Before debating skills vs. equipment, please consider Risk Compensation

[fyrdyvr]

What specifically did your instructor train you to do if you are deeper than 60' and you have an OOG emergency?

In an OOA emergency I would first try to notify my dive buddy and begin to share air, then make a slow controlled ascent (permitting enough air is available). If that is not possible then my next option would be to ditch my weights and make an emergency ascent exhaling the entire time. There were no specific instructions on doing this from over 60', I just recognize my limitations and know that I would be totally out of air before I surfaced from deeper than 60'

Another reason that I carry it is the possibility of an equipment failure. I know, I know...equipment today is so much better....it never fails. Maybe so, but the equipment is mechanical, made by humans, serviced by humans and used by humans so there is a chance it could fail. If it is my secondary, no problem, switch to my octo end the dive and I'm golden, but if my first stage fails....well now there's a whole new problem. My decision to use the pony is for emergencies only, not to extend my dive times. I guess everyone is entitled to use them how they see fit.

 

[mikemill]

bfw: In case you didn't know, you can use the "M-Quote" button to quote multiple posts at once. That way you can have one reply instead of 10

 

[Thalassamania]

It has everything to do with living long enough to reproduce and not dying before successfully breeding. That, and/or the ability to make sure your offspring do the same.

For most of primate evolution, smartest has been a good approximation of fittest, at least until we created societies that protect the stupid from their own choices.

You don't have a significant biological background, do you?

 

[GeorgeC]

.....I don't debate your explanation of the idea that traffic accidents increased after the installation of air bags. It's a fact! People do drive more recklessly when they believe they will be protected. I don't find it a stretch to assume divers would do the same thing.

Great Post REG!

I would like to see some data to prove air bags cause people to drive more careless causing more accidents. I don’t believe people say I have an airbag so I can speed. The airbag is not a “visual” device. Air bags are packed behind the dash, steering wheel and the A & B post therefore they are not tangible. If they are not tangible the driver does not know what to expect from its deployment as most of us have never had the first hand experience of an airbag deployment.

The larger SUV speeding or skidding through an intersection is due to lack of training. Did the person ever take the SUV in a closed area during rain/snow and slam on the breaks, take sharp turns, compare the skidding distance that with a smaller car. I don’t think so.

The pony on the other hand is tangible and consciously part of your gear. You know it is there and hopefully you understand why it is there. It should be considered like the airbag there if you need it but not to rely on to make it part of your dive plan.

As far as a pony making you more risky take this example. Lets assume deco is not a concern due to the depth and my plan is to return to the boat with 30 cf in my tank. I dive a single tank without a pony and return to the boat with 30 cf in my tank as planed.

Now “being more risky” I dive with a 30 cf pony on the same dive, look at my gage calculate 30 cf remaining in my back gas. Knowing I have a pony I take the risk and dive longer. I return to the boat with 15 cf remaining in back gas and 30 cf in my pony. Does this dive have a higher risk with the pony than without? With the pony I have a total of 45 cf of total gas back on the boat. The second dive I simply made the pony part of the dive plan. Albeit on the spot but nonetheless it is part of the plan. I don’t think the pony made me more risky as it simply leveled the playing field.

I like the post and it drives home the fact that the pony should be used solely as a piece of gear for an emergency situation only and never used as “let me stay a little longer as I have all this extra gas”

 

[mikemill]

I would like to see some data to prove air bags cause people to drive more careless causing more accidents. I don’t believe people say I have an airbag so I can speed. The airbag is not a “visual” device. Air bags are packed behind the dash, steering wheel and the A & B post therefore they are not tangible. If they are not tangible the driver does not know what to expect from its deployment as most of us have never had the first hand experience of an airbag deployment.

There have been studies done that show the air bag thing. A lot of this is based on one's perception which may not be conscious. In fact you really can't rely on what people say.

And the devices don't have to be visual. Just knowing it is there is enough. Heck one could probably do a test and just say some device has been added to makes them safer and we'd get the same statisical result.

My ABS isn't visual and the only feedback I get from it is the thumping of the break when it gets activated (which btw everyone that has it should engage in a controlled environment so they know what it is like).

I believe that training and experience also has a similar effect. You feel safer doing the normal routine and push it a little further bit by bit.

 

[don Francisco]

Great Post REG!

I would like to see some data to prove air bags cause people to drive more careless causing more accidents.

George-
Risk compensation is very subtle and happens at the fringes. A driver with airbags may not drive faster, but might be more likely not to wear seatbelt. A driver with 4WD or ABS brakes may not drive faster, but might be more likely to take the car out in poor road conditions where he might otherwise stay home.

In a similar vein, simply having a pony probably won't cause you to breathe your tanks lower, but might make you more comfortable with a deeper dive, or affect your decision process if you saw mating eagle rays near the end of your dive.

