#195533 - 02/10/10 04:30 PM
When does redundancy become too much?
|
Old Hand
Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 714
Loc: Kentucky
|
I did a search on redundancy and found several interesting threads (loved the one on small survival saws) but none really answered my question. I have been thinking about this (redundancy) a lot and how it relates to pack size and weight and how much gear any one person can carry. To clarify a little bit more I have some specific examples/questions as well.
For example, one thing I have been wondering about is signaling mirrors. I have a PSP with the 2 X 3 Resue Flash signal mirror in it. If I carry this in my pocket should I also carry a larger 3 X 5 signaling mirror in my pack? Should I carry another one somewhere else as well?
Here's another example. If I carry a PSK with three ways to make a fire, should I then carry additional fire-making gear in my pack as well? If yes, should it be duplicates of the same gear, something different, or both?
Do I carry a heatsheet in a pocket and a tarp in the pack? Cereal bars in my pocket and trail mix in the pack? I could go on and on with these kind of comparisons but I think everyone gets the point by now.
I have read several posts in other threads like "one is none, two is one and three is a backup," but when does enough become too much? As a final question, what items do you layer; items that redundancy is a must; and what items do you carry just one, the items you think redundancy is just not neccessary? Would you also relate how you layer them and the reasons why? The information would be greatly appreciated.
_________________________
Uh ... does anyone have a match?
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#195535 - 02/10/10 04:50 PM
Re: When does redundancy become too much?
[Re: Mark_F]
|
Old Hand
Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 882
Loc: Colorado
|
Work thru your scenarios and some things become clearer.
For instance- the signal mirror question.
It's a signalling device. Is it the ONLY means you have to make a signal? (probably not) Is it the ONLY kind of signal that will keep you alive? (as in - somebody will call in artillery fire on your position unless you give them a mirror flash) Probably not. Is there a specific somebody at a time/place that is expecting your mirror flash? (probably not)
So if it's not all that important, and can be substituted with something else (such as a smoky fire, a whistle, a flashlight beam) then it's not important enough to carry two.
I'm not a believer in the one-is-none, two-is-one mantra. Only for SOME things. For instance, when I go flying, I have a spare pair of eyeglasses within reach. (w/o glasses I couldn't find the airport) When I go hiking, I have extra warm clothing but only 1 GPS. My one compass backs up the GPS if needed though situational awareness is my real backup. And so on.
BTW- I'm a Reliability Engineer.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#195538 - 02/10/10 05:20 PM
Re: When does redundancy become too much?
[Re: unimogbert]
|
Rapscallion
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 02/06/04
Posts: 4020
Loc: Anchorage AK
|
Yep, let me summarize/amend a bit,
Prioritize - Identify what is most essential, then work down from there. Hydration is more important than food.
Fit to scale - Identify the scalar needs for each mode of operation. EDC is not the same as BOB.
Multitask - Identify equipment, material, and supplies that can meet more than one requirement. Candles make light and heat.
Skills - Focus more on how to improvise, increasing your knowledgebase, thinking outside the box. The more you can make use of what is readily available, the less you will need to keep with you constantly.
_________________________
The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. -- Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher (1820-1903)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#195546 - 02/10/10 06:36 PM
Re: When does redundancy become too much?
[Re: benjammin]
|
Geezer in Chief
Geezer
Registered: 08/26/06
Posts: 7705
Loc: southern Cal
|
I have never bought into the "one is none, two is one, etc. routine, although if I were in Sales, I might think differently. The one exception I make consistently is the stuff needed to make fire. Typically I will carry a lightweight canister or alcohol stove, as well as all the materials (ignition and tinder) I would use to kindle a campfire. I also tend to go a little heavy on water (I am typically in the desert southwest).
Most of my gear is picked for versatility. It so happens that my very nice, lightweight compass has a mirror, with which I could signal if something happened to my dedicated signal mirror. I usually carry at least some clothing items that are very bright - possible signal application there.
Skill and knowledge are the lightest of all, and can multiply the utility of your gadgets many times over
_________________________
Geezer in Chief
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#195548 - 02/10/10 06:43 PM
Re: When does redundancy become too much?
[Re: benjammin]
|
life is about the journey
Member
Registered: 06/03/05
Posts: 153
Loc: Ohio
|
One basic question for me in deciding how much of each item is: How many am I preparing for? If it's just me then I don't have a lot of duplicates on my person -- pretty much a whistle, multi-tool and lighters (I smoke).
But in my car, where I'm likely to have my wife and/or one or both of my children, I tend to carry more, much more. Heavy on water (at least a case) and food (granola bars, oatmeal, cookies, hard candy, etc.). Also, various tools, shelter materials and cooking gear.
Since you use the word "carry", I'm thinking you're focusing on a situation where you are without a vehicle or it may not be usable and you have to walk to somewhere.
I tend to focus my redundant items on areas that I consider high reward or perhaps make up for areas where my skills aren't what I want them to be. For example, on one camping outing, I decided to test my skills and make fire on my own. First, it took me almost 20 minutes to collect tinder, very small wood pieces and increasingly larger wood and set up a a fire bow with a branch and shoelace. Then another 45 minutes to get an ember -- and that was in good (but damp) weather in the summer. I can't imagine me being too successful on a day like today in Ohio starting as fire that way. Therefore, firestart redundancy is important to me.
So for me that means several fire-starting methods (different types such as lighters, fire steel, spark-lite, wetfire tinders, some steel wool, candles), means of collecting and purifying water, some high-carb light-weight foods, several knives and quick shelter (heat sheets, bivy, tarp, paracord). For you, it could be different.
I tend not to keep too much in my pockets (that's just me) but rather tend to keep most everything in a good quality hydration backpack (kept filled) that can handle 30-40 pounds of gear easily. I keep that in my vehicle with other gear that would be more for sheltering in place (such as if sheltering in my vehicle after getting stuck out somewhere).
Finally, my mindset is that if I would need to hike out, my final (hopefully no pun intended) decision on if I would keep the pack as-is or perhaps swap out some things from my car kit would depend on the specifics of the situation at hand. Weather, distance from my destination, my current state would all be variables.
Regards,
Michael
_________________________
Education is the best provision for old age. ~Aristotle
I have no interest in or affiliation to any of the products or services I may mention. Should I ever, I will clearly state so.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#195560 - 02/10/10 09:19 PM
Re: When does redundancy become too much?
[Re: hikermor]
|
Old Hand
Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 714
Loc: Kentucky
|
I'm not a believer in the one-is-none, two-is-one mantra.
I only mention it because a lot of others had posted it in the past and it is the mantra by which redundancy is born. For example if I only carry one lighter and it malfunctions, I have none. If I only carry one emergency blanket and it is blown away or disintegrates I have none. And so on. My question is when does redundancy become too much? Say I go on a hike with DSs scout troop. I want myself and others (esp. DS) to be prepared for whatever comes along (for me the scenario is less important than the preparedness - if it is important to you then you can substitute any scenario in which you might be inclined to carry survival gear and have redundancy with it). So for the hike we carry a PSK that includes items for first aid (small FAK), shelter (emergency blanket or poncho, cordage), fire (spark-lite, matches, lighter, tinder quik, small candle), water (baking bag and water purification tablets), signaling (mirror, whistle, bandana), and maybe some other items such as knife, trail mix, fishing kit, duct tape and so on. You know, typical PSK stuff we all carry but we don't neccessarily want to get into here. Ok, so if I have these items on me already, do I then turn around and pack similar items in a pouch on my belt? More still in a day pack as well? Do I pack a more substantial FAK, a tarp and coil of rope, similar or other fire making gear, a canteen and cup with more purification tablets, a larger mirror, second whistle, etc? Do I pack just a needle and thread in PSK and put a more substantial sewing kit in the pack or pouch? The paranoid freak in me says "yes" because if I have a hole in my pocket I still have what's in my pack. But let's leave my personal problems out of this for now. Obviously some items make more sense than others (like a canteen or water bottle - don't want a baking bag to be the primary water carry device after all) but what about the fire-making items, the signaling items and some of the others like duct tape, sewing pins, etc? I feel like if I am already carrying several different ways to make a fire in a mini kit on my person or separately in my pockets that I don't really need additional gear in my pack as well. If I am wrong in this assumption then where does the madness end. Gear in my pockets, a mini kit, duplicates and additional gear in a fanny pack or pouch, still more in a pack? Nighthiker, I am not saying I want to carry this much ... far from it, but I do want to be prepared. Should I carry an extra mirror in my pack if I already have one in my PSK on my person? Should I carry a third, fourth or fifth backup for fire if I already am carrying a spark-lite, bic, and strike anywhere matches? I don't think I do but I want to be sure for my sake and for DSs sake; that's why I am here posing the question. As I understand, a PSK carried on the person, in pockets, or whatever is intended as back-up to ones regular gear (or to make do when for whatever reason the regular gear is not available). If so then this implies I will be carrying other, probably larger and heavier versions of the same gear (maybe not neccessarily, though, as in the case of someone on a short day-hike who doesn't really plan on staying out overnight but carries a PSK with emergency shelter items in it just in case, but even in this case I wonder how much redundancy is necessary). The question remains, and I perceive it as a more general question, how many layers of redundancy are enough, when does it become too much, and where is the balance? Additionally, what do you carry that is redundant, how much, and why? This way I can see from the voices of experience if I am on the right track or if I need to reevaluate. Please feel free to share what you carry, how much, and why.
