Do you actually see people diving with pony bottles?

[Gareth J]

The youll know what the next question is...why?
off topic but.. I heard of a team of GUE dives that was exploring a wreck that im very familiar with recently not sure if its GUE or this particular group but they dont use lines for penetrations. One ccr diver got lost inside the wreck and spent 3 hours trying to find his way out - he shot an smb out of a small port hole and a buddy noticed he was overdue and went to see what the problem was ( yes he was solo after being seperated) - the diver was on his bailout and fortunately the second diver was able to smash a window and pass some more gas to him while others went in to rescus him...
and heres the punch line...
he still thinks you shouldnt have to use a line, that progressive penetration is the only safe way

Whilst I may have issues with some aspects of GUE. This really doesn't sound like GUE. They are fanatical about the use of lines, coming from the cave diving environment.
GUE have many positives, the focus on excellent buoyancy control, and good diving skills, etc. Progressive penetration, would be a no, no in a GUE team.

 

[Lorenzoid]

What exactly is your issue with it? I don’t quite understand why you object to a widely accepted best practice of carrying a redundant gas source in dive conditions that warrant it? I am curious as to what the hangup is? I suspect it is because GUE doesn’t do it that way, it’s not DIR or something along those lines. I base that on your “GUE makes everything hard” quip. That’s fine with me if that’s your reason, we don’t dive together.

Huh?

As I think I said way in the beginning of this thread, I have nothing against ponies. My system provides an alternative to a pony--it provides the redundancy that some rely on a pony for--that's all.

 

[Lorenzoid]

- You’re safer trained on your equipment than someone who is untrained on theirs. You realize this means nothing?

No, because that was not the context of my original comment. I expressed surprise that a dive boat would REQUIRE me to carry a pony (or alternatively, doubles) simply because that is their rule. For all the dive boat knows, I have never used a pony before in my life. Respectfully, are you reading the whole chain of posts when you make these comments?

- YOU have NO redundant gas. Your buddy has gas for you in the event of catastrophic loss of your gas. Unless you’re separated. This is no better than what two brand new OW divers have.
- The risk of being blown off a wreck and separated from your buddy in low vis water is why NJ divers carry redundant gas. Entanglement risk is why NJ divers carry redundant gas. It is not about some captain making rules. It is the reality of diving here.

These situations relate to having ENOUGH gas, not to "redundancy." I specifically asked whether the dive boat imposes this requirement for reasons of having enough gas to handle an emergency OR to handle equipment failures (i.e., redundancy), and Wookie said he believed the reason was redundancy. I think you're conflating gas planning with redundancy.

 

[Wookie]

No, because that was not the context of my original comment. I expressed surprise that a dive boat would REQUIRE me to carry a pony (or alternatively, doubles) simply because that is their rule. For all the dive boat knows, I have never used a pony before in my life. Respectfully, are you reading the whole chain of posts when you make these comments?



These situations relate to having ENOUGH gas, not to "redundancy." I specifically asked whether the dive boat imposes this requirement for reasons of having enough gas to handle an emergency OR to handle equipment failures (i.e., redundancy), and Wookie said he believed the reason was redundancy. I think you're conflating gas planning with redundancy.

Maybe I should be clearer. I carry a pony for redundancy. I do not carry enough gas to stop and solve a problem. It's if I have a failure of my main spring or for some reason the regulator fails to provide gas, I have enough gas in my pony to make a direct ascent with a safety stop from a recreational no stop depth at max ascent rate.

If I'm entangled in a deep mine at the same time, I will die.

 

[Lorenzoid]

Sorry, Wookie, I didn't mean to pin my confusion on you. You answered what you thought the dive boat was thinking: redundancy.

 

[Wookie]

Sorry, Wookie, I didn't mean to pin my confusion on you. You answered what you thought the dive boat was thinking: redundancy.

Not at all. When I ran a dive boat, we encouraged ponies for redundancy. We discouraged doubles because of the room they take up, and if folks have doubles, they will use the gas available.

 

[mainedvr]

Whilst I may have issues with some aspects of GUE. This really doesn't sound like GUE. They are fanatical about the use of lines, coming from the cave diving environment.
GUE have many positives, the focus on excellent buoyancy control, and good diving skills, etc. Progressive penetration, would be a no, no in a GUE team.

Also, just because a diver(s) have GUE training or stickers or whatever does not mean they follow said training or put it to good practice. I agree that does not sound like a "sound" GUE dive plan.

Since I have awaken this thread it really has taken off again....

 

[Lorenzoid]

Not at all. When I ran a dive boat, we encouraged ponies for redundancy. We discouraged doubles because of the room they take up, and if folks have doubles, they will use the gas available.

Encouraging is one thing, requiring is another.

Lots of boats discourage or don't allow doubles on rec-only trips because they take up too much room--I get that. Discouraging them because some people don't use them responsibly is a shame for the rest of us.

If a boat were to say "no doubles because they take up too much room" AND "you are required to take a pony," I guess I would choose not to dive with that boat.

 

[Diver-Drex]

Huh?

No, because that was not the context of my original comment. I expressed surprise that a dive boat would REQUIRE me to carry a pony (or alternatively, doubles) simply because that is their rule. For all the dive boat knows, I have never used a pony before in my life. Respectfully, are you reading the whole chain of posts when you make these comments?



These situations relate to having ENOUGH gas, not to "redundancy." I specifically asked whether the dive boat imposes this requirement for reasons of having enough gas to handle an emergency OR to handle equipment failures (i.e., redundancy), and Wookie said he believed the reason was redundancy. I think you're conflating gas planning with redundancy.

I’m clear on what contingency gas is. Your contingency is your buddy’s gas. You are relying on two things in the event of a catastrophic gas loss.
1) your buddy has enough gas to get you both back to the surface.
2) Your buddy is there to provide that gas.
Experience in NJ is that even with well trained divers in the water buddy separation occurs. 2 above should not be solely relied upon. The mitigation is that each diver carries an independent redundant gas source.
You have the means to provide this but apparently can’t get past what your GUE instructor is telling you. Learn and practice shutdown drills. Or dive with the crossover valve closed. Breath one tank down to rock bottom and then switch tanks. You have all of the same gas available for your dive but now you are protecting your contingency.
If there is a reason that you don’t think redundant gas is a good thing please explain that?
You’ve said your buddy being there is good enough for you. Maybe for the dives you do in the conditions you’re in that is sufficient. Strictly within OW limits this is acceptable to many (although criticism of the buddy system continues adnauseum on this board). But for 90fsw plus dives on wrecks with multiple entanglemt hazards in 30’ or usually less vis I don’t think it is sufficient. In 33 years of diving here I haven’t heard anyone argue against it because it just makes sense. And the certification agencies are in agreement with me as well.
We are now grilling the tenderized horse so no response is needed. We disagree. We don’t dive together so we can be good with that.

 

[uncfnp]

This really is a non argument. If you don’t like the rules of a dive boat or captain, don’t use them. There is a popular dive op in warm tropical waters that requires all divers to ascent as a group. I don’t like this so I I don’t dive their op.

As to requiring redundancy in NJ. We all know that even the best buddy pairs can fail. It just takes a moment of inattention, even less in poor viz or high current. We have seen the proof here on SB. I can’t fault a boat that requires another form of redundancy beyond buddies when the local dive conditions warrant it.