PADI tables finally going away?

[The Chairman]

I have a healthy distrust to any device, electronic or not

I would suggest that this is the core of most of the "tables are safer" argument. They're not... they're just another tool. Use the tool as it was intended or leave it alone.

 

[notivago]

I would suggest that this is the core of most of the "tables are safer" argument. They're not... they're just another tool. Use the tool as it was intended or leave it alone.

Yes, very true. Yet the core of my argument is: tables are more accessible than computers besides providing a slightly different function. Although there is no doubt that the planing part can be easily addressed in computers if this is so desired.

As I have said before, in the States may be that computers are very affordable, in Brazil they are not affordable at all. Would the tables be dropped from courses it would prevent many people from diving.

 

[Blackwood]

Yes, very true. Yet the core of my argument is: tables are more accessible than computers besides providing a slightly different function. Although there is no doubt that the planing part can be easily addressed in computers if this is so desired.

As I have said before, in the States may be that computers are very affordable, in Brazil they are not affordable at all. Would the tables be dropped from courses it would prevent many people from diving.

But recall that NetDoc suggested teaching people to use the tools they'll most likely be using.

If in Brazil tables are the rule, by all means teach them. Where he teaches, tables may be the exception, not the rule. Teaching someone a tool they are unlikely to use is doing them a disservice.

I prefer digital bottom timers (edit: gauge mode computers specifically), but I'm not in the majority here in southern california.

 

[notivago]

But recall that NetDoc suggested teaching people to use the tools they'll most likely be using.

If in Brazil tables are the rule, by all means teach them. Where he teaches, tables may be the exception, not the rule. Teaching someone a tool they are unlikely to use is doing them a disservice.

I prefer digital bottom timers, but I'm not in the majority here in southern california.

As far as I remember, the proposition was to drop completely teaching tables from certification authorities and having an especial course for those that wanted to learn tables.

I am all go to teach both, but remember that certification authorities operate world wide, so you can't have programs that are based on local necessities.

Everyone can have tables, not everyone can have computers.

 

[The Chairman]

But recall that NetDoc suggested teaching people to use the tools they'll most likely be using.

Thanks for highlighting this.

I haven't seen a set of tables here in Key Largo in a long, long time. PDCs work just fine for me.

 

[Paladin]

Thanks for highlighting this.

I haven't seen a set of tables here in Key Largo in a long, long time. PDCs work just fine for me.

Well, if I ever dive in Key Largo, I'll show you a set! Which would you prefer, PADI or US Navy?

 

[Quero]

As I have said before, in the States may be that computers are very affordable, in Brazil they are not affordable at all. Would the tables be dropped from courses it would prevent many people from diving.

And as I have said before, you are grossly overstating the effect of the cost of one item of dive equipment on diver acquisition in Brasil. There is simply no relationship between the GDI in Brasil, the cost of dive computers, and the number of people who decide to learn to dive. It is everything--the whole package--related to diving in Brasil that makes it unaffordable to the vast majority of adults there. There is no way you will ever convince me that those people who have the means to take scuba diving courses and to pay for dive trips also lack the means to buy a dive computer. You yourself said that your dive buddy, who has a high-income job at a bank, doesn't have a dive computer. Do you honestly believe he can't afford one? It is simply a choice about what to spend fun money on for the most pleasure--like whether to go away for the weekend to the mountains, to buy a couple of new outfits in the latest fashion at Shopping Morumbi, to buy a new car when the one you've got is still running well, etc. Upper-middle-class Brazilians (who, by and large, make up the mass of divers there) are status-hungry, and that dive cert, that weekend away, that new car, those new clothes--they all confer status; I can only imagine the blank looks on friends' and relatives' faces when shown a dive computer! Why would anybody want to spend fun money on something like that when there's no "status return" on the investment?

There are some intelligent arguments being given in this thread for maintaining instruction in table use, but this specific argument, citing the purchase cost of dive computers in Brasil, is quite simply untenable.

 

[Atom]

I'm no technophobe, but the fact is I have more faith in tables. Computers use transistors as logic gates and a dive computer has millions of micro-transistors in it. All it takes is for one transistor to fail and the computer will give false information. The diver would probably not even know that the computer he is relying on is lying to him.

To my way of thinking, relying completely on an electronic device underwater is foolhardy.

Nah... you've got a slight case of technophobia

But seriously... the electronics in dive computers are not cutting edge, most of those are running on fairly simple microcontrollers, which are very reliable.

Can they fail? Yes. But so can other mechanical instruments. The real question is, do they fail more often than mechanical instruments? And is that rate of failure larger enough to justify not using electronics? I'd say by the amount of dives being done using those devices and the number of incident reported, they are not a serious issue.

Electronic failures rarely are subtle, but even if you have one of those, it's no different than a subtle mechanical failure. Let's say you're diving with a watch + mechanical depth gauge, any failure other than catastrophic or something you can infer (like 100' depth in a site that goes to 30', watch reading the same time after multiple readings) requires you to interact with your buddy to discover the failure and take action. It's exactly the same situation if you're using a dive computer. You're not relying on 1 electronic device but on 2 as your buddy is your backup.

I hate to use this as an argument as it's kind of an appeal to authority but.... WKPP divers are doing some very serious dives using electronic bottom timers, you'd figure that if anybody wouldn't trust electronics in water it would be them.... they don't use computer, but still use electronics.

 

[Atom]

"My conclusion is based on 57 years of observing human nature. If you give someone an inch, they'll endeavor to take as much of that inch as possible and often more. For example, when the speed limit on the Interstate was 55 MPH, people routinely traveled at 65 to 70 MPH. Now that the speed limit is set at 70 MPH, they want to drive at 80 MPH or above. If a diver looks at his computer and it says he has XX minutes left until NDL is reached, it is simply human nature to try to take all that is given. When you consider that one diver's DCS threshold will differ from that of another, diving right up to the NDL over and over could be asking for trouble. Sooner or later, the law of averages will catch up to you.

I agree that some people will ride the limit... that limit still exists with tables and the same people who are pushing it with a computer will push it with tables. They'll start interpolating between columns/rows because they don't want to be too restricted, they'll overstay by a few minutes, round up their surface interval time to get to the next PG, etc....

Diving a multilevel dive using a square profile off the tables has a built-in conservatism.

What about those who use the wheel? Is the wheel not safe now?

You can use your computer this way do, check your NDL on your computer at the max depth before you go and use that as your limit instead of the computed NDL. It's a tool , it's up to you to choose how to use it.

Idiots with computers or idiots with table, you pretty much end up with the same results. Used properly both are very safe, used incorrectly they both puth you at risk, it's the diver who'll make the mistakes not the table or the computer. That's the point I'm trying to make here.


And I say all this as one of those aliens who used a table to plan a nitrox dive on a boat in Florida, I even had printed my own EAD/OTU table since I didn't have it with me; ) (took me a while to buy mine)

 

[Pullmyfinger]

Turnabout is always fair play.

Blackwood's pimp hand is strong!