Nitrox Class Without Tables or Math...OK?

[BHB ScubaTroll]

On what basis do you say that it's unsafe?

Based on this statement

I'll admit that it might be more dangerous for some than it is fo others

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.

Did you show them how to use it properly?

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.

Did you show them how to use it properly?

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

Based on your quote at the top of this post

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.

I would say, based on my experience, and not having taken the SDI nitrox course, (based on your examples of use) that it would be cumbersome for any nitrox diver. A computer that resets itself once programmed it NOT a safe computer.

You are getting into my field of experince here... computers

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?

Based on the fact that you stated your computer is "more dangerous for some than it is for others"... it makes Pete's point that there are different ways to teach the same thing... with or without a "more dangerous for some than it is for others" computer

I don't know Pete's entire point, but that is why I am sitting in on his class Tuesday, and will write a report based on the class. But, not knowing the whole class has made me take a "wait and see" attitude, rather than a "it's just wrong" attitude

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.

A difference of philosophies... that one I won't even get into... Mine is quite different from yours AND Pete's (as stated in the quote above)

 

[El Orans]

I don't know Pete's entire point, but that is why I am sitting in on his class Tuesday, and will write a report based on the class. But, not knowing the whole class has made me take a "wait and see" attitude, rather than a "it's just wrong" attitude

Looking forward to your report.

 

[BHB ScubaTroll]

Looking forward to your report.

Thanks,
I think a lot of people are now (What have I gotten myself into!!!)

 

[The Chairman]

Pete apparently doesn't think that you need to be teaching dive skills in a nitrox class.

It's beyond the scope of this class. I teach other classes that deal with in water skills.

I don't think that you need to be teaching dive computer use.

Is this due to your ignorance or that you don't want your students to know how to use their equipment? Planned ignorance in diving doesn't make any sense!

There was a pamphlet with my last mask showing me how to clear it. Perhaps we can do away with that from our OW course now. Why skimp on essential skills? If they are going to USE a computer, then they should be taught how to use one competently. Why teach out of the scope of a class? Ego is not a valid answer here. There are many who like to be a "sage on the stage" when it comes to teaching. Heck, I catch myself providing TOO MUCH information all the time, and I am sure I will do that again tonight! But I would rather spend a LOT of time on a few principles (like Safety), then smaller amounts of time on MANY principles. Focus is the key here. Focus on the subject matter at hand. Focus on the equipment in use by your class. Focus on SAFETY.

 

[MikeFerrara]

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

While there are a couple of you trying to make it out that way, I don't believe that "most"readers would get that idea at all.

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.

Does every class teach that? I'm not at all convinced of that. In fact, I'm convinced that many aspects of typical dive training leaves many divers prone to making certain mistakes without the knowledge or skills to avoid them and that we see those same mistakes being made over and over. That's where the beeper come in I guess.

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?

Certainly not. They all have their uses but I don't take any of them diving.

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 do think they're useless unless you're trained to rely on them. A beep for this a beep for that. You hear a beep....what is it telling you? Look at your depth guage and you'll know where you are. Know your MOD and you'll know if you are above or below it. What else is needed and can you demonstrate that it is needed or has somehow added to the safety of diving?

What do you think is better insurance against ending up below an MOD...a beeper that tells you that you did it...or training a diver to be aware of where they are and in control with the additional aid of buddy/team procedures that allow for quick easy to interpret feedback before a limit is broken? Are most divers being trained that way? Demonstrably not. In the current climate of the dive industry, you might be right...we may need beepers and now we seem to be training divers with the assumption that they will have and need a beeper.

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

99% ? I don't even think you'll find a consensus like that in this thread. I can certainly tell you that no where near 99% of the divers that I dive with or have trained rely on beepers. 100% of the divers that I dive with or have trained have the choice to use a computer or not and can make these simple calculations without a dive computer. I don't believe that 99% are sorry learned those simple skills.

