PADI tables finally going away?

[Kingpatzer]

This whole discussion is really about the wrong question, is it not?

Yes, but people still get caught up in the tool used, rather than what it is used for. As long as that continues, so will the discussion.

 

[The Chairman]

I was at DebbyDiver's retirement party last night, and a singular discussion was amazing. I very well respected member of our forum and a rebreather diver to boot told us how a friend of theirs had misplaced their Navy Tables and so called them up to get a letter group. After several minutes of trying, they realized that they could not make heads or tails of the tables anymore. This is actually an instructor I respect. I still do.

Then today we did too stellar dives on Tenneco Towers. Due to fishermen, we did west towers first and I hit 104 ft. I ascended as my NDL was within 2 minutes and still had 1900 psi of Nox30. Second dive was to 110 ft (middle tower) and I incurred 10 minutes of deco on Nox 30. I surfaced with 2000 psi.

Before we left the dock, Bill, the captain and owner of the Sea Experience, told us where to find the tables on his boat (under the tip jar), but that for this set of dives a PDC was mandatory. If you didn't have one, you were required to rent one before they left.

Wow. Now, this was my first time on his boat, and so I asked him for his rationale. First, they only require a PDC when they are doing two deep dives in a row. They do it because there have been so many human errors by those who use tables in the past. No, no one had to go to a chamber, but there were way too many close calls where peeps forgot to set their watches, didn't watch their depth, traced the wrong path to the wrong letter group and so forth. IOW, human error is so common, that he insists on every diver having a PDC to as a back up to their humanity.

Of course, I expect any number of die hards to come on here and deplore the state of teaching in today's Scuba Class. I have one word (and it's my favorite):

:gans:​

• A Scuba Instructor is incapable of gauging long term forgetfulness and/or a willingness to follow the rules as they define them. In fact, as technology progresses, our ability to use it to our advantage does as well. Our students, past, present and future, have an ever increasing ability to research these developments and make up their own minds about what is acceptable to use or not. Disregarding these trends is dangerous for the student. It's far better to train them how to use their tool of choice and not stick to the past.
• PDCs have shown themselves far, far more reliable than a human doing tables. Failures happen all the time and tables rely on both an underwater timing device as well as a mechanical or electronic depth gauge. That's twice as many instruments to go bad when compared to a PDC which integrates these things.

 

[mikemill]

Re tables vs. computer -- Me, I typically don't use either a "table" nor a PDC for determining my decompression status. First of all, GUEs "Minimum Deco" is a very simple method of running "NDL" dives (and we all know, there is no such thing as "no decompression" diving, don't we?) and doesn't require anything more than a bottom timer.

Since doing UTD's Essentials of Rec I have been diving min deco "tables" and absolutely love it. After seeing them and diving them for a year and a half now I can't believe how absolutely complex everyone else (excluding GUE's min deco tables) make's their dive tables. Of course once you throw in depth averaging those tables become even more fun.

Wow. Now, this was my first time on his boat, and so I asked him for his rationale. First, they only require a PDC when they are doing two deep dives in a row. They do it because there have been so many human errors by those who use tables in the past. No, no one had to go to a chamber, but there were way too many close calls where peeps forgot to set their watches, didn't watch their depth, traced the wrong path to the wrong letter group and so forth. IOW, human error is so common, that he insists on every diver having a PDC to as a back up to their humanity.

I don't expect to be diving in FL anytime soon but thanks for the head's up on the op to avoid. Like Peter I use a bottom timer which has all the same stuff a PDC has except the decompression algorithm. So it activates once I hit about 3ft, tracks depth, max depth, temp, and time. The newer model of my bottom timer (though I really want a Xen) even has a resettable average depth. Combine that with a two column table and the chances of mistakes are almost nil.

Of course, I expect any number of die hards to come on here and deplore the state of teaching in today's Scuba Class. I have one word (and it's my favorite):

IMO it isn't a state of teaching, it is a state of people not wanting to think. They'd rather be blissfully unaware and wait for the compute to beep at them.

