Average Depth Diving?

[Albion]

I dont see the problem with computers!

they are not that expensive and can be used as another tool.

The lady mentioned, who gets skin bends, why couldnt she simply pad her ascent its not hard.

In my work we use excel spread sheets using multiple variables to come up with a sales price. For a given piece of equipemnt, based on my epxerience, i can ususlly guess close enough to the price, however i will pad it a bit. So why dont i throw out my expensive note book and just guess it all?

I'm sure i could also dive in much the same way, however i prefer to carry with me a device to measure real time my dive profile and give an indication of my nitrogen loading (ie remaining dive time). sure i could guestimate my profile by working out blocks of time and depth, but why bother when i have a machine that does it for me and allows me to concentrate on my dive.

As Thalassamania pointed out earleir part of this comes down to efficiency. in my work if i guess at everything and padded the price a bit i might be losing business by overpricing. similarly if im creating profiles in my head and padding them because im rounding up my depths and times you can end up spending longer in the water than need be which isnt always a good thing. Likewise if you hit the surface and find some aches and pains, how do you sit down and explain, well i was at 30m for 10mins, well actually it was between 28 and 32m, then i moved to 20m etc etc. I would prefer to be able to hand over my computer and say look at that tell me what i did wrong while i suck down this O2.

I know computers arent going to stop me getting bent but within conservative limits they are set with these days together with common sense and good diving practice they work pretty well.

 

[JeffG]

The lady mentioned, who gets skin bends, why couldnt she simply pad her ascent its not hard.

So use a computer, so that you can ignore it? Interesting concept.

 

[Thalassamania]

I really thought we were done with the foolishness.

You make a statement about something: "but where do you think the original data that computers use comes from? The same kind of experimentations!"

I, who was actually there, correct you.

You try and cover up: "What does that have to do with decompression? My point was that the deco algorithms built into computers are not "magic" they too are best guess based on data collected, experimenation and attempts to model how things really work.

From what people seem to be saying it's as though computers are perfect and can make no mistakes and anyone else that doesn't use the exact same output as a computer or existing deco program is just picking stuff out of the air."

Put down the koolaid.

 

[Albion]

So use a computer, so that you can ignore it? Interesting concept.

That's not what I said.:shakehead

 

[JeffG]

That's not what I said.:shakehead

Maybe I am misunderstanding what it is that you are saying, but if she is using a computer to "drive" her deco, then she is to follow what it wants to do...not what "she" wants to do....ergo she would be ignoring what the computer wants her to do.

 

[miketsp]

Maybe I am misunderstanding what it is that you are saying, but if she is using a computer to "drive" her deco, then she is to follow what it wants to do...not what "she" wants to do....ergo she would be ignoring what the computer wants her to do.

All the computers I've had contact with allow you to add a safety factor - that's not ignoring it by any stretch of the imagination.
My wife had a similar situation - regular mild skin bends at a 0% conservative setting, no skin bends ever with the computer set to +20% conservative.
Which, coincidence or not, makes her computer act very similar to my Vyper at 0% conservative.

 

[Charlie99]

So use a computer, so that you can ignore it? Interesting concept.

Do you also assume that just because your computer shows a deco obligation and a 10' ceiling that one is supposed to pop right up to 10' ??

Try looking at computers as simply another tool. Look at them as a way to mechanize and automate the depth and time tracking.

The computer does the tracking. You set the profile.

The computer doesn't forget what depths you have been at and how long you have been at each. It doesn't get distracted from the task of tracking assumed N2 loadings.

OTOH, the computer doesn't know your level of hydration, how hard you partied last night, and how seasick you were on the ride out.

People keep treating this tracking deco and setting dive profiles as a "false either-or" choice. It ISN'T a case of either blindly following a computer or totally rejecting a computer and doing all detailed tracking in your head.

Intelligent use of available tools makes a lot more sense.

Of course, if you are so technophobic that having the computer display its guess at N2 loadings or deco ceilings confuse you, then by all means, cripple the computer and turn off the deco calculations, eliminate redundancy and rely solely upon your mental tracking of depth and time.

 

[Albion]

Maybe I am misunderstanding what it is that you are saying, but if she is using a computer to "drive" her deco, then she is to follow what it wants to do...not what "she" wants to do....ergo she would be ignoring what the computer wants her to do.

Well average deco isnt working for her either is it. She could start by seeing if switching from average depth deco to using a computer avoids this. It would be more scientific than her present method

So we simply padded the deco by an extra 5 mins as that's what she has emperically figured out works for her at those depths/times.

Cmon this isnt a great advert for it

a lady who has had a major surgery (a long time ago) and gets skin bends if she follows standard DIR deco ascents.

only an idiot would believe this is the way to go about solving the problem. err i had a bit of a twitch on the last dive, i will spend another 10 minutes on o2 next time, see if it works for me.

 

[Albion]

Try looking at computers as simply another tool. Look at them as a way to mechanize and automate the depth and time tracking.

The computer does the tracking. You set the profile.

The computer doesn't forget what depths you have been at and how long you have been at each. It doesn't get distracted from the task of tracking assumed N2 loadings.

OTOH, the computer doesn't know your level of hydration, how hard you partied last night, and how seasick you were on the ride out.

People keep treating this tracking deco and setting dive profiles as a "false either-or" choice. It ISN'T a case of either blindly following a computer or totally rejecting a computer and doing all detailed tracking in your head.

Intelligent use of available tools makes a lot more sense.

exactly

 

[Thalassamania]

A computer is a device that helps you too see where the edge of the cliff is. You get to choose how close you want to stand to it. The problem is that so many of the computers out there have become so conservative that you no longer know where the cliff is, just that its somewhere over there and that inefficiency frustrates people.

The thing that I don't understand is the Luddite approach of many of the averaging adherents; average depth diving is an obvious potential computer application. It is not hard to envision a dive computer that can do both "conventional" and averaging calculations and show you were you stand from both perspectives.