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

[Celt]

Yes, 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.

Fair enough

 

[MichaelMc]

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.

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."

Yes, that does not solve everything, which is why solo training covers assessing risks, carrying other redundant gear such as line cutters and staying out of known riskier situations when solo. Especially situations with high risk of entanglement. Which is still not a complete solution, but nothing is.

For a diver without that solo training, redundant gas from a pony gives them an extra backup on gas for the buddy who may be momentarily less attentive and accessible. Whether that is worth it depends on conditions and how attentive and useful the buddy is.

 

[VikingDives]

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.

Sure. I'm not arguing that you should do every rec. dive with a redundant air source. You (and I) make decisions about relative risk and necessary mitigation, and I think that's correct.

I'm simply refuting the argument that a pony bottle is a liability.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

 

[Nemrod]

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

 

[BoltSnap]

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

May you both enjoy most awesome, safe and enjoyable diving together for many, many decades to come!!

 

[Blackcrusader]

Some dive buddies look farther away than they actually are.

 

[KenGordon]

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.

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.

 

[KenGordon]

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

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.

in fact though almost no U.K. solo divers have a solo diving card. It is practically pointless unless you want to solo dive at one or two inland sites. People generally become solo divers as result of getting bored with looking after new divers or because it is just logistically easier. It is blindingly obvious that you need redundant gas and so you commonly see that.

Many fatalities (I guess a third in the Incident Reports) involve separation, of course there is a question of cause and effect. Dead people are generally poor at keeping in touch with buddies. Unwell people might go for the surface without involving a buddy and in U.K. conditions you are unlikely to see where they went.

 

[KenGordon]

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.

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 is a membership organisation run by very active divers. Those people are all very aware of what really goes on.

Successful dives are not reported to HQ, they are supposed to be recorded by the local branch but often not as it is a bit of a hassle and not entirely obvious to people as why it is worth while.