Almost as speechless that such an incredible cannon should lack the perfect trigger...(quote]
Thanks....I think

Excuse me? Isn't that the same thing as me saying about your cannon.....
"I'm speechless. Almost as speechless that such an incredible trigger should lack the perfect cannon..."?

Every valve type has a certain amount of inefficiency in their speed of actuation and flow. Due to the diaphram actuator in a QEV (aka Sprinkler Valve"), they're slow to open in a situation where milliseconds are the difference between go or no go. If you build a cannon with .005" clearance between the sealing piston and cylinder walls, you'll find forces coming into the equation that you didn't think of.
Your statement :"recursion, sweet recursion" is great for computer code and 100% efficient but, in the physical world where gas can be a somewhat illusive substance it has it's flaws. As all valves are inefficient, you are suggesting that I actuate a valve / to actuate a valve / to actuate a valve. With that design, the inefficiency stacks up. To fully actuate, the piston in my cannon requires almost explosive force in order to overcome the high speed drag created by escaping air around pistons through tolerances and into the barrel. The pilot valve must open near instantly to free the piston from it's seat. This can not be accomplished with a slow, inefficient valve opening another slow, inefficient valve, to vent the pilot gas. I explained in my original post that my first choice was a solenoid pilot valve but, for reasons also explained, I used the ball valve.