Moderator: Moderators
ian mckenzie wrote:Hey NZcaver, as you can see I've deleted my post as my Stop is not built the way I said it was, it only looks that way... when I took it apart, what looks like a normal thin nut is in fact the top of a longer threaded bit inside, which you just can't see... apologies for the misleading info... maybe edit out the quote from your post so others don't get misled as well.
ian mckenzie wrote:I've seen it happen, once, during a cave rescue seminar. The thing just came apart in the caver' hands. It was the nut that had come off...
Joel Corrigan wrote:Er, happened to me years ago so guess it's not that unusual...
NZcaver wrote:That original post on the ukCaving forum states -One Stop; irregularly used for the past five years. Checked often. Never had bobbins replaced nor springs. The thing decided to part company of itself in as much as the retaining nut came away from the bolt (lower bobbin section)!!
To me, this statement implies that this particular Stop is about 5 years old - in which case it would use the threaded sleeve design. However, if it was acquired after being used by someone else - perhaps not.
I hate to give up any piece of gear as much as the next guy, but I wonder if there comes a time when you should just retire that obsolete item? Equipment designs usually change for a reason...
paul wrote:You can buy seconhand Stops from a local caving shop - apparently ex- military or fire service and very little used. They have the original metal clip so must be of some age...
Since these retail for about 25 pounds as opposed to about 45 pounds for brand new Stops, there's a lot of incentive to stick with the older design!
Certainly, as a general rule, 'avoid maillions' does make some sense, especially if that's what Petzl recommend, since it is easy to remember, but things aren't quite as black-and-white as that.
Whatever, when it comes to 'getting on the rope' risks, leaving a long cowstail clipped in until a descender is loaded and checked would possibly help avoid many descending accidents when using any descender.
You have confounded the facts with over analysis.
That is certainly nice general advice akin to looking both ways before you cross the street but does it have anything to do with the topic under disussion?
potholer wrote:...My intention was to say that since the possible problem (of catch operation in rare circumstances) isn't necessarily entirely avoidable by using a crab, the 'don't use maillons' rule isn't entirely comprehensive...
David_Campen wrote:...You have confounded the facts with over analysis...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users