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

[grf88]

This is how you distort it. I wrote he swam off despite signals. He is the one who is leaving. I guess it doesn't matter what I wrote, you are fixated to your conspiracy theories.

If he was your buddy it was your responsibility to follow him when he swam off, not to abandon him and join somebody else. Yes, you should choose not to dive with him again but by abandoning him you were ignoring your responsibilities. I have distorted nothing, you have stated what you would do and I have responded to that statement.

 

[rmssetc]

SCUBA is the only sport I can think of where people typically participate without 100% reliable redundant life support items

I take it that you have never been rock climbing.

While some climbing systems use redundant ropes, that's the exception, not the norm. Even in those cases, there are many life support items that have no redundancy, but they engineered with enough of a safety margin that the assumption is they will never break (similar to the idea that a first stage is designed never to fail closed).

There are similar issues in climbing with insta-buddies (insta-belayers). I will say that the normalization of deviance from the procedures we are trained to use, particularly in casual settings (shallow Caribbean reef, lead climbing in a gym) is much greater in SCUBA than in climbing.

In general, climbers are better and more consistent about buddy checks and have a greater understanding of their responsibilities to their partner.

[Begin deliberate simplification]
In SCUBA, a buddy is there in case of an emergency, not required unless there is an issue. In climbing, a buddy is essential and their mistake is often the cause of an emergency.
[End deliberate simplification]

 

[scubaozy]

I have a concern for those who get discouraged from using a pony by some of the twaddle that is posted. In my area where there is a lot of diving in cold water and a pony can be very beneficial in the event of a freeflow. Like you I do not giver a tinkers damn about how other view my own choices.

Stop playing the victim, not one person told you should not use pony except OP and he already is long gone.
Alone in this thread you have several posts like broken record starting with "some people ......"
I have also concern because according to bsac incident reports divers get into trouble because they used pony. We discuss it here so that people hear all possible outcomes.

If he was your buddy it was your responsibility to follow him when he swam off, not to abandon him and join somebody else. Yes, you should choose not to dive with him again but by abandoning him you were ignoring your responsibilities. I have distorted nothing, you have stated what you would do and I have responded to that statement.

Sorry but your own scenario counts on it that you are separated, so, you already left him and you planned it from the beginning that way. If my buddy is swimming off against my signals and our dive plan, warrants me to act and end that contract. I will not jump the cliff because my buddy did. Well, I am not a native speaker but it takes a lot of imagination to turn the phrase "if my buddy swims off" to abandoning the buddy.

 

[Lorenzoid]

While this is true, I've also found that those who use a pony, like myself since ditching my doubles/twinset, don't give a flying fig what others think about my use of a pony bottle. So I just laugh along as I read this thread. The arguments for or against are nothing more than an intellectual exercise in debate techniques. They aren't really going to sway anyone's opinion one way or the other.

Agreed. I think many of us are here debating because we're bored and can't go diving today. I don't think any of us intend to sway anyone else's opinion. If someone has made an informed decision, they should dive as they see fit. My only goal in this debate--other than to have fun in the intellectual exercise of debating--is to see that the reasoning on different sides of the issue (and it's multi-faceted, not just yes always use a pony or no never use a pony) is out there for newer divers to find in the future and make their own informed decisions.

 

[VikingDives]

An analysis of this post shows the real problem. You say you charge more and teach more, yet you are using the same agency and standards as the others who are looking at the cheapest route to certification.

• A quarter century ago I was certified in a course that I later realized skipped a whole bunch of standards in order to make the training cheap and efficient. I later taught for a shop with the same agency, and no standards were ever skipped.
• My niece is a certified NAUI diver, but she got that certification with one 2-hour pool session and one OW dive to 10 feet. NAUI standards demand much more than that.

A student fully taught according to WRSTC standards will be a competent beginning diver. The problem is that many, many dive operations around the world regularly ignore those standards.

I disagree with you when you say, "A student fully taught according to WRSTC standards will be a competent beginning diver. The problem is that many, many dive operations around the world regularly ignore those standards."

This isn't about deviation from standards. It is entirely possible, and often the case, that the student can meet the minimum standard, but still lack competence or basic skill in the water.

Being able to hold a Buddha hover for 60 seconds doesn't mean that the student has achieved an understanding of neutral buoyancy, but it meets the PADI standard. Teaching students on their knees meets standards for most agencies.

As a DM, I worked with a number of instructors that did not deviate from the standards, but taught students in a manner that did not lead to students to learn to dive correctly or comfortably.

 

[tursiops]

I disagree with you when you say, "A student fully taught according to WRSTC standards will be a competent beginning diver. The problem is that many, many dive operations around the world regularly ignore those standards."

This isn't about deviation from standards. It is entirely possible, and often the case, that the student can meet the minimum standard, but still lack competence or basic skill in the water.

