Air Integrated Computers "Could Potentially Kill You."

[The Chairman]

That's not even in the original post.

I thought? I read somewhere......
You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like, likely to offend, contains adult or objectionable content, contains personal information of others, risks copyright infringement, encourages unlawful activity, or otherwise violates any laws.
Whilst a minor amount of off-topic posting may be overlooked, the general rule is your posts or threads must be relevant to the forum or thread in which you are posting.

A few days ago a Staff member actually told someone " To just leave...You'll be forgotten soon enough..
Awesome....

O.K. I'm good.

I'm not understanding why you think my post was off topic? I really don't. We're talking about AI PDCs and safety and someone suggested that the transmitter could be broken off. My point was that would be a transmitter that was incorrectly positioned. In other words, the problem wasn't with the AI, but with how someone was using the equipment. Isn't this within the scope of safety and PDCs with AI???

 

[Edward3c]

That's not even in the original post.

I thought? I read somewhere......
You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like, likely to offend, contains adult or objectionable content, contains personal information of others, risks copyright infringement, encourages unlawful activity, or otherwise violates any laws.
Whilst a minor amount of off-topic posting may be overlooked, the general rule is your posts or threads must be relevant to the forum or thread in which you are posting.

A few days ago a Staff member actually told someone " To just leave...You'll be forgotten soon enough..
Awesome....

O.K. I'm good.

How is The Charman‘s post off topic. It deals with one possible disadvantage of an AI transmitting unit.

 

[Umuntu]

Sorry, but I do not follow you on this. What does it mean "better"? Less conservative is better? Closer to the US Navy tables? Or do you mean those advanced algorithms available on some AI computers which take into account the "effort", evaluating it based on air consumption? In this latter case, I can see the point of preferring an AI-equipped computer over a traditional SPG...
Something, indeed, that I always did take into account also using the tables. Whenever air consumption had been larger than my usual SAC rate of 13 liters / minute, I always employed the table of the same maximum depth, but of a longer time, corresponding to the same air consumption I had in a normal-effort dive of this longer duration.
Example: my classical dive of 30 minutes at 30 meters, requiring a short deco stop of 3 minutes at 3 meters. The pressure at bottom is 4 ATA, hence my SAC rate is 13x4= 52 liters/minute. In 30 minutes, I typically use 30x52 = 1500 liters, which is roughly half of my 15-liters tank at 200 bar. Hence typically I still have 100 bars when I reach 9 meters and launch the SMB. Suppose that I see that the SPG indicates 67 bars instead of 100, it means that I had an anomalous air consumption, and instead of using 1500 liters (half of my tank) I had used 2000 liters (2/3 of my tank). I consider the extra air consumption equivalent to extra bottom time, and I follow the table for 30 meters, 40 minutes.
Of course my super-cheap Leonardo has no knowledge of the air in my tank, so he cannot make this adjustment to my deco stop. Does an AI-equipped computer makes the correction as I always did with the tables, or the pressure transmitter is simply used for sending an acoustic warning when the pressure falls below a threshold?
If this is the case, I really do not see the point of an AI computer.
If instead the knowledge of the pressure in the tank allows the computer to factor this in the deco algorithm, then probably the AI feature starts to become quite useful and important... And I understand why you say that a better computer can be safer than my Leonardo.

So far as I am aware, only the Scubapro G2 and M2 dive computers take account of your "work rate" (and other factors) in their algorithms ...

"Human Factor Diving is a feature specific to SCUBAPRO computers. The G2 series can monitor heart rate, skin temperature and other physiological factors to provide the most unique and adaptive algorithm, using real time information from the Human Factor Diving feature."​

Other AI dive computers do take account of your SAC in calculating how long your remaining tank air will last ... although your air time remaining is a real time calculation based on your depth and will increase as you ascend.

 

[Boston Breakwater]

Air Integrated Computers "Could Potentially Kill You."

