commercially produced Spectra cowstails

[potholer]

In a frog setup, cowstails are only really used for protection when doing manoeuvres (knot passing, rebelays, etc), unless the caver uses the long cowstail as a connection between harness and hand ascender, rather than having a dedicated safety cord.

[kmstill]

Time for a dumb question, by yours truly.

I recently built a home made frog system, and I can do changeovers with my SMC rack........

where in the hell does the Cowstail fit into this system? I obviously don't want a dynamic cord running to my upper ascender, so when I stand in the loop i bounce around all over the place..........the croll is attached to the belt via mallion.......

In my opinion, On rope doesnt describe what the cowstails are used for with a frog. At least I didn't comprehend it when I read the book recently............ What am I missing????

Maybe it's confusion about which piece of the system we're talking about.

In my frog set-up, I have two connections coming off my upper ascender. One is my long footloop, and you're right that you want that static for efficiency; i'm using tied spectra cord and am happy with it. Then a second seperate attachment that runs from my harness D to my upper ascender; this is a safety should my croll fail and is not usually weighted during normal frog operations - as such, dynamic rope can be used without adding "bounce" to the frog; I use the long leg of my cowstail (tied dynamic rope) for this.
As the previous poster mentioned, I also use the cowstail when rigging (positioning aid/fall protection), passing knots/rebelays, QAS for traverses, etc.... While I could have a seperate safety from my upper ascender to my harness day, exclusive of the cowstail, the simplicity and flexibility of the overall system has been working well for me (and a large number of other froggers).

[Chads93GT]

Ok you just answered it. I guess I never thought the system through fully. I guess I will tie a cowstail out of dynamic rope tonight and incorporate that into my system Thanks.

[kmstill]

the best thing is, you get to go home now, play with rope and knots, and spend time tweaking the system to your exact preferences - what a way to pass non-caving time! gotta love the evolving system and ever-expanding gear collection.

[NZcaver]

In my frog set-up, I have two connections coming off my upper ascender. One is my long footloop, and you're right that you want that static for efficiency; i'm using tied spectra cord and am happy with it. Then a second seperate attachment that runs from my harness D to my upper ascender; this is a safety should my croll fail and is not usually weighted during normal frog operations - as such, dynamic rope can be used without adding "bounce" to the frog; I use the long leg of my cowstail (tied dynamic rope) for this.

Good answer, Kelly. I use exactly the same system.

[jharman2]

This is a new product and therefore we have no independent testing data available. Without objective data we can not be so quick to discount this product. Yes - Dyneema / Spectra is a static material. However, it appears that the lanyard has extensive energy absorbing stitching. Does this lanyard react in a similar manner to the Petzl Spelegyca when subjected to a dynamic load? I have not seen any evidence presented in this thread to substantiate the claims that this is a dangerous product.

If you have done the requisite testing to prove that this product is unsafe PLEASE make it available.

[ek]

It appears it has extensive energy-absorbing stitching? Really? Where?

[Chads93GT]

You know, the kind that rips out and you fall to your death...........

[NZcaver]

This is a new product and therefore we have no independent testing data available. Without objective data we can not be so quick to discount this product. Yes - Dyneema / Spectra is a static material. However, it appears that the lanyard has extensive energy absorbing stitching. Does this lanyard react in a similar manner to the Petzl Spelegyca when subjected to a dynamic load?

It appears it has extensive energy-absorbing stitching? Really? Where?

Good question/point. I found a picture on line, but haven't seen one of these personally.



It's difficult to tell for sure, but the Kong Speleo Y Lanyard seems to have a lot of stitching. Perhaps more than necessary for a standard "non-ripping" lanyard?? The long side appears to have a standard row of bar tacking, but the short side has several pairs of bar tacks - almost like a sewn daisy chain. If it's supposed to function like the Petzl Spelegyca, Kong certainly doesn't seem to be advertising it. Jay - you'll have to let us know the truth when you get yours.

[fuzzy-hair-man]

This is a new product and therefore we have no independent testing data available. Without objective data we can not be so quick to discount this product. Yes - Dyneema / Spectra is a static material. However, it appears that the lanyard has extensive energy absorbing stitching. Does this lanyard react in a similar manner to the Petzl Spelegyca when subjected to a dynamic load? I have not seen any evidence presented in this thread to substantiate the claims that this is a dangerous product.

If you have done the requisite testing to prove that this product is unsafe PLEASE make it available.

