| Imported post
I did NOT miss any computer stops. That's the point. My buddy did less than me to be truthfull, but there was points in the dive where I went wee soiree's(+10mtrs) deeper than him. I have realised that saying it's the 'pooters fault does bring up bones of contention in the fact we all use them and(I did)trust them. I did what I was told!!!! It leaves the questions; Are the computers basicly dangerous or is my body more suited to table diving? I think it is a mixture of the two options. The difference in deco I missed compared to the Buhllmans and my 'pooter was 8mins on dive 1 and dive 2 was off the table. As I said in another thread the lowest my 'pooter got to was a 5min no stop in dive 2. The reason I tend to go with Buhllmans is that Navy tables were designed around fit, healthy Navy divers. Buhllmans, I believe, were not. As an example, the next time you go for a dive, follow your computer then check tables after you get out. I think you might see a big difference in stops.
Peter  |