I agree backup are a good idea, plus without my watch, my log books would be in a sorry state.
WWW
WWW
how important are watches?
- Thread starter cherinere
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
scubakat
Senior Member
I'm all for redundancy, It's a good thing, but to truely manually back up your computer you would also need your tables & a depth guage stashed on your person somewhere. I'll carry a watch, but any equipment failure ends my dive. Provided that I have been conservative & stayed within no deco limits I should be able to ascend to a safety stop & surface.
-kate
-kate
Kate,
There are some ways to not have a computer crash end your diving, but few follow them.
The first is if you are using your computer as a back up to tables. A computer crash in this case would eliminate your back up, but not your primary, you'd be able to continue diving. I personally only use this method when my buddy is diving tables as it eliminates most of the advantages of having a computer.
Next, you can have a backup computer. If a computer fails, you have lost your back up, but can continue diving. This only works if you are using idential computers or if you use the more conservative model as your primary. This is an expensive option, but my first choice.
Otherwise, you are correct, when a computer crashes, ascend slowly, make your stop and find other activities for a minimum of 12 - 24 hours.
WWW
There are some ways to not have a computer crash end your diving, but few follow them.
The first is if you are using your computer as a back up to tables. A computer crash in this case would eliminate your back up, but not your primary, you'd be able to continue diving. I personally only use this method when my buddy is diving tables as it eliminates most of the advantages of having a computer.
Next, you can have a backup computer. If a computer fails, you have lost your back up, but can continue diving. This only works if you are using idential computers or if you use the more conservative model as your primary. This is an expensive option, but my first choice.
Otherwise, you are correct, when a computer crashes, ascend slowly, make your stop and find other activities for a minimum of 12 - 24 hours.
WWW
Madder_Than_Hell
Guest
I do a lot of spearfishing and it's easy to run out of bottom time. I always put my watch around the hose of my computer, just for a redundant timer. Just in case the computer were to go out for some reason.
kauai_diver
Guest
I always carry a backup. I use a TUSA wrist computer because I don't like always having to grap my console to look at it and you can see it quickly on your wrist. The lack of the air integration to the computer is not that big of a deal to me. I also don't like to have tons of things on my arm, so I mount my Casio via a velco band to my console. This setup works great for me. That way when I do look at my console, I see everything at once.
A back up time piece is a must in my opinion. A picture of my setup.
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1385862&a=13593715&p=52572638
A back up time piece is a must in my opinion. A picture of my setup.
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1385862&a=13593715&p=52572638
The Chairman
Chairman of the Board
Hey all,
I don't think I have seen a post on here that says you shouldn't carry a watch. Most of us, whether we rely on computers, tables, or both, see the validity of carrying some form of timepiece with us, and maybe two. Some of you have divulged your choice, but I do wonder, if there is a concensus on which watch is wight? Analog vs. digital, complex vs. simple... you get the idea.
I carry two time pieces... one being my Air integrated computer; the Suunto Cobra. It is somewhat complicated, and I do have to decipher it a tad, but every dive makes that easier and easier. However, I like seeing my profiles on the PC after I am done. Sophistication always takes a bit of getting used to.
The second is a black LumiNox "Navy Seals" watch. It is not a true government issue watch (they don't identify their covert operators in any way), but it is identical except for the name on it. It is analog and the only other features are the date and the INCREDIBLY bright luminescence. Where I may have to squint to read my Cobra, and turn the light on, I never have to do that with my LumiNox. I can always read it no matter what type of lighting I am in and I NEVER have to use a second hand to operate a back light. Oh yeah, it does have that "macho" rotating bezel somone was refering to earlier.
While I do have two of these LumiNox watches, if I feel I need another redundancy, I will take along my Orca dive computer. That way I have three time pieces and two computers. It is very simple and easy to read, but not very sophisticated.
I don't think I have seen a post on here that says you shouldn't carry a watch. Most of us, whether we rely on computers, tables, or both, see the validity of carrying some form of timepiece with us, and maybe two. Some of you have divulged your choice, but I do wonder, if there is a concensus on which watch is wight? Analog vs. digital, complex vs. simple... you get the idea.
I carry two time pieces... one being my Air integrated computer; the Suunto Cobra. It is somewhat complicated, and I do have to decipher it a tad, but every dive makes that easier and easier. However, I like seeing my profiles on the PC after I am done. Sophistication always takes a bit of getting used to.
