Will Air Integration in dive computers replace the SPG?

[dmoore19]

Nope, I mean right here on Scubaboard. I have been a member since 2009 and it was obvious. People who used computers were called computer monkeys and computer jockeys and were assured they were going to die. Tables and a bottom timer, which is still a common theme, were used period.

I am not exaggerating at all and think that your denial is only used as a way to continue your dive my way or you will die platform.

Since I don't dive in the UK and never have I can't speak to that.

Ok...so I've been on Scubaboard since 2007 and I don't remember this. Do you mean offline...real world... attitudes? If so, I've been a tech instructor for 10 years...and I didn't see this attitude either.

That's why I ask if maybe it's a regional/local attitude? It certainly doesn't represent the tech community I know in Asia and Europe...

I remember technical dive boats in the UK 10 years ago where everyone was wearing VR3 or VR2 computers. I also remember happy faces when the 'color' version came out... I, likewise, remember first seeing a Liquivision X1 in action... and that must have been around 2008... because the owner died shortly thereafter (not because of the computer, I might add... no FIGJAM there Pete...). The X1 received A LOT of positive attention in the community when it was introduced. I also know divers who use Cochran computers and have done so for decades... some very pioneering technical/cave instructors, I might add...

Or.... are you mistaking (or exaggerating) where technical divers have simply stated that a computer is not necessary for technical diving? A sentiment that remains true and justifiable to this day....

 

[The Chairman]

Remember @Uncle Pug's infamous "Computers will rot your brain!". I've had techies tell me this equivalent this year. You've got to work on your situational awareness on this Andy. Search "Gauge Mode" and I'm certain you'll find loads of examples.

 

[stuartv]

I tried to explain it you you. 'Mental arithmetic' on rec dives is baloney. How have I insulted you? Because I've said you have no experience? Sorry for pointing out the obvious.

Yeah, occasionally I run across motorcyclists who are more experienced than I am. They've been riding 40 years - on the same bike or same brand and style. They've never had an accident. But they've also never ridden over the speed limit. Never ridden in really heavy traffic. And never ridden in bad weather. They, too, believe that there is nothing someone who has only been riding one or two years can possibly tell them. If they person with less saddle time agrees with them, they are "smart". But, if the person with less saddle time disagrees with them, they are ignorant and close-minded and stupid for not listening to the "more experienced" person.

I can only imagine that at some point in the past the guys that insisted that mechanical depth gauges were the only smart way to go thought the same of you that you seem to think of me now.

My dad started diving in about 1960. He dove in the Navy. He was diving the caves of north Florida (we're from Tallahassee) before a lot of people on this board were even born. The mastodon skeleton he brought up out of the Aucilla river may still be on display on the US Geologic Survey at FSU. He scoffs at your electronic depth gauge. He never needed one. Are you going to listen to him and stop using it?

 

[DevonDiver]

I am not exaggerating at all and think that your denial is only used as a way to continue your dive my way or you will die platform.

Whenever I've posted about technical diving and computers, my rationale has been that of training. All my tech courses are taught using bottom-timers and tables as the primary means of decompression control. That's because I view following a set run-time to be a critical technical skill... as it promotes precision and accuracy. It's a training tool... not a 'set in stone' approach forever.

Beyond that, I've never had a problem with tech computers, provided technical divers don't forsake proper planning and preparation. They should be a tool, not a crutch (the same applies to AI...)

Did you see these attitudes on the DIR forum/s? Because the only agencies I know that don't use computers, instead use timers with ratio deco... Perhaps you saw those attitudes from vocal DIRists...and mistook them for being representative of all technical diving? (an easy mistake, given internet footprints..)

 

[dmoore19]

No, I don't pay much attention to the DIR forums. It was right out in the main forums. Right here on Scubaboard.

It wasn't even specifically directed at Tech diving.

I don't believe for a moment that your methods are unproven or that they are unreliable. It is in no way a personal attack. It was simply to point out that in the past there was a lot of people saying that a tech diver using a computer was heavily frowned upon. That a rec diver using a computer to take advantage of the increased bottom time was a computer jockey. It was and is still often said though with a lot less frequency. The computer is now mainstream, even in the tech community and tables and slates are used as backup. I am quite sure that your statements are all a product of your training that is deeply ingrained.

