Poor Man's Doubles ???

[PerroneFord]

Vicente,

The idea with the pony bottle is "what problem is it solvig"? For too many, the problem it is aimed at is not having an attentive buddy. At 40ft, the competent diver is in safe range of the surface, and generally feels that even with a bad buddy, he can make it to the surface if things to bad. Once that diver begins to stretch to 80, 100ft, or deeper, they begin to think that redundant gas might be a good idea. And of course, they are right. Here is where the variance starts.

DIR subsribes to the idea of unified diving teams. So the buddy is the backup gas supply. Other agencies (and divers) feel differently, so the solution becomes a pony bottle. Two different solutions to a percieved problem. There is a difference. Suppose the problem at depth is getting caught in wire or line. Will the pony help? Suppose the diver gets badly cut on a wreck? Will the pony help? Suppose the mask or fin gets lost. Will the pony help? In DIR thinking, the team is the solution to a myriad of problems. It's a flexible solution that can offer more assitance than a pony bottle. But it can also cover the same thing a pony bottle would. Some feel that this places too much reliance on a "buddy" and the diver is no longer independent.

Obviously, at some point, the dive parameters really do call for redundant gas as more than just a convenience. The DIR solution is doubles. Other's choose a large pony.

It's just a difference in philosophy. Some agree with it, many don't. It is what it is.

 

[Vicente]

Hmmm, I see your point.

Thanks for the well-reasoned argument.

 

[rjack321]

Vicente,

The idea with the pony bottle is "what problem is it solvig"? For too many, the problem it is aimed at is not having an attentive buddy. At 40ft, the competent diver is in safe range of the surface, and generally feels that even with a bad buddy, he can make it to the surface if things to bad. Once that diver begins to stretch to 80, 100ft, or deeper, they begin to think that redundant gas might be a good idea. And of course, they are right. Here is where the variance starts.

DIR subsribes to the idea of unified diving teams. So the buddy is the backup gas supply. Other agencies (and divers) feel differently, so the solution becomes a pony bottle. Two different solutions to a percieved problem. There is a difference. Suppose the problem at depth is getting caught in wire or line. Will the pony help? Suppose the diver gets badly cut on a wreck? Will the pony help? Suppose the mask or fin gets lost. Will the pony help? In DIR thinking, the team is the solution to a myriad of problems. It's a flexible solution that can offer more assitance than a pony bottle. But it can also cover the same thing a pony bottle would. Some feel that this places too much reliance on a "buddy" and the diver is no longer independent.

Obviously, at some point, the dive parameters really do call for redundant gas as more than just a convenience. The DIR solution is doubles. Other's choose a large pony.

It's just a difference in philosophy. Some agree with it, many don't. It is what it is.

Damned Perrone, after a zillion threads bashing and hashing this around you got this one el perfecto. And succinctly too! I hold this up as the next 'sticky' in the DIR forum!

 

[Tagerisatroll]

I still don't get what the argument is against a pony. Perhaps someone can 'splain it.

I think PeroneFord has pretty much nailed it in his post.

The only thing I would add is often the DIR find themselves diving where many pony bottle would be useless as RAS because they aren't big enough to get back to the surface from the deepest point of the dive. So they get treated only as stages or deco-bottles in their training.