Hello, everyone. Admittedly, the "Tagline." was an attention getter.
Firstly, I'm a firm believer in using gear that you are comfortable with, and like.
Secondly, I'm a firm believer in using gear that is appropriate for the specific dive that you are doing, and within your experience level.
I'd like to have different setups posted that you use, (Possibly pictures.)
What brand of computer do you use? Do you think that a stand alone wrist mount computer removes a potential risk (Failure Point?)
Although, any piece of equipment can fail.........Right?
What benefits are there in using A.I. other than determining your S.A.C. rate, and monitoring your P.S.I. or connecting more than one transmitter? (Are there more?)
What are the disadvantages in using A.I. computers.
I think the discussion will be interesting, and the replies will give us all some insight, whether we are newly certified recreational divers, experienced divers, technical divers, commercial divers, military divers, or the ones that delve into the "Dark Side."
(Yeah.....you know who, I mean.
I also think this might bring something back to some of us that we either have completely forgotten, or haven't thought about for awhile.....
I use (2) Shearwaters (Non-A.I.) for redundancy with (1) or (2) SPG's depending on the "Rig." I'm using. No elaboration (For now

 

[scubadada]

So far as I am aware, only the Scubapro G2 and M2 dive computers take account of your "work rate" (and other factors) in their algorithms ...

"Human Factor Diving is a feature specific to SCUBAPRO computers. The G2 series can monitor heart rate, skin temperature and other physiological factors to provide the most unique and adaptive algorithm, using real time information from the Human Factor Diving feature."​

Other AI dive computers do take account of your SAC in calculating how long your remaining tank air will last ... although that"s a real time calculation based on your depth and will increase as you ascend.

The SAC is adjusted for surface consumption, so, it is not affected by depth. It is cylinder size dependent, to calculate RMV, you must use cylinder size and working pressure. Some computers take your safety stop or other stops into consideration when calculating your air or gas time remaining, others do not. Shearwater is an example of the latter.

EDIT: It dawned on me that perhaps you were referring to air time remaining increasing with ascent, of course that would be true, If this is what you meant, I apologize for my misunderstanding and attempt at a correction, above

 

[Degenerate]

I'm not understanding why you think my post was off topic? I really don't. We're talking about AI PDCs and safety and someone suggested that the transmitter could be broken off. My point was that would be a transmitter that was incorrectly positioned. In other words, the problem wasn't with the AI, but with how someone was using the equipment. Isn't this within the scope of safety and PDCs with AI???

It wasn't just someone who suggested that, it was the OP himself...

I'm having a real hard time figuring out how I would catch/hit a transmitter on something during a dive (if I had one).
Would be very interesting to see how OP thinks a transmitter is positioned if he believes that is a risk big enough not to use one.

 

[Boston Breakwater]

I'm not understanding why you think my post was off topic? I really don't. We're talking about AI PDCs and safety and someone suggested that the transmitter could be broken off. My point was that would be a transmitter that was incorrectly positioned. In other words, the problem wasn't with the AI, but with how someone was using the equipment. Isn't this within the scope of safety and PDCs with AI???

It wasn't directed at you "Everyone, relax.
It's been a week. I'm still learning the functionality, and navigation of the site.
Thanks.

 

[The Chairman]

It wasn't directed at you "Everyone, relax.
It's been a week. I'm still learning the functionality, and navigation of the site.
Thanks.

Cool.

A bit off topic for everyone, but a note about what is not OT. Like any conversation, we expect threads to wander a bit around the topic. It's easy to want to really control the topic, but people tend to digress a bit. In this case, any response about PDCs and/or transmitters would probably be on topic, even if another bit of kit is mentioned in the process. I had intended to send my last bit via "Quote in Conversation" and I really mucked that up, didn't I? It appears you're not the only one getting used to the vagaries of xenForo and ScubaBoard!

 

[Umuntu]

EDIT: It dawned on me that perhaps you were referring to air time remaining increasing with ascent, of course that would be true, If this is what you meant, I apologize for my misunderstanding and attempt at a correction, above

That's what I meant ...

 

[Boston Breakwater]

It wasn't just someone who suggested that, it was the OP himself...

I'm having a real hard time figuring out how I would catch/hit a transmitter on something during a dive (if I had one).
Would be very interesting to see how OP thinks a transmitter is positioned if he believes that is a risk big enough not to use one.

Hello. The transmitter was used in a "Hypothetical." situation during a discussion. It evidently caused confusion.
I'll start a new thread to clarify.
My apologies.
Cheers.