In the past, I saw similar attitudes about things like anti-lock brakes, power windows, power steering, automatic transmission and other technologies introduced into the auto industry. The same arguments were applied. People who learned to drive with these items were no properly trained. They are not needed, they are at an added cost nobody wants them.

It is my contention that AI will follow the same path and will be used in tech diving in the future. In 5 years something new will come along and be the next technology that will be frowned upon by the tech community. I have no idea what that technology will be.

Whenever I've posted about technical diving and computers, my rationale has been that of training. All my tech courses are taught using bottom-timers and tables as the primary means of decompression control. That's because I view following a set run-time to be a critical technical skill... as it promotes precision and accuracy. It's a training tool... not a 'set in stone' approach forever.

Beyond that, I've never had a problem with tech computers, provided technical divers don't forsake proper planning and preparation. They should be a tool, not a crutch (the same applies to AI...)

Did you see these attitudes on the DIR forum/s? Because the only agencies I know that don't use computers, instead use timers with ratio deco... Perhaps you saw those attitudes from vocal DIRists...and mistook them for being representative of all technical diving? (an easy mistake, given internet footprints..)

 

[dmaziuk]

Are you sure? One is an actual space station and the other has Jar Jar Bings.

Do not underestimate the power of The Force.

someone had to say it

 

[DevonDiver]

Do not underestimate the power of The Force The Dark Side.

someone had to correct it

 

[DevonDiver]

... in the past there was a lot of people saying that a tech diver using a computer was heavily frowned upon.

I can't remember reading a single post to that effect, but that may mean I don't spend long enough on Scubaboard LOL

... a rec diver using a computer to take advantage of the increased bottom time was a computer jockey. It was and is still often said though with a lot less frequency. The computer is now mainstream, even in the tech community and tables and slates are used as backup.

Well, rec and tec is different...

That said, I believe many of the remarks made about diving computers are directed at their usage, not the computers themselves.

Tools, not crutches. The spirit being that divers should still 'plan their dive and dive their plan'... and not become reliant upon; or abdicate total responsibility for their personal safety, to a dive computer.

The issue... and the remarks... as I interpreted them, were directed to the users, not the computer. This doesn't mean that a diver shouldn't use a computer, nor does it mean they shouldn't reap the benefit of real-time, multi-level saturation/decompression tracking. But rather, that the diver shouldn't disengage their brain and allow themselves to be content with splashing into the water and blindly following the dictates of a computer without any outline plan for the dive in place.

 

[Bennno]

I have no intention to embarrass you, either personally or professionally... I simply suggest that you might research the concept of Gas Matching... as it applies to overhead environment diving.

You are spinning Andy, I was talking about rec dives. You're telling me to plan for a funeral if I don't plan 50' reef dives and I should be embarrassed?

 

[dmoore19]

Okay, and how do your comments regarding the use of AI differ?

I understand that you and some others have shown a distrust of AI and your opinion and that of others is that it is not necessary. I presented the idea that in the past the same was said for computers. I don't deny that AI and computers are not necessary, for that matter an SPG isn't necessary either. If one were to follow your absolute line of thinking, none of these "tools" would be necessary because you planned your dive and would know exactly how much gas you have in your tanks.

The question is if AI will replace the SPG in the future. I believe it will, just as the SPG replaced the j-valve. The discussion of ATR and the computer that displays that information is for another thread, that information is a result of AI, I can see that it would have no value for a Tech diver, at least in it's present form.

I can't remember reading a single post to that effect, but that may mean I don't spend long enough on Scubaboard LOL



Well, rec and tec is different...

That said, I believe many of the remarks made about diving computers are directed at their usage, not the computers themselves.

Tools, not crutches. The spirit being that divers should still 'plan their dive and dive their plan'... and not become reliant upon; or abdicate total responsibility for their personal safety, to a dive computer.

The issue... and the remarks... as I interpreted them, were directed to the users, not the computer. This doesn't mean that a diver shouldn't use a computer, nor does it mean they shouldn't reap the benefit of real-time, multi-level saturation/decompression tracking. But rather, that the diver shouldn't disengage their brain and allow themselves to be content with splashing into the water and blindly following the dictates of a computer without any outline plan for the dive in place.