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!

boulderjohn

Technical Instructor
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
28,191
Reaction score
22,426
Location
Boulder, CO
# of dives
1000 - 2499
I am just looking at bsac reports.
2015 1 solo out of 9 fatalities
2016 1 solo diver out of 11 fatalities
2017 2 solo diver out of 10 total fatalities

Sample is all divers, given small amount of solo divers, they should not be presented at all, I would expect 0 incident per year, yet this is not the case.
As noted by Ucarkus, total numbers are meaningless if we do not know the percentages of the total populations.

A few years ago, someone remarked that over the last couple years, there were just as many cave diving fatalities with certified cave divers as non-certified divers, and he concluded that it showed there was no benefit to cave training. In reality, since probably 99% of cave dives are now done by people with some level of cave certification, the fact that the fatality numbers were about the same showed that a remarkably high percentage of non-certified divers die and a remarkably low percentage of certified divers die.

Since the overwhelming majority of divers dive either with buddies or in groups, if all other factors were equal, you would expect the overwhelming majority of the fatalities to be on dives with buddies or groups. I have no way of interpreting the relative danger of solo diving from those numbers.
 

Nemrod

Contributor
Messages
12,335
Reaction score
2,608
Location
Dixie/High Plains
Take it with bsac, I am sharing what I read, I rather trust them than someone random in the net.

So you cannot read what exactly was in your post yourself. You do not have to trust me or DAN, you can read it for yourself. The BSAC data is faulty because it includes buddy dives that became split and does not specify the level of training or equipment nor if the dive was a planned and equipped as such by a certified solo diver. Do not trust me, trust your own eyes.

And most of the people on this forum are not "somebody" or "anybody" but have long records of postings. You can agree with a forum member or not, of course, but using skewed BSAC data just because they are BSAC means "somebody" on the interwebs might be getting misled and it is not this "somebody."

James
 

boulderjohn

Technical Instructor
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
28,191
Reaction score
22,426
Location
Boulder, CO
# of dives
1000 - 2499
The simplest answer is that redundancy is an effective mitigation strategy. We don't need a study to tell us that. That's the purpose of logic.
The most effective risk mitigation you can do in regard to diving is to stay in bed every day, and then look for ways to mitigate the risk of bedsores. In all activities in life, we have to assume what level of risk we are willing to accept. Different people make different decisions.

I accept the fact that carrying a pony bottle mitigates risk--no question about it. As I said previously, for the overwhelming majority of my recreational dives, I do not use a pony, even though I accept that it mitigates risk. That is because I have decided that for me, the risk is not so great that I feel a need to carry one. That is my decision for the dives I do. Other people may make a different decision for the dives they do.
 

Wibble

Contributor
Messages
1,948
Reaction score
1,526
Location
UK
# of dives
500 - 999
AFAIAA BSAC doesn't approve of solo diving, being big proponents of the buddy system.
 

wetb4igetinthewater

Instructor
ScubaBoard Supporter
Scuba instructor
Messages
6,434
Reaction score
4,964
Location
Seattle
# of dives
500 - 999
The most effective risk mitigation you can do in regard to diving is to stay in bed every day, and then look for ways to mitigate the risk of bedsores. In all activities in life, we have to assume what level of risk we are willing to accept. Different people make different decisions.

I accept the fact that carrying a pony bottle mitigates risk--no question about it. As I said previously, for the overwhelming majority of my recreational dives, I do not use a pony, even though I accept that it mitigates risk. That is because I have decided that for me, the risk is not so great that I feel a need to carry one. That is my decision for the dives I do. Other people may make a different decision for the dives they do.
Oh really?

And what about this? How do we mitigate against this?


Imagine lying bed one moment and then..... :eek:
 

Ucarkus

Contributor
Messages
353
Reaction score
203
Location
Berlin, Germany
# of dives
1000 - 2499
So you cannot read what exactly was in your post yourself. You do not have to trust me or DAN, you can read it for yourself. The BSAC data is faulty because it includes buddy dives that became split and does not specify the level of training or equipment nor if the dive was a planned and equipped as such by a certified solo diver. Do not trust me, trust your own eyes.

And most of the people on this forum are not "somebody" or "anybody" but have long records of postings. You can agree with a forum member or not, of course, but using skewed BSAC data just because they are BSAC means "somebody" on the interwebs might be getting misled and it is not this "somebody."

James
When I am on a dive boat I often commence the dive with a big group then each goes their own way. I do not interpret this as buddy separation.
 

tursiops

Marine Scientist and Master Instructor
ScubaBoard Supporter
Scuba instructor
Messages
12,651
Reaction score
11,033
Location
U.S. East Coast
# of dives
2500 - 4999
When I am on a dive boat I often commence the dive with a big group then each goes their own way. I do not interpret this as buddy separation.
What do you interpret this as, if not buddy separation? Is your buddy there when one of you needs the other?
 

Ucarkus

Contributor
Messages
353
Reaction score
203
Location
Berlin, Germany
# of dives
1000 - 2499
What do you interpret this as, if not buddy separation? Is your buddy there when one of you needs the other?
The person is labeled as solo diver. If I am a solo diver commencing a dive in a group of 3, I will probably go my own way after entry. If I am a part of the other two, I would go on my way with my buddy and not worry about the whereabouts of the solo diver.
 

grf88

ScubaBoard Supporter
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
2,519
Reaction score
2,362
Location
Markham, Ontario
# of dives
1000 - 2499
The person is labeled as solo diver. If I am a solo diver commencing a dive in a group of 3, I will probably go my own way after entry. If I am a part of the other two, I would go on my way with my buddy and not worry about the whereabouts of the solo diver.
So when you do dive solo do you carry a redundant air supply of any type.
 

mac64

Contributor
Messages
1,041
Reaction score
763
Location
Ireland
# of dives
5000 - ∞
"Recreational" is more than depth....entering an unknown wreck, for example, is not recreational diving. What you are describing is dangerous diving...and usually commercial.
You’ve really thrown the cat into the pigeons now. So there’s recreational, commercial, scientific, military and dangerous. I think any dive at an unknown site has the potential to be dangerous. But my point is a reliable buddy in the water if conditions allow it or on the surface is a big advantage if things don’t go to plan.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Top Bottom