Pony bottle skills

[divad]

I use a slung pony sometimes and, by comparison, would feel kind of vulnerable and not in control with it back-mounted. Listen to these pony-haters. They actually know what they're talking about.

 

[michaelp68]

One other idea about slinging a bottle: Should you go further with your diving where you need stage bottles or deco bottles, then you will sling these. If you are used to having a "pony bottle" slung, it won't be any issue for you to make the transition. One thing to keep in mind is that whatever you do technique wise, it should be a building block skill for future more difficult and demanding dives. A back mounted pony won't help you here.

I hadn't thought about that. But it sure makes sense. Thank you.

Michael

 

[BigboyDan]

I deploy the reg and breath from my pony every day that I carry it. Parachutes should be checked often.

right!!


<profanity censored by mod>

 

[matt_unique]

Scary? Every major agency teaches diving to 130 ft (others cut it off at 80 or 100) without requireing a pony or any redundancy on OW no-stop dives. The methods taught for dealing with OOA/LOA emergencies are air sharring and controled emergency ascents. With adequate dive planning and adequate skills I think this works (although I think 130 is pushing things for a no-stop dive). What I find scary is that so many divers don't seem to have much confidance in these basic skills. The percieved need for a pony seems more rooted in a lack of proficiency in the basics of "buddy diving" and gas management.

There's no reason for an instructor to encourage redundancy for recreational no-stop dives and I'm certainly not aware of any training standards that require them to.

Certainly for dives in an overhead (real or virtual) other steps are needed but a pony doesn't cut it there either.

Ha ha ha, and we all know that if it's not taught in a recreational dive class then I guess we shouldn't do it. Redundancy is hammered in tech classes precisely to address unplanned needs (since the consequences are more severe with tech dives).

The scary reference in my thread was to see an instructor dismiss the notion of "unplanned needs". Your perception as to why some divers feel they need a pony may be right on for some, obviously not for all.

A CESA from depth is at best a risky last resport option to get air if a buddy is not able to assist. It is foolish to rely on the most dangerous options for safety when there are so many other (smarter) options available such as a pony bottle.

--Matt

 

[divad]

Really every one. So you go on a charter or resort boat and get assigned a lousy buddy. Then lets say that things go south because of your poorly skilled buddy who shouldn't be on that dive in the first place. Maybe your pony bottle or your rabits foot saves your bacon but what about the lousy buddy? It doesn't sound like much of a vacation to me.

There are all kinds of angles we can use to argue the merits of a pony bottle, solo diving or whatever but I don't see any justification for diving with some one if you have doubts about their ability to perform on the dive. I sure don't see where it should be the driving factor in other decisions. The mistakes just keep adding up.

And your argument against solo diving is what?

 

[MikeFerrara]

Mike, when you write about the perceived need of rec divers for a pony being rooted in a lack of proficiency . . . are you just stating a general view of the average rec diver with a pony? Do you think my perceived need for a pony is rooted in a lack of proficiency? What about the idea that the pony, or doubles, is a requirement of dive operators?

I'm of course not in a position to comment on your proficiency but, IME, it's often divers that are pushing the limits of their training, experience and equipment who lean towards a pony bottle. Not always but often. I think about the time a diver starts doing dives where they feel a need for a pony bottle they may benefit more from some entry level technical training. As far as the oporators go they have to do what they think is best but I get the impression that what they're saying is that they think these dives are beyond the where a "standard" rec rig is sensible and require a pony as the minimum addition. If they weren't afraid of cutting their business too much they might just require doubles.

You also mention air sharing and controlled emergency assents as options for dealing with ooa/loa emergencies. I'm wondering how deep is too deep, realistically, for a cesa to be performed successfully. 80 feet? 100 feet? 120 feet? 130 feet? More? Less?

Good question. I can't answer it for you though other than to say that IMO many rec divers dive too deep for the equipment and techniques they're using.

You also mention that there's no reason for an instructor to encourage redundancy for rec ndl dives. But I'm wondering if there's harm or risk from the redundancy, and if there's benefit from such redundancy.

Whenever you add equipment you also add complexity to the whole dive including emergency procedures. Emergency procedures need to be simple and commited to muscle memory/reflex. Configured well and practiced with I absolutely think there's benefit to having redundancy.

 

[MikeFerrara]

And your argument against solo diving is what?

For another thread.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Ha ha ha, and we all know that if it's not taught in a recreational dive class then I guess we shouldn't do it. Redundancy is hammered in tech classes precisely to address unplanned needs (since the consequences are more severe with tech dives).

Good point about the tech classes...and that might be one choice for a good place to examine options for conducting dives beyond where a diver confortable with the equipment and procedures you've been using. I think a pony is often just a patch for something that isn't working.

A CESA from depth is at best a risky last resport option to get air if a buddy is not able to assist. It is foolish to rely on the most dangerous options for safety when there are so many other (smarter) options available such as a pony bottle.

--Matt

I agree.

 

[divad]

For another thread.

Drat.

 

[doole]

Ha ha ha, and we all know that if it's not taught in a recreational dive class then I guess we shouldn't do it. Redundancy is hammered in tech classes precisely to address unplanned needs (since the consequences are more severe with tech dives).

The scary reference in my thread was to see an instructor dismiss the notion of "unplanned needs". Your perception as to why some divers feel they need a pony may be right on for some, obviously not for all.

A CESA from depth is at best a risky last resport option to get air if a buddy is not able to assist. It is foolish to rely on the most dangerous options for safety when there are so many other (smarter) options available such as a pony bottle.

--Matt

On this last CESA point I half agree - there are smarter options. The rest is bollocks.

Mike's observations are astute.

Why would I be put into the position of having to defend the notion of planning the damn dive and managing your damn gas?

Some divers do tend to go through a stage of 'more is better'. Dive your pony for a while - I actually did myself, admittedly. You'll get over it.