PDCs have shown themselves far, far more reliable than a human doing tables. Failures happen all the time and tables rely on both an underwater timing device as well as a mechanical or electronic depth gauge. That's twice as many instruments to go bad when compared to a PDC which integrates these things.

Except bottom timers have it all in once device just like a PDC.

I say simplify the tables, improve the ascent strategy (seriously, that part alone has made my diving so much nicer), and then teach both the table and computers.

 

[Pullmyfinger]

Well said.
I agree on teaching both. Naturally, student will use whatever they like after being certified.
But they should be taught to use both methods. How much time is an instructor really saving by not teaching tables?
Why is this time saving important anyway?
Since when should a student be dictating to an instructor what they are taught?
If a student asks to be taught everything about diving except certain parts, the instructor should cater to that?
Dive training is a buffet?
Computers are a good tool. It seems that some instructors are favoring that one tool so heavily, that you are throwing out another tool as a result.
You should be teaching both tools.
If a student goes on to choose not to use one in favor of another, that's their business. But they should be taught both approaches.
Why cut that corner? To save time?
Who's time? Yours or the students?

-Mitch

Sent from my Blackberry.

 

[The Chairman]

I don't expect to be diving in FL anytime soon but thanks for the head's up on the op to avoid.

I'll tell him to start printing the "Going out of Business Signs". If that's your criteria for a dive op then you'll miss one of the friendliest and best run boats I have ever, and I mean EVER been on. They are a class act and have survived a lot worse than people with bottom timers avoiding them.

Of course once you throw in depth averaging those tables become even more fun.

I know of two people who got seriously bent doing this. Both are accomplished divers and both made simple errors in math. The deeper you get, the harder it is to average your depth. Unfortunately, the deeper you dive the more important it is that you do this CORRECTLY. Unlike a PDC, you are subject to Nitrogen Narcosis.

The newer model of my bottom timer (though I really want a Xen) even has a resettable average depth. Combine that with a two column table and the chances of mistakes are almost nil.

So what's the REAL difference here? You allow an electronic device to track your moves and why? SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT. Hey, that's OK. I don't mind making a part of my diving easier and less problematic so I can concentrate on what I am really there to see: Pretty fishies! I also appreciate power inflaters but only LAZY people use them. Real divers only inflate orally! Or weights/BC. You just don't want to have to concentrate so hard on buoyancy control.

IMO it isn't a state of teaching, it is a state of people not wanting to think.

You mean like using a bottom timer to average their depth?

They'd rather be blissfully unaware and wait for the compute to beep at them.

Ohhhh, the condescension. Surely, you could have a better argument than an appeal to stupidity.

Except bottom timers have it all in once device just like a PDC.

All the bennies and yet they're still macho! We get it. I still detect technophobia with a touch of elitism. You don't trust PDCs, yet you use a dumbed down PDC. Anyone else get the irony here???

I say simplify the tables, improve the ascent strategy (seriously, that part alone has made my diving so much nicer), and then teach both the table and computers.

If you're happy with that, then by all means. I say: Let the student decide. Those that want the extra task loading are free to do indulge themselves as you have done. The decision remains between the instructor and the student.

 

[Scott L]

Then today we did too stellar dives on Tenneco Towers. Due to fishermen, we did west towers first and I hit 104 ft. I ascended as my NDL was within 2 minutes and still had 1900 psi of Nox30. Second dive was to 110 ft (middle tower) and I incurred 10 minutes of deco on Nox 30. I surfaced with 2000 psi.

Looks like you need a tutorial on best mix. IJS.

 

[The Chairman]

Dive training is a buffet?

Actually, it is. It always has been. If people don't like how you conduct your classes, they will vote with their fins. Shoving your idea about what's important for them to learn down their throats is counter productive and causes them to look elsewhere.

