Why the dislike of air integrated computers?
- Thread starter patgrayjr
- 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
AfterDark
Contributor
I use 2 PDC's but ultimately put my trust in USN air tables, no wheel that's for shmucks. I only trust these devices so far. Anyone that puts to much trust in such devices had better have a good measure of luck on their side sooner or later they are going to need it. You know what they say about ass-u-me.
No, it's more like this.
OP: I am looking for advice on a computer.
Post 2: Buy a Petral, there is no other computer
Post 3: But it isn't AI, I want AI
Poster 4: If you buy anything but a Petral, you are buying a piece of crap and AI is only sold as a point of failure and while you're at it, buy a BP/W. You aren't a real diver if you buy anything else. PADI sucks.
Post 5: Repeats poster #2
Post 6: Repeats poster #3
Repeat X times
Post 115: Should I buy the big spare air or the litle one?
It's fun, not a something to get your shorts in a knot over.
That is exactly why I got involved in this thread. When people spout preference as "fact" and then tell me I am "wrong" because I choose a different way of skinning the cat, I get pissy!!! Here are facts....
AI Hoseless or Hosed is good technology. Use it if you want.
Non AI computers are good technology. Use it if you want.
Analog gauge and bottom timers are good technology. Use it if you want.
If you tell me I am "wrong" you have to prove it. And in this topic you can't!! You are wrong! (OK that was irony, leave me alone)
I LOVE my hoseless AI Oceanic. That makes me different from you, not wrong.
Out.
Well I'm not in my 20s, not capable of running a five-minute mile, nor have enough divers on-board to rotate them to dive only once a day. So I'm most definitely not diving Navy tables. And I don't assume: I believe. Specifically, when the manufacturer says their DC never killed anybody.
(Edit: if and when I ever get into tec diving it'll be a different story. By then maybe there'll be AI -- all together now -- Pet-Rels! and the whole "AI DC bad" meme will be long gone and forgotten.)
Adobo
Contributor
A couple of questions:
- What's wrong with the PADI wheel? Isn't it essentially a dive table?
- My recollection from casually browsing the accidents and incidents thread, most diver incidents fall into 2 categories - health issues and diver error. It seems that whether you are diving a computer, using the PADI wheel, using the U.S. navy tables or cut your own table, none of that matters if you panic and bolt. Or if you have a heart attack. Or if you run out of gas because you did not plan/execute your dive properly. If you agree with that, what concerns do you have then about using a dive computer? (Disclosure: I don't use a dive computer to figure out my NDL or my deco obligation. I use my computer in gauge mode and I basically use tables when I plan my dives.)
This post made me laugh out loud because of the irony.
It should be known that the US Navy Tables as well as PDCs are derived from the same algorithms. No matter how you cut it, computers generate those very tables. So, whether it's a PDC or a table, you're still relying on 'such devices'. Only the agency tables as well as the PDCs have factored in another 15-20% safety factor over those Navy tables.
On top of that, your SPG, Depth Gauge and watch qualify for being 'devices' in their own right. The only real difference between an integrated PDC and an SPg, Depth Gauge and watch, is that the latter relies on fat fingers attached to an even fatter head that gets down right stupid the deeper the combo goes. The diver is the weakest link and their ability to interface all that makes having an error free dive highly problematic. What's noticeably missing from the the SPG, Depth Gauge and watch combo then, is nothing but a hyperactive ego emboldened with a good dose of unbridled testosterone.
Yes, the level of passion on this subject is hard to fathom.
I had AI on my recreational rig and liked it. I removed it even from my singles/rec set up once I started diving doubles and stages, but I'm hardly militant about it. Yes, it's another failure point - but not a big deal. HP gas leaks are pretty manageable and unless if you have been a total rubberhead managing your gas, you'll have plenty of time to surface even if you do have a problem, which is very unlikely.
I never had a problem linking up. In fact, from a reliability standpoint, I've had more SPGs crap out or get "uncalibrated."
My reasons to go non-AI?
1. The transmitter is a big knob that is too often mistaken for a tank valve handle and abused by folks on the boat. On a twinset, it could be really confusing during valve shutdowns, so it's a nonstarter there. On some 1st stages, hose routing dictates that the AI transmitter be mounted in a place where it is more likely to bump your head. It's one more piece of gear and batteries to worry about.
2. A desire to standardize my routines for checking tank pressure. You can't really go AI on twins and stages, or at least it isn't worth it, and I'd like have same set ups and habits across the board.
3. The realization -- for me, YMMV -- that I actually was more aware of gas consumption when I had to go to the "trouble" of checking an SPG. Having that be a deliberate act, as opposed to a casual glance at my wrist, has made me a lot better at tracking and estimating gas consumption without even needing to check very often. Don't know if that makes sense, and for some people I'm sure the opposite is true, but for me the more I dove without the AI, the less I found that I needed it or wanted it.
BTW, "trouble" is in quotes because it really should not hard to check your SPG. I really don't get the comments from folks about it "interrupting" their dives to check an SPG. It's just enough of a conscious act that it makes you BE conscious, which is a good thing, but it takes all of about 3 seconds.
Cons of ditching the AI? I miss uploading dive logs and getting automatic SAC calculations without me having to remember to manually write down and than manually enter the beginning and ending tank pressures. And, the wrist is convenient for sure. If I was only diving recreationally, and didn't have to worry about the transmitter getting bunged up all the time, I might go AI and ditch the SPG entirely. You'd just have to call the dive if you lost your link. Again, if you've been conscientious and aware of your dive plan and gas consumption I don't consider it much of a risk in a no deco dive.
When my son is old enough to dive, I'll probably put the transmitter on his regulator so I can swim close and unobtrusively check his pressure, but I want him to get used to using the SPG.
Bottom line, whatever works for you. Frankly, best advice is pick the best computer you can -- for you -- in terms of interface, features and form factor. If it has an AI option and you want it, fine. If not, I wouldn't compromise some other feature I wanted on a computer just to get it.
I had AI on my recreational rig and liked it. I removed it even from my singles/rec set up once I started diving doubles and stages, but I'm hardly militant about it. Yes, it's another failure point - but not a big deal. HP gas leaks are pretty manageable and unless if you have been a total rubberhead managing your gas, you'll have plenty of time to surface even if you do have a problem, which is very unlikely.
I never had a problem linking up. In fact, from a reliability standpoint, I've had more SPGs crap out or get "uncalibrated."
My reasons to go non-AI?
1. The transmitter is a big knob that is too often mistaken for a tank valve handle and abused by folks on the boat. On a twinset, it could be really confusing during valve shutdowns, so it's a nonstarter there. On some 1st stages, hose routing dictates that the AI transmitter be mounted in a place where it is more likely to bump your head. It's one more piece of gear and batteries to worry about.
2. A desire to standardize my routines for checking tank pressure. You can't really go AI on twins and stages, or at least it isn't worth it, and I'd like have same set ups and habits across the board.
3. The realization -- for me, YMMV -- that I actually was more aware of gas consumption when I had to go to the "trouble" of checking an SPG. Having that be a deliberate act, as opposed to a casual glance at my wrist, has made me a lot better at tracking and estimating gas consumption without even needing to check very often. Don't know if that makes sense, and for some people I'm sure the opposite is true, but for me the more I dove without the AI, the less I found that I needed it or wanted it.
BTW, "trouble" is in quotes because it really should not hard to check your SPG. I really don't get the comments from folks about it "interrupting" their dives to check an SPG. It's just enough of a conscious act that it makes you BE conscious, which is a good thing, but it takes all of about 3 seconds.
Cons of ditching the AI? I miss uploading dive logs and getting automatic SAC calculations without me having to remember to manually write down and than manually enter the beginning and ending tank pressures. And, the wrist is convenient for sure. If I was only diving recreationally, and didn't have to worry about the transmitter getting bunged up all the time, I might go AI and ditch the SPG entirely. You'd just have to call the dive if you lost your link. Again, if you've been conscientious and aware of your dive plan and gas consumption I don't consider it much of a risk in a no deco dive.
When my son is old enough to dive, I'll probably put the transmitter on his regulator so I can swim close and unobtrusively check his pressure, but I want him to get used to using the SPG.
