Vivoactive 3 and HR Swim

If it connects to the band for an activity, the optical HR turns off and the band is used. If no band is found, it uses oHR,

One thing to note, is the va3 doesn't support the HRM-swim for swimming. When used with a device that supports it, the HR isn't transmitted while swimming, and the data gets sent in a batch when you get out of the water. The va3 doesn't support this mode, so it just works like a normal band.

What a pity :-(

Using HRM Swim is batch mode is something that is generally for tri/multisport devices. It's the same with the HRM-Tri, in that it only works in batch mode on some devices. And for running dynamics, the HRM-Tri doesn't send that to the va3, in the same way the rd pod isn't supported by the the va3.

As jim_m_58 said, the VA3 is not compatible with the swimming band.
In previous versions of firmware, when starting a swimming activity the optical wrist-type pulsometer did not turn off (it was an error), but this allowed the pulsations to be recorded (not as part of the activity) but as day.
I also use it to swim and at least mark the "lengths" of the pool, weather, etc.
To use the swimming band the closest model is the FR735.

Thank you all for your information.

For the swimming session, I will forget my HR, unfortunately.

During my freedives in swimming pool, I think I am gonna use something like Yoga or "any activity " or something like that ; I only need HR, timer and current time

Even then, your VA3 will not give you sensible heart rate from swimming. So don't have any expectations in that regard. It's a limitation of optical HR.

Hi,

There should be an option to "Enable Heart Rate" when swimming. Simply show a warning telling that "Heart rate is not optimal under water".
But it would be good enough for a lot of user including me !!

The point is let user decide if he want it or not.

Thanks,

Hi,
The point is let user decide if he want it or not.

That may be your point, but the question is, why would you want unreliable data? What purpose would it serve?

I have found the HR data to be unreliable for cycling.... but I find it better than nothing. I find that after much fitness sports using a HR strap, I have a good idea what my HR should be doing at a given time and I can easily pick when the HR is giving good or bad data. Likewise for swimming, I think data that comes with a proviso that we acknowlegde that the data would not be reliable would be better for many users than nothing. I suspect the problem for Garmin is that the support nightmare of people who complain it is not accurate (as happens now for cycling). For them it is easier to not have to deal with that. I think that could be dealt with by having the default be off and require the user to tap an acknowledge message to turn it on.

I suspect the problem for Garmin is that the support nightmare of people who complain it is not accurate (as happens now for cycling). For them it is easier to not have to deal with that.

It goes a little further than this. What most people don't realize is there are different Max HR's for running, cycling and swimming. On average, a person's cycling Max HR is 7 bpm lower than running and swimming is 15 bpm lower. Different muscle groups being used, so different zones. Garmin realizes this and has different settings for higher end watches such as my 935. The problem is people are comparing their perceived rate of exertion while swimming, looking at their HR and thinking it's correct because they feel the same while running or doing cardio and the HR is about the same. So, if the oHRM is measuring correctly while swimming (extremely unlikely knowing the limitations), then people are in a much higher HR zone than they thought. This in turn results with inaccurate measurements for calories burned, recovery time, training zones, etc... So, is unreliable data better than no data? I think unreliable data will cause more problems and confusion and I think Garmin has made the correct choice of omitting oHRM on all their devices.