|
| dprapr23. 09. 2012 20:18:45 |
Now we're there!
Why even have a safety lanyard if you can't afford a fall with it. Then it's only for protection during rest at the peg, for possible photography and for protection on a horizontal rope.
From the very beginning this gadget didn't seem convincing to me, even though most think otherwise.
| (+1) |  | |
|
|
|
|
| ben23. 09. 2012 20:28:10 |
But still...this gadget, as dprapr says, saved my life in a fall on Cjajnik Tower...and exactly this one that I'll return to the store tomorrow!!! 
| (+3) | | |
|
|
|
|
| facko27. 09. 2012 21:34:48 |
This refers to the above-mentioned post on SVK safety ... I managed to dig it up -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOzhOs9SAws&feature=related
Image to maximum and action 
If I understood correctly - me and my German are three different things - the classic SVK (with braking plate + 11mm rope) and one more did best ...
|
|
|
|
| jax27. 09. 2012 23:37:28 |
Facko, I think you're not quite right.
In this test it was (if I understood correctly, my German isn't great either, luckily some things are written on screen, you can use google translate) like this:
the first two attempts weren't really self-belay sets - in those cases the log was just on a sling or daisy chain - in short, like many self-belayed not long ago. In those cases the forces were so great that the sling or cord snapped. In short, such protection is as if there was none (by the way, I self-belayed like that on Amalia years ago. I won't say I'd repeat it)
Then came "classic" self-belay sets with plate. In those cases the absorption was sufficient so the rope didn't break (in none), but in all cases absorption was poor - very high forces act on the body and certainly severe injuries would occur in a fall.
The last two tests are perhaps the most interesting - these are two "modern" self-belay sets with tear-out inserts. One - Petzl's - does its job well, tears completely and absorbs the force well. The other (unfortunately didn't catch the manufacturer, think they didn't even say) tears only partially and absorbs the force poorly - on the body still roughly the same high forces as with plate sets.
Moral of the story: self-belaying without plate is nonsense, self-belaying with plate keeps us on the rope, but often at the cost of severe injuries, self-belaying with tear-out inserts can do its job well, but not necessarily.
Ergo, safety even with modern, CE-tested sets still on sale is not guaranteed.
| (+1) | | |
|
|
|
|
| Keko28. 09. 2012 16:08:29 |
In this test they used a completely rigid body that absorbs no energy itself in a fall. In the case of a human fall, most energy transfers to him and that part causes fractures, tears, internal and various other injuries. Even in the first two cases, if a human fell, the rope and sling wouldn't break but most energy would transfer to the human causing catastrophic injuries. Forces in a rigid body fall on the rope or sling itself are substantially higher than in a human fall.
With modern safety sets most energy is absorbed in them and a smaller portion transfers to the human, hence fewer injuries, of course provided the safety set is appropriate and not like what's happening lately with these devices.
| (+1) | | |
|
|
|
|
| jax28. 09. 2012 16:20:19 |
Yes, but as you could see at the end, this test showed exactly that even appropriate, tested and non-outdated devices don't necessarily do their job as we'd like. After all, that set that tore only halfway was tested and on sale.
|
|
|
|
| Keko28. 09. 2012 16:45:44 |
As I wrote above, they used a completely rigid body where the safety device had to absorb all the energy and this test is not the best indicator of what would happen if a human fell. Imagine putting a log behind the wheel instead of a test dummy in car crash tests, what do you think the results would be or otherwise what would remain of the seatbelt and steering wheel. In short, the log would break everything in front of it and not vice versa.
In a human fall, this set would perform much better too, since part of the energy is absorbed by the human due to his structure. It would be good to do the same test with a test dummy and a bunch of sensors measuring individual forces. But this test certainly showed some facts and shortcomings in safety sets.
| (+1) | | |
|
|
|
|
| VanSims28. 09. 2012 17:51:33 |
This test is also described in the article whose link Keko provided.
|
|
|
|
| facko28. 09. 2012 22:54:05 |
Given all the posts ... would anyone dare to draw a line under all this and write which SVK are OK - meaning they cushion the jerk just enough not to "pinch" you in a fall (since the upper waist part is no longer "in") and tear just right - enough so the funeral service has no business?
