Fair enoughYes, there are recreational dives to unknown sites, but purely recreational divers should recognize and avoid situations beyond their recreational level training when they encounter them on those dives.
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
Fair enoughYes, there are recreational dives to unknown sites, but purely recreational divers should recognize and avoid situations beyond their recreational level training when they encounter them on those dives.
Yes, a pony does not cover all emergencies (nor sidemount or twins). But it goes a long way toward "I need a different source of air right now and for at least the next few minutes."I was just giving an example of how you may think you have covered every possible scenario only to find you’ve slipped up. That’s how accidents happen.
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.
My buddy:
YMCA certified in 1979. Yes her hose is out of place, she will tell you that is my fault like everything is because she had just done a practice drill with me and it is not fully stowed away yet. And "somebody" NAUI certified in 1968:
I do not know what somebodies excuse is but he overexposed that shot . I do not need a pony, I got a buddy! Thats is her closing on "somebody" in the back there!
N
That is because ponys have disadvantages vs a twinset. If you can use a twinset it is almost always better. Just because “some“ people say never in “any” situation (and to be honest I think those “some” people are rare) doesn’t mean a pony is widely useful.That is fine but some will decry the use of a pony bottle as an alternate air supply in any situation while happily using their doubles.
You should read the actual per incident reports rather than the summary, you should also read the report form that gets filled out in case of an incident which captures qualifications. If the fatality was a BSAC member then their qualifi cations are availabl.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
All U.K. diving fatalities are in the BSAC Incident Reports, if it was not a club dive or no BSAC members were involved to submit a report then the entry might rely on coast guard or RNLI reports.BSAC data does not magically include all dives. It is self reported by individuals or for organized group BSAC dives.
How many BSAC members do you think voluntarily report the discouraged solo dives? We may know how many ended with fatality or serious incident. But there is likely more underreporting of successful solo dives than of successful buddy dives, the type BSAC approves of.