In fact, aside from a few instructors here who seem to like classes like this there seems to be quit a few not in favor of the total reliance on a dive computer for these simple calculations. How would you explain that?

From a training point of view, I think divers need to know this stuff for the same reason that school children are still taught basic math even though we have very powerful computers. Without that, these divers won't recognize when the computer presents them with a rediculous number and whether due to incorrect data entry or whatever, it certainly happens.

Most here seem to be of th opinion that the calculations are easy. Has any one at all weighed in and said that it's hard? It's hard to deny that they have their use. So what is the arguement against teaching them? If there is an easy convenient tool tool that we can provide students, why shouldn't we provide it? How is it an improvement? How is it safer?

Help them to better use their computers in class if you want but why leave out the other stuff that's so handy to know? Why build handicaps into training?

 

[BHB ScubaTroll]

Heck, I catch myself providing TOO MUCH information all the time, and I am sure I will do that again tonight! But

Wow! Am I glad you said that!

In my head, today was Monday (Start of work week). I need to get some work done before I head to Orlando today.

I'm out of here!

 

[Walter]

Well, it's probably no surprise that I'm philosophically opposed to this type of class, but if there is a fault, it lies squarely with the agency and not with Pete who is teaching this class within standards.

As for teaching how to use a computer.....they work in so many different ways. I've have many different computers since I bought my Edge back in '86. Every time I get a new computer, I have to learn how to use it. Unless the folks who make 'em get together and set up standards, I don't believe it's possible to teach students how to use their computer unless you either mandate everyone has the same computer or you spend lots of one on one time including teaching yourself how to use that particular computer.

 

[Rick Murchison]

FWIW, recreational Nitrox can be summed up this way:
"Diving exclusively EAN32, so long as you remain within the recreational diving envelope of 100' or shallower and your total bottom time within any 24 hour period does not exceed 180 minutes, there is no need to track MOD or the oxygen clock.
You still have to follow the computer's limits on rate-of-ascent and bottom times for 'no-decompression' diving."
There's your 5 minute Nitrox course. No dives required. Send $50; here's your card.
Why bother teaching anything else?
Just trust the computer to handle the nitrogen side of the problem, trust the gas supplier to provide the proper mix, and dive on...
However...
If you take a basic Nitrox course from me, you'll be exposed to the math - not only the simple MOD calculations but also the "highly complex" EAD formula (gasp!). And gas planning, and minimum ascent pressures, and time planning based not only on oxygen and nitrogen exposures but on personal SCR, tank size and planned profile. (Note: I include all this planning stuff in just about every course I teach; there's always someone there who's never had to do it, and a review never hurt anyone )
And the use of both EAN tables and air tables based on EAD.
And the use of computers as planning and diving aids for Nitrox diving.
And personal analysis of your own tanks, marking your own tanks, "chain-of-custody" rules for your own tanks - which you not only have to demonstrate in class but actually perform prior to the two actual, real, underwater dives you have to actually plan and execute on actual Nitrox!

Admittedly, my course is far too involved, takes too much time and costs too much for many, but I ain't after market share
Don't get me wrong... the five minute course is adequate for most recreational divers, and for those who want to approach diving that way I have no gripe. After all, it is recreation, and so long as you obey the rules of the five minute course you won't have oxygen problems, and no one's tail is on the line but your own and your diving companions.
But if you are one of those rare divers who wants to have a deeper understanding of your play than the bare necessities, I have a fun, mildly challenging, interesting course for you.
Rick

 

[The Kraken]

:classic:

the K

. . . but I don't think Uncle Ricky's stupid.

 

[MikeFerrara]

It's beyond the scope of this class. I teach other classes that deal with in water skills.

Only as of late. The omre important it is for a student to be in control of their depth, the more I want to see first hand in the water that they are before I certify them to dive under those conditions.

Is this due to your ignorance or that you don't want your students to know how to use their equipment? Planned ignorance in diving doesn't make any sense!

