Info Are Pony Bottles Dangerous?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

I am talking about NEEDING it.... lol
I did need it. High current dive with overhead boat traffic on a scooter. Buddy had his reg free flow due to the current and went from 1500 to 300 psi in a few minutes. I passed my primary and then breathed from my air2 until I hit about 1000 psi (don't remember exactly right now), and then I went to my pony so he'd have my remaining 1k psi and I had a full pony. We finished the dive safely and expediently to get out of the channel, surfacing once we hit 10 fsw and about 30ft from shore. I detailed this specific incident last year on here if you wish to read more details on it.

I NEEDED my pony to ensure a safe return and to keep an incident from becoming an emergency. That's proper planning and usage of a pony.
 
I NEEDED a pony whenever I used it (30 times, perhaps), as it was providing the necessary redundancy which was required for those demanding dives.
A tool can be useful or even necessary without been actually employed.
 
how many dives have you carried a pony and how many times have you needed it?
When looking at dive accidents and incidents, typically it is never a single thing that goes wrong. I even heard something very similar recently around aviation safety on a podcast I was listening to. A "3 strikes rule," which is a good quick and simple way of explaining it. It's rarely ever a single thing that goes wrong, because a lot of scuba equipment and procedures are designed around redundancy. Instead, it's a series of things going wrong, perhaps 1-2 under control of the diver, and another 1-2 out of the diver's control.

For example, first the diver was tired, then the diver got cramps, then the diver had buoyancy issues, then the diver passed up multiple opportunities and suggestions to turn the dive, and then the diver finally had another buoyancy issue, shot to the surface and died. Or, divers have a minor equipment issue before dive but ignore it, decide to cave dive without training or proper equipment, get lost in cave, and drown.

Instead of 3 strikes, I like to think of it as "snake eyes," where if your dice all roll 1's you're dead. To improve your odds, you can add dice by adding redundancy, or increase sides by improving quality of that redundancy. The whole "never dive alone" mantra repeated by every dive agency over-and-over, is an example of that redundancy, and of course a better buddy would be an example of more reliable redundancy.

When it comes to life and death, and in SCUBA, we're never that far from it, you would hope you're never in a situation where you really need your redundancy. However, if you ever do need it, it may save you from death, severe injury, or a traumatic experience. Regardless of whether I'll ever "need" the pony bottle, it certainly is a stress reliever in that I don't have to worry about a large class of potential scuba issues.

----

Now to actually answer your question directly:

I have carried redundant air (sometimes a pony) on every dive since about July 2021, which is about 100 dives (not sure, I don't log/count). Around June 2021, I had an incident described here. Thankfully, I didn't "need" redundant air, because I had none with me, and the redundancy of the surface being about 30ft away was good enough. However, if that had happened on one of my few 60-120ft dives (I had several at the time), the risks would have been much greater.

Many divers treat their dive-buddy as a swimming pony bottle, and there is certainly no shortage of those stories.
I am talking about NEEDING it.... lol
I also know precisely what you're doing, and you do too, setting an unrealistically high bar. If divers "needed" pony-bottles more often, we'd probably have a LOT more dead divers. If someone needs redundant air, and doesn't have it, they end up dead or injured and wouldn't be able to answer.

As seen by other responses, people have actually needed redundant air / pony-bottle, or at least found it extremely useful.
 
A pony tank becomes dangerous if it causes the diver to move his secondary reg from the main tank to the pony bottle, leaving the main tank with just one reg.
Doing so can result in the incapability of employing a large amount of gas stored in the main tank if the primary reg fails.
Using a pony tank should always be simply "incremental" to the standard setup, not a trade-off between the main tank and the auxiliary one.
If the pony-bottle does not have sufficient air to safely surface, the diver isn't using a pony-bottle correctly.

Personally, I do remove the octo and don't consider it even slightly dangerous, given I always have enough air to surface in both tanks, and in the event of a failure, will surface. If the chances of a failure in a 2 minute window are 1/1000 (which would be really high), the chances both fail at the same time would be 1/1000000.

I am curious though, how often are 2nd stage failures, where they fail to deliver air? It's not something I've heard about happening. (To be clear, I'm not suggesting it doesn't happen, just that I don't hear about it.)

edit: This is a good example of the snake-eyes analogy in my previous post. There may be a slight increase in risk to yourself removing the octo, but the addition of a (properly used) pony bottle can more than compensate for that risk. It's a similar concept to how many solo divers use pony-bottles, while buddy-divers use their buddy for redundancy.
 
Redundancy. Simply calculate the amount of gas you need to get yourself to safety from the WORST point in your dive. Then bring that gas.

Show your workings that include:
  • SAC/RMV at an elevated breathing rate, maybe a CO2 hit
  • Allowing time to get your act together at the worst possible time
  • Including all safety and decompression stops
  • Including any gas changes
For a recreational dive, this is simple arithmetic.

For a technical or rebreather dive, it is standard operating procedure.
 
I also know precisely what you're doing, and you do too, setting an unrealistically high bar.
.i am genuinely curious about how often they are needed. Thanks for referencing your incident - glad it wasn't deeper and more catastrophic.

In ~ 3000+ dives, I can only think of one incident where i would have switched to a bailout: deep night dive, grabbed a tank that hadn't been filled, rushing and didn't check pressure. Basic stupidity! Fortunately my buddy was there so it worked out. It was not the kind of dive I would do solo.

I get your point though - you can't post about the dive you don't survive .....
 
If the pony-bottle does not have sufficient air to safely surface, the diver isn't using a pony-bottle correctly.

Personally, I do remove the octo and don't consider it even slightly dangerous, given I always have enough air to surface in both tanks, and in the event of a failure, will surface. If the chances of a failure in a 2 minute window are 1/1000 (which would be really high), the chances both fail at the same time would be 1/1000000.

I am curious though, how often are 2nd stage failures, where they fail to deliver air? It's not something I've heard about happening. (To be clear, I'm not suggesting it doesn't happen, just that I don't hear about it.)

edit: This is a good example of the snake-eyes analogy in my previous post. There may be a slight increase in risk to yourself removing the octo, but the addition of a (properly used) pony bottle can more than compensate for that risk. It's a similar concept to how many solo divers use pony-bottles, while buddy-divers use their buddy for redundancy.
I have never seen a 2nd stage failure. Instead I witnessed dozens of 1st stage failures, and had a couple of occurrences my self.
Most frequent is O-ring extrusion, but also filter clogged and valve closed due to hitting rocks.
That's the reason for which I use only tanks with two valves and two fully independent regs. An octopus with a single first stage is not safe enough for me...
 
I have never seen a 2nd stage failure. Instead I witnessed dozens of 1st stage failures, and had a couple of occurrences my self.
Most frequent is O-ring extrusion, but also filter clogged and valve closed due to hitting rocks.
That's the reason for which I use only tanks with two valves and two fully independent regs. An octopus with a single first stage is not safe enough for me...
Freeflows are very common
 
2nd stage failures, where they fail to deliver air?
I have never seen a 2nd stage failure
Freeflows are very common
I think angelo was mostly referring to unable to deliver air. I'm familiar with freeflow, that's ultra common. Basic free-flow, which can be stopped, has happened to me plenty of times. I've never experienced a "catastrophic" free-flow, but certainly heard of them.

Given this topic has been nagging at me for some time (before this thread), I decided to create another thread on the "2nd stage fails to deliver air" topic:

 
Feathering a valve to breathe from a freeflowing second stage. Will call that a win for sidemount but with the caveat that it is a very unlikely use case for manifolded doubles — can shutdown the freeflowing side and breathe from the working one.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom