Why the dislike of air integrated computers?

[Pullmyfinger]

DaleC is on point.

Why the dislike?
Many divers feel that it is unnecessary and expensive. But isn't that the case with many things that we all buy in our lives?


I don't personally feel that AI is of use to me, so I purchase other things (Uwatec bottom timers, a used Predator)


On the other hand, I do think AI is kind of "cool". So there's nothing to really "dislike" about it.
It's a nice feature, and fun to have, so why not get an AI computer?

I don't think it's much different than buying the newest phone, and downloading different apps.
Maybe not necessary, but fun to have, so why not?

My wife is a new diver, and diving with her reminds me that most divers do not care about the things that many of us divers here on Scuba Board care about. (all of the gear ).

She really just wants to go diving and doesn't really care about the details about gear.
But to her, air integration seemed cool....so I bought her an AI computer.

From her perspective, the AI computer is a lot cooler that the Uwatec bottom timer she normally dives with.
I imagine many diver share her view.

As for me and the rest of my Scuba Board/gear head brethren........we are the minority.

I don't dislike AI. It isn't for me; but I can see the appeal.

-Mitch

 

[DaleC]

Yep, It's like smartphone technology and me.

I embraced PC's because they are a tool I really used a lot initially (word processing) and grew into with web stuff and now video editing. I can log 8hr's easy when I'm working on a video.
I embraced laptops in a limited sense because it allowed me to take my word processing on the road, better than a tablet say. Tablets are fun, but hard to actually work on.

But smartphones are a technology I intentionally choose to bypass. I only use a cell to phone people and find it a poor choice for "work" like word processing and editing. To me they tend to dumb down what a user does to more of a passive interface ie. surfing while I prefer more active use. Most people I know that have them are tied to texting, casual calls and FB far more than I want. When I look at Youtube analytics I also see that most people drop video after 2 minutes. I think this is partly due to smartphone data use issues and the way users have become trained to short snippets which suit the device.

So you could say (or rather I could) that I "dislike" smartphones, and would not pay much of anything to get one. That doesn't mean they are bad. They are quite smart! I, personally, just dislike the platform.

 

[The Kraken]

This discussion will continue until the cows come home.

I dive an AI computer, but I also have an SPG neatly tucked away on my starboard side along with a Citizen dive watch.

Redundancy is a good thing.

Preplanning and preparation. The computer craps out, fall back on the basic dive plan.

Oh, did I mention DIVE PLAN ?

Flew helicopters many, many years ago when the instruments weren't all that reliable. Used the same technique, the fancy instruments fail, fall back on needle, ball, air speed, magnetic heading, altimeter and vertical speed indicator.

I'm still alive.

Safe dives . . . . . .
. . . safer ascents !

the K

 

[DJ457]

It seems a recurring theme that air integrated is readily dismissed by advanced and tech divers and I was wondering why. I could see it being another failure point or "crutch," but with a backup SPG the benefits outweigh the risk of failure in my mind.

Just wondering what some of the concerns with AI are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, I am a fan of the Air Integrated dive computers, but I love what the Petrel has to offer. I'm thinking of getting a petrel 2 as my next dive computer for technical diving. But is there an air integrated computer that has similar features as the petrel that can be used for tech diving? Are transmitters safe to use for tech diving? I've heard of people having issues with transmitters losing sync.

 

[The Kraken]

Yes, they can lose 'sync", but just like a computer, when reset they will display the current info and it takes only a few seconds. If you're diving that close to the edge, well . . . .

Safe dives . . . . . .
. . . safer ascents !

the K

 

[dmaziuk]

Yes, they can lose 'sync", but just like a computer, when reset they will display the current info and it takes only a few seconds. If you're diving that close to the edge, well . . .

In order to accurately represent a signal digitally one has to sample it at 2x the frequency. If you're burning, say, a minute of air per second and you're down to your last few minutes, then you need to sample twice per second and loss of link for more than half a second is significant. Us regular folks can probably tolerate loss of link for a couple of minutes as long as it comes back afterwards.


NDL calculations and ascent rate alarm are tied to sampling rate on the water pressure sensor, too, only in this case you don't want your NDL recalculated every time you lower your hand to point the camera or lift it to the inflator hose.


That is the advantage of an analog device: a properly working one is giving you the up-to-date reading every time. What a properly working digital one shows can be out of date up to its refresh rate. There are applications where that is significant, diving is not one of them. And even the ones that are nowadays go digital and just up the refresh rate.

 

[The Chairman]

If you're burning, say, a minute of air per second and you're down to your last few minutes, then you need to sample twice per second and loss of link for more than half a second is significant.

I'm sorry, but this sentence makes no sense at all. I've never heard air consumption quantified as "a minute of air per second". Also, If you are down to less than five minutes of air, no analog or digital device will make up for your inattention. That's like thinking that anti-lock brakes can make a difference to a person texting while driving. Quite often, idiocy is it's own reward and we often refer to that phenomenon as Darwinism.

 

[doctormike]

If you're burning, say, a minute of air per second and you're down to your last few minutes, then you need to sample twice per second and loss of link for more than half a second is significant.

If you are in this scenario, then instrumentation - analog or digital - is irrelevant. You are surfacing, getting some sort of redundant gas supply, or drowning.

But put me down in the "had frequent AI link failures, especially with strobe photography, and gave it up" group.

The thing about these statistics is that no one has really global link failure statistics. So if you have a good WAI system and you do 100,000 dives, then you will conclude that the WAI failure rate is less than one in 100,000. On the other hand, if there are 10 divers and two of them have had issues with link failures, then that's very significant statistically.

So posting here that you have never had a link failure is interesting, but not very relevant statistically. If 95% of the posters here swore that they never had a link failure, and 5% had, that would be an unacceptable failure rate, despite that huge number of glowing reviews.

I'm not saying that those are real numbers, it's just that link failures are pretty common complaints, so I wouldn't dismiss them just because you personally might not have had an issue with them. Had to know. So if you like WAI, that's great, just recognize that failures can happen. Also recognize that a failure is not necessarily a disaster, especially for a situationally aware diver in a dive that is non-overhead (physical or virtual).

 

[AfterDark]

A couple of questions:

1. What's wrong with the PADI wheel? Isn't it essentially a dive table?
2. 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.)

I use the USN tables because they allow me to do air only decompression without any cert. Been using them since the 1970's damaziuk I'm no spring chicken either which is why I allow more time at deco stops then the tables call for, I usually double the time 4min @ 10' turns to 8 mins.

Been doing this for over 30 years now back when tech diving didn't have a name yet and there were no certs for it. Come to think of it PADI and NAUI were just starting to grow so there were no PADI tables or wheels either.

Adobo I also plan my dives with tables. The PDCs are for the benefit of the dive operators if one goes I still get to do my second dive that I paid for already a dive insurance policy if you will. It's basically an easy to read depth gauge for me BIG numbers.

Since I'm too old and tired for more than 2 dives per day I really don't need the PDCs for me. The next time I panic will be the 1st time.

 

[doctormike]

I use the USN tables because they allow me to do air only decompression without any cert.

Huh? Does your dive computer check your c-card?