Do you really understand your computer, or is it a threat to you?

[dmaziuk]

One thing about ZH-L is that you can make up your own half-times, e.g. create ZH-L32 and feel twice safer than you did with ZH-L16.

 

[ThatDogDontHunt]

One thing about ZH-L is that you can make up your own half-times, e.g. create ZH-L32 and feel twice safer than you did with ZH-L16.

Yep. This ^^.

Have the algorithm's changed? Or just the implementation of them. Maybe too many marketing driven adjustment grommets are now confusing divers?

For basic recreational scuba I claim no dive computer manual should be required. Does anyone read the manual that tells them how to suck on their reg? Why should a dive computer be any different?

My first dive computer provided all the info I needed on the main screen. Down side was that you had to push a stupid button just before every dive. That grew old. My next computer provided all of the required info on the main screen, with no need to push a button.

Providing the info and understanding what it means are different issues. If it is not easily provided then that is on the manufacturer. If you do not know what it means - that is on you.

 

[Centrals]

I only need my computer to tell me the depth, eclipsed time and ndl in recreational diving that I have been doing for the past 25 yrs.
What else do I need, certainly not bells and whistles eg. Blue Tooth!

As for trimix dive I need two bottom timers and pre dive plan!

I have not came across any computer claiming 100% safe! The answer is very simple, isn't it?

 

[ThatDogDontHunt]

One thing about ZH-L is that you can make up your own half-times, e.g. create ZH-L32 and feel twice safer than you did with ZH-L16.

Whut? Is ZH-L8 only half as safe as ZH-L16?

 

[Centrals]

How do you quantify safety?

 

[rongoodman]

For starters if I'm not mistaken I think the older Uwatec's run some kind of hybrid Buhlmann 8 tissue model. This bring up a whole separate discussion about tissue loading but me personally I would feel much safer running an advanced computer that uses ZHL16-C with gradient factors especially since its taking into account twice as many tissues being loaded.

Older dive computers simply didn't have the computational horsepower to run Buhlmann 16, VPM, or a full implementation of RGBM, thus the slimmed down proprietary algorithms, some of which linger on today. Many of the early GUE complaints were referencing these older computers and algorithms. The Liquivision X1 was the first to be able to run VPM, with Buhlmann added a little later. There was an aftermarket implementation of true RGBM available for some of their later models, but it never got much publicity.

 

[KenGordon]

Older dive computers simply didn't have the computational horsepower to run Buhlmann 16, VPM, or a full implementation of RGBM, thus the slimmed down proprietary algorithms, some of which linger on today. Many of the early GUE complaints were referencing these older computers and algorithms. The Liquivision X1 was the first to be able to run VPM back in 2007, with Buhlmann added a little later. There was an aftermarket implementation of true RGBM available for some of their later models, but it never got much publicity.

Didn’t the VR3 have VPM?

Buhlman 16 isn’t at all hard. It might be twice the compution a Zoop does.

 

[rongoodman]

The manual says that it used a modified Buhlmann, with some changes suggested by the bubble models.

 

[GF99/99]

I only need my computer to tell me the depth, eclipsed time and ndl in recreational diving that I have been doing for the past 25 yrs.
What else do I need, certainly not bells and whistles eg. Blue Tooth!

As for trimix dive I need two bottom timers and pre dive plan!

I have not came across any computer claiming 100% safe! The answer is very simple, isn't it?

What else do I need? Well the "bells and whistles" I just listed earlier:

I would disagree I think modern computers these days are way way more advanced than your 24 year old Uwatec Aladain. Modern computers these days are amazing and make diving much safer.

For starters if I'm not mistaken I think the older Uwatec's run some kind of hybrid Buhlmann 8 tissue model. This bring up a whole separate discussion about tissue loading but me personally I would feel much safer running an advanced computer that uses ZHL16-C with gradient factors especially since its taking into account twice as many tissues being loaded.
Next advanced computers give you many advanced features that are very nice to have and make your dive safer that your Uwatec does not offer. Since I run Shearwater platforms I will speak about them but there are many other advanced computers that offer the same features and more. Just to name a few advanced things that my advanced computer provides that yours does not that I find I need during a dive are.
CC/BO mode
Ability to program in 5 mixed gases and edit them underwater
CNS loading (very very important especially when you start going over 180min run times)
Stack time monitor
Dil P02
Digital compass (very very handy to have for cave diving)
Accent/decent rate in a number (very nice for deep dives and scooter diving)
Surface GF
+5 calculation
Built in Bluetooth to update computer software
User changeable AA battery (super handy for remote diving)

These are just a few advanced features that I use to keep me safe that a 24 year old computer can not give me. Im sure that are many other advanced features that others use as well.

Yes I agree there is no such thing as a safe computer but in my opinion an "advanced" computer with all the "bells and whistles" can give you a much higher degree of safety then a 24 year old Uwatec Buhlmann 8 tissue model that only displays depth and run time and your using bottom timer and dive tables. Sorry mate but this is 2021 and dive computers have come along way from your 24 years old Uwatec and dive tables.

The Ford Model T will get your from point A to point B but so will a 2022 Ford F-350. Yes both can not claim 100% safety if you get in an accident but I guess its a matter of how you want to get from point A to point B

 

[GF99/99]

Older dive computers simply didn't have the computational horsepower to run Buhlmann 16, VPM, or a full implementation of RGBM, thus the slimmed down proprietary algorithms, some of which linger on today. Many of the early GUE complaints were referencing these older computers and algorithms. The Liquivision X1 was the first to be able to run VPM, with Buhlmann added a little later. There was an aftermarket implementation of true RGBM available for some of their later models, but it never got much publicity.

Yup I agree this is why I was saying that todays dive computers have a lot more "advanced" features then older computers i.e. running Buhlmann 16, VPM, or RGBM plus several other "advanced" features that we can use to streamline our diving and make it safer.