a different computer using a differing gas model. And while DAN may have unofficially stated that there was one model they felt was the "one", until they come out and publicly announce that they have figured out the supreme dive gas bubble deco model, then it is all speculation. Until it is published, then it is just speculation. So until DAN "mans up" and publishes that they have determined the most correct gas model of them all....

Peace.

(Flame proof divesuit applied before typing above )

And I totally agree with Sea Urchin they are big ugly and wouldn't fit on my wrist very well. Plus they are way too much $$$ for my needs.

Basically it all comes down to personal preference. Safety, form, performance, ease-of-use, cost and features needed are all part of the equation that we weigh differently and lead to our choices.

[Landlocked Dive Nut]

For what it's worth, I did 5 dives a day on Nitrox on the T&C trip with my two Suunto computers, and I never once lost any bottom time, did not go into deco, and did not max out my oxygen uptake. I did 60 minute dives (or nearly so) and always came back to the boat with at least their required 500psi in left in the tank. I'm very happy with my computer choice for my type & style of diving.

I am NOT happy with someone inferring that I am uninformed, cheap or stupid because of my choice in gear. We are supposed to respect each other's choices & opinions on this board.

[secretsea18]

Most people on this board are smart people. I have known most for them for a long time. Most of them can "do-the-math" well enough to realize that going to the chamber and possibly ending their diving career because their computer is too liberal for their skills (most are not tech divers nor wish to be) is far more expensive than missing a few minutes on the bottom. In fact most of them go on vacation for fun, not to maximize their bottom time. I have yet to meet one that cares for their bottom more time than their buddies safety also. I can point a few on some other scuba boards but not here. If dive buddies don't work out here we just change them around and every one is generally happy.

Excellent viewpoint.

As a matter of fact, I dive a conservative computer ON PURPOSE. The reasons stated above are exactly the reason for this. I do not want to get bent because my computer thinks it's OK to go for 50 minutes at 100 feet.....

And if anyone were to ask me if I get enough bottom time.... well I get plenty of bottom time... averaging around 75-80 minutes per dive for my last 250 dives .... That's plenty for anyone.

Regarding Kamala's post, I imagine that the people with bottom time issues were on air. T + C divesites are rather deep, and diving on air would limit anyone not on Nitrox.

I agree completely!


(all of the divers at T&C were diving nitrox.)

But were those divers diving on Nitrox computers with the set properly? I have an Oceanic Nitrox computer that works just fine, as long as I set the nitrox setting correctly ... just before each dive. If I forget to do the setting, it defaults to 40% O2 + AIR. Giving the most penalty for both oxygen and nitrogen. I got horrible bottom times when I forgot to do the setting just before entering the water. Talk about annoying.

Part of the features the Suunto has that I love. Set the Nitrox setting once, and it stays there until I change it during a trip.

[WreckWench]

First off a message was sent to Scubafanatic and he has toned his posts down and may have possibly stopped posting in this topic entirely.

He achieved his goal of getting people to think even if he was a bit 'fanatical' about it.

He acknowledged he was a bit harsh in his posts but sometimes loses sight of how 'gentle our board is'.

So let's all keep that in mind or we will have to close this topic and lose the value its added.

[secretsea18]

First off a message was sent to Scubafanatic and he has toned his posts down and may have possibly stopped posting in this topic entirely.

He achieved his goal of getting people to think even if he was a bit 'fanatical' about it.

He acknowledged he was a bit harsh in his posts but sometimes loses sight of how 'gentle our board is'.

So let's all keep that in mind or we will have to close this topic and lose the value its added.

This thread was the most fun in weeks.

Even though it may have fanatic, differing viewpoints make for interesting threads. No feelings hurt. And no need for babying.