_________________________
Uh ... does anyone have a match?
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#195562 - 02/10/10 09:48 PM
Re: When does redundancy become too much?
[Re: Mark_F]
|
Old Hand
Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 882
Loc: Colorado
|
Where is the balance...... that IS the question isn't it?
I don't know :-) And I don't know the answer for you either.
My hiking loadout changes with the season, where I'm hiking and distance/duration/company. Lighter is better but having some safety margin is important. I often hike alone so that helps direct what my margin consists of.
I don't think I carry two of anything identical (except spare batteries). Oh, wait, I usually carry 2 (or more) waterbottles. I carry things that will substitute for others such as paracord for shoelaces (it has many other uses of course), a 1" swiss army knife in addition to my 5" fixed blade, my goretex shell in addition to my army poncho, etc.
Everyone who does outdoors stuff has a box of things they've purchased and either replaced with better or set aside as "it seemed like a good idea at the time" I'd give you mine but..... I might need it someday when I change my mind. :-) (I have a LOT of redundancy at home on the shelf.)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#195567 - 02/10/10 10:22 PM
Re: When does redundancy become too much?
[Re: Mark_F]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 08/03/07
Posts: 3078
|
The question remains, and I perceive it as a more general question, how many layers of redundancy are enough, when does it become too much, and where is the balance? Additionally, what do you carry that is redundant, how much, and why? This way I can see from the voices of experience if I am on the right track or if I need to reevaluate. Please feel free to share what you carry, how much, and why. That depends on the level of paranoia, the weather and how much you can carry, i.e. physical fitness. Choosing the right kit geared to successfully fulfill the mission and not the level of redundancy is probably more important unless of course you are purchasing junk that hasn't been tested for the appropriate conditions you will likely come across. Even Antarctic explorers such as Sir Ranulph Twisleton-Wykeham-Fienness have admitted to making this error of judgment when he admitted ditching a down jacket to save weight, which nearly cost him his life.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#195571 - 02/10/10 10:39 PM
Re: When does redundancy become too much?
[Re: unimogbert]
|
Rapscallion
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 02/06/04
Posts: 4020
Loc: Anchorage AK
|
Encumbrance is the balancing factor, and it is quite a subjective one. For the masses, encumbrance means generally not exceeding the space limits of garment pockets, handbag or briefcase or daypack for EDC. Not everyone is subject to that sort of limit for EDC, but it is common enough to use as an example. Now for handbags, briefcases and daypacks, this is in addition to items not intended as essential survival items, although improvisation can capitalize on those items as well in a pinch. This would be items like notebooks, textbooks, cosmetics, office/classroom utensils, etc. So the inclusion of an acoutrement container is still not just for EDC survival purposes. Rather, we are capitalizing on unused space that always seems to be available on such containers regularly.
Most of the time lately I travel pretty light. I don't often bring a shoulder bag or briefcase to work, so EDC is confined to what I can fit in the pockets of my coat, shirt and pants. Naturally I am not going to pack my pockets to bulging capacity as this is neither comfortable nor of much practical use. So for EDC, I am going to narrow my focus considerably and have a list of small very essential items. These should be things I would use often anyways. So EDC is reduced to fundamental lifestyle type necessities, such as a small multitool, a keychain flashlight, a small butane lighter, and so on. My list won't necessarily match what others have, nor be in the same priority, but it is a fair representation I think.
