PADI tables finally going away?

[Pullmyfinger]

Too true,
Student will vote with their fins. The problem is that if all of the instructors and agencies bow down to that demand,then we are left with ONLY what the student wants.
Which is often the shorter OW classes that are so widely known.
Classes have become shorter due in some part to student demand.
It seems that in an effort to "give them what they want", things get cut out....such as teaching tables.
If I am fresh off the street and I want to learn to dive...how can I possible know what I should be taught?
The instructor is the trained professional in that relationship. The instructor is supposed to be the one that is teaching ME....not ME dictating to the (trained professional) instructor.
So out of fear of possibly losing my business, the instructor decides to cut enough corners so that my training is short enough, so that I'llhave fun?
I'm paying for professional, complete, challenging, and worthwhile training.
If I want to have FUN with my instructor, I'll buy him/her dinner and beer after the training has been completed.
I define this as me meeting the standards set by my instructor....not me dictating what my instructor teaches me as a minimum.

Back to the point...I have a computer and a bottom timer. I'm glad my instructor took the time to teach me to use both.

-Mitch

 

[The Chairman]

I just see it differently.

You remind me of my Chem 1 teacher who MADE us learn slide rules rather than use a calculator. "You won't always have access to a calculator..." were her immortal words! Your analogy is a bit off. Tables are like using a sextant with a bunch of tables to determine my lat and long. I'm gonna use a GPS with a lot less human error built in.

Unfortunately, both are SWAGs. Neither are an exact representation of the nitrogen you have absorbed. Understanding how your physiology is changed based on the environment and your diet/health is far more important for students to understand.

 

[Paladin]

Pete,
Do you explain to new students that they have a choice between using tables or a computer, or that they can learn both? Or do you just assume that they'll want to use computers and not even mention the tables?

Further, in the arguments against using tables, it has been noted that depth gauges and watches can fail.

The people on the other side of the argument note that computers can fail.

Both sides are correct. And if a failure occurs, the solution generally is the same for both sides: end the dive.

The major difference between the two is that with tables, diving can continue for the day after a surface interval and the watch or depth gauge is replaced. With a computer, diving for that day is over, even with a replacement computer.

If I have traveled to a dive site and have paid good money to dive, I would not want to have to sit around and waste the rest of a perfectly good day of diving because I had relied on a computer that failed.

As I have said before, I carry two depth gauges on a dive: A capillary and either a mechanical depth gauge or my computer in gauge mode. I keep a second watch in my dive bag. So during any given dive, I may have the computer (in gauge mode), or a watch and a depth gauge. My dive is planned using the tables, so any failure of any instrument may prompt me to end the dive, but because I'm using the tables, I can continue diving that same day, after a proper surface interval.

If I were to be relying on the computer to do my thinking for me, and it failed, then my diving for the day would be over. Worse, if I had driven 500 miles to go out on a boat for a single day's diving, then my diving would be over for the trip, period. I would be forced to make the long drive home, dejected because I had driven all that way and spent all that money just to sit on the boat and watch everyone else dive.

I contend, and I always will, that both should be taught, because knowledge is the key to safe and enjoyable diving. To ignore one in favor of another because it's easier does the student a disservice.

You can call "shenanigans" all you want on this, but it will not change anything.

 

[The Chairman]

Classes have become shorter due in some part to student demand.

Thank goodness for that! I saw how classes were taught from the 70s until now. Students don't want to waste their time or energy learning things that they don't need to know. Some of those old skills are downright dangerous for the newbie to do as well. Good riddance.

A good instructor is constantly evaluating his class and evolving it to be efficient and effective. Cutting out useless trivia that a student won't use is a part of that important process. Students want value for their money, and nostalgia for doing it the same way at any cost is counter productive AND expensive.

There was a time when surgeons used ONLY the skill in their hands. There was a thoracic surgeon on the boat today describing the robotic device he uses to perform surgery. There was no bravado that a human could do that job better. You've got to clear out the pride and arrogance in order to accept that some jobs are best done by an electro-mechanical device.

That, or you can stop evolving. The dinosaurs tried that once.

 

[Pullmyfinger]

I am aware. It is an inexact science.
My opinion stands, use both or only one if you like.
You should be taught to use both methods.
The instructors that are not teaching the use of tables certainly know how to use them.
They may choose not to teach the tables, but in doing so they are making the choice for their students.
The student cannot make a choice if they are taught only one way.
What if a student that was originally taught to only use a computer decides to use tables later?
What's he to do? Look in his OW manual? There's only a picture of a table in the recent one I looked at.

It's all a moot point I guess. Agencies have aready made the decision to only teach computers.

I guess I'm argueing for the buggy whip. ;-)

-Mitch

 

[Pullmyfinger]

As I previously stated....I have a computer and a bottom timer/tables.

Don't worry NetDoc, you're not the only one here evolving and progressing. Plenty of us here, with differing opinions are evolving just fine. ;-)

-Mitch

 

[The Chairman]

Pete,
Do you explain to new students that they have a choice between using tables or a computer, or that they can learn both? Or do you just assume that they'll want to use computers and not even mention the tables?

No. I am the instructor. I tell them that we are going to learn how to use a PDC from the onset, because I KNOW that in Key Largo that's what they are going to be using. If they ask me about tables, I would be glad to teach them. No one has asked. Go figure.

The major difference between the two is that with tables, diving can continue for the day after a surface interval and the watch or depth gauge is replaced. With a computer, diving for that day is over, even with a replacement computer.

