Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
couchmaster
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Apr 21, 2007 - 01:07am PT
|
http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1575796;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread
Reposting from RC.com
It may be a brand new Alien which fell apart, a post recall, not a problem batch, but who can say just yet.
Dude (posting as pinsandbones shows up mid-discussion on the accident and injuries thread and says:
"There was indeed a BROKEN Alien involved in the Easter weekend accident on Souder's Crack. I would have posted earlier, but just recently received surgery to pin my wrist back together. Aside from being laid up for six months, I am very fortunate to have come away from the fall with only the injuries I have sustained. Many thanks go out to all that have helped me with this ordeal. As for the cam, it broke off right at the end if the stem, leaving the head and trigger assembly still set in the rock. It appears to me that the malfunction was due to a manuf. defect. This is being discussed with CCH. I would strongly advise all who are climbing on post recall aliens to be very careful".
That's "post recall aliens".
|
|
Holdplease2
Big Wall climber
Yosemite area
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2007 - 10:03am PT
|
At this point, according to the rest of the thread, they haven't confirmed the manufacture date or whether or not there was a dimple on the alien. It could be that this alien was one of the recalled ones, or it might not be, of course.
They describe the failure as the stem pulling out leaving the trigger system and head behind, the same as what would happen in a braze failure.
Apparently, the guy is working with CCH and the shop where he purchased it and we'll hear more.
-Kate.
|
|
steelmnkey
climber
Vision man...ya gotta have vision...
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2007 - 10:41am PT
|
For what it's worth, Kate, the Alien that failed at Paradise Forks last year did not have a dimple. Failed right at the braze point.
|
|
426
Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2007 - 10:57am PT
|
I heard that PF deal was a "returned (dimpled) to REI and given a 'new' one affair"...
Sounds to me like there were 2 accidents at RRG. Belayer failure and a "head popped off"...
Yall be careful out there!
|
|
steelmnkey
climber
Vision man...ya gotta have vision...
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2007 - 07:11pm PT
|
426 - Roger on the PF unit being one that was a replacement for a dimpled unit. Just saw Caleb today (guy that was involved in the PF accident) and he's doing great. Could have been way worse.
|
|
rhyang
Ice climber
SJC
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2007 - 07:15pm PT
|
Yikes. Glad I sent mine back for tensile testing.
|
|
Ezra
Trad climber
WA, NC
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2007 - 07:16pm PT
|
Where do you send them to pull test cams????
That's the only way I'd buy an Alien.
|
|
The Dog
Sport climber
Joshua Tree, Ca
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2007 - 08:01pm PT
|
Sounds like the fall could have easily generated the 12kN to which the unit is rated. If that is the case, then where the unit failed simply does not matter ... it did it's job. If I remember correctly, the consequences of climbing are spelled out pretty clearly on every piece of equipment sold for at least the last ten years. Unless you have an assistant working a computer simulation while you climb it is pretty hard to figure how much force you will generate at any given time, so it is best to err on the side of caution and leave your ego at home. Better to back off if a climb is over your head and you know it. Just my experience (20 years) here. I am sorry that you are hurt and wish you a full and speedy recovery.
The Dog
|
|
rhyang
Ice climber
SJC
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2007 - 08:13pm PT
|
re: tensile-testing - see thread here.
Newer ones should have the 'tensile-tested' stamp, shown in a pic on that thread, else send them in for testing. Ones made before 11-04 are safe AFAIK, but I don't have any that old.
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2007 - 11:13am PT
|
It's unfortunate that the guy got hurt, but he seemed to be aware of what has been going on with CCH over the last five years.
Anyone who knows how to read, yet STILL buys and climbs on Aliens is a complete idiot. Sorry, you might try to blame CCH for the defective products, but it's your own stupidity for buying the damn thing.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 22, 2007 - 11:45am PT
|
Andanother/AC, I think we have a board full of idiots. Myself included.
The dog has a very good point, but given how many issues there's been, any new Alien failure should be looked at signifigantly closer than any report of a BD or Metolius cam failure which are absurdly rare.
I heard once of something like a tiny Metolius 00 tcu failing. It was pointed out that despite the 4KN rating and factory advice to use as an aid only piece, the guy had taken a large lead fall onto it. Even those kinds of failures are rare for BD and Metolius, which is really shocking when you are looking at how small and fragile those kinds of little pieces actually are.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 22, 2007 - 12:09pm PT
|
As I understand it A.C. CHH got lucky with the dimples. They subbed out some work to a fella who was concerned that his quality work would be confused with CHH's other (shoddy?) stuff. At his own inititive, he punched the dimple to identify his high quality work.
But, to speed the process of brazing, immeditatly after brazing he would dip the unit in cold water to cool it off so he could continue.
Bad idea as it was that which caused the failures. Fortunatly, CCH was then able to determine what really happened as they could quickly and accidentally identify the batches.
CCH, with help from several regular climbers like HealyJH and TGreene, has inititated some process changes designed to all but elimated chances for mfg errors, but if found, quickly be able to pinpoint the possible lots.
Tensile testing of ALL Aliens before the leave the factory is one of the results. All Aliens should be stamped "tensile Tested" on the swage.
Interestingly enough. They will test all units which you send back to them. I did this with like 20+ units. I put a identification tag on each unit before shipping them. 1 was recieved back with out a tag, which may have indicated a possible testing failure. Surprisingingly, most, but NOT all, of the units were stamped "tensile tested".
You can get them tested AC, by sending them directly to CHH and they will gladly do this for you.
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2007 - 12:25pm PT
|
"What else about Aliens should I know?"
It's my understanding that the older models (5+ years) are OK. They obviously have more problems than a legitimate cam, but seem safe enough.
When the recall happened, I remember being blown away by the complete lack of concern on behalf of CCH.
