What is the advantage of having one tube, instead of separate rear and front sight. If it is glare, couldn't the front sight be hooded and accomplish the same task with less metal?
Sure, I could have gone hooded front and rear. Here's the "Mk1":
The front sight base has a 1/8ths rifle dovetail so yeah, I absolutely considered a hooded front rifle sight. And it would have worked - as a sight.
But think about draw times. Ow. The full-length tube turns out to be the slickest setup possible on the draw, and it's more stable front to rear across the whole thing. Needs custom leather of course(!) but then so would a hooded front.
Towards the end of the Mk1 period I ditched the fiber optic core. Tim was right: it gets in the way. Looks cool as hell, but...no, wrong answer.
The Mk2 was a full-length brass tube. Worked great but too delicate.
The Mk3 was a steel tube wrapped in leather for cosmetic reasons. Bzzzt. Nope
.
The Mk4 is on there now and works great, but there are still minor strength issues. The Mk5 will be very different and feature a much stronger bolted-down front mount among other radical differences.
Hey, I'm learning as I go. Failure IS an option - it's all experimentation and if something doesn't work, OK, go revise.