Are dive computers making bad divers?

[Akimbo]

... People who believe that you can't teach decompression without use of tables, really don't understand decompression themselves...

The one advantage of "looking over" (rather than really "learning") tables is for repeds. Working through them really drives the concept of residual Nitrogen home, at least for people I have worked with. Just looking at single-level multiple dives for air as a teaching tool makes it pretty clear. It also sets the stage for the discussion of "no-fly" times.

 

[Steve_C]

tables + rules to use them are a computing device
circuits + rules to use them are a computing device.
A computing device is a computing device.

Tables were easier to use then remember the button sequence on my old vper.

However, most of my dives are multilevel and I often do not know the levels ahead of time so
I dive a computer (well two computers) and understand what they tell me. Still find the Aeris easier to set then the Sunnto Zoop.

 

[DevonDiver]

I don't think computers make bad divers. I think bad instructors make bad divers.

That's the core of it.

Big agency diving is shifting to computer-based training. Instructors don't train divers to use computers properly. Instructors role-model laziness in dive planning.... students inherit that attitude.

 

[scagrotto]

Worst case, your dive is somewhat [-]more conservative than your plan[/-] shorter than it could have been.

Fixed it for you.

Working through them really drives the concept of residual Nitrogen home

That's what I've always thought. People might understand the general idea of residual nitrogen from a simple explanation, but I think that some practice with the tables probably gives most people a better feel for it. Something like the difference between academic knowledge and actual experience.

 

[Centrals]

I think this is probably the most accurate assessment thus far in the thread. We all know the value of planning your dive, and diving your plan, but even multi-level planning a la The Wheel is still a profile that isn't necessarily in line with the way most recreational divers actually dive. And in that regard, I don't necessarily think computers are making bad divers. If it allows a more accurate computation of their nitrogen loading it's not a bad thing.

I like The Wheel and still don't understand why it was made redundant. Too complicate to use than computer?
Table and The wheel should be part of the learning curve in scuba diving.
Every now and then I met divers who kept getting into deco mode because they did not understand their own computers let alone the rental one.
No wonder so many of them do not like Sunnto or equivalent.

My answer to the original question:
Yes or No.

 

[John A Lewis]

I don't think computers make bad divers. I think bad instructors make bad divers. I think divers who don't care make for bad divers. I think divers who don't understand what exactly their computer is telling them, how to properly use, set and follow their computers are bad divers.

THIS.

So very much this. We can sell you a computer, but please learn how to use and properly read the information it is giving you. Read the manual, ask questions, know how to program it before getting on the dive boat.

 

[timz]

I knew an instructor whom taught my friend to fxxk the table and just get a dive com.

My friend has 0 knowledge on the table at all until i took my OW, he came and asked me abt the table.

 

[KeithG]

I want to vote YES on this one. But based upon a slightly different observation.

In the good old days, bad divers did not understand and / or follow tables, and they knew they didn't. So they should have had some idea that they were failures.

Now a days bad divers splash out some cash for a magic bracelet (that they don't understand and / or follow properly) but they have no idea. They think they are great divers and have no idea of the risks they may be taking. They think they are covered.

So I vote YES because computers allow idiots to fool themselves...

 

[flots am]

How many of you guys do dives without computers? For those senior divers who have been diving since before the computer revolution, do you feel that the new generation has been idiotized by computers, or no.

I don't even bother with a depth gauge or watch for some dives, so I'm probably not representative.

A number of the agencies have a choice between computers and tables, or have gone exclusively with computers. I don't see a big problem either way.

The real problem is that new divers seem to after more of a "bucket list" thing that a life-long hobby, and have been getting less involved every year and dropping out faster. They mostly seem to want to know how to do a few dives and not die.

flots.

 

[NAM001]

I really don't have a lot of problem either way. computers surely reduce the chance of error in planning but with every sword it has 2 edges. For me it is the question of can I recognize a computer response as being valid. I learned on tables and play with them often. I use simulators to run a virtual dive. After a while you start to think along with the computer and you you quickly recognize when something is not right. You learn this by underatanding tables good and bad aspects.