Now your calling me ignorant. I am an ignorant elitist huh? LOL

Are you saying that not teaching the use of specific computers in a nitrox class somehow prevents a diver from knowing how to? Have you read a computer manual lately. They explain all the functions of the computer and refer the diver to their nitrox course material for the significance of certain functions. What do you add to that? What does the manual leave out that you are providing? IMO, all you are doing is dumbing down the supporting material (the knowledge behind the computers use).

Pete, not teaching the simple calculations looks exactly like planned ignorance to me. You're right, that planned ignorance in diving doesn't make any sense.

There was a pamphlet with my last mask showing me how to clear it. Perhaps we can do away with that from our OW course now.

That seems like a stupid statement to me but as long as you ask,haven't we done that already? I think we already fail to teach this skill...or at least teach it well. Most diver only learn to clear their mask on their knees looking up at the sky. Looking up at the sky is totally unnecessary and only being able to do it while kneeling just isn't adequate in many cases.

Why skimp on essential skills?

That is exactly my point here. Maybe you'll answer that. Why skimp on the essentials?

If they are going to USE a computer, then they should be taught how to use one competently.

I don't believe that anyone can use a computer competently without having a means to check the computers answer just as I don't think that you can competently use a pocket calculator without having learned how to add, subtract, multiply and devide. So...I'm not sure that I agree that you are teaching them to use their dive computer competently.

Why teach out of the scope of a class? Ego is not a valid answer here.

Yes, I already know that anyone who doesn't agree with you is an elitist and they are so because of ego. Is it your own ego that so dilikes any one to disagree with you? Or is it your elitism? To the question though, I don't think that verifying sills that are critical to the diving at hand (buoyancy control....awareness...ect) is at all beyond the scope of a class that adds a gas that makes those skills even more important. I certainly don't see how the teaching of simple calculations that define the limits of the dive is at all beyond the scope of any good nitrox class.

There are many who like to be a "sage on the stage" when it comes to teaching
Heck, I catch myself providing TOO MUCH information all the time, and I am sure I will do that again tonight!

I'll take your word for it that you have that problem in your teaching but I don't think the teaching of one very simple equation that define critical limits of a dive is teaching too much information.

But I would rather spend a LOT of time on a few principles (like Safety), then smaller amounts of time on MANY principles. Focus is the key here. Focus on the subject matter at hand. Focus on the equipment in use by your class. Focus on SAFETY.

That's just it though. I disagree that leaving out such simple and useful information is focusing on safety.

I certainly do not believe that not verifying a students ability to follow the plan that you're teaching them to make in the water is at all focusing on safety. The reason that I don't believe that is because I've had so many nitrox students who were in need of remediation. Some who breezed through the classroom work but blew the plan in the water due to a lack of awareness and basic skills. I think teaching the class such that those deficiencies were identified and addressed only added to the divers safety in their future diving....before the remediation they did poorly and after, they did great. I'm glad that I didn't turn them loose with a nitrox certification without having provided that service. You say that not doing it is somehow focusing on safety? I admit it, I don't see how it is.

As far as I can tell you aren't breaking any laws so by all means teach whatever classes you want to whom ever wants them. For myself, though, I will never teach a nitrox class without teaching the very simple math involved and I will never under any circumstances issue a diving certification to a student that I haven't dived with.

If your contention is that teaching less and not diving somehow improves safety I would sure like to see some support of that.

Maybe I should plan a trip...not easy since my job loss but I can try. You and I could pick some of your former SDI nitrox students at random (we wouldn't want any planted ringers, would we?) and invite them diving. Then we could discuss just how safe they really seem to be...where it counts...in the water. You could put your students where you mouth is so to speak. You could demonstrate first hand how not having dived with them and how leaving out a simple equation is an improvement. Maybe we could even do a little write up to let the scubaboard folks know how these randomly selected divers did in the water. What do you think?