If working, do you ever need to replace dive computer (Aeris Atmos 1)

[Imbodie]

Maybe in general but I have done nearly 1.5 hour dives where I had hit 110 feet on an aluminum 80. And still got on deck with the specified 500 psi or more. I was told this past summer in Florida by a DM for a well known operation (that I enjoy and still like) that I was breaking the law and that I could not stay down more than one hour or the captain would have to call the Coast Guard! Like, really, is that a law? Or you just want me out of the water? And most of the group of people I often dive with are worse, or should I say better . And in Cozumel the DMs just give up and get out of the water.

James

YOU need a new computer... OP likely doesn't.

 

[georgec02]

YOU need a new computer... OP likely doesn't.

lol... definitely true. I never really need anything... which was why my original post did ask if there was a reason that I "needed" to think about replacing our computer vs. "want".

Sorry about the diversionary reply mentioning using my kids' scuba cert as an excuse to buy new computers for my wife and I. I'll cross that bridge and do my research if it happens. Original post really was just verifying whether it mattered / I should be concerned that we have 15+ year old dive computers.

Not planning on Nitrox cert anytime soon, as normal recreational diving seems to be doing ok for us, and with the kids getting certified, we'll likely be diving fairly basic dives for the next couple of years until they get more experience under the belt.

Appreciate all the feedback so far and entertainment.... especially @tursiops who said...

That is irrelevant. The computer being asked about is NOT a modern dive computer.

The computers are pretty old.... they may even have predated the first iphone....

Cheers all!

 

[Imbodie]

lol... definitely true. I never really need anything... which was why my original post did ask if there was a reason that I "needed" to think about replacing our computer vs. "want".

Sorry about the diversionary reply mentioning using my kids' scuba cert as an excuse to buy new computers for my wife and I. I'll cross that bridge and do my research if it happens. Original post really was just verifying whether it mattered / I should be concerned that we have 15+ year old dive computers.

Not planning on Nitrox cert anytime soon, as normal recreational diving seems to be doing ok for us, and with the kids getting certified, we'll likely be diving fairly basic dives for the next couple of years until they get more experience under the belt.

Appreciate all the feedback so far and entertainment.... especially @tursiops who said...

The computers are pretty old.... they may even have predated the first iphone....

Cheers all!

if you do any diving deeper than 30 feet you really should look into nitrox certs.. I do a lot at 60' and definitely feel the difference at that depth post dive. Don't let that drive you on the new computer decision though. Typical recreational diving does not require nitrox specific computer... and when I say typical.. LOTS of divers never get deeper than 60'.

 

[rongoodman]

I mean if you are doing 6 tank dives a day... yeah get a nitrox computer... I don't think I have ever done more than 3 dives a day with a solid hour surface interval between them.

Five dives a day for multiple days is very common on liveaboard trips.

 

[Imbodie]

Five dives a day for multiple days is very common on liveaboard trips.

You sir are NOT the OP... and the OP said NOTHING about liveaboards...

 

[lexvil]

To crawl out of the rabbit hole here for a moment, any computer is better than no computer and reality is you don’t need any computer but you’re better off with one, a modern air integrated wireless wrist mounted computer will just make diving more pleasant. If you dive nitrox on an air only computer and know you MOD the air computer will add a lot of conservativeness to the dive, wasting bottom time advantages of the nitrox.

there are a lot of good computers available, my favorite is the Teric but the Garmin is tempting but something like a used perdix will introduce you to why you should fill that want, after all diving is a “want” for most people so may as well use good stuff and make it as pleasant as possible.

 

[dmaziuk]

So, while described as "liberal", guessing that DSAT still maintains a safe profile for a general recreational diver?

What @boulderjohn said, however, keep in mind that the original DSAT report recommended not maxing out on dives/days and taking every 6th day off. Which is why many dive resorts work on 6-day schedules (or used to), and many liveaboard customers dive nitrox (but have to watch their oxtox -- you'd want a nitrox-capable computer for those schedules).

IOW if your definition of a "general recreational diver" does not include 5+ dives/day for multiple weeks non-stop, then DSAT is not only safe, it is in fact the only one that was designed for this kind of diving.

 

[boulderjohn]

What @boulderjohn said, however, keep in mind that the original DSAT report recommended not maxing out on dives/days and taking every 6th day off.

I am pretty sure that most people reading this thread will not know the context of all of this, so it might be helpful if I provide it.

DSAT is Diving Science and Technology, a subsidiary of PADI. A half century ago, recreational diving was guided by the US Navy tables, or agency variations of those tables. Those tables were designed for navy divers doing one dive a day, and they called for extremely long surface intervals between dives. This made the typical 2-tank dive schedule divers are so familiar with today impossible. DSAT did extensive research to see what was really necessary for people who do the typical dives associated with recreational diving rather than the kind of dives done by the navy. That research led to the PADI Recreational Dive Planner (PADI tables), which shortened the first dive time limits, changed the theoretical tissue determining surface intervals, and increased pressure groups in the tables to decrease rounding errors. This led to significantly shorter surface intervals, the surface intervals we are accustomed to today.

The DSAT computer algorithm used in computers today is essentially a computer version of those tables.

This was all brand new when the tables were published roughly 40 years ago. They contained the following statement: Since little is presently known about the physiological effects of multiple dives over multiple days, divers are wise to make fewer dives and limit their exposure toward the end of a multiday dive series.

Of course, anyone who has gone on a liveaboard trip in the 40 years since that was published has blown that advice out of the water.

 

[Centrals]

It is great to have computer running on DSAT as back up because I could never get it into deco mode as my trusted work horse(Buhlmaan ZHL-8) is more conservative.
It is fun to compare the ndl between the two during the dive.

 

[Belzelbub]

Hi all,

I have an Aeris Atmos 1 wrist-mount puck. The thing's probably at least 15 years old by now. It still works, I have extra o-rings for it and it has never given me any problems. We just do regular recreational diving, no nitrox.

Is there any reason why I'd need (not want ) to replace a dive computer from a safety perspective (assuming it meets all my needs and is functional/reliable)?

Not really for that one. From a safety perspective, I’m only aware of some really old Uwatec Aladin computers that shouldn’t be used, but for air, they would probably be fine as well. The problem with them was that they assumed that the gas breathed during the dive was also breathed on the surface interval.

DC algorithms have come and gone out of favor, but I don’t think any of them are inherently unsafe for recreational divers, with the above example excluded.

Though my kids are getting certified this month so that might be an excuse to get my wife and I new computers this year...

That’s as good of an excuse as any. My oldest is using my previous computer. Youngest had to get a different one as I didn’t have another lying around.

Newer computers provide a bunch of features that should be in the want category, not a ton that are in the need category.