pony or spare air?

[halocline]

As long as you don't let it give you a false since of security and put your self into a hazardous position then why not. More air is more more time to get your self out of a tough spot that some of us newbies get ourselves into. On another note. If you burn through an al80 in a pool fast then a pony might be a better idea anyways.

There are several problems with these statements. First, IMO the very act of choosing a spare air implies a false sense of security, because those devices simply do not have enough gas to be a reasonable alternate air source in anything but the absolutely bare minimum shallow diving. Second, if you think that an alternate air source is a viable solution to getting "yourself out of a tough spot that newbies get themselves into," you're essentially trying to substitute equipment for diver judgement. That's dangerous. Try learning to avoid getting yourself into tough spots. Third, using a pony as compensation for "burning through an AL80 fast" is not providing a redundant air source, it's trying to extend your dive unsafely.

I know you probably did not mean these things in this way, but that's exactly what they do mean.

When will people learn that diver behavior results in safety, not unnecessary equipment? Certainly there are times for EXPERIENCED divers to carry a pony, for example solo diving in recreational settings, or, for multiple deep dives/day (i.e. liveaboard) when you might want to make sure you can extend a safety stop regardless of something like a tank o-ring blowing, or an unexpected visit from an OOA diver.

But brand new divers thinking that a pony makes them safer, rather than learning and using sound dive judgement (like some semblance of gas planning and proper buddy skills), are sorely mistaken.

 

[DaleC]

When will people learn that diver behavior results in safety, not unnecessary equipment?

I will agree with the sentiment as expressed but that is only telling half the story. One reason I carry a redundant air source is that I cannot always gaurentee the skill, reactions or physical position of the person I am diving with.

Some agencies expect a high level of training before certification and even make continued certification contingent on maintaining skills and reenforce reactions via repetition but most others will certify divers with a bare minimum of skills, demonstrated once, in a pool, and no stress testing at all.

I don't mind diving with those divers on occasion but I refuse to put my life in their hands. I don't see a RAS as unneccisary in that regard.

People with only known, educated and conscientious dive buddies probably won't have those issues.

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

I will agree with the sentiment as expressed but that is only telling half the story. One reason I carry a redundant air source is that I cannot always gaurentee the skill, reactions or physical position of the person I am diving with.

Some agencies expect a high level of training before certification and even make continued certification contingent on maintaining skills and reenforce reactions via repetition but most others will certify divers with a bare minimum of skills, demonstrated once, in a pool, and no stress testing at all.

I don't mind diving with those divers on occasion but I refuse to put my life in their hands. I don't see a RAS as unneccisary in that regard.

People with only known, educated and conscientious dive buddies probably won't have those issues.

In general I agree with you. I have several RAS systems and choose to dive with one when solo or instant buddy.

However, the context was New divers with RAS. These divers would be better off not diving with unknown, uneducated buddies. The RAS by itself does not cure them of the core issues, only patches a couple of specific scenarios.

It is kinda like a new driver dressing up in a nomex fire suit and crash helmet for a spin around the neighborhood. One could argue they are safer for the gear, but most people would agree that skills like paying attention, proper speed and looking at your sides are more important than the gear overkill since they prevent the accident instead of increasing you chance of survival.

 

[halocline]

One reason I carry a redundant air source is that I cannot always gaurentee the skill, reactions or physical position of the person I am diving with.

Diving in this situation, with an 'instabuddy', carries with it some of the characteristics of solo diving, given the fact that you're right, you just don't know how the other person is going to behave or react on the dive. A reasonably sized pony makes perfect sense in this situation. But that's a decision that's arrived at through analysis of the situation, not just some vague notion that "more gas is safer".

 

[Tortuga68]

OTOH, no-one ever died from having too much gas

It is kinda like a new driver dressing up in a nomex fire suit and crash helmet for a spin around the neighborhood. One could argue they are safer for the gear, but most people would agree that skills like paying attention, proper speed and looking at your sides are more important than the gear overkill since they prevent the accident instead of increasing you chance of survival.

You're talking about passive saftey (preventing an accident) vs active safety (minimising the impact of an accident)

A better driving analogy might be electronic stability systems (passive) vs airbags (active), since airbags can actually kill people - whereas I don't think wearing a firesuit or helmet is likely to have a negative outcome

 

[halocline]

OTOH, no-one ever died from having too much gas

In this context (new divers), carrying extra gas in an effort to increase safety can actually decrease it. New divers can easily use the perceived increased margin of safety to dive less conservatively. It's unlikely that many would admit to doing that, but in fact just the perception that they need extra gas is an admission that they are not confident in their dive safety otherwise.

Also, it is possible that some divers will be at increased risk of DCS from carrying extra gas. I'm convinced that if the 'big tank' trend in tourist locations like Cozumel continues to grow, we'll start seeing a higher incidence of DCS. These are divers with no deco/tech training, who want more gas so they dive deeper and longer. All other things being equal, deeper/longer rec diving will likely result in higher DCS incidence.

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

OTOH, no-one ever died from having too much gas




You're talking about passive saftey (preventing an accident) vs active safety (minimising the impact of an accident)

A better driving analogy might be electronic stability systems (passive) vs airbags (active), since airbags can actually kill people - whereas I don't think wearing a firesuit or helmet is likely to have a negative outcome

I guess I have a different view...

In my analogy, wearing a helmet restricts visual and auditory senses slightly increasing risk. More importantly, both the helmet and Nomex suit will tend to give as a sense of security (some of it false) and definitely a feeling of being a hot shot driver when most of us are not.

E BTW: I have a nice Harrison Ford type scar on my chin from an airbag, saved my life, but left a nice mark and 10 stitches.

 

[Rubber Duckie]

And worth every penny...

Ah... there's so much to question but I'll limit myself to this: Please explain what making an Al 80 last 1:30 in a pool has to do with redundant airsources? I'm very curious to hear your views on dive planning in this regard as it appears you and rubber duckie think a redundant airsource is used to extend a dive.

The last part of my post when I was talking about using a pony in a pool was supposed to be a joke. Earlier in my post I stated that a pony should be a backup only and you should be careful to not let it give you a false since of security.

 

[Tortuga68]

it is possible that some divers will be at increased risk of DCS from carrying extra gas. I'm convinced that if the 'big tank' trend in tourist locations like Cozumel continues to grow, we'll start seeing a higher incidence of DCS. These are divers with no deco/tech training, who want more gas so they dive deeper and longer. All other things being equal, deeper/longer rec diving will likely result in higher DCS incidence

That may be true, but the cause is pushing NDLs, not having too much gas

 

[halocline]

That may be true, but the cause is pushing NDLs, not having too much gas

Agreed, but if divers are taking more gas in order to extend their dives, then the two go hand in hand. I'm just saying that carrying larger volumes of gas implies a greater responsibility for dive planning and execution. Many of these divers are simply trying to compensate for less-than-stellar SAC rates by using a bigger tank, and are still just riding the computer. Not everyone, I'm sure!