wetlettuce
Contributor
Hi
I've just finished JJ's book on DIR. It's not bad but I have a question regarding computers.
In his book he states three methods of dive planning.
Tables, Computers and Personal Decompression Software. He then states 13 disadvantages of computers without stating any positives about the other two methods although I assume he supports his deco software. He does say that tables are the foundation and should be learnt and understood by divers.
One of his disadvantages of computers is the algorithm they use and how they extend deco time. When I looked at the GUE decoplanner software they use Buhlmanns algorithm which is the foundation for virtually all computers on the market today.
I can understand the GUE software giving me the best mix to use, and then if I was inclined I could upload this to a technical dive computer like the VR3. However this would still not be DIR, (unless of course they team up with or create their own brand of Dive computer). However I am a nitrox diver and so dive shallow and have no need for advanced mixes as yet. Many people are now doing so and I have heard whispers in BSAC that they are considering teaching nitrox as part of their main syllabus rather than a technical skill.
JJ states that Oxygen toxicity is now the biggest danger for nitox divers and yet he criticises dive computers for showing that critical information.
When we are using computers we are told that if the battery fails (which has been checked during the dive) or the computer fails during the dive then immediately abort the dive and stay at six meters for as long as possible then do not dive for 24 hours. Seems logical to me.
I like computers, they are more accurate than me, they track depth, time and temperature and speed of ascent and descent better than me and then can calculate Buhlmanns algorithms better than me. If I use tables then many dives that I do would not be possible due to the conservatism of them. I do back up with tables if I need to although this is irrelevant when you consider what to do if your computer fails.
The same things could be said of a bottom timer. If they fail you have no record of your maximum depth and so how can you use tables to carry on ? Also my computer will calculate decompression and bubble creation live and so is using more accurate data. Deco software can be nothing other than a forecast of what you should do if all of the parameters are correct and if you do something different during the dive then all subsequent info is invalid.
With all the benefits of DIR it seems a shame that they are so resistant to what could be the real breakthrough in diving. Technology will only get better. Better algorithms better deco planning and more reliable.
I'd like to be a DIR diver however until their attitude changes and they embrace such a useful piece of kit I shall be forever discounted as a 'stroke'.
Comments welcome
Kindest Regards
Andy
I've just finished JJ's book on DIR. It's not bad but I have a question regarding computers.
In his book he states three methods of dive planning.
Tables, Computers and Personal Decompression Software. He then states 13 disadvantages of computers without stating any positives about the other two methods although I assume he supports his deco software. He does say that tables are the foundation and should be learnt and understood by divers.
One of his disadvantages of computers is the algorithm they use and how they extend deco time. When I looked at the GUE decoplanner software they use Buhlmanns algorithm which is the foundation for virtually all computers on the market today.
I can understand the GUE software giving me the best mix to use, and then if I was inclined I could upload this to a technical dive computer like the VR3. However this would still not be DIR, (unless of course they team up with or create their own brand of Dive computer). However I am a nitrox diver and so dive shallow and have no need for advanced mixes as yet. Many people are now doing so and I have heard whispers in BSAC that they are considering teaching nitrox as part of their main syllabus rather than a technical skill.
JJ states that Oxygen toxicity is now the biggest danger for nitox divers and yet he criticises dive computers for showing that critical information.
When we are using computers we are told that if the battery fails (which has been checked during the dive) or the computer fails during the dive then immediately abort the dive and stay at six meters for as long as possible then do not dive for 24 hours. Seems logical to me.
I like computers, they are more accurate than me, they track depth, time and temperature and speed of ascent and descent better than me and then can calculate Buhlmanns algorithms better than me. If I use tables then many dives that I do would not be possible due to the conservatism of them. I do back up with tables if I need to although this is irrelevant when you consider what to do if your computer fails.
The same things could be said of a bottom timer. If they fail you have no record of your maximum depth and so how can you use tables to carry on ? Also my computer will calculate decompression and bubble creation live and so is using more accurate data. Deco software can be nothing other than a forecast of what you should do if all of the parameters are correct and if you do something different during the dive then all subsequent info is invalid.
With all the benefits of DIR it seems a shame that they are so resistant to what could be the real breakthrough in diving. Technology will only get better. Better algorithms better deco planning and more reliable.
I'd like to be a DIR diver however until their attitude changes and they embrace such a useful piece of kit I shall be forever discounted as a 'stroke'.
Comments welcome
Kindest Regards
Andy