why hate safety devices?

[AfterDark]

I’m not big on electronic devices for safety. Hate maybe the wrong word, mistrust is more accurate. I work in the hi-tech field and see very expensive, well built and well tested devices fail for reasons that sometimes remain unknown even to the design engineers. My dive computer is of course electronic, my backup is plastic dive tables and a simple dive watch. The watch is electronic also but, the chances of 2 failures at the same time are slim. My SPG was bought in the early 1980’s I’ve only replaced the hose and it has never failed. I also believe reliance on gadgets doesn’t necessarily make for good divers. My diving goes back to before SPGs, BCs and computers. Much of this new gear to me is like heated seats in car, nice to have but I can still drive my car if they don’t function.
I am my own most important piece of dive equipment. I want to be involved in my diving not on auto pilot, relying on electrons to keep me safe

 

[gcbryan]

You may have an alarm clock by your bed. It's probably fairly inexpensive and it probably works quite well and is reliable. You can also get projection clocks that project the time on your ceiling so that you don't have to turn your head. I don't know if they are 3 times as expensive as is typical with AI vs non-AI computers but let's just assume that they are.

It's OK if someone enjoys a projection clock but it's basically solving a problem that doesn't exist since it's pretty easy to just turn your head.

It's the same with dive computers. I turn off the alarms that I'm able to turn off on my non-AI computer. Why would I pay more for another alarm? Why add the complexity of a wireless unit just so I don't have to turn my head?

Your same arguments could be applied to tank bangers...why hate safety devices! Simply referring to something as a safety device doesn't make it one.

 

[Kevrumbo]

This post is likely to start a flame war, but my intent is to solicit opinions.

Why do some scuba divers hate some scuba innovations that can give rise to a higher degree of safety?

<snip>

What makes scuba different?

I think the real issue should be (in light of the dan carlock settlement), why aren't more and more divers utilizing such Search and Rescue Devices as below:

McMurdo

 

[Saudi-Diver]

I used to use an Air Integrated computer till about 2 years ago, I bought it straight out of open water training. I made a conscious decision to replace it with a simple wrist mounted non integrated computer ( Cressi Archimedes 2) and SPG. I find it has improved my situational awareness while diving. I think it has also sharpened up my dive planning skills as well.

 

[redacted]

If your interest is truly safety rather than trying to defend some expensive electronic gadget, then you may be asking the wrong question. Perhaps you should ask, "If you had $500 to invest in improving your safety while scuba diving, how would you spend it?"

I do occasionally dive with a low gas alarm, but it is not part of my computer. It is much more a novelty than a necessary safety device. And it has never activated without my expecting it.

First

 

[DevonDiver]

This post is likely to start a flame war, but my intent is to solicit opinions.

Why do some scuba divers hate some scuba innovations that can give rise to a higher degree of safety?

Dude...if a flame war happens, it is because of the way you have worded your question.

Firstly, hate is a very strong word. How about re-phrasing it to say "have objections to" or "have rational arguements against"

Secondly, there is a thumping assumption in saying "give rise to a higher degree of safety" or naming things "safety devices".

If you want real opinions, without aimless ego sparring, why not ask people to validate or explain "their objections to equipment items that are generally claimed to increase safety"?

I don't think any diver would "hate safety devices". However, I do suspect that some divers have rational arguements against the claimed safety benefits of certain items of scuba equipment.

Those arguements may not be directly against the items themselves, but in some cases may be against the mindset or psychology that those items encourage within a diver. Nonetheless, they are still valid points and worthy of consideration.

Dive computers, with associated gizzmos and alarms, may increase safety, but they do not promote safety. Humans a fallible...and many people will happily become reliant of technology.

GPS gets people from A-B more efficiently. However, it does not promote navigation skills. See the analogy?

 

[ajduplessis]

Firstly I would like to point out the following before commenting on this topic. I dive recreational with and AI transmitter via my D9/Helo2. I enjoy the fact that all the information you need is all in a single place and easy to read/understand. I also dive with a SPG tied off on my L d-ring. I check and compare both SPG and DC data every few minutes. On air dives I will place a depth alarm of 35m limit (115ft), purely of the possible effects of narcosis.

