Is safe second really needed?

[rjack321]

This whole thread reminds me of another phrase from the same original source. Something about "beyond the pale".

Oh, and And "Rule 1".

Not only am I going back to to buddy breathing, I will raise you a SPG with a J-valve!!



I can see the allure of vintage gear for the proficient, but don't see most divers as remotely proficient.

 

[Nemrod]

I have racked my brain for months trying to answer that question. "Is safe second (octo) really needed for open water diving?" I see and know the necessity for a long hose primary and a short secondary in wreck, cave or technical diving (when i wreck dive I use a proper set up). So this question is strictly regarding recreational open water dives within the NDL. In my 14 years of diving I have never been in nor been able to think of a situation where buddy breathing would not suffice, but a "octo" could. To me it seems the only thing an "octo" is good for is beating reefs and a kelp anchor, because those "octo keepers" don't work worth a damn. With this in mind my (very experienced) buddy and I removed our "octos" about 8 months ago. Since then we get dirty "unsafe" looks from people and DM's, once in a while some one says "we are dangerous and need an octo so we can share air." To that we have replied "Why is that? Isn't that is why they invented Buddy Breathing". To date no diver nor DM has been able to come up with a better answer than "It is easier', or because PADI said so bla bla bla. And I have even received a "Hell Yeah, stick it to him" from an old timer. As of now I personally think an "octo' is a security blanket for the inexperienced or under trained diver.

So here is the true question can anyone give me a valid reason why I should carry a "octo" on open water dives? And further more a situation where buddy breathing would not work, but an "octo" would. Please justify your reasoning and back it up with a story if possible. Or if you agree, leave a "Hell Yeah".

PS: don't tell me to get a BC air source, they are annoying and hinder effective manual inflation of the air cell.

I often don't use an octopus/safe second, particularly for shallower or benign conditions. It is just more junk to tote around and increase failure rate. A friend cruises along below with no BC, no octo, no extra junk, single stage double hose reg. Bullet proof, no O rings, reliable to a fault.

Minimalist diving is the future:

Does Lance Armstrong have training wheels on his race bike?

N

 

[pittyyofool]

Minimalist diving is the future:
N

I completely agree, and I like your rig, I like being a minimalist to as said in this earlier post. http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/4388491-post69.html I am nowhere near the minimalist as you, on most dives, but a few I have come close.

Why carry all that extra crap anyway?
Do you carry around a role of TP just in case the restroom's dispenser does not work?

 

[Reg Braithwaite]

Do you carry around a role of TP just in case the restroom's dispenser does not work?

Travel much? ;-)

 

[Slonda828]

This whole thread reminds me of another phrase from the same original source. Something about "beyond the pale".

Oh, and And "Rule 1".

I invoke JeffG's law!

JeffG's law:
As the thread gets longer on Scubaboard, the chance of DIR coming up approaches 1.

Congratulations to nadwidny, for being the first special needs diver of the thread to prove JeffG's law. *clap, clap*

 

[Teamcasa]

"Is safe second (octo) really needed for open water diving?" <snip>
With this in mind my (very experienced) buddy and I removed our "octos" about 8 months ago.<snip>
Isn't that is why they invented Buddy Breathing".

Since the Octos 1st job is to provide an alternate source of air for your buddy, I say as long as you and your buddy are on the same page, your risks are minimal.
However, the Octos other job is to give you something to use should your primary fail and if you end up separated, no matter the reason, you will be re-thinking that decision pretty fast.

 

[captain]

However, the Octos other job is to give you something to use should your primary fail and if you end up separated, no matter the reason, you will be re-thinking that decision pretty fast.

Considering a second stage is half of the whole then that logic would be to always have a complete second regulator not half of one because you don't know which half might fail. So in reality it is a half safe second. So everyone will now needs either doubles, a pony or an H valve.

 

[pittyyofool]

However, the Octos other job is to give you something to use should your primary fail and if you end up separated, no matter the reason, you will be re-thinking that decision pretty fast.

as Captain pointed out that logic is only true if you 2nd stage fails. If somehow your 1st stage fails in a way that does not result in a increased IP causing a free flow. You are still up s#!?s creek with out a paddle no mater how many safe 2nd's, 3rd's and 4th's you may have. In the event of a 1st, or 2nd stage failure modern regulators are designed to free flow, which is a completely manageable situation. Just bite on one side of the mouth piece and breath and return to the surface, allowing the excess air to escape. (or do they not teach that any more either?)

 

[Teamcasa]

as Captain pointed out that logic is only true if you 2nd stage fails. If somehow your 1st stage fails in a way that does not result in a increased IP causing a free flow. You are still up s#!?s creek with out a paddle no mater how many safe 2nd's, 3rd's and 4th's you may have. In the event of a 1st, or 2nd stage failure modern regulators are designed to free flow, which is a completely manageable situation. Just bite on one side of the mouth piece and breath and return to the surface, allowing the excess air to escape. (or do they not teach that any more either?)

I can also dive with one fin but using two is much eaisier.

 

[pittyyofool]

I can also dive with one fin but using two is much eaisier.

I can also dive with 2 second stages but it is easier with only one. :reduced drag, less risk of endangerment, fewer failure points.