Rec Dive Computer for Tech

[robertarak]

I supplied information related to a post in a public forum that I thought was important. You took issue with that and stated my information "isn't relevant". I think it is. I think diver safety is a "big deal". I'm just silly that way.

 

[chrpai]

I supplied information related to a post in a public forum that I thought was important. You took issue with that and stated my information "isn't relevant". I think it is. I think diver safety is a "big deal". I'm just silly that way.

I'm for dive safety also. And that starts with proper dive planning, situational awareness and dive skills.

Relying on an AI computer to tell you your gas supply and then watching it not change for 20 minutes and not be concerned about that to the point that you run out of gas and drown because you don't know how to execute a half dozen emergency exit procedures and then blaming your drowning death on a product recall that already has a firmware upgrade is well.... there's a word for that but I'm not going to use it.

I'm not sure what your beef with me today is but I'm not going to feed it anymore. Good day.

 

[nimoh]

Products get recalled all the time. There's a firmware upgrade that's available that resolves the issue.
If you buy a Hollis DG03 from DGE it's already going to have the firmware upgrade. I didn't see anything worth mentioning.

Why are you making such a big deal out of nothing? Could it be because you are a Liquivision dealer? Should I suddenly make a big deal about an explosion hazard recall they had?

FWIW, I've actually dove with the OP and I have no desire for him to either die or spend too much money on something he doesn't need.

Not being familiar with the Hollis, it seems to me that if there is a firmware upgrade that fixes the problem, then I agree that the problem is no big deal and not worth mentioning. Similarly, the Liquivision recall was not a big deal either. After issuing the recall, they found out that the explosions were caused by people trying to recharge non-rechargeable batteries, and there was no issue.

 

[chrpai]

Not being familiar with the Hollis, it seems to me that if there is a firmware upgrade that fixes the problem, then I agree that the problem is no big deal and not worth mentioning. Similarly, the Liquivision recall was not a big deal either. After issuing the recall, they found out that the explosions were caused by people trying to recharge non-rechargeable batteries, and there was no issue.

Ya, LiIon batteries can be picky that way. Agreed, no issue and I use 4 of them in my canister light and 1 of them in my backup-backup dive light. My other backup light is 3C alkaline and never gets used. I figure why put all my eggs in one (chemistry) basket. It gets really, really dark at the bottom of Lake Travis.

 

[nimoh]

Why would a recreational diver need a computer that supports 3 gases ?

I don't believe it is very common for recreational divers to need this feature, but it is an easy feature to implement on a dive computer and long feature lists help to sell computers (IMO).

When I was strictly a recreational diver, I never once switched gases during a dive, but did switch on the surface on occasion and made use of the multiple gases to make the switch quicker. Now that I am a tec diver, I still have never switched gases on a computer during the dive since I don't use a computer anymore

 

[chrpai]

I don't believe it is very common for recreational divers to need this feature, but it is an easy feature to implement on a dive computer and long feature lists help to sell computers (IMO).

I think this is one of the "tech light" features that comes with the gauge mode for free (or atleast included in the $249 price). For the scenarios I see a recreational diver using this, they aren't really good dive plans IMO. ( 32% bottom gas and switching to 21% pony at safety stop or something.)

I also have an Oceanic bottom timer. So for "tech lite" I could see cutting tables and using the BT and then using the Holis DG03 gas switch (say 32% to 50% for PADI Tech 40 ) as a backup sanity check. That might or might not get one by for a few years until you actually need more or realize you don't. I haven't been down that road yet so it's hard to say but for $249 I'll take that chance. Worst case I sell it for $125 and upgrade to a Shearwater or Liquivision. Other worst case I put it in gauge mode also have have redundancy for using tables.

 

[tracydr]

I doubt that's the issue, and I've never seen anyone even imply that's a reason to avoid tech computers if you're a rec diver. If it was actually an issue, I'd say powerful rec computers like the Cobalt would present a much bigger problem.

Just by way of example, since it's the easiest to use and most powerful (processor-wise) rec computer I know of, the Cobalt's RGBM implementation is designed to plan and execute deeper decompression dives, with the computer even switching over to a more computationally-intensive version of the algorithm for dives planned or conducted below 150'...but it's also much more liberal than anything you'd get from most tech computers. And the exceedingly simple UI makes flying the computer on a deco dive all too easy. Which is fine, until it isn't. does happen, after all... like when your Cobalt floods completely at 190' for no apparent reason towards the end of a 30 minute dive. At that point, you'd better have a backup method of ascending and know how to use it.

