PADI tables finally going away?

[promocop]

old school Army Ranger tables...simple 60-60-60 Sixty feet for 60 minutes at 60 degrees. What's the issue?

 

[300bar]

old school Army Ranger tables...simple 60-60-60 Sixty feet for 60 minutes at 60 degrees. What's the issue?

I must be WAY to young,but 60 degrees.
Is that up,down,left or right.

Hope it's not the Temp.

 

[rstofer]

Divers That don’t Plan a Dive then Dive the Plan using table are asking for problems
There is a reason that commercial divers (at least in Canada don’t know about the USA) are required to use tables (computers are backup only or not used) tables came from a lot of research the computers are algorithms based on those tables. To not learn them is………
That’s my 2 cense

Did you ever notice that there is a disclaimer in many (all?) dive computer owner's manuals that the computer is NOT to be used for commercial or military diving?

Hm...

Richard

 

[DA Aquamaster]

We are obviously never to to reach any kind of decision point here, so I am posting my summary points for anyone that may come across this thread from the search engines, and taking my ball and going home (so to speak). I promised my girlfriend I wouldn't get my PTSD all up in arms because of people on the internet.

I reached the same conclusion earlier today.

Consider this:

The record store owners may hate Michael Jackson's music, but you can bet they were fully stocked after his demise. How do you think ScubaBoard got to be the largest forum for Scuba? We gave people what they wanted, when they wanted it.

It is basically just stating the business practice of selling what ever people want.

But it does not apply to the discussion at hand because supporting something as being right or as being a best practice just because everybody does it has nothing to do with whether that something is actually correct or a best practice.

It's called an ad populum logical fallacy. The problem with an ad populum fallacy is the fact that many people agree on something does not mean that what they agree on is true. While it is true that in some cases the fact that many people agree can constitute legitimate evidence, the challenge is to understand the relevance of the argument to the conclusion in order to separate fact from fallacy.

In this case, it's a false argument to equate the undeniably popular, but also undeniably bad, practice of people just riding their computers with saying that is an ideal we should not only aspire to but teach from the start.

Maintaining that we should not teach tables because so many people just dive their computer is much like saying that because so many people drive after drinking that we should just teach them to have a beer before they get in the car. Just doing it does not make it right.

Pete either can't see the fallacy as it applies to dive computers, or he will not admit he may be wrong. He also apparently cannot or is unwilling to acknowledge that there may be another equally valid point of view. Arguing about it ad naseum is not going to resolve those particular issues.

So there is really not much need to tie up the band width or increase the post count on what has become a pointless argument.

 

[rstofer]

I encourage you to check out the required dive equipment for NAUI divers. Just how many depth gauges are required amongst a buddy pair? How many watches? How many SPGs? You might be surprised at the results.

It's been a long time but I don't recall those topics discussed. Would you post the answers please?

I know how we actually dive (everybody has everything) but I'd be very interested in the answers to these questions.

Thanks!
Richard

 

[DA Aquamaster]

old school Army Ranger tables...simple 60-60-60 Sixty feet for 60 minutes at 60 degrees. What's the issue?

I always understood it as 60 ft (depth), 60 minutes (time), 60 feet per minute (ascent rate).

At 60 degrees, you'd add some conservatism for a cold water dive and either limit the NDL to 50 minutes or increase the "depth" on the table to 70 ft.

 

[Elonna]

All of my student gear comes with an Oceanic Veo250. You would not have had to buy a PDC, just as you didn't have to buy a BC or regulator.

The goal is to remove obstacles: not to create them.

Posted via Mobile Device

And I said if the school could provide them that would be great. However....and this is the point that I will continue to try to make...that doesn't mean I shouldn't learn the tables too. Again, learning the basics of a PDC would be awesome. I'm all for it being added to the curriculum...but after class, when I can't afford a computer of my own...I need the tables.

As a new diver I would never 'wing it'.

 

[DevonDiver]

I'd equate it to (as always) learning to drive a car.

If you learn on an auto-shift (dive computer), then you are not able to use a manual shift (tables).

If you learn on a manual shift (tables), then you can use an auto-shift (computer).

Thus, it makes sense to always learn to drive a car with a manual shift... but some people still chose to learn in an auto-shift, because they make the decision that this is all they will ever use.

Does that make them better or worse drivers?

It makes no difference, other than cutting down their options - but if you don't want/need those options, then it has no bearing.

 

[ScubaDocER]

Precisely what you would do were your watch/depth gauge/SPG fail. Wing it somehow.

Wow. To say that I am stunned at this response would be an understatement. I suppose I should not be after reading previous statements made on previous posts. But even this response has me speechless.