Bottom line, whatever works for you. Frankly, best advice is pick the best computer you can -- for you -- in terms of interface, features and form factor. If it has an AI option and you want it, fine. If not, I wouldn't compromise some other feature I wanted on a computer just to get it.
paulw
Contributor
My my my.. I HATE liver and believe if anyone eats it they will have bad breath and throw-up... but that's my opinion and I believe that's what most of this discussion is.
Why AI computers are "readily dismissed by advanced and tech divers" is their opinion based on information they believe, maybe they didn't like them, saw a bad one or believe it is one more failure point but SPG's and hoses are failure points also and I have had both fail but it comes down to what you like and want. There are reasons I would not want AI, if I was doing very confined diving like caves or wrecks with restrictions I probably would not want a transmitter on a tank I was shoving through a hole but for recreational diving I like and want AI.
I dive AI and here are my facts:
I have 3 AI computers, an 11 year old Oceanic VT-Pro with over 800 dives on it and a Oceanic DataMask with as many or more and a Liquivision LYNX with over 300 dives on it ( I semi-retired the VT-Pro and DataMask when I bought the LYNX ) and I have never had a failure in the water. I dive the LYNX as my main computer and use either the DataMask or the VT-Pro as a back up so I have two transmitters on my rig and the oceanic transmitter is 11 years old. Some of my dive buddies dive Shearwater Petrel's, they are GREAT units and I really like them but I bought the Liquivision because I wanted AI and I am very happy with it. Just my opinion.... (I still say dont eat liver.... it's just nasty)
Why AI computers are "readily dismissed by advanced and tech divers" is their opinion based on information they believe, maybe they didn't like them, saw a bad one or believe it is one more failure point but SPG's and hoses are failure points also and I have had both fail but it comes down to what you like and want. There are reasons I would not want AI, if I was doing very confined diving like caves or wrecks with restrictions I probably would not want a transmitter on a tank I was shoving through a hole but for recreational diving I like and want AI.
I dive AI and here are my facts:
I have 3 AI computers, an 11 year old Oceanic VT-Pro with over 800 dives on it and a Oceanic DataMask with as many or more and a Liquivision LYNX with over 300 dives on it ( I semi-retired the VT-Pro and DataMask when I bought the LYNX ) and I have never had a failure in the water. I dive the LYNX as my main computer and use either the DataMask or the VT-Pro as a back up so I have two transmitters on my rig and the oceanic transmitter is 11 years old. Some of my dive buddies dive Shearwater Petrel's, they are GREAT units and I really like them but I bought the Liquivision because I wanted AI and I am very happy with it. Just my opinion.... (I still say dont eat liver.... it's just nasty)
DaleC
Contributor
I hate to resort to semantics in such an intellectual debate but I once again, refer to the OP. The question specifically asked was: "Why the dislike of air integrated computers?"
Whatever someone posts in response to this is a valid and reasonable statement, according to the question. I dislike AI computers because they cost too much. That's it. I can also say I dislike them because they are too gadgety, too shiny or that they give off radiation that interferes with transmissions from little green men. Those are valid responses too.
The question is "why dislike".. not "what's wrong" with AI computers. One is a personal opinion requiring no evidence, the other is open to debate on validity.
If some of you guys weren't so reliant on technology to explain the data you may have caught the difference
Whatever someone posts in response to this is a valid and reasonable statement, according to the question. I dislike AI computers because they cost too much. That's it. I can also say I dislike them because they are too gadgety, too shiny or that they give off radiation that interferes with transmissions from little green men. Those are valid responses too.
The question is "why dislike".. not "what's wrong" with AI computers. One is a personal opinion requiring no evidence, the other is open to debate on validity.
If some of you guys weren't so reliant on technology to explain the data you may have caught the difference
It says you are a new user. Passion, lol, we have been arguing with one another for over a decade and we are still going at it strong. People here on scubieboard have well honed, strong opinions and they are borne out by real world experience on all sides. So welcome to the fray. And I think, if you read between the lines, most of the people here like and respect one another, though, it is hard to tell sometimes.
N
Similar threads
