Christian wrote:


> > How did you know it's a "general consensus"?   It seems that the last
> > time I heard you use that expression, it was no more than just your
> > personal opinion.  :-))
>
> My original post was:
>
> > In the instances of both Remora and TUG II that is, quite simply, not
> > the case. Our general (GENERAL) consensus of opinion is that dives
> > below 35m should always be done on twins or at least with a very
> > serious pony bottle, about 500 litres of that (18 cu ft).
>
> Does that answer your question? :-))

It may have answered Strike's (although I doubt it), but I still would like
to know by what method this conclusion that there is a general consensus was
derived. .

> > >Today I almost always take the pony, even on the
> > >shallowest of dives.
>
> > Why?
>
> Because, in no particular order:

<snip of reasons that might be good, but don't address what I believe to be
Strike's question>

I think what prompted Strike's question was your use of the phrase "even on
the shallowest of dives". I don't know about your diving, but for most
divers I have worked with (and for me!), the shallowest of dives is probably
something like 10 feet. Do you really take your pnoy on those dives ? And if
so, why ?

Me, I think a pony has its uses, although I don't own one. My usual buddy
always stays close (although she is now out of commission for another 9
months again!), and otherwise I apply Feesh's rule, by diving only to my own
limit of a CESA. I practice those regularly, and they provide me with more
sense of security than a pony that may have developed any amount of faults
during the dive. I think ponies are useful in wrecking, extreme solo diving,
diving in very low visibility, and maybe for those who have not developed a
high level of proficiency/comfort yet, with the following caveat:

I have seen too many divers who allowed ponies to become a crutch for their
own lack of ability to recommend their general use. A bit like gloves,
really. They give you a superficial sense of security, unmatched by reality.
They diminish the perceived need for checking gauges religiously, because
there is always the reserve. But just like the old J-valve, it can be a
false security. Anything that has the potential to diminish your vigilance
is a bad idea, in my book anyway.

Just my 2 cents' worth.

Bjorn