Tec computer with Trimix and A.I., is Suunto HelO2 the cheapest option?

[Wayne at DiveSeekers]

OP stated AI and a lot disagreed (me too). If he wants a computer, great, do it right the first time around (he wants to go Tec), like most have said….Shearwater (agreed)! Here is another added incentive, due to current exchange rate, now is the best time to get the Shearwater Petrel!!! So now, he would be getting a great computer and can save money ($100) at the same time!

 

[boulderjohn]

I had an interesting dive yesterday with an insta-buddy I met for the first time on the boat. He was an experienced diver looking to go into tech in the future. He had an expensive Suunto AI computer--the watch style. I don't recall which number exactly. He got it on a key man discount. I had my Shearwater predator. We were doing a basic wreck dive to about 110 feet, followed by a drift dive on the reef. On the wreck dive, I went a little into deco--no big deal--cleared at a normal safety stop time. He held his stop a long time, so he had a big deco obligation.

The reef dive was where it got interesting. I stayed right on the reef, at about 55-57 feet, while he lingered well above it. He later said he was trying to avoid NDL issues. I wasn't even remotely close to NDLs at any time on that. About 3/4 of the way through the dive, he dropped down to show me that his Suunto had gotten fed up with him and gone into error mode. It was no longer providing any guidance other than gauge mode information. The dive was over.

I really don't understand how a computer that is designed to quit on you during a dive is an advantage over one that keeps working for you.

 

[rhwestfall]

I really don't understand how a computer that is designed to quit on you during a dive is an advantage over one that keeps working for you.

that was so "20 years ago".......

 

[KD8NPB]

I really don't understand how a computer that is designed to quit on you during a dive is an advantage over one that keeps working for you.

He operated outside of the algorithm and didn't follow his computer.

By the computers calculations, microbubbles were starting to form, thus, there was no point in continued calculations. By displaying "Error", it hopes to get you to end the dive and prevent DCS.

It's the dive equivalent of dividing by 0.

 

[boulderjohn]

He operated outside of the algorithm and didn't follow his computer.

By the computers calculations, microbubbles were starting to form, thus, there was no point in continued calculations.

I believe that may be the reason, but as reasons go, it is idiotic. If microbubbles are forming, that is when you really need a computer to work, not quit. There is a very good point in continuing calculations. You aren't dead yet, are you?

If my computer decided that sort of thing was happening, it would continue to work out a plan to get me to the surface safely. It would not just say, "Sucks to be you--figure out an ascent profile on your own. Not my fault if you die on the way."

In the recent cave accident in Norway, because of the problems the divers encountered, they ended up under water for hours more than they had planned. There was nothing they could do about that. If you are ever in a situation where you have to deal with an emergency that forces you well past your plan, you need an ascent profile that will bring you safely to the surface. Which would you prefer when you look at a computer--a plan to get you up safely, or an error sign?

 

[lefrogster]

Why didn't you use the Suunto Dive Planner, which is the same algorithm as the dive computer?

I used the dm4 dive planner and even on P-2, I couldn't reproduce the dive plan that I got from deco planner. DM4 would put a long stop at 6m and put me at the limit of my gas supply. If you violate that stop the Helo2 will lock out. On the dive in question there was around a 4 min difference between what deco planner and dm4 said.

 

[KenGordon]

I really don't understand how a computer that is designed to quit on you during a dive is an advantage over one that keeps working for you.

I don't recommend the HeO2 for technical stuff, especially trimix. HOWEVER I think this thread mistreats Suunto.

I have two Suunto computers and they work. They have done numerous technical dives and the only way to get a hard error underwater is to ignore a ceiling for more than 3 minutes. I know this because one is entry level and cannot has switch, so it thought I'd just done a 60m dive on air with air deco and then got to 6m with a ceiling at about 8m when in fact I had been on 40% and 70% on the way up. This isn't about stops it is about the ceiling. What do you want it to do - how long before it should say 'I think you will be dead soon get on O2?" How much r&d and testing should Suunto do for the people that ignore the computer?

Regarding DM4 plans giving an extra 4 minutes at 6 rather that 21/18/15 etc as per other dive planning SW. If you didn't have enough spare gas for an extra 4 at 6. (Say 120l) what was your plan for a buddy's deco gas failure? Don't you carry twice the deco gas you need for yourself (assuming a team of two).

Take a look at the deep stops thread on rebreather world, maybe your ideas about to what constitutes a safe deco profile will change. Irony of irony maybe Suunto have been right all along.

Ken

Ps I like air integration for my logs but would never trust wireless for in water info)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tphelps]

Yeah I would avoid A.I., you'll come to find in tech we like things with the least probability to fail. If you are relying on an AI computer, if your computer fails you loose your gas pressure as well.
My recommendation is to do your training first and then look at shopping. That's what I did and I'm so glad I did. I have a Shearwater Predator for my Hollis Prism 2 and I love it! Shearwater is amazing, cant beat the display, simplicity and algorithm. But I recall Hollis just released a new TMX computer (also AI coincidentally).

 

[kr2y5]

What do you want it to do

In the ideal world, what I'd hope a computer to do for me is, to produce a best-effort deco schedule. I would define such schedule as the shortest profile, for which some metric of risk (e.g., predicted probability of DCS, quantile of bubble size, or whatever) does not exceed X, where X is some sort of configuration parameter that expresses the desired degree of conservatism. If according to the model, this is no longer possible, then I would expect the computer to automatically decrease conservatism, i.e., to produce the shortest deco profile for the smallest Y > X, for which there is a solution. This, of course, with the understanding that with the schedules produced this way, there's potentially a much larger discrepancy between the model and the reality (since there's been less experimental data in that range to tune model parameters), and the actual risk I'm getting exposed to can be much higher (or lower) than what the model predicts. I'd be OK with a computer displaying "ERROR" to indicate that all bets are off, as long as it still proposes some deco schedule I can follow.

Is that how non-opinionated computers work? If not, how do they work?

 

[Jim Lapenta]

I don't see any dive computer mfg assuming that kind of risk. There is however a computer that will do all of that. It is the one.between your ears. You set parameters for what you just described, plug them into v planner or other software and write down or print out the results. Then when the crap does hit the fan you pull them out and using your bottom timer follow.that plan. Once you start tech training you'll see, at least in my experience and with the instructors I would take further training from, whatever computer you get is going to be used in gauge mode with printed tables anyway. Even if you could find a computer to do what you want what do you think you'll fall back to on a dive if it craps out.
I dive a shearwater predator with vpmb unlocked. I still would never do a tech level dive, or most recreational deep dives, without written back up to follow on my bottom timer.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2