Waterlover
Contributor
The dive was planned deeper but only made 190. I was using 18/45. I took the O2 along for practice carrying the 2 stages on deeper dives...I usually just use the 50/50 down to about 180 .
Tech Dive Coputer
- Thread starter tyrell
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
detroit diver
Contributor
- Messages
- 3,410
- Reaction score
- 13
There's a huge difference. Nothing wrong with planning on a computer on dry land. Take your results and put them on your wetnotes along with bailout plans.
If your computer craps out underwater, what have you got?
Wetnotes don't disappear. Computers sometimes do.
Computers aren't progress in Tech diving. They're marketing tools for the sales department.
When I see PADI requiring computers for they're tech course, that says enough. I'm running in the opposite direction. But of course, that's me....
a couple of questions:
1 - which tech divers are not using a computer?
2 - are those "majority" of tech divers all trained by GUE?
Halcyon obviously doesn't make a computer.
3 - is this why they don't promote computers or is their view point the reason they have not made one. we know they would never suggest the use of any gear that is not manufactured by themselves
4 - this computer between your ears, is it capable of doing algorithams. mine sure the f@$^% isn't.
5 - if you can not do algorithams in your head do you restric your diving to square patterns with written in stone bottom times, run times, and depths.
6 - what do you do if your dive falls outside that strict preset dive plan. [by accident of course]
7 - do you generate those custom dive tables with a computer, and do you trust that computer. or do you use a different computer to verify the tables you have generated.
Just some questions to better understand the the loud voices on this board
1 - which tech divers are not using a computer?
2 - are those "majority" of tech divers all trained by GUE?
Halcyon obviously doesn't make a computer.
3 - is this why they don't promote computers or is their view point the reason they have not made one. we know they would never suggest the use of any gear that is not manufactured by themselves
4 - this computer between your ears, is it capable of doing algorithams. mine sure the f@$^% isn't.
5 - if you can not do algorithams in your head do you restric your diving to square patterns with written in stone bottom times, run times, and depths.
6 - what do you do if your dive falls outside that strict preset dive plan. [by accident of course]
7 - do you generate those custom dive tables with a computer, and do you trust that computer. or do you use a different computer to verify the tables you have generated.
Just some questions to better understand the the loud voices on this board
1. Not many in caves, not many in wrecks either.
2. Some are trained by GUE, lots (as evident on this board) are internet trained in "DIR" methods.
3. Interesting theory, I am unable to answer this question for you.
4. In a word, no. Most anti computer guys are stating that you "learn" the tables and also cut a set for between dives. (This is the best reason for standardized mixes.)
5. Mostly, yes
6. Contingency planning with tables is necessary, but very limited.
7.
Great questions.
As a side note, you will see lots of GUE cave guys with a Nitek 3 in cave country. I won't say most, but a lot more than the internet based DIR prescribers would ever believe.
Cheers and safe diving.
2. Some are trained by GUE, lots (as evident on this board) are internet trained in "DIR" methods.
3. Interesting theory, I am unable to answer this question for you.
4. In a word, no. Most anti computer guys are stating that you "learn" the tables and also cut a set for between dives. (This is the best reason for standardized mixes.)
5. Mostly, yes
6. Contingency planning with tables is necessary, but very limited.
7.
Great questions.
As a side note, you will see lots of GUE cave guys with a Nitek 3 in cave country. I won't say most, but a lot more than the internet based DIR prescribers would ever believe.
Cheers and safe diving.
OK lets see.
1 - I agree with your final statement, everybody i have seen in cave country tends to use the Nitek 3. and every tech diver i know is using a computer if it opperates within the limits and gas they are diving.
it is true that a lot of trimix divers are stuck using bottom timer and tables, unless they have bought a VR3. but i will bet that most of them have a VR3 [or simular] on their list of purchases.
2 - I find it very interesting that you say they are DIR internet trained. that is a scary thought. I read somewhere here there is a guy who has been diving caves for 12 years and is not even a certified diver. you can not get trained from the internet. you can only get opinions and information. i to find the oppinions of people here supprising for how little experience they have, and their reason. they read it here or somewhere else on the internet. talk about taking stuff out of context and trying to apply it to real life.
3 - interesting theory
4 - so you not only limit yourself to the run times, & depths but also the mix you will use. this really sounds like a follow the leader mentality. which prompts another question
4a - for a bottom gas is it better to use a standard mix say not neccessarily the best mix, just because it is the only tables you have with you or memorized. or is it better to use the best mix for the dive. example [off the top of my head] 350 foot dive in cold water with a little current say to investigate a wreck. some of the desicions i would make about my bottom gas. this is a cold working dive so my PO2 should remain low say 1.0 to 1.2, also my END should stay high say 100 feet. i can inhance my rule of thirds by getting off the bottoma gas asap [plus other theories for this] so i might choose 32% or 36% as a travel/deco gas.
so the best mix based on the physiological perameters i have set would be a "custom" gas. just think of the flexability.
as opposed to having a predetermind gas i "must" use set the peramiters of the dive.
now add into that a intermidiat trimix [which i could argue both pros and cons to this, depending on the acual dive i would be doing.
5 - to bad, you don't know what you are missing, say in a good wreck with several levels 150 feet down with amazing visability, and artifacts everywhere. and then you find the entrance to the engine room.
i will give a little example. last week i was in the Caymans we planned a dive to the Donut off of the turttle farm. our guide uses tables she planned for 240 feet. my buddy and I had computers VR3's so we get there and guess what the swim through was at 250 feet. no problem we went through the whole and she [and her buddy] waited on the other side. She could not break depth.
on the way up at out first stop at 200 feet she planned 1 minute. guess what there was a 300 pound turttle just hanging out there with us whille he danced and eventualy mated with a smaller female. we my buddy and i spend about 4 minutes watching this rare event, as she moved on over the wall missing it all.
and finaly we cleared deco about 20 minutes before she did.
