Wireless

[Kevrumbo]

Used to have the Vytec wireless transmitter installed in addition to my Analog SPG, back in my Doubles "Training Wheel" Days --became annoying when the display kept on flashing "Failure" and could not reacquire the transmitter after doing a set of Valve Drills, or an extended switch from backgas to Deco Gas. Disconnected and totally weaned off its use now (anyone want a Vytec Transmitter?). . .

 

[GreenDiverDown]

If your primary SPG is your brain and your backup SPG is the thing clipped to your left waist D, then why would you need a backup for your backup.

 

[Rainer]

If your primary SPG is your brain and your backup SPG is the thing clipped to your left waist D, then why would you need a backup for your backup.

I like this answer, Stephen. That said, any reason NOT to have a backup for the backup? Is EXTRA redundancy bad? Certainly at some point, but is this that point?

 

[Ben_ca]

Why not have a back up to the back up to the back up? Why doubles why not triples?

It is just not needed. Give it a try... IRL figureing out your gas consumption in your head with a cross check with your SPG isn't that hard....

 

[GreenDiverDown]

I like this answer, Stephen. That said, any reason NOT to have a backup for the backup? Is EXTRA redundancy bad? Certainly at some point, but is this that point?

Well then, I think we're full circle right back to Roakey's answer... yes, un-needed redundancy can be bad.

 

[darkpup]

I like this answer, Stephen. That said, any reason NOT to have a backup for the backup? Is EXTRA redundancy bad? Certainly at some point, but is this that point?

But you're missing the point. In DIR, your buddy's SPG is your backup. Once again, you're adding a backup for your backup. You're also adding a transmitter that creates an additional failure point that isn't needed on your first stage (i.e. o-rings), along with all the problems Kevin mentioned regarding the transmitter failing to be acquired by your gauge (i.e. valve drills, left post roll off, etc).

If 2 SPGs are enough, why add a 3rd? Why add a 3rd backup that also creates additional failure points in your first stage? Is it your goal for your team to have 4 redundancies on an SPG (i.e. 2 brass and glass, and 2 wireless transmitters)? How many SPGs are enough, and when do you draw the line?

For DIR, they draw the line at each buddy having a single SPG.

Where you draw the line is completely up to you.

~ Jason

 

[Rainer]

I guess what I'm wondering about is whether or not you would thumb a dive if your SPG broke (say the glass cracked)? If so, then having a wireless transmitter might keep you in the water. Thoughts?

 

[DIR-Atlanta]

It isn't like this means it's twice as likely as you'll have a problem.

Actually, that's exactly what it means. Taking two of something on a dive effectively doubles the chances that at least one of them will fail.

Also, why wouldn't you just continue the dive if the other SPG was working (esp the brass one)?

Confucius say "Man with one watch always know what time it is. Man with two watches never sure".

 

[Rainer]

But you're missing the point. In DIR, your buddy's SPG is your backup. Once again, you're adding a backup for your backup. You're also adding a transmitter that creates an additional failure point that isn't needed on your first stage (i.e. o-rings), along with all the problems Kevin mentioned regarding the transmitter failing to be acquired by your gauge (i.e. valve drills, left post roll off, etc).

If 2 SPGs are enough, why add a 3rd? Why add a 3rd backup that also creates additional failure points in your first stage? Is it your goal for your team to have 4 redundancies on an SPG (i.e. 2 brass and glass, and 2 wireless transmitters)? How many SPGs are enough, and when do you draw the line?

For DIR, they draw the line at each buddy having a single SPG.

Where you draw the line is completely up to you.

~ Jason

You're missing my point about asking. I'm not trying to jusify diving a wireless transmitter (I don't). Just trying to understand WHY it's not DIR. The answers people are giving make a lot of sense. Just want to get all of the questions out of my system.

 

[Rainer]

Actually, that's exactly what it means. Taking two of something on a dive effectively doubles the chances that at least one of them will fail.

Yes, but the failures are independent. Having two of something doesn't mean I'm twice as likely to have a problem! If I owned two cars, I'm not twice as lucky to have car trouble keeping me from getting to work. Silly logic...

Confucius say "Man with one watch always know what time it is. Man with two watches never sure".

Um, a man with one watch just knows what time the watch reads. Nothing more, nothing less.