How do you figure? You are missing a critical data point. You no longer have an idea how deep or how long you dove. What? You're gonna use your buddy's info? Why not just dive his PDC on the next dive? You're gonna have to really stick with them, but that's just good buddy skills.

You can call "shenanigans" all you want on this, but it will not change anything.

I would agree with the last half of your statement. Some people like arguing with the sign post and take the wrong way home. Me? I simply plug in my address in my Navigator, and it tells me how to get home from here. :kiss2:

Another anecdote about technology. When my son joined a Boy Scout troop we went on a hike in the Ocala forest from a lake to Alexander Springs. I broke down and bought a new fangled GPS for the occasion. Didn't even know how to use it that well, and in actually I fancied more as a gadget or a toy than a tool. As it turns out, there was a fire in the area we wanted to camp and acres were blackened and crawling with ticks, so we kept hiking. By the time we found a decent camp, we were so fatigued that no one really knew where we were or how far we had come. Except for me. It showed the spring run was less than an eighth of a mile down a dirt road. Hot, dirty and about out of water, my son and I traipsed on our "wild goose hunt" as one Scouter called it. We came back, cooled off, clean and with a bucket of spring water! Technology won that day and I got to benefit from it. Yay!

Wow, I loved that GPS. I still own it too!

 

[Blackwood]

. You don't trust PDCs, yet you use a dumbed down PDC. .

You and I see eye to eye on which tools to teach (PDCs are IMO overwhelmingly better for new divers learning about deco).

But not about min or ratio deco and the reasons for using it.

Personally, I use it not because of some distrust of a computer, but because of its simplicity and flexibility.

And min deco can be used in concert with a PDC. When my friend Chris and I went to Coz together, I dove min deco and he used a PDC (versa pro, borrowed from yours truly). I ran the profiles, he followed me. We did something like 30 dives in 9 days, and not until the very last dive of the trip did his PDC show a ceiling, which my profile cleared.

 

[Paladin]

"How do you figure? You are missing a critical data point. You no longer have an idea how deep or how long you dove."

Wrong. I check my gauges every couple of minutes. I know how deep I've been. Besides, I plan my dives by the tables, remember? I select my maximum depth before I ever hit the water and I don't go past that planned depth. It's called self-discipline. If my mechanical gauge fails, my capillary gauge is a back up, so I still know my depth. If my watch fails, it has failed within the last couple of minutes, so I still have a grasp on my bottom time so that when I call the dive and head for the surface, I still have enough info to plan my next dive.

You decry the thoroughness of "old school" training and claim that the knowledge that was taught was uselessly complete but the fact is, when I was taught to dive, my training included what to do under virtually every contingency. In the aviation world, it's called "situation awareness."

My training took nearly a year and much of it was head work. My oldest son was certified last September. His training had begun in the spring, in April. I told my friend, the owner of the LDS we use and an instructor since back in the '60s, that I wanted my son to be thoroughly trained using both the old and new skills. My son also wanted this type of training and is now glad he had it.

My youngest son has been training since last fall and will be getting his JrOW next month.

Oh, and he didn't charge any extra for the better training. He said it was his pleasure to train them.

Funny thing, though. My sons learned how to use both the tables and computers but neither wants a computer. They like the tables. They're both tech geeks and like all the new video games and such. My oldest builds and services computers for himself and his friends and my youngest is as tech savvy as anyone else his age. Go figure.

But, since you don't even tell your students that the tables even exist, you make the decision for them, eh?

"No. I am the instructor. I tell them that we are going to learn how to use a PDC from the onset, because I KNOW that in Key Largo that's what they are going to be using. If they ask me about tables, I would be glad to teach them. No one has asked. Go figure. "

They don't ask because you haven't told them they exist. How are they suppose to request something they don't even know is available to them? Oh, that's right. You have already decided for them. They don't need to know anything you don't want to teach them.

By the way, Key Largo isn't the only place people dive, you know.

 

[VooDooGasMan]

What it will boil down to is that, let's see anyone reading this right now that know's there table, has a good Idea on how long to stay down for the depth they are at, and move on to there next depth, even with a guide. The size tank you have only has so much time, dependent on computer and your lost in the simple theory of tables in your head. My self I have simple theory of in water Recompression, Upon the gas I have available, and from first call to authorities "I'm Bent", till help arrives.

Just knowing the theory in short is all the student needs to know. I thought PadI had E-tables or something like that, anyways this no table and use computer, I will say maybe say safe enough, yet the new diver will be dependent on how to plan a dive, Yes the scroll the computer can work if ya know the darn theory.

My four hours under today was just harness, tank, wetsuit and weight belt, with depth and pressure gauge. At shallow depth First dive a little under 1/2 tank is close to an hour, second dive finish tank off, 45 mins. And again on second tank, Then 5th dive I dive a al 50 for I know I get an hour at less than 40'. My surface was to come up, fillet fish and put in baggies, pour hot water on me to warm, to close to a half an hour. The last two days was deep spearfishing.

It will take a long time for students to understand how long to stay, at what depth, and surface.

This no table will be great as it will hold divers back from adventuring the dive world on there own, dependent on dive facility's and charters, A big KUDOS for the idea. So the classes are faster and the dependency on Instructors is longer. I say Its a great way for the knowledge to be put out there. My only question is how many are going to DIE that want to advance without waiting for a mentor to help plan a dive.

Next thought, I have a lot of thinking going on when down for 40 hrs a week. NITROX is taught with regular table , and some nitrox tables, 32,36,40, so is this where the student learns the table, or does the student have to have a nitrox compatible computer.




Happy Diving