Nitrox Class Without Tables or Math...OK?

[LSDeep]

It seems to me that you have one argument and you are using it where it doesn't apply. I had no problem with Nitrox years ago, have no problem with rebreathers now, and am not averse to change. I have no problem with computers although I think that you still should keep your brain in the loop.

Teach someone how to use their computer if they can't figure it out themselves but why not teach the basic formulas as well. Nitrox made simple as a marketing slogan doesn't sound like it's about a program on the leading edge of change as you are arguing. It sounds like telling someone that learning about Nitrox is hard but that if you come to your class you'll make it easy. As an aside, rebreathers aren't new. They predate scuba.

as you say and believe i said. all up to you. yes i will make nitrox easy (as possible) for you if you come to me and take a class (it will be still the same doc / pete teaches)- or as hard as it gets (your choice).
you should keep your brain working - no matter what course you take! a sdi (computer based course) doesnt mean there is nothing to learn.
never argued about the "leading edge of change" but about the "we have 2006 and computers are common and tables are to but sooooo 1985 )
nobody ever claimed nitrox is hard - if you look at earkier posts of mine you will see me advocating for the open water / nitrox combined - because its easy.
and no, rebreathers arent new - never said so. i was talking about rec / tek scuba and rb's (seems to be the lost baby) and they will come back big - you (or me) like it or not. from siebe - gorman to widowmaker and (the promised) new innerspace - meg follow up.
as i said, scuba evolves still very fast and you better grow with it. there are basics that will never change (physics - never say never) and equipment that will be faster changing than you imagine and change the whole way you teach today. dont worry, old way will still work just be outdated as tables are basically today .

 

[Kim]

This is just going round in circles. There are two sides to it and I can't see them ever agreeing with each other. Whatever anyone thinks about it, the agencies are simplifying (or dumbing down if you want) the entry requirements for scuba. Part of their ability to do that is because of the technological advances that have been made. In the end I do believe it's first and foremost a safety issue, because as long as people aren't killing themselves then whether they are getting 'as much out of it' as they could becomes a matter of personal choice. Some people don't need much to be happy, some need much more. Some people know that the light goes on if you press the switch.....some people need to know why and can probably re-wire their whole house. These are just differences of human nature. To say that if you don't know x,y, or z you shouldn't be diving is ridiculous if there are safe ways to dive that don't require that knowledge. You can argue until you are blue in the face, but are more people actually dying because of all this 'dumbed down' instruction? If you look at that rationally it is still the most advanced experts who have the most accidents....simply because they push the limits (which are only theoretical to start with!!) and sometimes push that one step too far. If inexperienced rec divers were dying in droves then it's hard to see that things wouldn't change - but they aren't. In fact...it's only the more experienced people who 'know' the real danger they put themselves in....and then call it 'luck'. Well...if 'luck' can be so consistent then show me the way to Vegas 'cause it would sure beat working for a living! It's not 'luck'...it can't be...it happens too often.
So, is diving more enjoyable if you know all the why's and wherefores? To some, yes it is....to others, they don't care - they see the fish, the coral or the shipwreck and they're happy. Is it a case of ignorance is bliss? Maybe, but as long as they know a way to do it that seems safe (supported by the statistics), who is anyone else to tell them that really they shouldn't be doing it?

I like to know more and therefore ask questions, read books, do training etc. Does it make me better than them? I don't think so....just different. Why should I care that if their computer packs up then they have to immediately call their dive unless they know how to actually work out what's happening, even if they've only been down for 10 minutes? It doesn't bother me and if that's as far as what they know will take them - hell, that was their choice and they could always have taken a different course.

 

[andydiver06]

KISS (keep it simple and stupid) is a good principle - Whether you are using a comp or a table. Backup table with comp or a comp with a table to prevent Davy Jones knocking on your door. You need to have redundancy in a diving situation. Knowing basics is always a good idea. Anyway EAD and MOD and CNS are hardly anything tech

 

[Kim]

KISS (keep it simple and stupid) is a good principle -

Yes...and for so many that just means following the DM. Let's face it - if they could actually use their computers properly that would actually be an advance! (even if they don't actually know 'why'!)

 

[BHB ScubaTroll]

Yep they know they MADE a mistake. Why not teach diver how NOt to make them?

Are you saying that you don't make mistakes, even though you know how NOT to make them?

That is what your answer seems to say.

 

[BHB ScubaTroll]

Really. the manufacturer thinks it's ok and lot of them were sold. As I said I want to take it through Pete's class. I've done lots of dives with that computer and it hasen't got me hurt yet, though, I'll admit that it might be more dangerous for some than it is fo others. Personally, I'm not afraid of it. My question is, can an SDI instructor teach a nitroc class with it?