This being said I don&#8217;t see an AI transmitter or any alarm as safety measure. They are great tools and have a function. I have seen &#8220;stuck&#8221; SPG needles, thus using AI as backup devices. I also understand that AI and DC can fail, thus my redundancy in pressure/depth equipment. Generally speaking this setup is an overkill on recreational dives, but I like to be safer. The only alarm of benefit is ascend rate, the rest are nearly useless. Dive parameters and gas planning should have been clearly defined before the dive, anything outside of these parameters and I terminate the dive. As mentioned before I have a depth alarm of around 35m on air dives. I hope that I am possibly not to &#8220;narced&#8221; to notice that I have exceeded the dive plan and ascend, but this is no guarantee.

On deeper and or deco dive I only with SPG, no AI as this is totally useless and a major failure point. Gas planning and having the right dive partner (buddy) is vital. In the case of SPG failure I know we have enough gas each to complete the dive even in the event of losing 1 or both divers deco/back gasses.

The only real safety device is between your ears, that is if it is still 100% functional (using the right gas at the relevant depth).

My 2 cents.

 

[dkktsunami]

I don't "hate" any form of scuba innovation. I "choose" a more simple option that places all the responsibility on me to remain alert and aware of my environment. By the same logic, when I am driving I do not always signal before I turn - I signal only when there is somebody to signal to, and I consider this to be my responsibility.

 

[Garth]

I love safety.

I get annoyed seeing someone carry then totally disregard the presence of that safety precaution.

I.e. The pressure gauge. It's called keep your eye on it. Know how much gas you have.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

This post is likely to start a flame war, but my intent is to solicit opinions.

Why do some scuba divers hate some scuba innovations that can give rise to a higher degree of safety?

Example: the air-integrated computer with audible warning when you pass your user-determined "reserve gas" pressure.

Many SB members feel that a good 'ol brass 'n glass SPG is all you need. Fine. A few have made jokes about the cacophonous symphony that accompanies a class of new divers completing their OW certs when their computers warn them about various issues. Point taken.

Of course you should manage your gas. Of course your buddy should be near at hand. Of course you should learn to use your computer. Of course you should learn to dive without a computer. But why do some hate computers, or at least a perceived over-reliance on them in this case?

For example, a pilot should know to watch the altitude gauge. Also, pilots of aircraft with retractable landing gear should know to extend said landing gear prior to landing. I am not a pilot, but I am sure that warning systems exist in aircraft to alert pilots to low altitude and retracted landing gear, irrespective of how good the pilot is.

What makes scuba different?

First off, hate's too strong a word to apply here ... and so the title and tone of your post suggests that you are, in fact, looking to start a flame war. However, I'll pass on that bait and make two observations.

First, there is nothing wrong with innovative safety devices in general ... as long as the diver doesn't come to rely on them exclusively for his or her safety. The problem is that these devices are developed as a "failsafe" measure meant to provide a backup to the techniques you learn during your training. But in reality they become the primary measure of safety that a diver comes to rely on ... because it's easier to respond to an audible signal than to use a little bit of self-discipline and monitor your depth, ascent rate, and gas supply as you were taught to do. In this respect, there are two undesireable byproducts. First is that the diver develops reactive habits, rather than proactive ones ... and the second is that the skills the diver learned during their training atrophy, and if the device should fail ... as electronic devices can always do, particularly in a hostile underwater environment ... the diver is left without the basic habits he or she should have to conclude the dive safely.

Second, those audible alarms may be helpful to you ... but they're annoying as hell to everyone else around you. Sound carries incredibly well underwater, and when you're diving in a group ... as happens in most tourist destinations ... you have no way of knowing whose computer is beeping. In this respect, you try to "tune it out" ... which may not be a good thing if it happens to be yours. When they develop an ear bud that works with your dive computer, then I will believe them to be more useful than they are today ... as well as more considerate of the people you happen to be diving with, who may not appreciate listening to your dive equipment making noises throughout the dive.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)