By increasing your comfort factor, safety equipment subtly effects your decision making processes, making risks that seemed high before acceptable now.

----------------------

I don't know of data on risk compensation and air bags, but this isn't new science and the phenomenon was documented 40 years ago with the advent of radial tires.

As radials became more common in the USA, it was expected that their superior road handling properties would lower the rate of accidents due to loss of control. For a little while that seemed to be happening, however within a few years the injury rate not only crept back to prior levels, it went higher.

It seems that drivers adpated to the tires, and soon found that they didn't need to slow down as much to negotiate a given curve. Eventually they had the same rate of accidents, but now they were having them at higher speeds, thus suffering more serious injuries. This is one example where a technological improvement that should have saved lives had the opposite effect.

It will be very interesting to study DANs data on DCS over the next few years and see how the increasing percentage of divers using computers affects the rate of DCS.

dF

 

[LeadTurn_SD]

In an OOA emergency I would first try to notify my dive buddy and begin to share air, then make a slow controlled ascent (permitting enough air is available). If that is not possible then my next option would be to ditch my weights and make an emergency ascent exhaling the entire time. There were no specific instructions on doing this from over 60', I just recognize my limitations and know that I would be totally out of air before I surfaced from deeper than 60'

Another reason that I carry it is the possibility of an equipment failure. I know, I know...equipment today is so much better....it never fails. Maybe so, but the equipment is mechanical, made by humans, serviced by humans and used by humans so there is a chance it could fail. If it is my secondary, no problem, switch to my octo end the dive and I'm golden, but if my first stage fails....well now there's a whole new problem. My decision to use the pony is for emergencies only, not to extend my dive times. I guess everyone is entitled to use them how they see fit.

<Sorry, this is a hijack of a really good thread.>

fyrdyvr : I highlighted the section of your post that caught my attention. I'm not being critical or trying to be contrary (well maybe just a little), but a lot of divers think "if I'm below 60' and go OOA and my buddy is too far to reach, and I don't have a pony, I'm screwed".

That does not need to be true.

Thalassamania mentioned to you several posts back that a skill-based solution for making an emergency swimming ascent exists (yes, from 60' or more). He's right, as usual.

That really bears some more thinking about, before automatically deciding a 60' ESA as just not humanly possible for you, and the only solution is an equipment solution (pony), rather than a training solution (learning and continuing to practice ESA after OW class).

I'm not saying that carrying a pony is wrong, or that an ESA is something to plan on as your first solution to OOA. I just wanted to point out that the reason you stated that you might need a pony may not be completely accurate.

I'm not sure how most current OW courses teach ESA's (other than the PADI OW course my kids took a couple years ago, where they performed ESA's from only about 30').

My training in the 70's, while still PADI, was quite different. Maybe it was just the instructor (ex-Navy diver). But we did ESA's from about double that depth (about 60'), as a course requirement. None of us got bent or embolized, and while not exactly "easy" it was far easier than you'd expect. It builds a lot of confidence knowing that you CAN get to the surface safely from a lot deeper than you'd expect.

Oh, and we did NOT drop our weights. We swam up.

Safe Diving!

 

[Dan Weidert]

I started diving at a time when most of the equipment used today to mitigate risk didn't exist. My experience has led to my belief that equipment failure or going OOA, neither of which I have ever experienced, is a remote possibility for me. Because of that I do not and never have used an octo or pony. Some will say it is risky behavior but to me it isn't.

Captain,
Is not having a back up second stage not risky behavior for you because
A) it hasn't happened in the past so that predicts it is unlikely to happen in the future?
B) your skills and behavior put you in a lower risk category than most?
C) the equipment you own is safer than most?
D) others overstate what the risk really is?
E) some combination of the above?

Dan

 

[novicediver]

Turns out to be quite the interesting topic. I wonder if or how it would be possible to do a study of diver's behaviors vs training vs equipment vs accident rate. Obviously it cannot predict individual behaviors, but would be food for thought as people progress through different specialties.

 

[captain]

Captain,
Is not having a back up second stage not risky behavior for you because
A) it hasn't happened in the past so that predicts it is unlikely to happen in the future?
B) your skills and behavior put you in a lower risk category than most?
C) the equipment you own is safer than most?
D) others overstate what the risk really is?
E) some combination of the above?

Dan

I would say A, B and C
The past is no predictor of the future but it is a very good indicator.
I do not push limits, I stay in physical condition, I keep close watch on my SPG. I dive my plan and know when to thumb a dive.
I maintain my own equipment and use simple reliable systems that I am totally familiar with.

In general the risk may be overstated but divers using rental gear are at the mercy of whoever maintains it which is an unknown I don't have.
Any combination of the above helps.