The second is a black LumiNox "Navy Seals" watch. It is not a true government issue watch (they don't identify their covert operators in any way), but it is identical except for the name on it. It is analog and the only other features are the date and the INCREDIBLY bright luminescence. Where I may have to squint to read my Cobra, and turn the light on, I never have to do that with my LumiNox. I can always read it no matter what type of lighting I am in and I NEVER have to use a second hand to operate a back light. Oh yeah, it does have that "macho" rotating bezel somone was refering to earlier.
While I do have two of these LumiNox watches, if I feel I need another redundancy, I will take along my Orca dive computer. That way I have three time pieces and two computers. It is very simple and easy to read, but not very sophisticated.
greg somers
Guest
This is my personal opinion,so feel free to disagree,but I think that a dive computer should nearly always be a backup and not a primary.The human brain is far more complex.As divers we should all be able to memorise the dive table depths and times without the computers there to tell us.
I remember when the dive computer came out and it was always supposed to be a back up or a source of information,but not the last word in dive profiling.If the computer gave out underwater,how many of us would remember how to work out our dive times? I dive without a computer nearly all the time.
Shallow and deep.The watch,the tables,the depth guage.With the brain,they should be the primary.I can always work out my situation should a battery fail on me and continue my dive.I believe that this skill should be encouraged moreso than over-reliance on dive-computers.I have seen divers with all the latest contraptions go into panics because they never learnt to be comfortable with the basics of diving when those contraptions failed.It's like a false sense of security that is shattered when the item fails,and they do.
I would encourage everyone to memorise the basics of their dive tables,because sometimes you will forget to take them with you.
Stay smart,Stay safe,and stay in the water.
Cheers All Ears,
The Gasman.
I remember when the dive computer came out and it was always supposed to be a back up or a source of information,but not the last word in dive profiling.If the computer gave out underwater,how many of us would remember how to work out our dive times? I dive without a computer nearly all the time.
Shallow and deep.The watch,the tables,the depth guage.With the brain,they should be the primary.I can always work out my situation should a battery fail on me and continue my dive.I believe that this skill should be encouraged moreso than over-reliance on dive-computers.I have seen divers with all the latest contraptions go into panics because they never learnt to be comfortable with the basics of diving when those contraptions failed.It's like a false sense of security that is shattered when the item fails,and they do.
I would encourage everyone to memorise the basics of their dive tables,because sometimes you will forget to take them with you.
Stay smart,Stay safe,and stay in the water.
Cheers All Ears,
The Gasman.
Gassy, Old Chap,
I am of the generation that first saw computers that took up whole rooms, ran with vacuum tubes, and could add two and two almost as fast as a human... So if there is a generation that should be circumspect about them, it is mine.
That said, I think that you will agree that substantial progress has been made in their reliability, etc. In fact, your daily life--from the use of cars, phones, coffee makers, pcs(!)--has been dramatically affected, if not improved, by their presence. I think that they have made diving so much more enjoyable because they have freed me from "slavish calculations" every time I dive.
That said, I am aware of the "rough" time/depth/SI limits on any dive. So, after a 100 ft dive for 25 min, I would not believe my computer if it said that I could do a 60 ft dive for 40 min after a 20 min SI! Also, if it went dead 10 min into a dive I could ascend gracefully at that time with no threat to my life. Etc., etc. Thus, I think of the computer as my primary and am willing to give up diving for 24 hrs should it die on me mid-dive. BECAUSE THAT IS AN EVENT THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN VERY OFTEN. AND THE DEATH OF A COMPUTER MID-DIVE IS, OF ITSELF, NOT LIFE THREATENING TO THE HUMAN CARRYING IT.
My message--maybe lost in all that verbage--is that modern computers are sufficiently reliable to use as a primary if used intelligently. (Of course, you could question my intelligence--and you would not be the first!).
Joewr
I am of the generation that first saw computers that took up whole rooms, ran with vacuum tubes, and could add two and two almost as fast as a human... So if there is a generation that should be circumspect about them, it is mine.
That said, I think that you will agree that substantial progress has been made in their reliability, etc. In fact, your daily life--from the use of cars, phones, coffee makers, pcs(!)--has been dramatically affected, if not improved, by their presence. I think that they have made diving so much more enjoyable because they have freed me from "slavish calculations" every time I dive.