Diving is fun. Learning to dive should also be fun. I demand a lot out of my students that I think is important to their fun. Their trim, buoyancy and kicking are awesome. They are also competent and at ease in the water. That's what's important to me as an instructor. It's like requiring someone going for their Drivers License to show that they can drive a stick. Show me that you are competent to drive an automatic OR a stick. It's up to you. It's a veritable "buffet".

 

[Pullmyfinger]

I guess so.
I see your point.

It sounds like not teaching how to measure with a ruler because the student won't have fun.
Besides, they have a digital caliper that they plan on using so just teach them that.
They will still be missing something, no matter how great of a job you do in teaching them to only use their digital caliper.
All because you let the student dictate what they want to be taught.

I just see it differently.

V/R
-Mitch

 

[The Chairman]

Looke like you need a tutorial on best mix. IJS.

Thanks for the offer, but I am fine. IJS

 

[mikemill]

*grumble*, vBulletin mangled your post into one giant line when I quoted it. If I get some of the responses broken up incorrectly I apologize.

I know of two people who got seriously bent doing this. Both are accomplished divers and both made simple errors in math. The deeper you get, the harder it is to average your depth. Unfortunately, the deeper you dive the more important it is that you do this CORRECTLY. Unlike a PDC, you are subject to Nitrogen Narcosis.

Did they get bent because they made a simple mistake or because they made a simple mistake and were pushing the bounds? For me I don't have any problem with narcosis when I'm shallower than 100'. I rarely go below 100' except for quick dips.

So what's the REAL difference here? You allow an electronic device to track your moves and why? SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT.

Except the people I know who depth average also run the calculation in their heads even when they have a device that does the averaging.

Hey, that's OK. I don't mind making a part of my diving easier and less problematic so I can concentrate on what I am really there to see: Pretty fishies! I also appreciate power inflaters but only LAZY people use them. Real divers only inflate orally! Or weights/BC. You just don't want to have to concentrate so hard on buoyancy control.

UTD has a nice graph that I think really illustrates some of this well. By taking the time to practice skills, become familiar with gear, and work as a team we reduce the amount of time we devote to those parts of diving which allow us to spend more time on fun.

So even though I'm "thinking" about depth averaging, max depth, time, whatever I practice it enough that it is just a part of the dive and takes no real energy.

I took a recently certified friend out and it was amazing how much more I saw/noticed than her even though she was using a PDC

You mean like using a bottom timer to average their depth? Ohhhh, the condescension. Surely, you could have a better argument than an appeal to stupidity.

I didn't call them stupid. Stupid is a level of intelligence. It is more about not wanting to use their intelligence. One might call it lazy but I don't think that is the correct term either. Perhaps it is closer to the "I want it now" mentality.

All the bennies and yet they're still macho! We get it. I still detect technophobia with a touch of elitism. You don't trust PDCs, yet you use a dumbed down PDC. Anyone else get the irony here???

Yes I'm such a technophobe. Let's see: degree in computer engineering, I work as a computer programmer, I build robots in my spare time, I game like crazy, oh and I'm sitting in front of a computer with three monitors. Yes, I'm a technophobe and a Luddite. I used a PDC for years and have no problem with them; hell I have one on my scooter (granted in gauge mode). Even when I was using a PDC I still carried the PADI tables in my bag (and I still do) and I still now how to use them. I admit to a touch of elitism but that isn't restricted to scuba.

One of the things I do before I have a computer automate things for me is to know what the computer is doing. Hmm, maybe I'll get the Liquidvision Xeo. I seem to recall that they'll be programmable with custom deco algorithm. Maybe I'll write a min deco algorithm for it that way the PDC lovers will be satisfied.

If you're happy with that, then by all means. I say: Let the student decide. Those that want the extra task loading are free to do indulge themselves as you have done. The decision remains between the instructor and the student.

How is the student to decide if it isn't taught?