Move the tank valve up front?

[fisherdvm]

Well, maybe not completely. But with the advent of durable HP flexible hoses, I can not see why we can not have valve integrated BC's. My idea of a safety feature is a Yoke or DIN adapter from the back of the BC to the traditional tank valve. This then is lead to the FRONT of the BC to two separate valves, which then you can mount your two separate regulators first stages.

Kinda like the redundancy of the H valve, but accessibility of easy to find valves. Since tank failure is low, you would have the reliability of double regs, first stage, etc...

Why isn't this a good idea?

 

[Walter]

It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[fisherdvm]

Makes it easier to turn on and off valves in case of emergency (free flow), make it easier to find your regulator....

 

[rakkis]

- Keeping the components separate makes it easy to use differect brands/models interchangeably.

- Why would you need the valve in front? What problem does it solve that a good buddy check doesn't? I don't see how doing this would be a safety feature. Please explain. Also, adding more valves in series increases the chances of just one of them being closed when you jump in and thus not supplying you with air.

- A big part of the redundancy from H-valves is due to tank failure being low. You propose to negate that by putting a hose in the middle of the valves and the tank? Also, more first stages = more cost. Such redundancy is arguably not necessary for most shallow recreational dives.

- If the BCD/tank interface doesn't move, then you can't adjust the tank to adjust your ballast for proper trim.

 

[kawasakign]

I hate that saying.. "It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist." In this case its not said in a negative fashion but often it is. In my opinion a lot of times this line is said its refering to some type of innovation that doesn't fit the norm. Does that make it bad? No...but does it make it good...No . Look at how much the scuba world has evolved since its inception. I'm sure a lot of people said that about the BC when hard backs were used. Same goes with single hose regulators when all that was around were double hose. Hell look at the big split fin debate. But innovation leads to refinement and eventually something newer and better will replace the old or the old will change through refinement. Now with that being said...the old can do just fine!!


(Walter I hope you know I am in no way taking a jab or saying you meant anything negative with that line)

 

[1_T_Submariner]

By some hose standards this would be medium pressure.
Check out these hoses... They are not very flexible however in the 60,000 Psi model I'm not sure about the pressure range that you would need.

http://www.parker.com/parflex/polyflex.htm

Edit:
I don't think I would go this route. How about doubles or side mount?

 

[fisherdvm]

How about mounting the tank up side down, routing the hose between your leg - like a crotch strap, or running on the side along the waist band or cumberbund.

The high pressure hose to a Y split, directly to two valves, on two first stages. One on the right and one on the left. It can be made so the first stages are stream-lined, and fit comfortably along the shoulder straps.

Very short regulator hoses to the mouth piece. A longer one on the alternate to share.

The system will have less entanglement hazard, as there are less hoses, less protrusions from tank valve, first stages, etc.

Redundancy of valves allow for safe use at extreme temperatures and depths.

I think it can be done... The market will be small, perhaps only for the tech divers.

 

[spacemanspiff1974]

One of the first things I learned after donning a tank is that the tank valve must be positioned so that you can reach back and turn it. Frankly, I'm not sure why you would want another piece of equipment in front of you.

For me, I have a reg in my mouth, one on a necklace and my pressure gage strapped across my chest so that I can briefly turn my head and read how much is left in the tank...not to mention the low pressure inflator.

I'm not DIR, but I subscribe to the KISS philosophy regarding gear configuration. If keeping it simple means putting the valve in front, then go for it. Remember it's what works for you and what is safe.

Still, I would agree that it is a solution looking for a problem that is easily solved with proper tank positioning.