jd950
Contributor
- Messages
- 1,302
- Reaction score
- 288
- # of dives
- I just don't log dives
Bruce:
I don't agree on the safety of the Pelagic computers. I read somewhere recently that Pelagic computers comprise something like 42% of the worldwide market in dive computers, and Suunto has about 32%. I find it hard to believe that if the Pelagic algorithm was unsafe, we wouldn't have heard about it, not to mention recalls and lawsuits. And, yes you can dive as conservatively with them as you wish, including using the "conservative" setting or by setting visual/audible alarms at whatever level you feel is safe, or simply knowing what nitrogen level you think is safe and using the display to make your own decisions. My Aeris Elite T3 has several "bars" showing accumulated nitrogen levels and I, on my own, choose to set my NDL limit less than the computer's NDL, due to my age, overall fitness and other factors that can vary. If I am well rested, well hydrated and doing only a dive or two that day, I may dive closer to the computer's limit.
My compiuter doesn't care if I do a deep stop or stay extra minutes at a safety stop, or end a dive when it still says I have several minutes left.
On the other hand, even compared to my computer's conservative setting, I have seen folks with Suunto computers have to end a dive or incur deco obligations way early, compared to any other computer. I know a guy with a Suunto who jokes that he has to take it off if it is raining so it doesn't to go into deco before he hits the water.
Anyway, Oceanic has come out with a new computer that has dual algorithms, for those who feel the Pelagic algorithm is too liberal. I believe the second algorithm is very similar to the Uwatec.
It is hard to judge the validity of any algorithm, because the overall rate of DCS is so low and because so many factors contribute. But, there are books out there on the subject and some on this Board are very knowledgeable about the subject. From the reports I have read, I think rapid ascents are probably far more likley to cause a problem than any algorithm, and most instances of DCS that I have seen are rated as "undeserved" or due to behavior beyond what any algortihm would provide for.
I don't agree on the safety of the Pelagic computers. I read somewhere recently that Pelagic computers comprise something like 42% of the worldwide market in dive computers, and Suunto has about 32%. I find it hard to believe that if the Pelagic algorithm was unsafe, we wouldn't have heard about it, not to mention recalls and lawsuits. And, yes you can dive as conservatively with them as you wish, including using the "conservative" setting or by setting visual/audible alarms at whatever level you feel is safe, or simply knowing what nitrogen level you think is safe and using the display to make your own decisions. My Aeris Elite T3 has several "bars" showing accumulated nitrogen levels and I, on my own, choose to set my NDL limit less than the computer's NDL, due to my age, overall fitness and other factors that can vary. If I am well rested, well hydrated and doing only a dive or two that day, I may dive closer to the computer's limit.
My compiuter doesn't care if I do a deep stop or stay extra minutes at a safety stop, or end a dive when it still says I have several minutes left.
On the other hand, even compared to my computer's conservative setting, I have seen folks with Suunto computers have to end a dive or incur deco obligations way early, compared to any other computer. I know a guy with a Suunto who jokes that he has to take it off if it is raining so it doesn't to go into deco before he hits the water.
Anyway, Oceanic has come out with a new computer that has dual algorithms, for those who feel the Pelagic algorithm is too liberal. I believe the second algorithm is very similar to the Uwatec.
It is hard to judge the validity of any algorithm, because the overall rate of DCS is so low and because so many factors contribute. But, there are books out there on the subject and some on this Board are very knowledgeable about the subject. From the reports I have read, I think rapid ascents are probably far more likley to cause a problem than any algorithm, and most instances of DCS that I have seen are rated as "undeserved" or due to behavior beyond what any algortihm would provide for.
