Is a computer actually necessary?

[jviehe]

Uncle Pug once bubbled...
The dive computer does present some real downsides not the least of which is erroneous information.

Even if the information displayed where error free... and let's assume something we know to be untrue... even if the information were actually correct (the two are not the same) the real problem is this:

The information supplied by the dive computer is not the salient information needed. Presenting and prominently displaying information that is false at worse and superfluous at best is not helpful.

To the Compuphiles the issue is a choice between dive tables and dive computers. Those who proudly claim to carry both on their dive are still widely missing the point.

There is something more important than *NDL*.

And what would that be? Air? they can keep track of that too. The computer, in addition to displaying how much time you have left before you have violated NDL, also displays bottom time, and depth (aka gauge mode). You then use this to compute NDL. But why bother when the computer has already done it for you. 120, tables, computers, have one basic purpose to calculate nitrogen loading. They all do it very well when used properly. For realistic purposes, computers do not display incorrect information, and what they do , in addition to being superfluous is paramount, imperative, and indispensable.

This post sponsored by http://thesaurus.reference.com

 

[Saudi-Diver]

Are the algorithims most dive computers use not based on the tables we use? Just they can instantaniously give you a instant NDL calculation as apposed to using your watch and a dive slate and diving the dive plan.

 

[Uncle Pug]

jviehe once bubbled...
what they do , in addition to being superfluous is paramount, imperative, and indispensable.[/url]

Superfluous and paramount/ imperative/indispensable?

Use www.dictionary.com to look up synonym and antonym... that should help.

As for computing *NDL*... your faith in and fixation on this artificial construct are... ahhhh.... how shall I describe it.... words escape me...

 

[Big-t-2538]

Uncle Pug once bubbled...
words escape me...

This has to be a first.

 

[Uncle Pug]

Saudi-Diver once bubbled...
NDL calculation

... beside the fact that it is an artificial construct (that varies widely depending on whose version you are talking about)...

... is that there are other more important considerations that get lost in the flood of superfluous information (I like the word *superfluous*... rolls off the fingers so smooooothly.)

Here is a classic example of using a diver-mounted computer to miss the point:

Folks use their dive computer to maximize bottom time on a dive and then use the ascent indicator on the same dive to minimize the time spent ascending all the while trusting that the air supply as indicated by their integrated computer is sufficient.

 

[Uncle Pug]

Big-t-2538 once bubbled...
This has to be a first.

... in the ellipsis.


tip: look up *irony* and *ellipsis*

and *escape*

 

[UKPhil]

I plan my dives properly before I get in the water. However I do find the Computer useful after the dive, to analyse my profiles and see how closely I managed to stick to the plan. It could potentially also prove to be a useful "black box" record in the event of an accident, both for planning recompression treatment and as evidence for any investigations.

 

[jviehe]

Uncle Pug once bubbled...

... beside the fact that it is an artificial construct (that varies widely depending on whose version you are talking about)...

... is that there are other more important considerations that get lost in the flood of superfluous information (I like the word *superfluous*... rolls off the fingers so smooooothly.)

Here is a classic example of using a diver-mounted computer to miss the point:

Folks use their dive computer to maximize bottom time on a dive and then use the ascent indicator on the same dive to minimize the time spent ascending all the while trusting that the air supply as indicated by their integrated computer is sufficient.

Sorry, im just not that quick (computers rot the brain). What am I supposed to learn from that?

 

[BigJetDriver]

jviehe once bubbled...


Sorry, I'm just not that quick (computers rot the brain). What am I supposed to learn from that?

:wacko: At the risk of causing our ancient and honourable Uncle Pug to begin to growl, I must point out that, in reality, it is total dependence upon computers WITHOUT independent thought that WILL rot one's brain. If computer use, in and of itself, caused the brain to rot, our very own BRW would be a mindless drone, our astronauts would be vegetables, and commercial jet pilots would be near-zombies!:wacko:

 

[MikeFerrara]

jviehe once bubbled...


Sorry, im just not that quick (computers rot the brain). What am I supposed to learn from that?

In the phrase you question...

Folks use their dive computer to maximize bottom time on a dive and then use the ascent indicator on the same dive to minimize the time spent ascending all the while trusting that the air supply as indicated by their integrated computer is sufficient.

The point, I think, is this is the oposit of what we want. Several of us have already pointed out that from table to table and computer to computer NDL's are widely different. That's because they don't really exist. If we get compressed, by golly we will get decompressed. You can do it easy or you can do it hard. The more time you spend on the bottom the more you get compressed. That means that you wan a slower ascent. The folks who are doing as described are pushing it on both ends. They put faith in the fact that they're within a real NDL and then try to prove it by ascending at the maximum computer allowed speed.

Ignoring NDL for a moment, if the ascent is appropriate for the dive, the fact that a computer may have displayed some color other than green at one time doesn't matter. More time deep gets more time shallow. How much for how long is a matter for discussion all in itself. Finding out is maybe more of a process than a question and an answer. At this point decompression may be more of an art than a science. Thinking that a computer knows what you should do with any precission just doesn't fit what we know )or don't know about decompression.

Go read Ross Hemmingway's site. Divers send him data on the dives they did and the results. One guy says "I did this and felt good" another says "I did this and didn't feel so good" Then Ross says well maybe I'll make an adjustment to the code a little.