tvashtarkatena

Well, that's one spectacular trundle that's been stolen from me.

It's best if just the rider is high....

Is it possible that the gate might have opened?

Is that a falling corn chip or a shag carpet scrap?

Ya can't really tell shit from one crappy photo, but hey, I R un Enguneer n all that rot...

Safe to say the protest caused a few lawmakers to remove the corporate schlong from their gobs in a hurry. Nicely done.

Agree about the parabiner geometry. THis biner doesn't have it. It's geometry is excellent for the application, hence its higher rating. I already covered the webbing/knot/moment arm issue. I do things differently than I did 36 years ago, personally.

Ovals are weaker because of their inherently large moment arm which pretty quickly weights the spine n gate equally and adds a lot of bending stress on top of the tensile stress already there. Most biners now put the line of tension as close as possible to the spine, which sometimes has a slight curvature for added strength ( like prestressed beams). And use the gate only for backup when there's enough deflection to engage it. The biner you used (locking version) is stronger than most - 24/8/9 kn, so it's not the biner. Steel biners can handle 72/22 kn, BTW. Expensive, but for this application it seems well worth it.

"Paddy", Bone. Jebus, you looked like a Celt...probably just another one a them Teutons, I suppose.

Have fun with your new thread direction Bone! Later!

I'm seeing a little backwards 's' shaped deformation just left of the break, which would happen with an open gate, but that could be my imagination.

One more observation: It's better not to tie 1" webbing knots directly to any biner (as shown in the pic). The knot itself can cause the loaded webbing to be slightly off center, thus cocking the biner and potentially greatly reducing its breaking strength. Make sure that webbing, or whatever you use, is seated in the biner properly. Best just to run it through and tie your knots elsewhere. I guess that most biners fail because the biner gets similarly cocked somehow, the gate is nudged open, or some combination of the two, even if momentarily, during a fall or other high stress situ.

The Bhammers are impressive for their sheer liquid payload capacity. A sixer + 4 big beers...and that was just one guy's complement. We clocked the last 500' of gain at more than 2 hours of pure knee punching. Yeah...not an easy trek for the heavily burdened...

Boy, Paul's superpac ads against Huntsman were racist as hell. Huntsman's got one Chinese and one Indian daughter by adoption. Yup...they dressed him up like Chairman Mao. In another ad, they put Hindu thingies on he and his kid's forehead. Un fuckin believable Kinda thought a) adoption was an admirable, selfless act b) being Chinese and Indian were both OK here in America, you know, the melting pot and all and c) attack ads on a guys kids is somewhat...unseemly? Way to go, Bone! Nice candidate, buddy!

You can do a quick visual check of your slackline angle by simply carrying something like this in your kit. If you're above 172 degrees with your lightest person, I'd be worried.

Is that more than 11? It's more than 911...times a thousand.

We're giving it all the consideration it's due, Bone, as usual.

Assuming a weight of 1 kn (224 lbs), if 22 kn is used as a breaking load, then a 3 x safety factors means keeping the slackline angle below 172 degrees. A 10 x safety factor means keeping below 154 degrees. Not real hard to engineer a safe system with a known safety factor. Seems like a bit of a freebie, to me, at least. 'Never had a failure' can be had with a safety factor of 1.0001...yeah...not comforting. Seems like a few minutes boning up on some simple math would be worth it to anyone setting this stuff up on a regular basis. If you're just slacklining 2 feet over the lawn, however.... Regarding regular climbing anchors...0 degrees splits the load evenly between anchors. At greater than 60%, the anchor load starts slowly creeping up beyond that half and half relationship, hence that guideline.

The TSA is also considering the requirement that all airline passengers wear their underwear on the outside.

I kept thinking "That's a lot of effort just to retrieve the car keys."

'Taught' is assumed, but a few degrees of sag (when weighted) goes a long way. Reducing force on the anchor to an acceptable level given your setup is your first consideration. Beefing that anchor up is your second. You can have a nice, tight line and an catenary angle less than 170 degrees, no problem. Been there, done that. If you've got a cell phone with a calculator, you can use a lighter test weight to calculate what your catenary angle would be under full load by measuring the line deflection under that test load, the distance between the anchors, and then applying a little trig 101. If your angle exceeds what it should under your max allowable Load (given the equation above), then you need to back off on the tension until it doesn't. Better to know than to guess and just 'beef things up'. An anchor failure in these applications can be kinda bad.

Safe to say i was outshown in that dept.

Blake, Did those all occur as a result of leader falls?

I've already been punished. I pair of skis out of eight doth not make a fun trail breaking experience make...and that shit was a WALLOW. Nice, Tyson. I gots no decent people or inside shots. The B&W panorama's sum Denali shit, boyo.

Trip: Snowpocalypse 2012!!!!!! - Lookout Mountain Snowplow Date: 1/15/2012 Trip Report: 4500 vertical, 20 degrees, 3 feet of new, 8 men, probably less than one fully functioning brain between 'em. Lookout Mountain Pics Somewhat robust conditions on Saturday. Chose to avoid the avi terrain on the way up by short cutting the trail via a ridgeline. Sunday was an absolute stunner. Gear Notes: Skis (next time) Approach Notes: Dogged army of trogs