Another Tables vs. Computers Thread

[TheRedHead]

Bounce diving like that is not particularly good for you from a decompression standpoint. Like I said, I bet you were pretty tired a couple hours after that dive. It's just not an optimal or even good way of doing a dive.

The fact that you are 'following' your computer illustrates the reactive nature of the problem. You don't know if your computer is feeding you BS.

Who cares if it is 'typical' in Cozumel?

The time we spent at our deepest which was some sort of gully was very short and the fast compartment loading was quickly unloaded. Our ascent from 50 feet took over 10 minutes and created a nice shape. You could conceivably do a 75 minute dive at 60 feet with EAN32 on a Nitrox table not counting any residual nitrogen from the previous dive. I prefer the RGBM model of the Suunto computer. It is also used in the version of GUE's Deco Planner I have and GAP deco planner.

I wasn't tired in the least. In fact, I was taking an Advanced Nitrox class which commenced at 3:00 p.m. where we did classwork and skills in about 15 feet of water. By 10 p.m. I was tired.

If my computer was feeding me BS (and it lets me know my average depth), then 5 other divers' computers and my backup computer were also feeding us BS as we were all diving in a group with computers.

Because of the nature of Cozumel currents - they can change and reverse directions - you can't always count on diving your original plan. I look for local expertise in my dive operator. Luis has dived the 2 reefs more times that I have logged dives. I've been diving with him for years and consider him an expert on the local conditions.

You're objecting to this dive because the Collective wouldn't sanction it.

 

[limeyx]

Actually, wide variances in depth like my example profile are common in some areas. In places like Cozumel, Grand Cayman, Maui and anywhere else that you have walls and/or interesting coral formations all the way from deep to the surface. And yes, you really will hear multilevel dive plans like I described ---- very common on guided tours in those resort areas.

I wanted a way to do a quick validity check when a DM says "OK, the plan is 7 @ 130, then another 7 at around 80 or 90', then on up to 50-60' for about 10 minutes, then finish off the dive at 40' or shallower." I chose not to do it either blindly following the DM, or blindly following my computer.

For the DMs it isn't an issue, since someone in their organization has already set the typical profiles for the different dive sites, and they have repeatedly used the same profile and know which one work out well both for deco and for the gas consumption rates of their clientele.

I see your points, and sometimes I do forget that it's possible to lead your own dives Around here the DM is just to fill in the police reports if you dont come back (joke

We have to run our own dives, so we can do profiles that we all agree on. It also makes it uncommon to know exactly what depths for what times we will be doing the profile. Although obviously you have to be at a depth where you can actually see something

I don't have to plan how many minutes of gas I have to any great degree since I just calculate either an all usable gas, 1/2 out 1/2 back or 1/3's and know I can turn the dive when I want (as we lead our own dives I'm not having to follow the DM's profile). Makes it a bit easier for us.

 

[limeyx]

When you plan deco you had best dive your plan and have a contingency. I would probably dive that profile on a steel 100 or 120 and that leave plenty of gas for my buddy as well.

As far as a little deco, I find it unrealistic to plan a 10 minute dive to the NDL at 130 feet, particularly if I have traveled a long distance for a special dive. I am certified to make decompression dives and realized when I wasn't, that I was taking a risk I wasn't prepared to take.

agreed. All I was saying is that deco should be a planned thing, not an "oops look at what my computer is suddenly saying" -- from your original post it was unclear, but I have seen posts like that in other places.

Of course, whether incurring deco on a single tank is a good thing or not is another question entirely

 

[Soggy]

You're objecting to this dive because the Collective wouldn't sanction it.

What collective would you be referring to?

You clearly have no clue what you are talking about, especially when it comes to my views on 'the collective' and how it relates to my diving. If whiners didn't annoy me so much, I'd report your personal attack to the moderators.

Cozumel is not 'special' when it comes to the ocean behavior. I have dived there as well. If you can't understand why bounce diving from 50 ft to 106 ft is not a wise profile, I believe your deco procedures instructor should return your money.

 

[TheRedHead]

Cozumel is not 'special' when it comes to the ocean behavior. I have dived there as well. If you can't understand why bounce diving from 50 ft to 106 ft is not a wise profile, I believe your deco procedures instructor should return your money.

It wasn't a bounce, but a curve in the time span of 7 minutes or so. It is not an optimal profile, but because I had the assitance of the RGBM algorithm in my Suunto dive computer, I was able to dive it sucessfully and without any adverse effects. And it was a profile that has been done thousands of times by many divers.

You and I both know I'm talking about GUE's aversion to computers for recreational diving and it certainly wasn't a personal attack. You are just following your agency's teaching principles. I've read the 13 reasons and I don't agree with them. I'll let my Deco instructor know how you feel. :laughing:

 

[JeffG]

You and I both know I'm talking about GUE's aversion to computers for recreational diving and it certainly wasn't a personal attack. You are just following your agency's teaching principles. I've read the 13 reasons and I don't agree with them. I'll let my Deco instructor know how you feel. :laughing:

Soggy is NAUI trained, not GUE.

 

[Soggy]

It wasn't a bounce, but a curve in the time span of 7 minutes or so.

Potato, Potatoe

And it was a profile that has been done thousands of times by many divers.

Very true. I'm glad it worked out for you. I'm sure none of those thousand divers got bent, either.

You and I both know I'm talking about GUE's aversion to computers for recreational diving and it certainly wasn't a personal attack.

Your ignorance regarding my training shows...

 

[TheRedHead]

Very true. I'm glad it worked out for you. I'm sure none of those thousand divers got bent, either.

Your ignorance regarding my training shows...

Please accept my apologizes for misattributing your training. Some divers get bent on any profile and we all know that is true. What I do works for me and doesn't necessarily work for other divers.

But to say that someone doesn't know what they are doing because they are following a dive computer on a recreational dive insults the intelligence of divers who do use computers. And I maintain that they are particularly effective on drift dives where you may not follow a predetermined plan because the current will take you back to your starting point instead of where you intended to go. Computers allow you to optimize the dive on the fly. I suppose you could do this with averaging, but who wants to when we have tools that can do it faster and more efficiently?

 

[Soggy]

I didn't say that computers don't work and, while I don't use them often (yes, I do occasionally use them on vacation...you caught me), I don't believe that computers are a bad thing in and of themselves as long as you are not *following* the computer. To follow it implies that you don't have an idea how what the computer is saying relates to what is really happening. Many people ride the zero on a computer...according to the computer they are fine. Chances are, they probably won't get bent, either. That doesn't mean it is a good idea...it clearly adds to the risk of the dive.

I know I'm not explaining myself clearly, but hopefully you understand what I'm trying to say.

 

[TheRedHead]

Soggy, I find the Suunto algorithm to be more conservative in many instances than dives I could plan using tables. The more I reserach the RGBM model, the more I like it as it is based more on bubbles and seeds and less on compartments. I used to dive a Sherwood Wisdom and often experienced feeling bad at the end of my dive which could have been subclinical DCS and that did alarm me. If you are using a computer, you should listen to your body and adjust accordingly.