Since it is impractical to carry a BOB or even an expeditionary pack around with you most of the time, it is essential to put less useful but more robust items in it. By less useful, I mean to say things that are less fundamentally necessary for our regular or standard operating procedure. Maybe I should refer to them as limited use items, since that really is their nature. For instance, as an EDC, I might wear my leather coat most of the time, primarily because it is just robust enough to protect me during my daily routine yet I can wear it 9 months out of the year. Conversely, my down parka is only practical under extreme conditions, and so it is of limited, yet vital, use. Limited use items, then augment the EDC and allow us to operate under more extreme conditions, but at the cost of more bulk and weight. Redundancy of some items allows also for upgrading a like item to something more durable, longer lasting, or similarly enhanced. So, while EDC is intended as a compromise between usefulness and bulk, larger packs incorporate both redundancy and enhancement, as well as other non-repetitive items which are also of limited, but vital, use.
There again, even with the larger packs, a balance must be struck between necessity and girth. It is counterproductive to build a kit that is too cumbersome to allow suitable mobility, or one that is not much improved over the standard EDC fare. Therefore, a little planning, some experimenting, and reliable advice will help to determine what sort of items are important enough to include both in EDC and more larger secondary kits.
Ultimately, each person will have to discover that balance for themselves. You study, you practice, you plan, and hopefully you come up with a compromise that satisfies your criteria for what is going to be important and what is more superfluous to have in a situation you might find yourself in.
As I stated at the begining of this post, it becomes quite a subjective thing. I would not expect anyone else to have the same set of EDC items I have just because what I carry is good enough for me. That some might only indicates that we share common lifestyle elements and experiences, but is no indication either of us may have been right in our selection.
In short, there is no universal answer. Sometimes redundancy is essential, other times it is wasteful.
_________________________
The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. -- Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher (1820-1903)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#195572 - 02/10/10 10:39 PM
Re: When does redundancy become too much?
[Re: Mark_F]
|
Old Hand
Registered: 06/03/09
Posts: 982
Loc: Norway
|
The question remains, and I perceive it as a more general question, how many layers of redundancy are enough, when does it become too much, and where is the balance? Additionally, what do you carry that is redundant, how much, and why? This way I can see from the voices of experience if I am on the right track or if I need to reevaluate. Well, I view the process of re-evaluating what you carry as something that should NEVER stop. You always add, remove or change items to adapt to changes in season, environment, fitness and travel companions. At least I do, and I don't have any plans of stopping anytime soon. The question you ask is a valid one, but do you notice how the answers you're getting are essentially variations of the theme: Figure out what works for YOU! That is because no one can make that decision for you, nor can we know all the specifics about your situation necessary to make that decision. That does not exclude a meaningful debate of the balance. Personally I carry very little in terms of redundancy. I'll list them here: Fire: Lighter + some sparking implement (sparklite or fire steel). Some PJ cotton balls are backup for natural tinder. Shelter: A combined tarp/bivy bag/poncho thingy + plastic poncho + garbage bag (not all of these all the time). If I actually plan on sleeping outside I will bring tent/tarp and a sleeping bag. Now the tricky part: The level of redundancy depends on my planned activities. If I will leave the tent for short hikes I will bring some minimum backup emergency shelter that will go along for the short hikes. If I will either carry or be with my tent at all times I may say "to heck with 0.6 kg of bivy bag, I have a friggin tent (also an excellent bivy bag, BTW - don't panic if you can't pitch it) and if I feel particular paranoid that my tent may blow away I'll just bring some big trash/garden leaf bags". Flashlights - but that's just because I'm addicted to shiny things. Otherwise, it would be scrutinized according to Benjamin's decision check list. Knife will sometimes be backed by multitool (mission dependent). Some of the points made in the "backpacking light - deodorant..." thread are highly relevant to this discussion. Ultra light backpacking is an exercise in the art of minimizing to the extreme, with close to zero redundancy. There's a lot to be learned from the ultra light backpackers, but we don't need to embrace their philosophy to the fullest. In summary, I will say that redundancy makes sense a) for some very critical items (but very few!) Fire, shelter, water. And you seek redundancy in function, not duplicate items. b) If separation from your main gear is likely. (Such as wandering off from your camp on a supposedly short hike, or being tossed out of your canoe). Edit: This is from a wilderness trip perspective. For EDC, Benjamins thoughts are highly relevant.
Edited by MostlyHarmless (02/10/10 11:03 PM)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered (),
449
Guests and
6
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|