Being able to hold a Buddha hover for 60 seconds doesn't mean that the student has achieved an understanding of neutral buoyancy, but it meets the PADI standard. Teaching students on their knees meets standards for most agencies.

As a DM, I worked with a number of instructors that did not deviate from the standards, but taught students in a manner that did not lead to students to learn to dive correctly or comfortably.

The WRSTC standards for the Open Water diver say:

"Open water certification qualifies a certified diver to procure air, equipment, and other services and engage in recreational open water diving without supervision. It is the intent of this standard that certified open water divers shall have received training in the fundamentals of 4 recreational diving from an instructor (see definition). A certified open water diver is qualified to apply the knowledge and skills outlined in this standard to plan, conduct, and log open-water, no-required decompression dives when properly equipped, and accompanied by another certified diver."​

You are quite correct in criticising many instructors, you are a bit misleading in criticizing PADI for its standards, but you are arguably unfair in criticizing the WRSTC standards.

 

[VikingDives]

The WRSTC standards for the Open Water diver say:

"Open water certification qualifies a certified diver to procure air, equipment, and other services and engage in recreational open water diving without supervision. It is the intent of this standard that certified open water divers shall have received training in the fundamentals of 4 recreational diving from an instructor (see definition). A certified open water diver is qualified to apply the knowledge and skills outlined in this standard to plan, conduct, and log open-water, no-required decompression dives when properly equipped, and accompanied by another certified diver."​

You are quite correct in criticising many instructors, you are a bit misleading in criticizing PADI for its standards, but you are arguably unfair in criticizing the WRSTC standards.

I don't think I was criticizing PADI, and while the intent of the WRSTC is laudable, the implementation (standards) that agencies have implemented to achieve that intent is lacking.

The only way this will change is if agencies set the bar higher, as long as a buddha hover is good enough to meet standards, people are going to teach that way.

There are signs of hope though, I was glad to see PADI's requirement that some skills be performed in neutral buoyancy for DM candidates to achieve a 5. Eventually I expect those skills will translate to some instructors teaching that way. It's a small step forward, but I hope it makes the average instructor a little better.

 

[tursiops]

I don't think I was criticizing PADI, and while the intent of the WRSTC is laudable, the implementation (standards) that agencies have implemented to achieve that intent is lacking.

The standards from the agencies could be better, but it is mainly the instructors that are the problems.

The only way this will change is if agencies set the bar higher, as long as a buddha hover is good enough to meet standards, people are going to teach that way.

I haven't seen a Buddha hover in a class or the ocean except once in the last 15 years, and that once was a diver watching a bait ball.

There are signs of hope though, I was glad to see PADI's requirement that some skills be performed in neutral buoyancy for DM candidates to achieve a 5. Eventually I expect those skills will translate to some instructors teaching that way. It's a small step forward, but I hope it makes the average instructor a little better.

Agreed.

 

[Wibble]

It's not just about teaching. A lot of the 'problems' are with people who don't want to practice, or worse still when they think they're good enough.

When I started I did my Open Water and then I was advanced, absolutely brilliant in the water, my card said so, and so did the resort diving shop people...

But diving there was easy. Clear, shallow, warm water with no perils. Didn't need no steeenking pony.

Going to the colder, tidal, dark, poor visibility waters of the north to dive on shipwrecks, a completely different kettle of fish. Absolutely need redundancy and to be self-sufficient. Ponys/twinsets rule in those environments.


Hey; it's all about people knowing enough to be able to choose to dive with a pony/redundancy or not.

 

[scubaozy]

The standards from the agencies could be better, but it is mainly the instructors that are the problems.

This is a failure of the whole system including the students, instructors, agencies and the dive centres. As a professional instructor my biggest problem was the time pressure. Every person learns the core skills in different pace but course is limited to 4 days. You have huge variable of human talent but fixed time. Generally this is sufficient but it can be borderline. Typical student will show up without having read the book and will take 1 day off in between either ear problem, general tiredness, or sometimes to practice basic kicks and snorkeling. So in average 5th day of their holiday they will be certified and that leaves them 1 extra day of diving of their week holiday and they will fly home.
1 (or more) year(s) later, they will go on holidays and when they check in they will barely be able to put their kits together. When I check in a diver <10 dives, as a guide, during that week usually divers nearly need to nearly relearn the core skills and if I am available, I will help them improve. Do I blame the instructor? No. Because when I certified my students they met the minimum requirements. I am pretty sure their instructor did a good job as well.
Above case is a good dive centre I worked. The less good one will immediately offer them an AOWD and student will now have to relearn diving within same week and get a pass to dive to 30m.
Its the whole system that is causing the problem. I actually in contrast worked with very few dud instructors, I cannot share the same sentiment that it is the instructors that are the problem.