Nitrox tables going too?

[Randy43068]

New divers should be taught about dive tables from the beginning. Granted, most people will never use them unless they have to. However, learning and using dive tables isn't really difficult (unless the instructor is incompetent) and it's always good to know our diving "roots" so to speak.

Use of the dive tables might not be part of the student testing process, but it's always a good thing to have covered in class.

 

[TartanFrog]

Just recently I got my Nitrox cert. The PADI course was based on using a computer but the instructor offered to stay after the course and go over the tables with me. I was pretty comfortable with the tables because they were hammered into me during my OW. But it was nice to go through it with someone that had extensive knowledge and experience in using them.

My take is that just like with many things it is a technology trend. Early divers had nothing to go by other than what Mr. Cousteau defined and the Navy dive tables. Then the recreational community adopted them, made them more conservative and created instruction rules for keeping recreational divers safer. Now the computer technology and algorithms for crunching the numbers are advanced enough to do a lot of that for you and try to keep you from making a dumb mistake. Next stop will be microchip implants. Oh wait the military is already doing that.

 

[Insta-Gator]

Seems I've read all this before.

So, when a OW class only takes an hour, to show the student how to set up the kit, tell him/her to "breath through this hose" and while the computer light is Green you're ok, when it turns Yellow start going up, if it turns RED you're screwed. If you want to know why you're screwed, you'll need to sign up for our Tables Course.

 

[tstormdiver]

You guys are killing me! I can almost hear Doris Day singing "Gonna Take a Sentimental Journey"! Tables have their place, but PDCs have all but replaced them for recreational diving.

Here are some facts:

• Understanding Deco theory is not dependent on learning tables.
• PDCs (Personal Dive Computers) are not derived from tables. Both are derived from algorithms.
• Instructors should be teaching students to use the equipment they will be diving with. For most divers this is a PDC and not tables.
• PDCs don't get narced.
• PDCs provide an accurate record of your dives and safety stops.
• PDCs represent N2 buildup with an easy to understand (intuitive) bar graph rather than confusing "letter groups".
• PDCs don't forget when you submerged or when you surfaced.
• PDCs don't forget to reset the witness mark on your depth gauge.
• PDCs sound an alarm when you exceed your NDL, MOD or ascent rate.
• Learning PDCs can be less intimidating to a novice diver.

I don't teach tables to my OW students unless they specifically ask me to. No one has asked so far.

Pete, I (& I think the others) don't entirely disagree with you. You brought out the positives of using dive computers, but you left out some of the negatives,
- Computer batteries die
- Computers occasionally flood
- Some bad computers may slip by QC
- some divers, not understanding their computers, may ignore important alarms

Although the chances of some of these negatives is very slim, it still happens & unless the diver has a back- up computer to fall back on, it means 24- 48 hrs of no diving until the diver's system is fully cleansed of excess nitrogen. Then they may dive on a fresh computer or on tables (if they have a depth gauge, timing device & know hoe to use the tables).

 

[MarcelT]

Just my 2 cents on this:

I am a PADI instructor who has been teaching the table, the eRDP (and even the dreaded multilevel Wheel) so far. Even though I like the tables myself, I can fully understand that people forget how to use them after a while.

I am now teaching the computer option for the first time to Open Water Divers and have to say I am quite happy with it.

It is easier to the students, 90% of whom will be using a computer after the course anyway. I expect that a fresh recreational diver will be able to remember how to use a computer better than the eRDP say one year from now. This definitely adds to diver safety, with the added bonus of ascend speed warnings, safety stop reminders, and deco stops if necessary (how many divers remember the emergency deco procedure after 5 years?)

My experience had been 100% positive up to now. And I do NOT even sell computers

Happy diving,
Marcel

 

[The Chairman]

Granted, most people will never use them unless they have to.

I have seen tables being used by a recreational diver exactly once in the past year. Most agencies agree that divers should be trained to use the equipment that they will be diving with.

Pete, I (& I think the others) don't entirely disagree with you. You brought out the positives of using dive computers, but you left out some of the negatives,

There is no requirement for you or the others to agree with me. However, you don't indicate which item(s) you disagree with so as to continue the discussion. As for your negatives, let's address them, shall we?

- Computer batteries die

So do watch and eRDP batteries. All modern PDCs indicate battery life. There is no need to lose a single dive IF you are prepared. This is why training is so stinking important.

- Computers occasionally flood

So do watches and depth gauges. Do you call a dive then, or fudge?

- Some bad computers may slip by QC

It's why training is so stinking important!

- some divers, not understanding their computers, may ignore important alarms

It's why training is so stinking important! The biggest problem with PDCs today is simple ignorance. People feel that reading the manual is all you need to dive a PDC. Shenanigans! Just like tables, using a PDC requires a methodology in order for them to be a benefit. That should be a part of their training so they don't make those kinds of mistakes when they splash. Most people who DON'T dive with a PDC simply ignore using anything. They come up when they are low on air.

