Remote valves

[Alban]

Why are so many divers against the use of remote isolation valves ? Is there a known problem with them ? All I have heard is they are a potential failure point . Is there any information to confirm this ?

I have used a remote valve and have never had any problems with it and even if it did fail I don't really see it as a problem.

I can only see the the benifit of it really it can be shut down quickly and easily then the offending valve isolated.

Am I missing something major here ??

Many thanks Alban

 

[MikeFerrara]

IMO, it's just something else to hang on you that you don't (or shouldn't) need. With proper equipment config and some practice most can reach the isolator quickly and easily eliminating even the perceived need. If you don't need it don't take it. Why do you feel you need it?

 

[D.I.R.Lizard]

Mike~
Thanks for addressing this, I wanted to comment on it. But was afraid my opinion would come across to harsh.

I have never used the reomote it always seemed rather stupid to me. And it usually(not always) goes along with peoples gear configurations that are a nightmare.

I agree, if you don't need it why take it, And always have that extra chance of failure.

Just my opinion.

 

[Alban]

thanks for the replys , perhaps as you suggest i shoulld explain my reasons.

First I agree you should be able to shut down the valves , I fitted the remote not because i was unable to reach the manifold but because it is easier more convienient and i couldn't see a real reason not to .

As to it being a failure point I have never found any information to suggest this. It is made from stainless steel and would require a considerable amount of torque to break it.

You may have read this article http://www.divernet.com/technique/0102twins.htm
and interestingly a follow up
http://www.divernet.com/letters/letters0302.htm
relating to poseidon regs

My reasoning was if things go wrong it would probably be at the worst time , in a wreck or reeling up a line with the remote going over my right shoulder and clipped to my harness i at least would be able to instantly shut it down then close the offending valve.

I am using this remote as an aid to shut downs not as an excuse for not being able to preform a shutdown .

Many thanks for not being to harsh in your response.

Alban

 

[ericfine50]

Alban,

Aren't you just adding another failuar point and an extra "hose"? Seems to me it is not needed?

Eric

 

[Lost Yooper]

IMO, these things are attempting to solve a problem with convulation that shouldn't exist in the first place. You don't want convulation or extra stuff on these type of dives. Simplify, simplify, simplify. Less is best.

Take care,

Mike

 

[roakey]

Always look for a root problem. The author created an entire article about doing an end run around a root problem. He even admits it without ever stepping back and realizing where the problem lays.

He states:

"Also, I'm not very flexible physically - I am not sufficiently proficient at an isolate and shutdown drill to bet my life on it."

In other words, he's lazy and doesn't want to practice the drill, so he throws all sorts of line-entangling solutions at it.

Good indication of the level of expertise that writes for diving magazines today.

Roak

 

[padiscubapro]

I don't recommend remote shut off valves because it gives another point for snagging, I really don't believe its a failure point especially if valve is pointed down, since on most remote valves its just an extension and a know is still available at the valve.

I do believe it is necessary for SOME divers.. I can think of 2 divers I know in particular, 1 has a disability in 1 arm, and the other does not have the flexibility to reach far enough back due to an old injury. Both are excellent divers and have the shutoff placed as best as can be expected. I think its better to have the slight increased risk of entanglement or debateable failure point than not be able to reach ones valves..

I have never used a remote valve but If I was still using thinsulate under garments with my drytsuit I would probably have to use one myself.. My previous undergarments restricted my ability to reach back and the only position I would be able to reach the valves would place the tanks in a position I would hit my head on things behind me.

I would exhaust all posibilities before resorting to a remote valve.

 

[JamesK]

Does anyone have any evidence that this could fail, or has failed, easier than a regular valve? I am neither for or against these if someone else wants to use them. However, I would not personally use it because of the fact it is simply extra gear.

The only situation I could see using them is if you were jammed in a wreck, or small cave, and the you needed to isolate your cylinders and because of the spot you were in, you could not physically reach the manifold. I don't see myself in that situation any time soon.

 

[Alban]

Thanks again for the replys they have been interesting.

As far as i can see the main problem everyone see's is " an added failure point " if we look at our set up from a basic point we need a single tank and reg. Everything we add to that is " an added failure point" what we do is evaluate the risk of it failing against the possibility of it saving our lives, abd so we add gauges , hoses , secondary regs , manifolds ect , if we look at the remote in the same light , what is there to fail on this valve ? on a pre dive check i shut the valve and then open it slightly , as i said there is no imformation to sugest that these have ever failed . If it failed shut i would be in effect be using independant twins .

As for it being an engtanglement it runs from the isolator over my shoulder and is clipped to my harness it is not balloning out anywhere . so much attention is placed on us to place vital equipment on our chest area where it can easily be reached with either hand eg. gauges , knife, sissors, inflators you must agree that reaching the isolator valve is time critical and anything that improve this must be a benifit ? if i suggested putting my knife behind my head you would rightly call me an idiot. With the remote on my shoulder i can acess it with one hand in fact either hand with a reel in my hand and a torch in the other.
As I have said before i am not sugesting that this is used instead of performing a shut down I use it as an aid i still need to be able to reach the tank valves to close them or there would be no gain from using independants.

Many thanks for your opinions Alban