Ah, you made the CHOICE to dive with something that is less than safe for everyone... BUT, YOU made the choice, and decided that it is right for you.

And, you have justified it by stating that the manufacturer thinks it's ok and a lot have been sold.

You are making Pete's points very well.... again

 

[MikeFerrara]

Are you saying that you don't make mistakes, even though you know how NOT to make them?

That is what your answer seems to say.

Where did I ever say that I don't make mistakes?

We Were talking about the usefulness of beepers and alarms on dive computers. I think the beepers and alarms are useless, irritating and not needed for anything at all.

 

[BHB ScubaTroll]

Where did I ever say that I don't make mistakes?

We Were talking about the usefulness of beepers and alarms on dive computers. I think the beepers and alarms are useless, irritating and not needed for anything at all.

Most readers would be left with that idea from this series:

Ah, this is the one.... !!!
If the diver knows their computer, and it starts to beep, they know they have made a mistake.... AND, since they understand their computer, they understand that it is NOT a fatal, or potentially fatal mistake.... AND, they understand how to correct it.

Why, because they took the time to take a Nitrox course, which taught them how to use and understand their dive computer.

You made Netdocs point VERY well!

Yep they know they MADE a mistake. Why not teach diver how NOt to make them?

EVERY class will teach divers how NOT to make mistakes. BUT, I guarantee that mistakes are made by every diver, even though they have been taught not to make them.

A beeper or alarm is a warning... Fire trucks, Police cars, Ambulance... all have alarms as a warning... Smoke detectors, home security... are they all useless too?

Or, is it this: Someone who knows their dive computer, and how to use it will recognize a warning that is "USELESS, irritating, and not needed for anything at all" (to you).... understand what that warning means and react to it before a larger mistake is made.

That IS what those irritating beepers and alarms are meant for!
===

You indicate that teaching someone how to NOT make a mistake, will keep them from making a mistake....

You further indicate that beepers and warnings from a dive computer are useless when mistakes are made...
====

I believe that 99% of all divers would disagree with you (But, of course, they would be wrong)

 

[MikeFerrara]

Ah, you made the CHOICE to dive with something that is less than safe for everyone... BUT, YOU made the choice, and decided that it is right for you.

And, you have justified it by stating that the manufacturer thinks it's ok and a lot have been sold.

You are making Pete's points very well.... again

On what basis do you say that it's unsafe? I've made many dives with that computer without incident, my son has used it on many dives, I've loaned it out to scores of people and all wihout incident. I'm sure many more were sold and I've never heard of a single incident that was in any way related to that compuiter.

The computer that Zeagle sold for years was essentially the same exact computer with the added capability of being able to use two gasses. We had two of those and when I owned a dive shop and was a Zeagle dealer we sold quit a few others. I have personal knowledge of many many dives on those computers ranging from recreational to caves and I am not aware of a single indicent because of them. they seem to work exactly as the manufacturer says they should and they did everything that I needed them to do when I used them.

Again, on what grounds do you base your contention that they are unsafe or that I chose to use unsafe equipment?

I would imagine that using those computers would be rather cumbersom in the SDI computer nitrox course. I tend to think that a diver who couldn't easily calculate MOD or PPO2 would find it far less than convenient to use.

How does that make Pete's point? What is his point? Is it that diving is somehow easier or safer for those who are totally reliant on their computer? That it somehow makes for a better class to have umpteen students using unmpteen different comuters than it is to explain one very simple equation and how to use it?

Pete apparently doesn't think that you need to be teaching dive skills in a nitrox class. I don't think that you need to be teaching dive computer use. They come with instructions. I think you should teach nitrox diving and the student can then adapt those principles to using a dive computer, tables, a pocket calculator, palm pilot, PC, paper and pencil or whatever tools they see fit.

 

[The Chairman]

It's not a fair match though because I'm still waiting for Pete to answer the questions that I asked back on about page one.

This is W-A-Y misleading! Those questions were answered in detail.

It always goes this way. Any time I ask a question or make a comment in a thread that Pete is in he responds by calling me an elitist. So, I have come to the conclusion that the definition of elitist must be any one who doesn't agree with Pete. I rarely agree with Pete (at least when it comes to diving) so there is little doubt that I am an elitist.

This is a strawman fallacy. The comment was directed to those who indicated that those unwilling to take a NitrOx course with tables should not dive.

Gosh I give up...ATA * FO2 = PO2 is too hard for Pete's students (SDI students?) and it's unfair and elitist to require it of them. I am starting to believe that. Further it's not necessary to see them dive before issueing them a diving certification because...? I'm still not sure that I get that part but you'll have that from us elitists.

YOU made the claim that this was "TOO HARD" for my students. My point (sans distortions) is that it is NOT NEEDED for their style of diving.