Mass confusion about computers????

[tridacna]

I used to think that @cerich was going to save us from this conundrum but it's taking a long while...who knows? There's a big market out there for exactly what you describe.

 

[lowviz]

@Shearwater

Bruce, any chance you can send Eric a demo model for evaluation? An old Petrel, anything...

 

[lowviz]

@tridacna healthy competition is everything.

 

[stuartv]

So yeah: I end my dives because my sac needs a tuck and my cylinder is really tiny.

I really was not trying to be insulting or condescending. I was trying to understand clearly what you meant and establish some context for your statements.

You say you aren't limited by your Cressi's algorithm. If that's because you always dive less than 60' and you always dive an AL80, then your statements mean one thing (to me). If you've been doing dives to 120', using an HP120, then your statements take on a different meaning. I just want myself and anyone else reading this to understand the full context behind your statements.

Here’s the thing.
I’ve been diving tables including Navy tables and variants for years.
I’m not completely ignorant when it comes to deco, bottom times, repetitive dives, SI, pressure groups, etc.
What I DO NOT WANT is to be diving along looking at time and depth then suddenly realize that some stupid computer algorithm is freaking out when I know based on what I know, I still have plenty of time and in no danger of violating rec profiles.
Other people including buddies have all switched to computers so I’m figuring it’s probably time for me to get with the times. My fear is that I’ll br using some cheap computer with a goofy algorithm and screw up my buddies dive or bench myself, or get srewed out of precious UW time.
I don’t want to be doing deco for overstaying some rediculously conservative bottom time when that time could be spent enjoying the dive.
I’m still having a lot of trouble trying to surrender my freedom and become a slave to the screen, especially if it’s a totally bogus OS.
But at the same time I’m not into spending a fortune. But maybe that’s just part of the new times?

Honestly, I think you would be best served by a computer with a known, predictable algorithm. Even a liberal Oceanic has the potential to give you unexpected and unwanted results. Mainly meaning if you do happen to exceed your NDL, ever. Which, let's be realistic, with your experience diving Navy tables is a real possibility (not that I'm recommending it).

And that means (to me), get a Shearwater. It will never give you surprise penalties for anything.

 

[tridacna]

@tridacna healthy competition is everything.

At BTS a few years ago, I saw @cerich 's first dive computer. (Or a mockup of one - I can't remember). It was the bomb.

Simple - liberal - and cheap - just like me. Nothing ever transpired after that. I wish. I adore my Perdix but would LOVE to see that thing come to fruition. It would be a game changer. Funny thing, I thought that SP would do something with Seabear too. Nada.

 

[dmaziuk]

Understand. Although I go up slow to the safety stop. And then slow to the surface.

This is a speculation, though: bubble thing is from VPM and I didn't look at it closely enough to know if slower off-gassing is actually programmed in, it's just how it should work as I understand it. But none of the computers in question run VPM. They run something that's rumoured to be close.

I really was not trying to be insulting or condescending. I was trying to understand clearly what you meant and establish some context for your statements.

You say you aren't limited by your Cressi's algorithm. If that's because you always dive less than 60' and you always dive an AL80, then your statements mean one thing (to me). If you've been doing dives to 120', using an HP120, then your statements take on a different meaning. I just want myself and anyone else reading this to understand the full context behind your statements.

Use a right tool: Cressis are for splashing around a reef, and that's what I do. If I were doing those 120/120 dives I would be doing a few things differently.

 

[lowviz]

@tridacna couldn't possibly agree more.

I even sent SP a screen mockup of a basic DC that the 'reading glasses' old coot set (me) could read with plano lenses. Nothing, not even a "thank you for your suggestion, **** off".

 

[dmaziuk]

However I do plan to do some travelling and also some offshore dives in Socal. Somewhere like Farnsworth Bank off the backside of Catalina would be a very unfriendly place for the Mares as would be the oil rigs.

First dive shouldn't be much different, my guess is that with slow ascent and long SS/SI, first day shouldn't be much different. But it also depends: if you want to squeeze 3 HP120s in on a single day at the rigs, then you have to limit you SS/SIs to make time and that would be mares-unfriendly. The other side of it is what
@lowviz said: when your computed NDL goes to 0, you don't know if it'll just make your SS non-optional, or even if it clears completely before you reach SS depth. Because it recalculates on the fly, neither would be exactly unexpected.

So DSAT would be basically what the second gen PADI tables are based on, correct?

Pelagic Pressure Systems programmers know. Just like Mares programmers know what TH is actually running inside the puck... We're all just idly speculating here.

 

[tridacna]

@tridacna couldn't possibly agree more.

I even sent SP a screen mockup of a basic DC that the 'reading glasses' old coot set (me) could read with plano lenses. Nothing, not even a "thank you for your suggestion, **** off".

I have +3.0 readers in my mask. No idea what you're talking about...

 

[stuartv]

Use a right tool: Cressis are for splashing around a reef, and that's what I do. If I were doing those 120/120 dives I would be doing a few things differently.

Don't you think that extra info would be useful to the people whom you tell that you use a Cressi and never find yourself to be limited by its algorithm?