The argument as I see it is that tech computers are expensive, and the functionality they offer in exchange for that added cost is largely useless to rec divers. Which is all well and good, except for the fact that lots of rec divers don't want a bare bones computer or BT/tables and if they don't get a tech computer they spend just as much if not more for a POS packed with 'rec features' like the OP's computer or a Galileo or any number of other 'old tech' units that offer a tiny fraction of a Petrel's functionality in a shoddy UI at almost the same price. It also overlooks the fact that, by virtue of what tech divers value, the basic functionality -- things like UI, ability to make changes while diving, screen clarity, data available, etc. -- of tech computers tends to be head and shoulders above the crap peddled to rec divers.

The Atomic Cobalt costs at least $400 more than my Liquivision XEO! I would definitely spend the money for my Xeo again over the Cobalt. It does everything I want, its user friendly and I can see the screen in poor visibility. Plus, I can use it for tech diving,if I so desire. ( I do) finally, one reason I purchased it, I like being able to change gradient factors to make my dive more conservative, and I love the dive planning ability.

 

[phoenix31tt]

I as well agree with the tech lite feature...

there is almost no tech diving where i am from but the one or two divers that do "tech lite", such as deeper than 160' on air tend to dive with a 40-50% tank and do their deco stops. In this case computers with these features are very handy to switch to your second gas on your deco.

I myself may end up doing dives such as these eventually after proper training but i will never invest in an 800$ computer with features (He etc) that i will most likely never use. As such a DG-03 or similar would be ideal

Its important to mention as well that anything beyond the recreational limits set by most agencies is considered tech diving (i.e. deeper than 130' or an overhead environment etc)

 

[Dr. Lecter]

The Atomic Cobalt costs at least $400 more than my Liquivision XEO! I would definitely spend the money for my Xeo again over the Cobalt. It does everything I want, its user friendly and I can see the screen in poor visibility. Plus, I can use it for tech diving,if I so desire. ( I do) finally, one reason I purchased it, I like being able to change gradient factors to make my dive more conservative, and I love the dive planning ability.

That's nice; I, too, have moved on from the Cobalt (though I'm smart enough to avoid Liquivision like the plague). Did you have a point that actually relates to my post and your earlier comment (regarding whether new divers were steered away from tech computers because it made deco diving "too easy")?

 

[flots am]

Why would a tech diver use or not use this computer? I have read through a lot of posts before making this one to try and find an answer.

I'm a big fan of computers for tech diving. Mine sits on my desk next to the printer.

With a dive computer, a failure means you no longer know what the pressure is in any of your tanks, or your depth or your time or where your deco stops should be or how long.

If you print out a plan with a tool like vPlanner and tape it to a wrist slate, any single failure becomes an annoyance instead of a disaster. Lost an SPG? No big deal. You planned the dive and know you have plenty of gas. Dead watch? Your buddy has one. Dead depth gauge? Your buddy has one of those too.

And the dive plan you taped to your wrist slate still works just fine.

Also, a pre-printed plan means that you have actually planned the dive and know how long and how deep and how much gas you need to bring and how much gas you'll need if your buddy has a failure.

I like dive computers for no-deco dives and have one. In fact, I have a really expensive one that claims to do deco dives just fine. However I'd never trust it with anything really important, like my life. If your computer fails on a recreational dive, the very, very worst that would happen is that you would have to surface. If it died and you had some unknown deco obligation, that would be a completely different story.

I'd say spend $50 on vPlanner, another $10 on a wrist slate and use the other $1400 to go diving.

flots

---------- Post added September 6th, 2013 at 05:48 PM ----------

Its important to mention as well that anything beyond the recreational limits set by most agencies is considered tech diving (i.e. deeper than 130' or an overhead environment etc)

That isn't some arbitrary limit and in reality, what "the agencies think" is irrelevant once you're certified. These are real distinctions that impact you personally.

On a recreational dive, no matter how badly things go, you can always "go up". On a technical dive without a physical overhead you have a choice between "bent or dead". On a technical dive with a physical overhead you have a choice between "dead or dead"

flots.