<font color='#000080'>
Quote:
| Originally Posted by [b Quote[/b] (Bob Cooper @ Aug. 29 2003,21:06)]The official DIR view is "if you think you need a pony, you realy need a twinset and if you don't think you need a twinset, you certainly don't need a pony"....or something like that anyway.
In other words you don't really need a pony. |
Bob, help me on this one, please.
I've spoken with lots of people using twin-sets and I'm pretty much sold on the benefits. I can see how they provide redundancy for system failure. What they don't do, in contrast with a pony, is provide bail-out for OOA situations.
Now, I understand, and have said more than once elsewhere, that planning for OOA is just bad gas management. However, I can envisage a scenario where problems might occur on a dive which distract you from monitoring your air supply. In those very situations, your gas consumption is likely to increase. It is not unforseeable that you can find yourself sucking on an empty tank. A pony is obviously invaluable in this situation. A sharp wake-up call when the tank empties and then a separate source to get you to the surface.
I can't see how a twin user would cope with this situation. I appreciate the rule of thirds, but in this case it doesn't really apply. Your views?