Well my previous post said that the standard that this item conforms to is the standard for slings, there was no mention of fall protection or fall prevention, to sell it as fall protection / prevention it should satisfy those standards as it doesn't it seems Kong hasn't had the testing done (or it failed) so there is no reason to suggest that it has any energy absorbing capability. So is there any reason to suggest it does have energy absorbing? I wouldn't expect a sling to absorb much.

BTW the spelegyca can produce unsafe peak forces (must be < 12kN according to standards EN892) when both arms are connected and a ff1 is present, the reason being is the spelegyca's ability to rip stitching is limited by having both arms connected. If you don't believe me see page 9 of Chamoix cowstail testing report (do a search there's a long thread about cowstails) so even if the Kong item had the same rip facility as the spelegyca it would quite possibly still record unsafe peak forces, spectra is generally accepted as having less energy absorbsion than tape so there is reason to suspect the results for the Kong item might be worse.

NZCaver: that photo is of the “Y” Rescue Lark's Foot not the “Y” Aro Speleo as shown on Kong's website: http://www.kong.it/pr_slng.htm

It also differs from the photo shown in the catalog earlier in this thread. The “Y” Rescue Lark's Foot the “Y” Aro Speleo and the “Y” Aro Canyon all satisfy EN566 which is for slings, all their slings satisfy that standard too.

The only one of these things that has any standard to do with falls seems to be the “Y” Elastic Lanyard which satisfies EN 358 which as far as I've been able to tell is related to fall prevention but NOT fall arrest / fall protection. The only thing that seems to distinguish it compared to the others seems to be a higher breaking load of 25kN vrs 22kN for the others.

[NZcaver]

NZCaver: that photo is of the “Y” Rescue Lark's Foot not the “Y” Aro Speleo as shown on Kong's website: http://www.kong.it/pr_slng.htm

Oops! I know where I went wrong - the thumbnails on that page are correct, but the images they link to have been switched around. This should be the correct one:



That doesn't look like rip-n-sh*t stitching near the central attachment point, but I guess it could be...

[fuzzy-hair-man]

the thumbnails on that page are correct, but the images they link to have been switched around. This should be the correct one:

I almost got caught with the same thing

That doesn't look like rip-n-sh*t stitching near the central attachment point, but I guess it could be...

I was trying to work this out but I can't really see where the attachment to the D maillon would rip to, in the Petzl one as I understand it, it rips down the other (non connected) leg, this seems to be constructed (stitching is oriented up when loaded) so that the maillon in the middle has no where to go so I can't see it ripping but I wouldn't know...

[jharman2]

It appears it has extensive energy-absorbing stitching? Really? Where?

I was far away from my computer this weekend and NZ beat me to the post - twice. I don't know that any of the stitching is or is not energy absorbing. Do you?

This product MAY or MAY NOT react the same as the Spelegyca. We don't know until testing is done. That being said I don't want to personally test it when a bolt peels at +200 feet. All I would like to see is an objective evaluation of this product based on sound data. I wish I had time to set up a load cell and conduct testing on this and other products....

[ek]

I was far away from my computer this weekend and NZ beat me to the post - twice. I don't know that any of the stitching is or is not energy absorbing. Do you?

Fictional example: I don't know if Felon-Pirate Bob's Responsible Daycare Service cares for children properly either...so I assume it doesn't until Felon-Pirate Bob proves otherwise.

I don't assume hardware store ropes are good for rappelling. I don't assume that cold medicines cure West Nile Virus. Many things are remotely possible, and I don't "withhold judgment" on any of them. I assume that if something looks sketchy and the manufacturers have made no effort to show that it is safe, that it is not safe. I assume that if something appears not to have a certain functionality, which would enormously improve its image to be advertised if present, that it doesn't have that functionality.

Studies have shown that a small percentage of persons are immune to the deleterious effects of HIV. I don't assume that I'm one of those people. I don't do testing to find out. I assume that I am prone to harm by it, because that is almost certainly the case, and because there is absolutely no detrimental result of making that cautious assumption.

Finally, suppose you did do tests and found out that this cowstail yields safe impact forces when fallen upon. Since the manufacturer doesn't publish information on how it works, it could at any time be replaced with another version of the product that does not perform in this way. In short, I'd be reluctant to trust positive experimental results for this product, either, if they were not accompanied by a certification or even so much as a statement from the manufacturer addressing the relevant concerns.