Since the recall of the dimpled Aliens there have been a handful of identical failures on non-dimpled aliens.
and now for the wise-ass remark:
Since you spend 24 hours a day watching this forum, hitting the "refresh" button, the strength of the cams in your closet is irrelevant.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2007 - 04:26pm PT
|
I've been around the metal fabricating world in one capacity or another for beter than 35 years now. ASME has had well developed procedures for all aspects of welding and brazing for a hell of a lot longer than that.
If I buy a non presurized chemical storage tank, that if it fails will only result in a major hassle but no posible loss of life. That tank will have about an inch of paper submitted before the approval for fabrication that documents all the:
Structural calculations,
Seismic loading calculations
Documentation of the quality of the materials and fasteners supplied,
The exact welding procedures to be used,
Proof of certification of the welders that do the procedures.
Documentation of test procedures
Results of sample and final tests.
Witnessing by a third party of final tests.
etc.
All of this by independent and licenced pros or at a minimum the signature of someone asuming legal responsibility for the accuracy of the statements.
There's no need for "lilly Guilding" and frankly a lot of those requirements are imposed only to guarantee an income stream for those with the power to mandate regulations that benefit themselves.
Still, climbing equipment should at least be built to common ASME standards!
BD, Metolious, DMM, and others seem to adhere internaly to a parallel sytem of standards. And, when their products do fail, it is almost always due to stressing beyond design limits, and they still seem take the failures seriously.
CHH from all acounts and the general apperance of their product has an ad hoc approach to quality control. If you can't afford the kind of quality control program that is industry standard, maybe you should be making a widget that no one is hanging their a$$ out on.
That's why I've never owned any.
|
|
Melissa
Gym climber
berkeley, ca
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2007 - 05:27pm PT
|
"Aliens are catching screamers all over the world"
Problem is that lately sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. I'm not so much into trusting my whole enchilada to one alien these days. When I do, I always kinda know what I've climbing over.
|
|
Melissa
Gym climber
berkeley, ca
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2007 - 06:12pm PT
|
Not all climbs let you build a nest of pro when you want it most. My favorite back up in those situations is always not falling no matter what the pro is, but I'm extra aware of it if I don't think my pro is bomber...and I don't think the aliens are as bomber as I used to.
|
|
jsb
Trad climber
Palo Alto, CA
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2007 - 07:52pm PT
|
Hey everybody (first post!),
This is mostly a bump, but there have been a few more interesting posts about this incident on the rockclimbing.com forum:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=1575796;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;guest=10876506
Specifically, a user named j_ung claims he/she actually phoned up cch to find out what the deal was... here's the post.
> j_ung, Apr 25, 2007, 8:01 AM, Post #74 of 86 (228 views)
>
>I don't know why I'm bothering with this, since I don't own any
>Aliens and I don't intend to ever buy any under any
>circumstances, but I called CCH and asked what's up. Understand,
> I'm not acting as a journalist in this case, like I was during
>the original recall episode. I'm just curious to hear what's
>going on.
>
>
>CCH was indeed contacted by, I assume, pinsandbones, in regard
>to the failure of his Alien. Said contact included pictures of
>the failed unit, which, apparently showed a broken cable stem,
>not a failed braze. So this failure is not the same as the
>recall failures. That MIGHT actually be bad news, since it may
>-- MAY -- point to an entirely different problem. However, it's
>important to note that cable-stemmed cams are vulnerable to some
> extent to sharp edges, of which it appears Souder's Crack has
>plenty. Without any additional information, I'll allow this
>failure might be due to that. To me, it's beginning to appear
>that this is not the result of any shortcoming on CCH's part.
>
>
>Dave Waggoner also told me that he requested additional contact
>from the pinsandbones several days ago, but has not gotten it.
>Not sure where pinsandbones is, but he's not here either. Hey,
>pinandbones! Post up your pics, mate!
>
>
>Lastly, I suggested to Waggoner that he post up with an update
>on this. I told him that, even if he has no additional
>information, a lot of people would appreciate some kind of proof
> that they care about what people think. It kinda seemed like
>that hadn't occurred to him. Waggoner's exact words were, "Yeah,
> I should probably go ahead and do that today."
>
>
>Though the limited information available appears to vindicate
>CCH, at least in this particular incident, I'm not seeing a
>whole lot to make me change my mind about them and Aliens.
>Quality assurance aside, they still seem to be unaware of or
>indifferent to the legitimate fears of their customers. Instead
>of responding to worst-case scenarios, as I believe they should,
>they still seem to act (or not act as the case may be) based on
>what they hope is true.
>
>
>Aliens remain the only cam on the market today above which I
>refuse to climb.
 justin
|
|
JLP
Social climber
Fargo, MN
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2007 - 08:38pm PT
|
If I'm reading correctly, it sounds like he doesn't know how to place a cam. These cams work a lot better when you place them in the direction of pull. I believe a WC Flex Friend broke the same way in a well known accident a few years back. I find it interesting how he claims the piece above "failed" on him as well.
JLP
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2007 - 09:30pm PT
|
If Aliens had the same qualities as other cams, I'd buy other cams.
But nothing rules the wasteland of pin scars in Yosemite like Aliens. For aid beyond A1, you better have some or safety suffers. In some dicey pin scar, another cam might not be as likely to fail but would be 10x more likely to just pull out.
Peace
Karl
|
|
phillip mike revis
climber
snowbird, ut
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2007 - 09:53pm PT
|
i have always thought that aliens were inferior to cams of the bigger name brands
i have never owned any and never thought i could have done anything any easier with them even in the pin scared world of yosemite and i don't think that saftey has suffered
and besides how can a company based in wyoming call itself colorado custom hardware
obviously aliens suck
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!