What's the point of these 3 gas computers?

[v--Locke--v]

umm, Doesn't the vt3 have the capability now to choose the algorithm? I think Oceanic did this to help satisfy the "tech" crowd. But I have the strangest feeling that they won't be satisfied. The problem is that the Oceanics are notorious for having a very aggressive algorithm, thus increasing your chances of getting sick. It could be that they like the 10' integrated stops and deep stops. Do the Niteks, Suuntos, and Oceanics guide for deep stops?

My Shearwater Pursuit gives me a deco profile of something similar to V-Planner using the 10' incrimental stops and the Liquivision can directly work with V-Planner. I think these are the reasons for the relation to tech. Many tech divers don't use computers and just dive rectangular profiles.

 

[ianr33]

Can you explain why you think this??

I've found my Suunto D9 perfectly acceptable.

A quick look at Suunto.com gives this:

"Decompression calculations are based on the Suunto Deep Stop RGBM model, which provides iterative deep stops as an alternative to traditional safety stops."

Where can I take a look at the "Suunto Deep Stop RGBM model" and use it to plan a dive to 300 feet? I assume this is readily available so I check what stops the computer will require on a particular dive?

 

[UncleJoes]

umm, Doesn't the vt3 have the capability now to choose the algorithm? I think Oceanic did this to help satisfy the "tech" crowd. But I have the strangest feeling that they won't be satisfied. The problem is that the Oceanics are notorious for having a very aggressive algorithm, thus increasing your chances of getting sick. It could be that they like the 10' integrated stops and deep stops. Do the Niteks, Suuntos, and Oceanics guide for deep stops?

My Shearwater Pursuit gives me a deco profile of something similar to V-Planner using the 10' incrimental stops and the Liquivision can directly work with V-Planner. I think these are the reasons for the relation to tech. Many tech divers don't use computers and just dive rectangular profiles.

I am NOT a tech diver, but hope to be in the future. I AM an Oceanic dealer, so I will only speak to the first quote. The current model of the VT3 uses Pelagic's standard recreational "DeSAT" Algorithm. I emphasize Pelagic, because it is their "aggressive algorithm". Oceanic's newest model, the OC1, uses a dual algorithm. The standard DeSat AND the Z+ (an advanced Buhlmann model similar to the RGBMs)

I don't beleive this computer is aimed at the tech crowd but more for divers like the OP who are starting out as Rec and know that they wish to progress on to tech.

 

[FishOutUvH2O]

I didn't buy my VT3 for it's "gas switching" ability, but I've been curious about why it has that ability. At least one person in this thread is adamant that it has no function at all and it's just marketing hype. I may be new to diving (1yr and just under 200 dives) and my dive ignorance far out weighs my dive knowledge. But, I find it hard (not impossible) to believe that Oceanic, or any other company, would spend the time, effort, and most importantly money on putting in a feature solely for marketing purposes. So, can anyone explain why, or under what circumstances, the gas switching ability is useful? Who was this feature targeted at? I've already heard the answer "it's targeted toward you new, ignorant divers that don't know any better. Who think that because it has the feature and brand X doesn't, it must be a better computer." That may be, but are there any other reasons for it?

Technical diving was defined at the first AquaCorp conference as diving which 'required you to switch gas supplies'. I think that's still a pretty good definition.

I've never heard of this before (which, given my dive experience, happens more oft than not). Is this a prevalent and often used definition in the "tech" world? To me it would seem a bit vague and exclusive.

 

[Cave Bum]

I've never heard of this before (which, given my dive experience, happens more oft than not). Is this a prevalent and often used definition in the "tech" world? To me it would seem a bit vague and exclusive.

Not used so much today. It was told to me by the owner of Dive Rite, Lamar Hires, who proposed the definition at that conference. I think he actually said 'switch regulators' but I'm not sure of that. It doesn't seem vague to me, however. Exclusive just a bit, though, if you consider a cave dive with no deco, just using back gas. This definition would exclude that and personally, I'd consider that a tech dive. But the greater majority of cave dives go into deco (at least mine do) so you're switching to deco gas. As a general 'test' I'd say any dive you have to switch to a different gas is definately a tech dive. That was the part I was trying to get across.

 

[RJP]

I may be new to diving (1yr and just under 200 dives) and my dive ignorance far out weighs my dive knowledge. But, I find it hard (not impossible) to believe that Oceanic, or any other company, would spend the time, effort, and most importantly money on putting in a feature solely for marketing purposes.

Seems like you've got some "marketing" ignorance as well!



As a marketing professional for more than 20 years, there's one thing of which I can unequivocally assure you:

EVERYTHING is done for marketing purposes!

Seriously, marketing is about selling product. Why would you add a feature that was not designed to sell more product?

 

[RJP]

Technical diving was defined at the first AquaCorp conference as diving which 'required you to switch gas supplies'. I think that's still a pretty good definition.

So if I did a 90min deco dive to max depth of 150', in an overhead environment, but did it all on back gas, it wouldn't be a "tech" dive?

 

[ianr33]

So if I did a 90min deco dive to max depth of 150', in an overhead environment, but did it all on back gas, it wouldn't be a "tech" dive?

Only if you did it sidemount and switched regs at regular intervals.

 

[FishOutUvH2O]

Seems like you've got some "marketing" ignorance as well!


As a marketing professional for more than 20 years, there's one thing of which I can unequivocally assure you:

EVERYTHING is done for marketing purposes!

Seriously, marketing is about selling product. Why would you add a feature that was not designed to sell more product?

To the first sentence of your post. . . Well, Duh! Of course I have marketing ignorance. But, knowing I'm a pigeon is half the battle against you marketing scoundrels!

To the last part, I agree that features need to be (or should be) marketable. I just don't think that the switching gas feature was put-in just to add another line to a brochure. In marketing don't you generally have a "target consumer" to aim that marketing at? If, so, who is the target consumer for this feature and what did Oceanic think the consumer "needed" it for or was going to use the feature for? Or, what uses have people come-up with for this feature, if any?

 

[muddiver]

For teh not-so-hard-core diver that has the skill and training to dive more than one EAN mix the gas switch is useful. Point: If you do a 90' dive for 29 minutes (USN No-D Table Rev. 6) breathing air or 32% EAN and during the ascent you ****ch to a pony/deco cylinder of 40% EAN at 70' you are now off gassing Nitrogen at a faster rate than if you ascended and decompressed on your original gas of either 32% or air.

Using a computer that can switch between the two planned gas mixes during this dive plan will allow the computer to compute your decompression and Nitrogen loading based on the decompression on EAN 40 and it will provide a lower repetive group designation and possably a shorter required surface interval time between dives. Otherwise diving more than one Nitrox mix just pads your safety based on one table but does not provide any other benifit.