I have never...EVER...seen this response to any legitimate diving question from an Instructor. There should never be a taught situation where a student is instructed by an Instructor to "wing it". It borders on the concept of advocating poor diving practices and engaging in destructive diving behavior.

Typically Instructors attempt to prepare students for the diving world. We teach them to think, be educated, and that there is a solution to most problems that they will face. It simply requires a clear mind and a focused determination to resolve the conflict at hand. At no point should a student be told to just wing anything. We teach then how to maintain proper buoyancy. We teach them how to obtain proper trim in the water. We teach them to be focused with regards to air management and dive planning. The operative word is teach. To wing it suggests that you are unprepared or poorly prepared. It suggests that you are throwing caution to the wind and hoping for the best. If they are going to wing it, then they really don't need an Instructor. What they will need is prayer.

I intentionally stayed out of this discussion because I have had similar ones involving NetDoc and they typically have ended the same. With random analogies being given that are rarely germane to the topic at hand. I thank you DA for pointing out the obvious fallacy with that approach. I felt content to watch from the sidelines when I realized that there are people who will read those statements and might think that since they came from an Instructor, then they must be true. If my computer fails, then I should just wing it. The errors in that line of thinking are staggering. It makes no sense in areas outside of diving. Others have addressed it quite well thank goodness.

I also concur with DA's statement that simply giving the people what they want is an irresponsible response to a legitimate question. My patients want Demerol and Dilaudid when they come into the Emergency Department. Under NetDocs philosophy, I should just give them what they want. It will make me popular and would do wonders for business. Until the DEA comes knocking on my door.

New students don't know what they don't know. It should be the responsibility of any Instructor to produce educated and competent divers. I don't know why some Instructors continue to whine about the time they have to put into educating their students. The student has paid you to educate them. Do that. And do it to the best of your ability. If that requires more time then give it to them. Or tell them you have taken them as far as you can and suggest someone who can complete their training. But to complain about the fact that providing more education to the student is wasted time or time you could be spending on other things is counter productive to the very concept of education. Some students need more time. Some students will require more patience. Often times it is these students that when they do get it, become the stars of the class!!

As many others have said, there has been no disagreement over the importance of PDCs in the diving community. Very helpful. They should be introduced and taught at the OW level. To exclude teaching the tables because it takes away time from teaching other concepts smacks of laziness to me. There are important concepts that the tables convey in teaching decompression theory. It gives students a tangible concept of nitrogen loading, surface intervals, and how to track nitrogen loading during repetitive dives. It is simply a tool. But it has provided a very decent building block for the understanding of decompression theory and an understanding upon which the computers algorithms are based. Students should be taught that the tables are not a holy grail, but just one of many avenues available to them to understand nitrogen loading and dive planning. It is a reasonable back up to a failed dive computer. I too fail to see why teaching this very valuable option is not an option. You have stated your reasons and they have yet to make sense to me. We'll have to agree to disagree.

Lastly, to tell students that they can learn the tables from some other source...leaves me speechless again. I will accept that I am a new Instructor and clearly don't know all of the tricks of the trade. I am SO grateful for the postings of others who have given me tons of information and guidance on how to conduct a class. Even I don't recognize my current teaching method from my previous one. And I am still looking for ways to make it better. To include more information in the class that is relevant and will expand their understanding of diving. This statement to me suggests that one is abdicating their responsibilities to their students. Clearly a subjective opinion, but is the one I have nonetheless. Tables can be very overwhelming. Sometimes students have trouble understanding them even when the Instructor has explained it to them. I am not sure I would want them to "learn it in the streets" without a supposedly educated Instructor helping them. They are not necessarily complicated, but again form a legitimate foundation for the understanding of decompression theory. It depends on how it is taught, but it can be understood without it being an inconvenience to either the Instructor or the student.

I still have not grasped the concept of finding ways to minimize contact with one's students. Educators should be doing the exact opposite.

 

[DevonDiver]

Precisely what you would do were your watch/depth gauge/SPG fail. Wing it somehow.

On a recreational dive.... the standard procedure would be to immediately abort the dive and ascend to the surface at a speed not exceeding 18mpm (or 9/10pmp if not PADI).

Your buddy should be available to assist with the ascent, although the diver should be capable of conducting a safe, slow ascent, without instrumentation, by themselves.

This strategy relies upon following the correct techniques and recommended safety limitations taught on entry level scubs courses.

i.e.
Plan your dive - dive the plan. This means you are always aware of the maximum depth you reached (if depth gauge malfunctions) and the maximum time you could possibly have reached on the dive (if timer malfunctions). You could still plan subsequent dives based on these 'maximums'.

Maintain a minimum reserve of air. This means that, in the event of spg failure, even towards the end of the dive, you are ensured of sufficient air to conduct a safe ascent to the surface.