Question Any objective data on SPG or transmitter failure rates?

[stuartv]

I would propose to define a failure as any situation which caused the diver to be unable to ascertain their remaining tank pressure for the remainder of the dive. I realize that would include computer failure if using a transmitter but that is ok because that is one of the failure points when using hoseless ai.

I don't think that's entirely fair. For MOST recreational scuba divers, the computer failure would mean their dive is over, whether they are using an SPG or AI, so it shouldn't count against AI but not count against SPG.

The outliers are ones who actually dive with 2 computers and could/would continue their dive even after one computer died. And that is further complicated by the possibly that the backup computer has or does not have AI.

I have 2 AI computers. I dive with both a lot of the time. If one computer dies, my other will still tell me my cylinder pressure and I would have no reason to end a recreational/NDL dive at that point. If it was a technical/deco dive, then yes, one computer dying means end of dive. But, again, that is the case whether I'm using an SPG or AI.

 

[Belzelbub]

That is a terrible feature.

Exactly. Makes no sense. I can understand alerting if the connection is lost, but to require intervention to display after connection is restored is useless. The log should record that the COMMS were lost at various points, so you’d be able to see if something was causing interference.

I’m going to guess Suunto.

 

[Seaweed Doc]

Exactly. Makes no sense. I can understand alerting if the connection is lost, but to require intervention to display after connection is restored is useless. The log should record that the COMMS were lost at various points, so you’d be able to see if something was causing interference.

I’m going to guess Suunto.

Sorry, it starts with S and ends with water. Great computer, and once you realize it's simple to deal with. Touch either button (on my Perdix) and it clears. But until you know that is true for all alarms, it's a little discomfiting.

(Of course, this may have changed with a firmware update. It's been years since I've had it happen. Or, rephrased, maybe it's been happening all the time and I never notice because I don't have to acknowledge it. Doesn't happen when I'm on land setting up and walk away from the transmitter, so maybe the bug was fixed?)

 

[Belzelbub]

Sorry, it starts with S and ends with water. Great computer, and once you realize it's simple to deal with. Touch either button (on my Perdix) and it clears. But until you know that is true for all alarms, it's a little discomfiting.

I’ve never seen that behavior. I did check the manual, and it does mention an acknowledgment, but not for an intermittent signal loss. The way I read it, it happens after no signal for more than 90 seconds. I’ve definitely never had that happen.

 

[greeniguana]

Exactly. Makes no sense. I can understand alerting if the connection is lost, but to require intervention to display after connection is restored is useless. The log should record that the COMMS were lost at various points, so you’d be able to see if something was causing interference.

I’m going to guess Suunto.

Shearwater. They do keep logging pressure even if you don't press the OK button. The downloaded log just shows a "coms lost for 30 seconds" gap.

 

[Seaweed Doc]

I’ve never seen that behavior. I did check the manual, and it does mention an acknowledgment, but not for an intermittent signal loss. The way I read it, it happens after no signal for more than 90 seconds. I’ve definitely never had that happen.

Well, can't say it wasn't lost for 90 seconds though that seems odd.