Help with redundant pressure guage

[KenE]

Looks like I have come to the wrong place if I want to put on a redundant air gauge. What is my reason??The reason is while in the Maldives on a liveaboard far from from a place to get a new transmitter or a gauge for that matter my transmitter died. Yes I did just end my dive but for it to end the trip because I no way to check my pressure? Not good.

Not really, many of us use redundant SPG with AI. We are just not as vocal as those who tend to condemn the practice. I too do not want to end a dive/trip because of a $5 battery. My SPG sits right next to my inflator hose at eye level if I ever need it. Primarily rely on AI until something changes that, then back to SPG. Diving is too important to me to stop because of a battery failure.

 

[tursiops]

Not really, many of us use redundant SPG with AI. We are just not as vocal as those who tend to condemn the practice. I too do not want to end a dive/trip because of a $5 battery. My SPG sits right next to my inflator hose at eye level if I ever need it. Primarily rely on AI until something changes that, then back to SPG. Diving is too important to me to stop because of a battery failure.

Do you wear a spare computer too?

 

[KenE]

Do you wear a spare computer too?

Nope, that is what the SPG is for! I have read all the arguments, you do you, I will do what I want. No hard feelings either way.

 

[Kendall Raine]

Yes I did just end my dive but for it to end the trip because I no way to check my pressure? Not good.

You could keep an extra SPG/transmitter on the boat. Like an extra reg(s), extra hoses and spare parts/tools. Why not just wear them both every dive? You could, but then you have an additional failure point which, if you take care of your gear/hoses, if should never be needed. AI transmitters are vulnerable to being used as handles when passing a tank up from the water. Shouldn't happen, but does.

 

[Member002]

A backup spg is not quite redundancy.

It's a tradeoff. You're decreasing your chances of information loss and increasing your chances of gas loss. Both result in you calling the dive, but only one bleeds something important to your safety.

That said these failures are infrequent and trivial enough that it doesn't really matter much either way. I think it just grinds people's gears to have people ask about it when they can't really articulate what they are gaining & losing and why they need it.

 

[tursiops]

Nope, that is what the SPG is for! I have read all the arguments, you do you, I will do what I want. No hard feelings either way.

I was just wondering if you're consistent in your approach...since a computer is probably more likely fail than a transmitter...and gives you more info related to your safety than just your tank pressure....like depth, time, N2 status, and ascent rate.

 

[KenE]

I was just wondering if you're consistent in your approach...since a computer is probably more likely fail than a transmitter...and gives you more info related to your safety than just your tank pressure....like depth, time, N2 status, and ascent rate.

Yes, I have my time and depth without the computer, ascent rate irrevelant if managed appropriately, N2 status is derived pre-dive and while useful, not required during dive. A total computer failure would likely end the dive. I have yet to have a computer failure but have had transmitter failures, so I would say that it is more likely to have a transmitter failure than a computer failure. I have yet to have a SPG failure. So, while many rely exclusively on their computer, many have learned how to manage without one if necessary. Those who rely on only a computer should carry two. I choose to carry one and have other means to safely complete my dives. You may have never seen your transmitter fail and hence rely on it, I have seen mine fail and will carry and SPG. Different experiences, different choices, the nice thing about it is we can make our own choices, doesn't mean one is wrong or better than another.

 

[tursiops]

Yes, I have my time and depth without the computer, ascent rate irrevelant if managed appropriately, N2 status is derived pre-dive and while useful, not required during dive. A total computer failure would likely end the dive. I have yet to have a computer failure but have had transmitter failures, so I would say that it is more likely to have a transmitter failure than a computer failure. I have yet to have a SPG failure. So, while many rely exclusively on their computer, many have learned how to manage without one if necessary. Those who rely on only a computer should carry two. I choose to carry one and have other means to safely complete my dives. You may have never seen your transmitter fail and hence rely on it, I have seen mine fail and will carry and SPG. Different experiences, different choices, the nice thing about it is we can make our own choices, doesn't mean one is wrong or better than another.

Some computers will tell you your transmitter battery status. I guess yours does not. For me, a transmitter failure during a dive -- due to a battery failure -- is not worth worrying about.

Most of us determine our "possible failure points" on the basis of reported group experience, not our own personal experience -- which is far more limited than that of the diver community at large -- and produces terrible statistics of small numbers.

 

[KenE]

and produces terrible statistics of small numbers.

I would be interested in your statistical numbers of SPG failures against hrs of dive time versus AI transmitter failures against hrs of dive time. I would be willing to bet AI has a higher failure rate, simply because of the sheer number of dive hours SPGs have seen relative to failures. And failures must be in dive failure, not pressurizing failures.

First, I highly doubt you can get those statistics, and short of that you are using hearsay data which is unreliable. So, without accurate data, and not relying on hearsay, you really only have your own experience and those around you that you can personally verify. As I said before, you do you, I will make my own decisions, one is not necessarily better than the other. You provide your recommendation, I will provide mine. Sometimes you must agree to disagree. Not sure why that is difficult?

I will repeat:

We are just not as vocal as those who tend to condemn the practice.

 

[tursiops]

I would be interested in your statistical numbers of SPG failures against hrs of dive time versus AI transmitter failures against hrs of dive time. I would be willing to bet AI has a higher failure rate, simply because of the sheer number of dive hours SPGs have seen relative to failures. And failures must be in dive failure, not pressurizing failures.

First, I highly doubt you can get those statistics, and short of that you are using hearsay data which is unreliable. So, without accurate data, and not relying on hearsay, you really only have your own experience and those around you that you can personally verify. As I said before, you do you, I will make my own decisions, one is not necessarily better than the other. You provide your recommendation, I will provide mine. Sometimes you must agree to disagree. Not sure why that is difficult?

I don't want to deter you from your quest to argue with me, but I would submit that a transmitter "failure" during a dive due to a bad battery is not a transmitter failure, but a rather a user failure.

I will repeat:

We are just not as vocal as those who tend to condemn the practice.

(Does repeating something make it more true?)

The word "condemn" is a red flag word; usually used only when you want to cast something/someone in a really bad light. It is like saying someone "admits" something when all they did was make a statement....but "admit" implies they were questioned and finally told the truth.
I don't think anybody here "condemned" carrying an SPG along with a transmitter; they asked Why?, they said it was of little importance, and they suggested alternatives. Pretty good discussion, actually, and no condemnation.