Pony Bottle Reg Use

[letterboy]

I am starting this so as not to hijack someone elses thread

I was told that it is safer/better if you carry a pony bottle to also have a octo off your primary tank. I do this for redundancy i get the whole less is more thing. does anyone out there dive the same way with one primary, one octo and a pony reg? if not why? if so why?

John

 

[Curt Bowen]

I am starting this so as not to hijack someone elses thread

I was told that it is safer/better if you carry a pony bottle to also have a octo off your primary tank. I do this for redundancy i get the whole less is more thing. does anyone out there dive the same way with one primary, one octo and a pony reg? if not why? if so why?

John

You were told wrong.

If you have an octo on your primary reg you are just adding points of possible failure to your system. Someday your dive may be ended because your octo on your primary reg develops a leak, blows, or the octo free flows.

The pony with its own second stage and pressure gauge is all you need.


If you dont need it, dont take it.

 

[letterboy]

You were told wrong.

If you have an octo on your primary reg you are just adding points of possible failure to your system. Someday your dive may be ended because your octo on your primary reg develops a leak, blows, or the octo free flows.

The pony with its own second stage and pressure gauge is all you need.


If you dont need it, dont take it.

i have been hangng out hear reading and i just read the post you made from the thread i pulled this from. it makes sense that i should go for the less is more approach, after all don't want you guys reading about me in the Accidents forum. . .

Thanks for your insight,
John

 

[idratherbediving]

john,
just get the doubles and the iso valve. then you wont be swimming sideways anymore. lol, inside joke

 

[Kestrell]

For what it's worth, I'll be purcasing a 30cuft pony and I'm keeping my octo. I think the whole "additional point of failure" thing is over done. I do not mean to criticize anyone own choices, DIR, non-DIR, or somewhere in between, or somewhere completely different. The way I look at it however is if adding points of failure were that big of a problem 747's would have one big jet engine instead of four.

 

[teknitroxdiver]

Jet engines are far more reliable than octo regs.

 

[MSilvia]

The way I look at it however is if adding points of failure were that big of a problem 747's would have one big jet engine instead of four.

Bad example. Extra engines add redundancy in a way an octo does not. If a single engine failure meant that the plane would suddenly begin dumping fuel at a rapid rate, it might be a valid comparison. Then again, if an engine fails, the pilots don't suddenly switch over to another engine... they're all working at the same time.

Two tanks with independant regulators is like having two engines with independant fuel sources. One tank with two second stage regulators is not, unless it has an H valve with isolatable first stages as well.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

 

[montyb]

Because I travel to dive in SC without a dive buddy I kept my octo on my primary rig. I also have a 13 cu ft. pony with a conshelf XIV 1st stage and 2nd stage with Sherwood button HP guage on the 1st. stage. If there is someone on the boat that I want to dive with I will, if not I sling the 13 and dive by myself. So it would really be inconvient to be taking the octo off and on depending on a buddy. Have not had any failure problems with the octo as of yet.
montyb

 

[letterboy]

Bad example. Extra engines add redundancy in a way an octo does not. If a single engine failure meant that the plane would suddenly begin dumping fuel at a rapid rate, it might be a valid comparison. Then again, if an engine fails, the pilots don't suddenly switch over to another engine... they're all working at the same time.

Two tanks with independant regulators is like having two engines with independant fuel sources. One tank with two second stage regulators is not, unless it has an H valve with isolatable first stages as well.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

Over analyzing it???

I got what you meant Kestrell

John

 

[Curt Bowen]

For what it's worth, I'll be purcasing a 30cuft pony and I'm keeping my octo. I think the whole "additional point of failure" thing is over done. I do not mean to criticize anyone own choices, DIR, non-DIR, or somewhere in between, or somewhere completely different. The way I look at it however is if adding points of failure were that big of a problem 747's would have one big jet engine instead of four.

First, This answer is not directed at Kestrell. Its just open thinking on my side.

Your probably correct and we are talking recreational limit diving so adding 9 to 11 possible points of failure is acceptable.

I choose to remove these 9-11 failure points and clean up my gear a little more.

For those who do not undersatnd the 9-11 failure points.

Standard Octopus Second Stage Failure Points.

1. LP Hose O-ring at the first stage
2. LP hose itself
3. LP Hose O-ring at the second stage (octo)
4-9. Normal regulators can contain 3-6 O-rings
10. Low pressure seat in second stage
11. Spring


In technical diving we attempt to remove as many possible points of failure as possible. But, we are talking recreational diving here, so we dont need to concern ourselves with increasing the chance for failure by adding extra equipment that serves no purpose.

Pile it on and dont worry about clipping anything up, let it all hang free.