That said, I am aware of the "rough" time/depth/SI limits on any dive. So, after a 100 ft dive for 25 min, I would not believe my computer if it said that I could do a 60 ft dive for 40 min after a 20 min SI! Also, if it went dead 10 min into a dive I could ascend gracefully at that time with no threat to my life. Etc., etc. Thus, I think of the computer as my primary and am willing to give up diving for 24 hrs should it die on me mid-dive. BECAUSE THAT IS AN EVENT THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN VERY OFTEN. AND THE DEATH OF A COMPUTER MID-DIVE IS, OF ITSELF, NOT LIFE THREATENING TO THE HUMAN CARRYING IT.
My message--maybe lost in all that verbage--is that modern computers are sufficiently reliable to use as a primary if used intelligently. (Of course, you could question my intelligence--and you would not be the first!).
Joewr
greg somers
Guest
But that is you and you aren't a novice diver are you?
There are many that are.The dive training that I recieved when I certified was far more intensive and involved than the standards that I teach now out of the agency manuals.
I know that that was done to make diving more accessable to others but I have seen too many people on dive trips who just don't get the suitable training or challenges to strengthen their skills.Every dive trip that I am on that involves some overseas trained divers ends up with one of them getting into difficulties with buoyancy,dive profiles,times and SIT's as well as little buddy sense.
All the gadgets in the world won't make someone a better diver if the gadget between the ears isn't working.By the way,what's with all the capitals? Can't you make a point without them? I realise computers are helpful to modern day society and am using one now to speak to you.The point is that when you take everything away,you are left with just the diver.If that is not right in the training and competence than the rest is irrelevant.Working out a dive profile only takes 20 seconds.Not slavish at all.
There are many that are.The dive training that I recieved when I certified was far more intensive and involved than the standards that I teach now out of the agency manuals.
I know that that was done to make diving more accessable to others but I have seen too many people on dive trips who just don't get the suitable training or challenges to strengthen their skills.Every dive trip that I am on that involves some overseas trained divers ends up with one of them getting into difficulties with buoyancy,dive profiles,times and SIT's as well as little buddy sense.
All the gadgets in the world won't make someone a better diver if the gadget between the ears isn't working.By the way,what's with all the capitals? Can't you make a point without them? I realise computers are helpful to modern day society and am using one now to speak to you.The point is that when you take everything away,you are left with just the diver.If that is not right in the training and competence than the rest is irrelevant.Working out a dive profile only takes 20 seconds.Not slavish at all.
Hey, Greg,
I use capitals instead of waving my arms wildly. And "slavishly" was an exaggeration to make a point, which I did not make too well. I just meant that studiously poring over the dive tables was neither a guarantee of the understanding what went into them nor did it add much to my personal dive experience. So much for the many courses in English composition that I took as a youth.
And, I have to agree with you--although it obviously pains me deeply (without capitals)--that exquisite diving equipment does not make an exquisite diver! And, I, too, have seen people dive who have not had the relevant experience to know whether to rely on their instruments--even watches, depth gauges and pressure gauges. However (note the lack of capitals), if those same folks were just using dive tables, I am not sure they would be any better off.
To some degree diving has been made "too easy", I guess. But we have all benefitted by the larger market: more and better variety of equipment, easier transit to wonderful dive destinations, many more interesting folks to meet, etc. Of course, those things have also come with negatives, many of which you did point out.
At any rate, I just wanted to make the point that being anti-computer just because it can fail did not make sense to me. With that, I will tip my hat, bow from the waist, and wish you a pleasant, capital Kiwi day!
Joewr
I use capitals instead of waving my arms wildly. And "slavishly" was an exaggeration to make a point, which I did not make too well. I just meant that studiously poring over the dive tables was neither a guarantee of the understanding what went into them nor did it add much to my personal dive experience. So much for the many courses in English composition that I took as a youth.
And, I have to agree with you--although it obviously pains me deeply (without capitals)--that exquisite diving equipment does not make an exquisite diver! And, I, too, have seen people dive who have not had the relevant experience to know whether to rely on their instruments--even watches, depth gauges and pressure gauges. However (note the lack of capitals), if those same folks were just using dive tables, I am not sure they would be any better off.
To some degree diving has been made "too easy", I guess. But we have all benefitted by the larger market: more and better variety of equipment, easier transit to wonderful dive destinations, many more interesting folks to meet, etc. Of course, those things have also come with negatives, many of which you did point out.
At any rate, I just wanted to make the point that being anti-computer just because it can fail did not make sense to me. With that, I will tip my hat, bow from the waist, and wish you a pleasant, capital Kiwi day!
Joewr
Similar threads
