To each his own. I would never travel with more than one BC, unless I was doing both side and back mount on the same trip. Locally, I just take the Scuba Sprinter:
Will Air Integration in dive computers replace the SPG?
- Thread starter CuzzA
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
I see spools fail far more often than any other piece of Scuba gear and mostly from benign neglect. I carry a dozen or so in my truck because I'm always replacing them for peeps. In fact I keep a bunch in the top drawer of the forward tool chest and a few more in the quick kit in the back of the Sprinter. I used to carry a half dozen or so. same as clips, but I ran out at Peacock one Saturday. I see leaky hoses all the time too and while I might suffer a small leak in the pool, I'm not going to let my student dive OW on any leaky equipment and I'm def not going into a cave with a leak. That's just nutzoid. However, I haven't seen the first leaking transmitter. Not one.
I have to imagine that within 10 years or so air integration will be the recreational standard, and casual/recreational divers will monitor two primary things - their no decompression limit time, and their remaining air time. Other things like air usage rate will likely be of more benefit to more experienced divers, as will features like having an illuminated display of air pressure and other data.
PADI's now turning out classes full of students every weekend who don't know what a dive table is or how to use one (it's all computer based), and I don't see that trend reversing among recreational divers.
PADI's now turning out classes full of students every weekend who don't know what a dive table is or how to use one (it's all computer based), and I don't see that trend reversing among recreational divers.
I sometimes wonder what "recreational" diving will mean in 10 years. From what I have read, it seems to me that what we now think of as technical diving is growing fast. Maybe 10 years from now the average diver fresh out of OW class will be diving to 200 feet on some kind of rebreather.
dumpsterDiver
Banned
- Messages
- 9,003
- Reaction score
- 4,661
- # of dives
- 2500 - 4999
I think that a huge advantage of AI would be the display and automatic calculation of time remaining - based on recent gas usage rate and depth. I had an old ORCA AI computer and it did that (actually had 3 of them) and it was nice. For redneck, solo deco diving.. It was cool.. it displayed the deco time )or time to surface) and it also let me know how many more minutes of "air time" I had remaining. As i recall the "air time" was based on time at current depth and included some reserve for ascent itself... but it was very easy for me. If I had an owner's manual, i might have understood (or remember it better) .. but it was a cool feature.. probably easier than all the "rock Bottom" calculations people are supposed to do in their heads..
Hey Benno,
Yes, I am aware that having an electronic pressure gauge for depth that is integrated into your computer allows your computer to extend your bottom time or reduce your deco time (compared to calculating it all using tables) based on real world usage data. You could do the same thing manually, using your mechanical depth gauge and bottom timer and tables that you take with you. The computer provides convenience, increased accuracy, and eliminates the possibility of a possibly-narced human making an arithmetic error.
And an electronic pressure gauge for cylinder pressure that is integrated into your computer allows your computer to possibly extend your bottom time. Or it can alert you to a need to reduce your planned bottom time. It tells you how long you can stay at your current depth, if you continue to breathe the same way, still do a normal ascent, with safety stop, and arrive at the surface with whatever reserve you set the computer for. You could do the same thing manually, using your SPG and knowledge of your SAC. The computer provides convenience, increased accuracy (in many ways), and eliminates the possibility of a possibly-narced human making an arithmetic error.
"Hey, I'm doing really good on air today and I'm nowhere near my NDL. My buddy has way more air left than I do. I think I'll stay down past my originally planned turn pressure because that was based on a worse SAC than I have today. Hmmm, let me figure out what today's SAC is and update my estimate for my TP."
That doesn't sound like such a good idea, does it? But, why not, if the computer is actually measuring your current SAC and doing the arithmetic for you?
In short, I think your premise is based on believing that there is advantage to the diver in having the depth gauge integrated into the computer, but you don't see any advantage to the diver in having the tank pressure integrated into the computer. I think depth and tank pressure are both things that divers plan their dives on - including revising their plan while under water - and having both things integrated into the computer lets the computer do a better job than the diver can of the measurements and arithmetic related to that dive planning. Depth is required for calculating deco. Tank pressure is required for calculating how long you can stay down. So, yes, I think you can compare them.
And no, I only carry a small, very low profile knife, in case I need to cut something that my EMT shears or Trilobite can't handle. I am pretty sure I've read that it's not unknown at all for divers to die because they switched to the wrong gas. Not common, but it does happen. And, yes, I am very familiar with my SAC rate thanks to studying the logged data from my AI.
That's what most of the current AI computers do. You set it for how much pressure you want to have left when you hit the surface. It monitors your consumption over the most recent period. Exactly how long depends on the computer, but I think they mostly based the calculation on your consumption rate over the last 1 or 2 minutes.
It will then display how many minutes you have until you have to start your ascent from your current depth. If you follow it, and your breathing stays the same, you can do a normal ascent (generally, 30 ft-min, I think), a 3 minute safety stop at 15', and then hit the surface with whatever reserve pressure you told it.
I know my Oceanic computer ATR (air time remaining) display works that way. I believe it even factors in required deco stops (if you go into deco) as part of the ascent when it calculates how much longer you can stay at the current depth. So, again, if you go into deco and ride the ATR down to 0 before you start your ascent, as long as your breathing stays the same and you ascend on schedule, you will do your deco stops and still hit the surface with 500 psi (or whatever you set).
That said, I believe I have read that some computers calculate ATR differently. Some computers do not factor ascent time in. So, if it says 1 minute ATR, that means you have 1 minute until you're going to be at 500 psi (or whatever reserve it's set for). To me, that is pretty useless for an ATR calculation. But, it highlights that if you use AI and look at the ATR at all, you need to make sure you know how your computer works for calculating that number!
While I don't mind cutting a dive short for lots of reasons, I won't extend them on the fly. Limits are limits. Since my cognitive functions are lessened with depth, I stick with the limits I determined on the surface. Plan your dive and dive your plan.
I don't think AI/ATR should be one's primary planning tool. But, suppose you plan your dive and conclude that you have plenty of gas. You get in and you're not even paying attention to your SPG (as many people here seem to be saying that they do, because they planned their dive and they know their SAC). You are paying attention to something else about your dive, so you don't really catch onto the fact that there is a bit of current and you are actually working harder than "normal". Maybe you notice it but you don't really think about it because that wreck you're swimming beside is so COOL!
With an SPG on your waist, glancing at your computer is not going to clue you in that you're sucking down your gas faster than planned. But, if it was on your computer, glancing at your computer might result in your noticing that you had intended to stay down for 15 more minutes but your computer is telling you you only have 5 more minutes of air left (before you need to start your ascent) - and maybe you better pause and figure out why that is.
With an SPG on your waist, glancing at your computer is not going to clue you in that you're sucking down your gas faster than planned. But, if it was on your computer, glancing at your computer might result in your noticing that you had intended to stay down for 15 more minutes but your computer is telling you you only have 5 more minutes of air left (before you need to start your ascent) - and maybe you better pause and figure out why that is.
Similar threads
