On Tuesday, 7 March 2023 11:09:32 PST Ryan Gardner via subsurface wrote:
> Interestingly, an older QT6 experimental build *does* show all the many BLE
> devices scattered around my house (including the dive computer I'm scanning
> for) A QT5 build from the same day as the QT6 test build does not
I'm wondering if this is a "me" problem or not -
I've got two Macs on OS X 13. The 5.10 release build and the latest test
5.10.99 build I could find both fail to find a BLE device when I scan for
it.
When scanning for devices, only a couple of non-BLE devices show up in the
list.
Interestingly,
Daniel,
What exactly is your plan? It could be that they are just planned
differently. Are you planning to descend and then do 30 minutes on the
bottom leaving the bottom at around 33-35mins runtime or were you planning
of leaving the bottom on 30 minutes meaning that some (3-5 minutes) of that
30
It's not a comparison with Shearwater or your manual method but Baltic on
the phone gives me 70% CNS and 104 OTU on a 74 minute runtime so very close
to the Subsurface figures. iDeco Pro is giving me 64% and 84 OTUs on a 65
minute runtime (iDeco Pro i can't see the descent, it seems to start at
Hello Everyone. I think that there is a mistake in computing/calculating CNS.
Ive noticed this when I tried to plan a diving on 50 meters and 30minutes
bottom time (including falling down), with 24litres air, 11litres nitrox 52%,
and 6litres oxygen (nitrox 99%). I used Bulhmann algorithm
