Tech Diving and Air Integration

[DevonDiver]

For me, this goes in the 'not needed' catagory.

I voted 'no place in technical diving', because there wasn't simply an option to say 'I don't use it'. At the moment there is no specific AI technology suitable for technical diving. Such technology could become available in the future. I like the concept of a consolidated method to switch/monitor between different tanks throughout the dive. It'd need to be suitably rugged and reliable though. So... bearing the future in mind...it may have a place in technical diving, but the use of recreational AI devices for technical diving currently doesn't meet the necessary requirements IMHO.

 

[Centrals]

I won't use it on rec or tec BUT that is my choice.
But I won't say it has no place in tec dive. Freedom of choice.
So I vote: indifferent

 

[waterpirate]

I chose indifferent cause I felt the poll was "loaded" to spark debate and discussion. I do not nor would I ever use AI on a overhead dive. Once you incur a cileing or overhead it becomes all about reduceing (potential) failure points. Couple that with risk management and risk assesment and it does not pan out for me.

However, I am in no position to impose my standards on someone else or another team. That is why I voted indifferent.
Eric

 

[eponym]

"Has no Place" for me personally.

In my deco diving, my dive computers are in gauge mode.
While my transmitter or synching problems have been very rare, taking that (slim) risk out of the dive plan just makes sense.
As does removing the (not especially robust) transmitter body from the first stage.

-Bryan

 

[Wookie]

I also said indifferent because AI has no place for me in diving ever. I don't buy the failure scenario that is so common in the other thread, I've seen way more second stages fail than transmitters, but then, everyone has second states, few have AI. It just isn't an issue because I would never seek out a computer that has AI.

 

[Jax]

I think there is a bit of difference between a tech diver that uses AI and a rec diver that uses AI. There are also some misconceptions.

1. "You can break the transmitter and blow all your air." If you break a uwatec transmitter, you destroyed the electronics. If you break the actual connection, I assure you that impact would break any high pressure hose attachment, as well.

2. "AI is for seeing your pressure on your wrist." Maybe for rec divers, but everyone I know uses AI for data collection and analysis . . . of course, geeks of a feather flock together.

3. "I don't want to depend on a transmitter . . ." I would think the tech diver does not depend on a transmitter, but has a gauge, as well.

4. "I have all these different gases . ." My Sol tracks up to 10 tanks.

So, in reality, in my limited experience, anyone who is tec diving is not dependent on their AI . . . It's just a data source. One newb's opinion. Flame away.

 

[boulderjohn]

In the thread that sparked this one, someone posted a link to a "coming soon" air integrated technical dive computer by Liquivision. I was surprised and looked at the specs. It will be a 3 gas computer, with all 3 gases being nitrox. I assume that means it is intended to compete in the market with the other 3 gas computers already out there. I assume that it will only be able to track one gas in terms of its AI, which I assume will be the back gas. I wonder if this might be the kind of computer being used by some of the people who said in the poll that they use AI for technical dives. Other people said they are using the AI computer in gauge mode, which I assume means that they originally bought the computer for a different purpose, since that would make it a pretty expensive combination SPG and bottom timer. That's a lot of assumptions, and I would be happy to be corrected on any or all of them. Those corrections are the purpose of this post.

I was once asked by Uwatec to use the Galileo Sol for some cave diving I was planning and let them know what I thought. I did not use it in AI mode because of the fear of whacking the transmitter on the cave ceiling and breaking it off. I also decided not to use the heart rate monitor because I could not think of a single benefit to using it--why would it change anything related to my diving? That left me with the three gas function, of which I only used two during the dives. My review of it was thus pretty incomplete, but it did not matter because it centered on the theory behind the functions.

I determined that a three dive computer that does only different mixes of nitrox would have a limited value. It would be used as I used it, for extended shallow cave dives starting with a nitrox mix and ending with O2 for decompression. It could be used for OW extended deep air dives ending with either one or two decompression gases. Unless I'm missing something, that's about it.

I wondered why someone who had the training to do a deep air dive and finish with either one or two decompression gases would not want to go on and get the training to use helium as a part of the bottom mix. If the diver wants to get trained for trimix dives, why pay a lot of money for a computer that will not serve that purpose?

Finally, I wondered why a diver who might be using multiple gases on dives with very long ascents would only want one gas being tracked in AI mode. If it is needed for one, why would it not be just as valuable for the other gases? If it is not valuable for the other gases, why is it valuable for the first gas?

So I have a couple of questions for those who use AI in their tech diving:

1. If you are using a computer originally purchased for recreational diving and are using it for tech diving in gauge mode, would you have bought the computer new for that purpose (which is understandable), or would you have instead gone with a bottom timer and spg?

2. If you are using an AI computer with all functions operating for deep or prolonged air/nitrox diving with decompression on different gases, did you purchase the computer for that purpose, or was it one you already had been using for recreational purposes?

3. If you are using an AI computer with all functions operating for deep or prolonged air/nitrox diving with decompression on different gases, do you plan to get trimix training in the future, and, if so, will you be getting a new computer when you do?

4. If you feel AI is valuable for one gas, why is it not valuable for the other gases? If it is not valuable for the other gases, why is it valuable for the first one?

---------- Post Merged at 09:49 AM ---------- Previous Post was at 09:47 AM ----------

4. "I have all these different gases . ." My Sol tracks up to 10 tanks.
)

Excuse my ignorance--it will track 10 different transmitters on 10 different tanks?

 

[mathauck0814]

As I've stated elsewhere. Diving with an AI transmitter is only conceivable if it is backed up by a brass and glass SPG as sync issues or battery issues could cause your pressure gauge to fail otherwise and on a long dive where the surface is not an option, that's a problem for me.

So if we can all agree that we're not getting in the water without a brass and glass SPG then the decision is not SPG OR AI Transmitter, it's AI Transmitter or a HP port plug screwed into the first stage.

Which is more likely to fail if you were to slam your first stage into a door frame in a wreck? The AI Transmitter? Or the HP port plug?

 

[The Chairman]

If my HelO2 supported multiple gasses for AI, I would not hesitate to use it at all. I have had only one transmitter failure but several SPG failures. Alas and alack, it can only keep track of one transmitter, so I only use it on my single tank reg.

 

[boulderjohn]

I
Excuse my ignorance--it will track 10 different transmitters on 10 different tanks?

For some reason my response came off line. I was told that it does indeed respond to different transmitters, and it has been used with 5. I had no idea.

I bought a Suunto Cobra (air integrated with no transmitter) in about 2000, and I used it for hundreds of recreational dives. I still have it, although it has not been in the water in a few years. When I first had it, I really liked the information it was giving me, including how much time I had left if I continued to consume air at the present rate. After a while, I lost interest in that feature and only cared about the PSI. That made the AI function about the same as an SPG for all practical purposes. I would still use it today under the right circumstances without a qualm.

When I started tech diving, it was not an option for me in my classes, even in gauge mode. I went the traditional spg route, which did not cost me a lot. Since I needed multiple gauges for multiple tanks, adding a new and relatively cheap SPG to each one was not that big a deal. AI was not even something to consider.

So let's say that we have a hypothetical fool proof AI computer that can read a different indestructible transmitter on every tank you use. Would I use it? I am trying to think why I would. What benefit do I get from this that would make it worth while?