6 - I consider contingences as the most critical portion of the planning, can you imagine all the possiblities of proper contingencies that SHOULD BE figured for
over depth/time, loss of gas, deco, or travel. what do you do if you loose your mid range deco gas [50% or 36%] and need to stay on your back gas. I just switch my computer back to my back gas and it recalculates my new deco times.
7 - i agree if a computer breaks above water big deal. but have you decided to just trust the tables you generate from one program on one computer. this is extreme i know, but so is closing your eyes to technology because you don't trust it
Don't get me wrong i am not opposed to the use of tables, thats where i started, but i used to have a rotary phone and no microwave as well.
It is like saying i don't believe in air bags because my car doesn't have them or i cant afford them, air bags are dangerouse, but they save more lives that they take. [and i have seen them take lives]
I appreciat the descution it is entertaining. however it is not training is it.
1 - I agree with your final statement, everybody i have seen in cave country tends to use the Nitek 3. and every tech diver i know is using a computer if it opperates within the limits and gas they are diving.
it is true that a lot of trimix divers are stuck using bottom timer and tables, unless they have bought a VR3. but i will bet that most of them have a VR3 [or simular] on their list of purchases.
2 - I find it very interesting that you say they are DIR internet trained. that is a scary thought. I read somewhere here there is a guy who has been diving caves for 12 years and is not even a certified diver. you can not get trained from the internet. you can only get opinions and information. i to find the oppinions of people here supprising for how little experience they have, and their reason. they read it here or somewhere else on the internet. talk about taking stuff out of context and trying to apply it to real life.
3 - interesting theory
4 - so you not only limit yourself to the run times, & depths but also the mix you will use. this really sounds like a follow the leader mentality. which prompts another question
4a - for a bottom gas is it better to use a standard mix say not neccessarily the best mix, just because it is the only tables you have with you or memorized. or is it better to use the best mix for the dive. example [off the top of my head] 350 foot dive in cold water with a little current say to investigate a wreck. some of the desicions i would make about my bottom gas. this is a cold working dive so my PO2 should remain low say 1.0 to 1.2, also my END should stay high say 100 feet. i can inhance my rule of thirds by getting off the bottoma gas asap [plus other theories for this] so i might choose 32% or 36% as a travel/deco gas.
so the best mix based on the physiological perameters i have set would be a "custom" gas. just think of the flexability.
as opposed to having a predetermind gas i "must" use set the peramiters of the dive.
now add into that a intermidiat trimix [which i could argue both pros and cons to this, depending on the acual dive i would be doing.
5 - to bad, you don't know what you are missing, say in a good wreck with several levels 150 feet down with amazing visability, and artifacts everywhere. and then you find the entrance to the engine room.
i will give a little example. last week i was in the Caymans we planned a dive to the Donut off of the turttle farm. our guide uses tables she planned for 240 feet. my buddy and I had computers VR3's so we get there and guess what the swim through was at 250 feet. no problem we went through the whole and she [and her buddy] waited on the other side. She could not break depth.
on the way up at out first stop at 200 feet she planned 1 minute. guess what there was a 300 pound turttle just hanging out there with us whille he danced and eventualy mated with a smaller female. we my buddy and i spend about 4 minutes watching this rare event, as she moved on over the wall missing it all.
and finaly we cleared deco about 20 minutes before she did.
6 - I consider contingences as the most critical portion of the planning, can you imagine all the possiblities of proper contingencies that SHOULD BE figured for
over depth/time, loss of gas, deco, or travel. what do you do if you loose your mid range deco gas [50% or 36%] and need to stay on your back gas. I just switch my computer back to my back gas and it recalculates my new deco times.
7 - i agree if a computer breaks above water big deal. but have you decided to just trust the tables you generate from one program on one computer. this is extreme i know, but so is closing your eyes to technology because you don't trust it
Don't get me wrong i am not opposed to the use of tables, thats where i started, but i used to have a rotary phone and no microwave as well.
It is like saying i don't believe in air bags because my car doesn't have them or i cant afford them, air bags are dangerouse, but they save more lives that they take. [and i have seen them take lives]
I appreciat the descution it is entertaining. however it is not training is it.
4. I don't use standardized gases. Best gas for the dive is something that I very strongly believe in.
5. Boils down to planning. If I'm ever in the water, I have a computer with me. Currently trying out the VR3, I enjoy it in caves, but yet to hit the ocean.
6. Most software cuts tables for gas loss, but it is much easier to just press a button or two.
7. See 5
5. Boils down to planning. If I'm ever in the water, I have a computer with me. Currently trying out the VR3, I enjoy it in caves, but yet to hit the ocean.
6. Most software cuts tables for gas loss, but it is much easier to just press a button or two.
7. See 5
you will love it
The store I teach through occasionally is having me do the demo. It is great so far. I hope they come up with a MP3 version soon as I would love to jam from it.
uk diver 2000
Guest
I use a VR3 and carry back up tables. You can buy the basic version and upgrade it for trimix, SCR, CCR, etc. at a later date. The folks at Phoenix add new upgrades with some regularity, SCR being the most recent. I'm pleased with it so far, although the video game needs some work!
Similar threads
