Traditional vrs progressive football

[Tom Dunlap]

In this article they talk about the advances in football helmet technology. Read the story of John T. Riddell.

The article says,"...Hall of Fame quarterback Fran Tarkenton was one of the last to change to a padded helmet, and Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page never did make the switch. "

In their time, both of those players were at the top of their game using the technology of the day. Just think how much better they might have performed with modern equipment and training. Would any of you ball players give up modern gear? Would hunters go back to making bows from bois d'arc? Fishing with cane poles? Some people do and that's pretty cool. But they are in the definite minority.

Tom



http://www.rakemag.com/angle/detail.asp?catID=40&itemID=11399

 

[Lumberjack]

This wouldn't have anything to do with trad vs progressive climbing techniques would it?


On the same note, what about hockey helments for the goalies?


Carl

 

[Stumper]

Tom, I embraced progressive climbing (except for friction savers) but I moved "forward into the past" in my archery gear-I now shoot bows of Hickory, Osage and Juniper and fling wood arrows out of them all. Cane poles can be fun but despite my admiration for the craftsmanship of split bamboo fly rods, after fishing a few I had to conclude that I actually prefer graphite.

I'll agree that when safety is an issue we all should be progressive. In other realms ..... Whatever the individual derives the most enjoyment from.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Originally posted by Stumper


I'll agree that when safety is an issue we all should be progressive. In other realms ..... Whatever the individual derives the most enjoyment from.

EXCELLENT POST!!!

 

[Lumberjack]

Originally posted by RockyJSquirrel
I am limited to larger tie-ins because SRT puts twice the weight on my tie-in crotch. I lose the 2-1 leverage when I have to pull myself back up a few feet. I lose control over one end of my lifeline since it will be out of reach. I LIKE the 2-1 leverage!

If you can get you rope next to the trunk, you should be fine on any limb over 2". Probably 1.5 would be fine depending on species.

Recently I climed a pine, and the TIP limb was about .5"-.75" in diameter. I made sure that there was a good limb directly under it, and went up. When I got to the top, I broke the limb off (it was dead) but the part next to the trunk was sturdy. I wouldn't have climbed it if there wasn't the limb under it, but I wanted to push the limb-its. I would feel safe on a limb 2" in diameter if the rope was within say a foot of the trunk.

It also depends on species, as to the flexability/ brittleness of the wood.

On the 2:1. I think that now that I have my i'D I will use a 2:1 Rads system. It is easy, place an acender above the i'D, and run a rope from the saddle and back to your hand. It would be good for yo-yoing, without the excessive (IMO) 3:1 on the current Rads setup.

Carl

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Burnham will probably chime in here soon

The Forest Service has the "Four Inch Rule" Climbers aren't allowed to tie into anything less than 4" diameter. Working above the TIP brings in another set of skills.

Oh...and I was trying to make a metaphorical leap from sports/play to work. I think most of you made the landing.

Tom

 

[Lumberjack]

Originally posted by Tom Dunlap
The Forest Service has the "Four Inch Rule" Climbers aren't allowed to tie into anything less than 4" diameter. Working above the TIP brings in another set of skills.
Tom

Is that an accesepted practice/rule? I am seldomly tied into to something 4" in diameter, normally the rope is accross several crotches that are way under 4".

Carl

 

[Stumper]

Carl, Since your rope bisects multiple crotches you probably aren't going to fall to your death but you are courting a slip and a bit of bruising-or worse. The 4" rule that Tom mentioned is one standard. An older rule of thumb is -"never tie into anything smaller than your wrist". In Cottonwoods wrist size still makes me nervous. In a live oak consideraby smaller seems okay but generally the rule makes pretty good sense. That is a DbRT rule -For SRT things would logically need to be bigger.:angel:

 

[Lumberjack]

I feel dandy on a pine limb or hardwood limb that is 2" or better in diameter, as long as my rope is against the trunk, and the limb is alive. I looked at a ruler and 4" is huge, if the rope is against the trunk, but if you are out on the limb is seems resonable. The only real brittle wooded trees that we have are Cedars, and Pecans.


Carl

 

[Jumper]

Originally posted by Lumberjack



On the same note, what about hockey helments for the goalies?


Carl [/B]

Some people are diehards when it comes to embracing new ideas, and hockey goalie equipment certainly falls into this category. Look how long it took for all goalies even to start wearing masks, 1959-ca 1973. I bought an off the shelf EDDY goalies "helmet" in 1999, and though I have been beaned good a couple of times, I never have suffered more than ringing in the ears. The there are the Domenic Haseks out there that still prefer a helmet and wire cagem which does not distribute the shock of a puck travelling at 100 mpg as well as a modern system in my books. Not necessarily a worse system, just older technology. Half the goalie experience is the equipment-they never stop talking about new stuff and technique. I see that technology for head protection for goalies is starting to influence catchers masks in baseball as well.

Your two cents Sean????

 

[Burnham]

My turn, I guess . Tom stated that we FS climbers must not use anything smaller than 4 inches as a TIP...that is not the whole picture. Our 4 inch rule is made regarding the diameter of the bole (of the conifer species that dominate western forests) above which I will not climb without installing a self belay system. That way, if I break the top out I will at least stay in the tree. That does not mean that I must have a 4 inch limb to hang a SRT, DdRT, or rappel line on. Below that 4 inch bole diameter I assess the potential strength of a TIP as any of you would, and chose according to my experience. Since many conifers commonly display a limb whorl growth pattern, it is often possible to set lanyard or lifeline over several braches close together. A much smaller limb will suffice if the line is against the bole, as Carl rightly states. But one must take great care in allowing the line farther out, especially in these species. One of the best FS SRT climbers I know once broke off the limb he was using as TIP...this was an good sized old growth limb, +4 inches, healthy, live Douglas fir. The line was about 3 feet out from the bole. He says the 20 foot fall to the ground was not what hurt, it was that big 25 foot long limb falling on him as he lay there dazed. It sounds like a Wiley Coyote moment , but it could have just as easily been a fatality as not...

Now, there is no way that I would hang my SRT line on a 1/2 or 3/4 inch pine branch, even more so if it was dead. I don't dispute the fact that another limb below it may mitigate, but don't forget that if the branch fails, the load placed on the "catch" branch generated in the fall onto it will be much higher than simply climbing on it. That lower branch better be plenty stout, or have some neighbors inside the line, or be real close to the initial placement.

Pushing the "limb-its" is not really my cup of tea , but then, I'm old enough to have a finely honed sense of my own mortality...that said by the guy that climbs to places where he sets up EXPECTING to break out the top .