Twin regulators

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

jale

Contributor
Messages
1,037
Reaction score
755
Hi,
in another thread, the topic of twin regulator (two first stages in one body) came out and @jadairiii named the old Seapro and I linked the modern V-twin from Beuchat( V-TWIN - Beuchat).
By curiosity, are there any other twin regulators?
As for their reason(s) of being, i only know that the modern Beuchat is to answer the need of some European regulations which impose two first stages for leadership levels. Any other reasons?
 
that's asking for trouble, that sounds like a terrible idea.... If you have to use two first stages, at least have something where you can shut them down. All that thing is doing is doubling your risk for IP creep and doesn't actually give you any redundancy. I wouldn't allow one of those in any leadership classes I teach, heaven forbid any of my technical classes.
 
If (when) a stage fails, there isn't an isolation/shut down possible. This is truly a "points of failure" kludge....
 
By curiosity, are there any other twin regulators?

Only 2 I know of would be the Water Gill FSDS regulator, Seapro bought/acquired Water Gill and re-branded it, then produced the other one.
77-ad-2.jpg


And the 2nd Gen Seapro, there is one on ebay right now.

Seapro Failsafe System. | eBay
 
If (when) a stage fails, there isn't an isolation/shut down possible. This is truly a "points of failure" kludge....
Exactly. The good thing to have is a cylinder with dual valves, even when using just one first stage. If one valve fails, you move the reg to the other...
Having just a single valve and two first stages attached to it doubles the risks of a freeflowing device, with no possibility to shut it down and continue using the other.
I think it is a very bad idea.
The main point of redundancy is to get INDEPENDENT air sources. Duplicating without separation makes the thing less safe.
 
I'm surprised that Beuchat even went this way. It's a gimmick that does not solve any real problem and why you did not see a rush to mimic Water Gill in 1979.

Cool thing about the Water Gill reg, it had a built in HP creep that when you stopped breathing it would over-pressure the Atpac inflator and start inflating your bc. Crazy!
 

Back
Top Bottom