I haven't seen yet any recommendation from SVK manufacturers for which user weight which SVK is suitable ... because SVK behaves differently for some cute lady with 50kg or some XYZ with 100kg?
If they asked a colleague who ordered a new bike (hybrid) among other things in front of her husband how many kg mother earth pulls her with  - will they issue such data for SVK too???
|
|
|
|
| Keko28. 09. 2012 23:20:08 |
To get an answer to this question, some independent institution like ADAC for cars would have to undertake extensive SVK testing under the same conditions and give their ratings.
Best to stick to the saying that's been mentioned many times on this forum.
Don't let mother earth pull you to her and don't rely too much on SVK, because many things can go wrong in a serious fall, SVK can only cushion some.
| (+2) | | |
|
|
|
|
| Loni8. 10. 2012 18:09:17 |
My Ocun Rip'n'stop arrived by mail today, both elastic straps were replaced.
|
|
|
|
| ljubitelj gora16. 01. 2013 21:09:08 |
Last year I joined PD, this year I'm reading a bit about this insurance again. This year I plan to cross the border a bit more often than last year.
http://www.pzs.si/vsebina.php?pid=79
Copying:
CLAIMING RESCUE COSTS IN FOREIGN MOUNTAINS
Procedure for reporting a claim under mountain rescue insurance.
If rescue in foreign mountains is needed, the insured must settle the rescue bill. The amount will be reimbursed by the insurer if insurance coverage is confirmed.
If I get it right one must pay rescue costs in foreign mountains anyway.
|
|
|
|
| ljubitelj gora16. 01. 2013 21:21:23 |
Rescue cost insurance for members A, B, B1, S+Š and P+O applies in foreign mountains of Europe and Turkey. Does not apply to domestic mountains (Slovenia), because rescue is free here, except in cases of gross negligence, which excludes any insurance anyway.
|
|
|
|
| ljubitelj gora16. 01. 2013 21:22:54 |
Is this really true, if someone gets injured in foreign mountains they have to pay rescue??? Yeah you get it back later, but rescue can cost idk 2000 euros.
How to avoid this, get insured?
|
|
|
|
| ljubitelj gora16. 01. 2013 21:43:10 |
Crazy that's why foreigners come to us for free rescue
|
|
|
|
| viharnik16. 01. 2013 21:51:17 |
There is also A+ insurance that covers all other mountains besides EU and Turkey. Covers helicopter assistance, GRS personnel intervention hours and transport home. But doesn't cover hospital care in hospitals, especially private ones. So there are other insurers e.g. Vzajemna where you can additionally insure against accidents also with annual hospital care coverage. Vzajemna mega package valid worldwide for 60€ covers quite a bit or probably all hospital care costs. I have A mountain insurance and also read Pl.Vestnik.
| (+1) | | |
|
|
|
|
| ljubitelj gora16. 01. 2013 21:59:24 |
I'm not planning to go to America, interested in Italy, Austria when just extra hour drive to new places, valleys.... but A doesn't cover it in accident case either... this immediate payment can be very high 2-3-4000 euros? Unless A covers it. Anyway at the end when claiming rescue cost reimbursement you get it back (A, B, C...).
|
|
|
|
| julius16. 01. 2013 22:09:29 |
Ljubitelj gora
This time all your statements are 100% accurate. For rescue in RS you don't need any additional insurance anyway, since we are ZZZS insured for rescue cases.
All insurances sold by PZS are scam and fraud of members in case of accident abroad. If something happens to you abroad, you'll have to pay all related costs. After return home and finished treatment you'll have to find appropriate forms on PZS, fill them and submit to insurer with proofs.
The insurer will show you the fine print in the contract with PZS, listing 1000 ways to maximally avoid reimbursement of money you paid for rescue and treatment abroad.
PZS has gone so far in efforts to urge alpinists to pay A or A+ fee if planning to climb abroad (worldwide) claiming they'll be well insured that way. No one clearly tells them they need half backpack of money or gold credit card just in case.
In short, membership insurance for accident abroad doesn't provide assistance. In other words you're left alone and on your own.
I advise you to peek across the border where they have it all arranged properly.
Best regards.
p.s. Ask Igor Zlodej, he'll give right advice.
| (+1) | | |
|
|
|
You must log in to post a comment:
If you do not yet have a username, you must first
register.