Disturbing trend in diving?

[MacDuyver]

Shearwater computers do not lock divers out if they went into deco and missed a deco obligation.

Not all computers work the exact same way.

This.

Back before I really understood what my computer was telling me and why, I’d just set it to GAUGE which would let me keep diving. I told a buddy of mine who’d done a ton of military diving that it wasn’t working right, he looked at it and looked at me and was like “you been coughing weird since you came up by chance?” and schooled me up on my computer.

I’ve learned a lot since then, but also one thing that a lot of people don’t take into account is that your typical customer on a dive boat in a vacation destination has way less than 25 dives and probably hasn’t committed to making themselves a better diver, they’re just in it for the experience. Personally I prefer diving with my usual crew, but I prefer randos to stick with me and use my computer as opposed to putting themselves at risk.

 

[The Chairman]

Deleted : Too much info.

It was good. I read it!

 

[Dan G]

As was already explained, if the DM goes into deco, he is going to clear it by doing the deco that the computer wants. If the customers followed along, they would presumably do the same thing. As long as you don't mis required deco, you can keep diving all day long.

Are you familiar with using dive computers for decompression dives?

There's a few things that can go wrong with this scenario. The first thing that comes to mind is that a customer may not have the gas supply to make the required stops. Another is that a customer likely does not know that the DM is doing deco stops and may decide they want to be shallower than the DM for some reason and may miss the deco window. If they are diving without tables or a PDC and just "following the DM," they are also using the reasoning that as long as they dive at an equal or shallower depth as the DM, they are fine. How would they know not to be, for example, 15-20 feet shallower? There is also the issue with the DM having a different NDL limit than the customer. Perhaps the customer dove the day before and the DM did not.

I do not doubt there are ways for divers and dive ops to dive by just "following the DM" without incident and I am not interested in being the SCUBA police. My point is that clearing a deco obligation by following a DM, even if it is one that likely clears upon ascent, is not as simple as the quoted text makes it sound.

 

[johndiver999]

There's a few things that can go wrong with this scenario. The first thing that comes to mind is that a customer may not have the gas supply to make the required stops. Another is that a customer likely does not know that the DM is doing deco stops and may decide they want to be shallower than the DM for some reason and may miss the deco window. If they are diving without tables or a PDC and just "following the DM," they are also using the reasoning that as long as they dive at an equal or shallower depth as the DM, they are fine. How would they know not to be, for example, 15-20 feet shallower? There is also the issue with the DM having a different NDL limit than the customer. Perhaps the customer dove the day before and the DM did not.

I do not doubt there are ways for divers and dive ops to dive by just "following the DM" without incident and I am not interested in being the SCUBA police. My point is that clearing a deco obligation by following a DM, even if it is one that likely clears upon ascent, is not as simple as the quoted text makes it sound.

The question was asked.. what if the DM accidentally puts his computer into Deco. The response is: "clear it", not violate it. A good DM should not put his customers into deco, especially if they do not have a computer, so the hypothetical question, made little sense to me.

It almost seemed as if someone was (erroneously) thinking that if you put a computer into deco, this condition would preclude its use in subsequent dives (that day) and would necessitate changing over to a fresh computer for the remainder of the day.

Like I said, I have been on many many dives, where the operator spelled out the time limits and the dive site precluded anyone from going too deep (assuming they stayed reasonably close to the DM), so the issue should not arise for the customer if they do what is demanded of them.

I certainly don't think that this (not having a computer) is an ideal way to dive. It definitely does not promote a diver progressing in their own abilities, but follow-the-leader is not such a bad game if the leader plays the game well and the conditions make that a reasonable place to play the game.

 

[Soloist]

people relying completely on the divemasters or guides for their bottom times, NDL status, basic dive profiles

There was a diver without a computer diving air on our boat in Cozumel this morning. After an extended period at 85 feet I glanced over my shoulder and saw them. Regrettably I decided it was a good idea to get involved! So I pointed at my computer and signaled they should ascend and level off. Justifiably the response to my hand gestures was complete and utter bewilderment. I quickly realized I was behaving like an @sshole, so I brushed off my previous nonsensical gesticulations and continued with my dive! Lesson learned.

 

[RGDiver]

I learned years ago that there are MANY divers who just got their cert and barely paid attention or learned anything in the process. Diving certs are for the most part a handout. I also learned it’s best to stay away from and avoid those who don’t know what they are doing as it’s not my responsibility to babysit idiots. Most just don’t care to really learn and want a concierge, no thanks. I am happy to help someone but if they have been diving for a while and still can’t figure out how to set up their rig, or keep their mask from fogging constantly…..adios. Buddy up with those that are real divers and look out for each other and enjoy yourself. You can tell who knows what they are doing usually just by looking at the equipment they own.

 

[schuylerclark]

This topic makes me think on how we consider risks - and which scenario is riskier?

A: follow a DM on a rec dive with no computer or watch, following their instructions to keep me safely within NDL
B: take an Uber to the airport driven by a random stranger who may be new to the city and just got a license recently
C: have an accountant file my taxes for me

I'm pretty sure that statistically B is the most likely to get us killed. And it's probably the most common. A is probably closer to C, right?

 

[MB NZ]

This topic makes me think on how we consider risks - and which scenario is riskier?

A: follow a DM on a rec dive with no computer or watch, following their instructions to keep me safely within NDL
B: take an Uber to the airport driven by a random stranger who may be new to the city and just got a license recently
C: have an accountant file my taxes for me

I'm pretty sure that statistically B is the most likely to get us killed. And it's probably the most common. A is probably closer to C, right?

For me, it's not just about risk, it's knowing that if I get in to trouble underwater, it is entirely my fault with no one else to blame. It focuses the mind!

 

[johndiver999]

This topic makes me think on how we consider risks - and which scenario is riskier?

A: follow a DM on a rec dive with no computer or watch, following their instructions to keep me safely within NDL
B: take an Uber to the airport driven by a random stranger who may be new to the city and just got a license recently
C: have an accountant file my taxes for me

I'm pretty sure that statistically B is the most likely to get us killed. And it's probably the most common. A is probably closer to C, right?

I was thinking the same thing the other day. We delegate our safety to professionals all the time without too much thought, but that is more or less by necessity.

Blindly trusting a DM and/or a dive operator for basic dive planning and logistics, is similar, but perhaps the difference is that the (competent) diver has the ability to greatly mitigate the risks by being capable of monitoring all the important safety-related aspects of the dive. When you are a passenger in a bus, there is not a whole lot you can do to ensure your safe arrival.

Maybe the fact that we CAN be responsible for most aspects of safety on a dive means that we SHOULD do so?

 

[MacDuyver]

This topic makes me think on how we consider risks - and which scenario is riskier?

A: follow a DM on a rec dive with no computer or watch, following their instructions to keep me safely within NDL
B: take an Uber to the airport driven by a random stranger who may be new to the city and just got a license recently
C: have an accountant file my taxes for me

I'm pretty sure that statistically B is the most likely to get us killed. And it's probably the most common. A is probably closer to C, right?

I assume you take your taxes to a Tax Preparer and not a CPA?