What's your pony bottle configuration?

[dumpsterDiver]

The only objection that I have heard to slinging a pony bottle is that some bug hunters claim that a slung pony gets in their way when they are trying to reach into holes (hopefully with tickle sticks...). I sling my AL 19.

Yes there is no doubt that a slung bottle can get in the way. Back mounted is much less obtrusive. On the other hand, the slung pony is safer for a number of reasons. The diver needs to make their own safety versus convenience analysis,

I prefer the simplicity of a back mounted pony, with a button guage and no octopus on my primary tank. The pony reg is worn on a necklace and donation of this reg is not the first option.

As for the size of the pony, 6, 13 and 19 are reasonable for certain applications in recreational diving, Too many people go for the "safer" 30 bottle, but after a while they realize they never need it and decide to leave it on the boat or at home. Convenience and simplicity are important facors in selection of the rig.

As for Doc WU, I think a pony bottle must have stolen his high school girlfriend or something. Maybe he has never recovered from the trama. He can never leave a pony thread alone. I think we should tell him that if he doesn't like pony bottles that he can go....... SUCK ON SOMETHING ELSE!

 

[DevonDiver]

Back-mounted pony is fine for basic, recreational scuba diving. It can be a 'line trap' - which means an entanglement hazard- so that means it isn't the best option for wreck or cavern diving... or in other entanglement areas (kelp, fishing lines etc). Because it is behind the back, it is much easier to get snagged in line... and much hard to untangle.

Those just aren't major issues for the majority of divers, so back mounted remains a generally fine option. But divers should be prepared to modify or amend their configurations when the circumstances demand it.

I dive a lot of wrecks... so I stopped back-mounting my pony long, long ago. I moved onto using a slung pony, with EANx36. I've seen divers get bent 'niggles' after incidents that led to quick ascents.. so the safety factor of doing any incident related ascent, plus safety stop, on nitrox was a factor I liked.

I hardly ever use a pony nowdays. It's either a single cylinder..or if the scenario demands redundancy... I go the whole hog (pun intended) and wear doubles.

 

[tc]

---

---

A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

Some off topic posts, arguments and personal attacks have been removed. If you's like to continue the argument feel free to take it to PM's. If it continues here it will be removed and the offender(s) banned from the thread.

Keep it civil please.

---

 

[Crush]

Edit: I posted, then read TC's comment, then removed my repartee.

Thanks for keeping it civil, TC.

My response would have only inflamed matters. I am glad that you are on the job.

 

[elmer fudd]

As for the size of the pony, 6, 13 and 19 are reasonable for certain applications in recreational diving, Too many people go for the "safer" 30 bottle, but after a while they realize they never need it and decide to leave it on the boat or at home. Convenience and simplicity are important facors in selection of the rig.

I think this is an excellent point. There's no doubt that more air is better in the event of an emergency, but if something is too inconvenient then you are more likely not to use it at all. In an OOA emergency, even a Spare Air is better than the 40 cf pony that you left in the car because it was too cumbersome.

 

[DevonDiver]

In an OOA emergency, anything that that will provide you with sufficient air to reach the surface is a benefit.

Whilst CESA is always an option for non-overhead dives, a redundant air source provides you with a more comfortable ascent.

You don't really need to carry redundant air for depths in which you could easily CESA. For deeper depths, where CESA would be more challenging..or where the risk of DCI higher, a suitably sized redundant air source is strongly recommended. If a redundant air source is carried, it should be capable of providing air for the entire duration of the emergency ascent. That is not true for Spare Air in many of the circumstances in which a diver would wish to opt for redundancy.

 

[halocline]

Darn, I wonder if skydivers have to justify their choice to use a backup chute,

In sky diving, if your chute fails, you die. You don't feel that way about regulator failure in recreational scuba diving, do you? If so, you're not trained very well.

The basic argument many people have against pony use, and it is valid, is that some divers choose to use a pony because they are not following safe recreational diving practices, usually without even realizing it. Of course everyone gets offended when they're accused of this, but it does happen. Certainly not everyone does so, hence the ongoing war of words.

Nobody on this forum can say definitively whether or not pony use in recreational diving increases or decreases safety. The only way to determine that would be with statistical studies that show a clear correlation one way or the other, and I really doubt that exists. Pony users (occasionally myself included) "feel safer", thats why they do it, but that does not necessarily translate into an actual increased margin of safety.

 

[manni-yunk]

In sky diving, if your chute fails, you die. You don't feel that way about regulator failure in recreational scuba diving, do you? If so, you're not trained very well.

.

UMMM - no. If a parachute fails - cut away and pull the reserve.


Its been probably 10 years since my last solo jump - but I was misfortunate enough to have an issue on my first. Luckily my training was good enough to fix it easily - if it was not repairable (during freefall) I could have just cut away - then engaged my reserve. MANY chute issues are repairable during freefall if you keep your head, dont freak out and remember your training.


Actually the analogy to skydiving with a reg and chute is perfect.

I think most skydivers if not all, have a reserve chute so that they do NOT die in the event of a primary failure.

 

[halocline]

UMMM - no. If a parachute fails - cut away and pull the reserve.

Actually the analogy to skydiving with a reg and chute is perfect.

I think most skydivers if not all, have a reserve chute so that they do NOT die in the event of a primary failure.

Sorry, I should have made this easier for you to understand. In sky diving, you are absolutely relying on a chute to keep you from dying, correct? Jump out of a plane, no working parachute, game over. In scuba diving at recreational depths and environments, if your regulator fails, you can either breathe off a buddy's reg, or worst case, simply swim to the surface. This is, in fact, the foundation of safety in recreational, open water diving. You do understand this, don't you?

That's a fundamental difference that erases any validity of the analogy in question. For deep technical diving in environments that prevent access to the surface, sure. But, diving in those environments requires much better training and full redundancy.

 

[manni-yunk]

Sorry, I should have made this easier for you to understand. In sky diving, you are absolutely relying on a chute to keep you from dying, correct? Jump out of a plane, no working parachute, game over. In scuba diving at recreational depths and environments, if your regulator fails, you can either breathe off a buddy's reg, or worst case, simply swim to the surface. This is, in fact, the foundation of safety in recreational, open water diving. You do understand this, don't you?

That's a fundamental difference that erases any validity of the analogy in question. For deep technical diving in environments that prevent access to the surface, sure. But, diving in those environments requires much better training and full redundancy.

LOL with this response - thanks for making it easier for ME to understand. The analogy was more to do with life and death reliance on gear - and redundancy. For a teacher - I would expect that you would have been more clear in your original post. You made an analogy to a sport that you likely have NEVER participated in and if you have -at best it was tandem and with no training. Jump out of a plane - shoot fails - go to backup. Very similar analogy.

Can you "simply swim to the surface" from the recreational depth of 130,or 120, or even 100 ft? I dont think so. And unfortunately Buddy breathing is not always an option. It should be - but it is not.

I understand buddy breathing and absolutely respect the need to buddy dive (it has saved my life at 117ft) . I still dont enter the water with MY redundancy on YOUR back. The real world of diving (not the utopian idea where everyone is trained equally and has adequate skills and similar gear) means that you might get teamed up with a buddy that doesnt react well to the emergency and necessary action steps of "sharing air". It also means that although avoided at all cost - buddy seperation can and does happen all the time.

Maybe if more people treated their gear configuration like a parachute - and had less reliance on a buddy, while still requiring a buddy in close proximity - we would all be a little but safer.