I never used dive tables - never learned anything about them. But I did learn COBOL in college. Should I start writing code instead of using this cool internet thing and software packages that do it all for me? Should I got back to Lotus and not use Excel? The way of dive tables is largely gone. Maybe for people who are going to do mandatory deco dives, it's a good idea to know it for planning multiple stages. But for recreational divers like me, as long as divers know how to use their computers (and I have a beef with folks who do NOT - I was one of those and feel the shame of having been that person), then I think it's 'all good'. Hurrah for advancing technology!
Are dive computers making bad divers?
- Thread starter CAPTAIN SINBAD
- 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
This thread started 7 long years ago. I know I participated back in those days, but I sure don't remember much about what I said then, or what anyone else said, for that matter. But I do have a reaction to the title of the thread. I think computers open divers to scenarios that give them greater opportunities for dive experiences, experiences that both allow and require them to use more thinking during the dive.
More than a decade ago, I set out with a DM and a group of divers in Kona, Hawai'i. We had a dive plan. I don't remember what it was, because we did not come remotely close to it. As we were heading to the planned site, we looked down and saw a manta ray hovering near the bottom. We immediately dropped to about 100 feet, where we saw the ray was in a cleaning station, with cleaner wrasse all over it. When the ray left, we were about to do the same, but an eagle ray showed up for a bath, so we stayed for a while. We left when our computers suggested we were getting close to NDL.
At about 60 feet, we saw a helmet conch, and one of us noticed it was stalking a decorator urchin. We paused to watch and were rewarded when the conch made a sudden move (didn't know they were into sudden moves) and covered the urchin. We checked our computers, which had gained plenty of NDL time by our initial ascent. We had seen what there was to see there, so we decided to go up a bit more. At about 30 feet, we encountered another interesting situation that I frankly don't recall now. We stayed in that area until our gas ran low.
That remains one of the best NDL dives I have ever had.
The "plan your dive and dive your plan" mantra works nicely if you know exactly what to expect throughout a dive. A computer allows for a dive that explores options, and exploring options requires on-the-fly thinking and decision making.
More than a decade ago, I set out with a DM and a group of divers in Kona, Hawai'i. We had a dive plan. I don't remember what it was, because we did not come remotely close to it. As we were heading to the planned site, we looked down and saw a manta ray hovering near the bottom. We immediately dropped to about 100 feet, where we saw the ray was in a cleaning station, with cleaner wrasse all over it. When the ray left, we were about to do the same, but an eagle ray showed up for a bath, so we stayed for a while. We left when our computers suggested we were getting close to NDL.
At about 60 feet, we saw a helmet conch, and one of us noticed it was stalking a decorator urchin. We paused to watch and were rewarded when the conch made a sudden move (didn't know they were into sudden moves) and covered the urchin. We checked our computers, which had gained plenty of NDL time by our initial ascent. We had seen what there was to see there, so we decided to go up a bit more. At about 30 feet, we encountered another interesting situation that I frankly don't recall now. We stayed in that area until our gas ran low.
That remains one of the best NDL dives I have ever had.
The "plan your dive and dive your plan" mantra works nicely if you know exactly what to expect throughout a dive. A computer allows for a dive that explores options, and exploring options requires on-the-fly thinking and decision making.
Belzelbub
Contributor
Same. And as addressed in your first statement, the majority of divers I've seen using a table in a class don't really understand what they are doing. They may be able to do the first dive fine, but tend to get good and lost on 2nd & 3rd dives.
I might say that it's neutral to an unmitigated good. The diver that doesn't understand how to set and read their computer is on the same level of the diver that doesn't use (or understand how to use) the tables.
Good point. I don't think tables would have ever been developed in that scenario. Prior to computers, you only had a couple data points unless the diver recorded others on a slate (like time and depth every 5 minutes). Analog depth gauges just had the needle that would move up to the deepest depth, and the diver was supposed to note the time when starting ascent.
Starting with real-time on the fly calculations and putting a table together after the fact, I don't see happening. Unless those early computers were extremely unreliable.
That's funny and unfortunate at the same time. Just not unexpected. I just realized that I've never used the plan function on my Garmin. I've used the one on my Perdix, but the Garmin is newer and I've never done it. Took me about 30 seconds to find the Plan Dive app and Plan a dive.
2stroketony
Contributor
This has been argued before and I am for knowing how to plan with tables before using the computer. My boys and I dive frequently and they must plan their dives with tables and only then they can monitor their dive using their computers as a back up. They use spgs also to maintain their habits of monitoring. Computers are great but the knowledge must be there first.
Why can't they plan the dives using the computer's dive planning feature? What is the advantage of the tables?
I will tell you the disadvantage.
Unless you do an absolutely square profile, the dive you do will not match the dive you planned for the first dive. Therefore, you will not be able to plan the second dive accurately using the tables. If you use the computer's planning feature, it will accurately take the true first dive into account and give a more accurate plan.
As noted, the exception is if you only do absolutely square profile dives, in which case, why use a computer?
I wanted to make this response separately.
In an earlier post, I gave dive details of a 2-tank dive I did last week. I will repeat the challenge here: explain to me how you and your boys would handle the planning for this 2-tank dive using EANx 32:
Dive One: 103 feet for 81 minutes
Surface Interval: 1:15
Dive #2: 82 feet for 88 minutes
Similar threads
