Recreational Pony Bottles, completely unnecessary? Why or why not?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

In an actual emergency, why would I make various stops including a final safety stop?
In an actual emergency, I would agree with you. With an adequately sized pony, though, the failure of my primary regulator is merely an irritation. I wouldn't want to give up the benefits of a normal ascent when I don't have to. Clearly a YMMV situation.
 
In an actual emergency, I would agree with you. With an adequately sized pony, though, the failure of my primary regulator is merely an irritation. I wouldn't want to give up the benefits of a normal ascent when I don't have to. Clearly a YMMV situation.

Same here. I’m referring to the GUE MG calculations. Seems like something you’d do for a team technical dive. IMO it’s overkill for an NDL dive. But I’m not DIR/GUE. Just a personal observation.
 
I've been mostly out of the thread for a few days--diving! I'm glad to see the tone has turned polite again.

Same here. I’m referring to the GUE MG calculations. Seems like something you’d do for a team technical dive. IMO it’s overkill for an NDL dive. But I’m not DIR/GUE. Just a personal observation.
I'm happy to agree it's "overkill." Much of DIR/GUE could be seen as "overkill" in my opinion, and that's not a bad thing. One could say you over-train, over-prepare, over-reserve gas, and then when the SHTF there is a high probability you will be fine. There's a saying that goes something like, when the SHTF you shouldn't expect you will rise to the occasion but rather you should expect you will sink to the level of your preparation. Neptune forbid I get a few minutes less bottom time than other divers or have to deal with a bigger tank on my back to meet the minimum gas requirement!

As for the slow, stepped ascent that GUE refers to as a "minimum deco ascent," I believe the only aspect that is arguably advantageous over a traditional direct ascent is that it may help the divers maintain control; less likely to snowball into an uncontrolled ascent. I believe Boulderjohn has pointed out that from a deco perspective it's probably equivalent in net effect to an ordinary safety stop. If somehow, despite all the preparation, a diver runs out of gas or has a catastrophic reg failure, the team should be able to ascend calmly using the same minimum deco ascent they do all the time. That's best case--what you aim for, what you train to do. If, in all the excitement, the team misses one or two of these non-obligatory stops it is unlikely to spiral into an uncontrolled ascent, and they will still be okay. Or if the team is ascending with a distressed diver who isn't trained this way, they could still manage a controlled ascent and surface with plenty of gas.

Yeah, some aspects of the DIR/GUE system may seem like overkill. I like overkill.
 
I've been mostly out of the thread for a few days--diving! I'm glad to see the tone has turned polite again.


I'm happy to agree it's "overkill." Much of DIR/GUE could be seen as "overkill" in my opinion, and that's not a bad thing. One could say you over-train, over-prepare, over-reserve gas, and then when the SHTF there is a high probability you will be fine. There's a saying that goes something like, when the SHTF you shouldn't expect you will rise to the occasion but rather you should expect you will sink to the level of your preparation. Neptune forbid I get a few minutes less bottom time than other divers or have to deal with a bigger tank on my back to meet the minimum gas requirement!

As for the slow, stepped ascent that GUE refers to as a "minimum deco ascent," I believe the only aspect that is arguably advantageous over a traditional direct ascent is that it may help the divers maintain control; less likely to snowball into an uncontrolled ascent. I believe Boulderjohn has pointed out that from a deco perspective it's probably equivalent in net effect to an ordinary safety stop. If somehow, despite all the preparation, a diver runs out of gas or has a catastrophic reg failure, the team should be able to ascend calmly using the same minimum deco ascent they do all the time. That's best case--what you aim for, what you train to do. If, in all the excitement, the team misses one or two of these non-obligatory stops it is unlikely to spiral into an uncontrolled ascent, and they will still be okay. Or if the team is ascending with a distressed diver who isn't trained this way, they could still manage a controlled ascent and surface with plenty of gas.

Yeah, some aspects of the DIR/GUE system may seem like overkill. I like overkill.

Good summary. Also serves as confirmation that DIR/GUE is not for me. I prefer a risk-based approach. My level of planning & preparation is not one size fits all. It is tailored to the level of risk of a given dive.
 
Good summary. Also serves as confirmation that DIR/GUE is not for me. I prefer a risk-based approach. My level of planning & preparation is not one size fits all. It is tailored to the level of risk of a given dive.
Tailoring preparation to the level of risk of a given dive assumes one knows the level of risk. I get it that rec dives could probably be classified into maybe just a few different levels of risk, say (from my North American perspective) Caribbean reef bimble or North Carolina wreck dive or Great Lakes coldwater wreck dive, etc., and one could prepare based on those classifications. But it seems to me that in reality it's more of a continuous spectrum, and there could be dives that don't fall so obviously into one of the classes. I do not believe I'm capable of judging risk level that well. Maybe that comes with experience, and I'm not there. Maybe I'll never feel capable of closely tailoring my preparation to the level of risk, as the more experienced I become, the more I'll see how poor I really am at judging risk.
 
Tailoring preparation to the level of risk of a given dive assumes one knows the level of risk. [...] [T]he more experienced I become, the more I'll see how poor I really am at judging risk.

You aren't alone.

1638908245857.png


Absent a framework that allows people to quantify and think about various outcomes, our gut reactions are usually way off. Humans are really terrible at assessing risks.
 
Absent a framework that allows people to quantify and think about various outcomes, our gut reactions are usually way off. Humans are really terrible at assessing risks.

It’s a significant part of my day job. Personally, I think I’m pretty good at it. It isn’t an exact science but categorizing risk into various levels isn’t all that hard I find. Treating every single dive with the exact same level of risk personally makes little sense to me. YMMV of course.
 
It’s a significant part of my day job. Personally, I think I’m pretty good at it. It isn’t an exact science but categorizing risk into various levels isn’t all that hard I find. Treating every single dive with the exact same level of risk personally makes little sense to me. YMMV of course.

I agree, but most people (like the masked but helmetless cyclists) don't take the time to do so. I'm with you though, I like a lot of what GUE does in training, but they're a little to dogmatic for my personal taste.
 
It’s a significant part of my day job. Personally, I think I’m pretty good at it. It isn’t an exact science but categorizing risk into various levels isn’t all that hard I find. Treating every single dive with the exact same level of risk personally makes little sense to me. YMMV of course.
Not necessarily "exact same" on "every single dive"--that would be a bit dogmatic. But I try not to lose sight of the fact I could still drown in 20 feet of water at Blue Heron Bridge.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/peregrine/

Back
Top Bottom