Although the chances of some of these negatives is very slim,

So tables are a solution in search of a problem. I agree.

it still happens & unless the diver has a back- up computer to fall back on, it means 24- 48 hrs of no diving until the diver's system is fully cleansed of excess nitrogen. Then they may dive on a fresh computer or on tables (if they have a depth gauge, timing device & know hoe to use the tables).

What does a diver do when they forget to write down their time in/out or forgets to set their witness mark? They fudge. Nope, you won't find that in any training manual along with the rule of 120, but we all know it happens and happens a lot. Here are some negatives in regards to tables (mind you, it's a short list!):

• They rely on the weakest link in the diver's kit: the diver.
• They are ill equipped to deal with multi-level dives.
• They are ill equipped to adjust for differences in actual depth over anticipated depth. You'll be narced as you try to figure them out.
• Hard to carry on my Modified Hog rig.
• Often forgotten on a dive. See my first response.
• Fat fingers ('nuff said).

 

[tstormdiver]

I have seen tables being used by a recreational diver exactly once in the past year. Most agencies agree that divers should be trained to use the equipment that they will be diving with. There is no requirement for you or the others to agree with me. However, you don't indicate which item(s) you disagree with so as to continue the discussion. As for your negatives, let's address them, shall we?
So do watch and eRDP batteries. All modern PDCs indicate battery life. There is no need to lose a single dive IF you are prepared. This is why training is so stinking important.
So do watches and depth gauges. Do you call a dive then, or fudge?
It's why training is so stinking important!
It's why training is so stinking important! The biggest problem with PDCs today is simple ignorance. People feel that reading the manual is all you need to dive a PDC. Shenanigans! Just like tables, using a PDC requires a methodology in order for them to be a benefit. That should be a part of their training so they don't make those kinds of mistakes when they splash. Most people who DON'T dive with a PDC simply ignore using anything. They come up when they are low on air. So tables are a solution in search of a problem. I agree. What does a diver do when they forget to write down their time in/out or forgets to set their witness mark? They fudge. Nope, you won't find that in any training manual along with the rule of 120, but we all know it happens and happens a lot. Here are some negatives in regards to tables (mind you, it's a short list!):

• They rely on the weakest link in the diver's kit: the diver.
• They are ill equipped to deal with multi-level dives.
• They are ill equipped to adjust for differences in actual depth over anticipated depth. You'll be narced as you try to figure them out.
• Hard to carry on my Modified Hog rig.
• Often forgotten on a dive. See my first response.
• Fat fingers ('nuff said).

Good points,.... but is more information & tools for the diver to fall back on a bad thing?

 

[oly5050user]

In my PADI class the instructor taught the eDPRML (or some similar acronym). Basically an electronic table that does calculations for you. It was a little annoying initially but very easy once I learned how to use it.

So I believe what Brendon said. If you know your depth when the computer fails, and you've calculated your limits before you dive, then a computer failure is just a minor annoyance.

I'm sure if PADI really wanted to, they could program Nitrox related stuff into their eRDPML device.

But regarding your original question, I think the dive shops are just being realistic -- these days it's probably unusual to not have a computer.

You can use nitrox with the eRDPml tool..use a ead table with it and you are good to go.

 

[jmasin]

I agree with NetDoc.

That said, I think the tables force practice, and force repetition so help develop understanding of what the dive tables represent.

I just don't think a few minutes to learn to read a computer is enough to truly grasp the fundamentals behind what the computer is doing. Granted you don't need an intricate knowledge of every single algorithm the computer uses, I'm not advocating anything like that. I went through Nitrox year before last, so I still remember the class, and sadly I saw people in the class figure out how to go through a table example but 5 minutes later don't really remember what PO2 really represents, or the critical importance of MOD etc.

Making the course more effective I'm behind, shortening the course to me is inappropriate.

Just my opinions.

 

[Kenny13]

I did both OW & Nitrox through SDI which teaches strictly computer. However, knowing this I took the time to do some research and teach myself how to use the NAUI tables prior to the class, and my instructor took a little time to go over them during the class as well even though it wasn't part of the curriculum.

I'm all for being trained on diving by computers, especially since that's all I would be using, but I can't see where it would hurt anything or take up too much time to give at least a brief explanation of tables too. For me diving by tables is just not going to be an option even as a backup to my computer, although I think they could be a useful aid for planning. I don't own a watch and hate wearing the things, therefore before going out and spending the amount of money it would cost for me to get a watch that I would feel comfortable wearing at any depth, I would rather just spend a few extra bucks and get a second computer and dive with 2 for the redundancy.