Equipped To Survive Equipped To Survive® Presents
The Survival Forum
Where do you want to go on ETS?

Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#205740 - 08/08/10 04:19 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: xbanker]
wolfepack Offline
Journeyman

Registered: 01/25/07
Posts: 52
Loc: Lynnwood, WA, USA
Originally Posted By: xbanker
Nice write-up on your test run. Great exercise that, together with your other thread, has rejuvenated my own planning. Thanks.


Thanks. It was the write-up of others that helped me get going with my own plans and I thought I would return the favor. Pass-it-forward as it were.

Quote:
You touch on something — situation awareness — that's an important piece of your "survival toolkit." Since it depends on what you see and what you hear going on around you, wearing headphones would impair your effectiveness. Depending on nature and severity of disaster, time of day, and neighborhood/area you're traveling, could mean increased peril.

Granted, the radio would presumably provide information useful to broader SA, but perhaps best monitored selectively.

Here's brief write-up on situation awareness, some of which you might find applicable.


Situational awareness is something I really need to work on. Like probably much of the population I go through my normal day without truly paying much attention to what's around me. It is easy to become lax when nothing ever happens. (I may have led a relatively charmed life in this respect). With this as my habitual state of awareness, I found it really hard to shift gears into a heightened state of awareness on this hike. It certainly didn't help that everything was actually normal anyway. As I said, something I need to think more about.



Top
#205741 - 08/08/10 04:32 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: Phaedrus]
wolfepack Offline
Journeyman

Registered: 01/25/07
Posts: 52
Loc: Lynnwood, WA, USA
Originally Posted By: Phaedrus
Superb writeup. One note; a good compromise between entertainment & into and situational awareness might be a single earbud with the radio set to mono. You'll get all the content while still retaining the ability to focus on outside sounds.

Again, I commend you on "letting rubber meet the road" and trying out your GHB. Many guys will "wargame" their pack but never try it until they need it. It was wise to give it a trial run.


Using a single ear-bud is a good suggestion. On the other hand, I had just finished deciding I didn't need the earbuds because my Coby one-piece headphones had worked so well. Back the decision drawing board I guess. smile

The Coby CV123 headphones I use are a one piece behind the head type. For me they are comfortable and fairly rugged (no foam ear cups to wear out, no thin plastic joints to get broken or crushed). The one-piece design means they stay on and don't work there way out over time. Also the behind the head design doesn't interfere with hats. A previous pair I purchased about 5 years ago are still going strong. Coby is one of those very bottom tier electronics companies that I generally stay away from. These headphones are the exception. I doubt everyone would like them, but they work well for me.

Top
#205742 - 08/08/10 04:36 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: rebwa]
wolfepack Offline
Journeyman

Registered: 01/25/07
Posts: 52
Loc: Lynnwood, WA, USA
Originally Posted By: rebwa
With all the usual disclaimers, the superfeet insoles really work for me and make a significant difference to my feet, legs and back. While I'm sure they don't work for everyone as we are all different --they might be worth a try. I've used them for several years and at least in the past they've offered a 30 day money back guarantee.

http://www.superfeet.com/superfeet-difference/


Thanks for the suggestion on better insoles. I'll take a look for them. I'll admit the superfeet website seems a little extreme in their claims, but that doesn't mean they can't have an excellent product that would work really well for me.

Top
#205743 - 08/08/10 04:42 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: LesSnyder]
wolfepack Offline
Journeyman

Registered: 01/25/07
Posts: 52
Loc: Lynnwood, WA, USA
Originally Posted By: LesSnyder
nice job... I really like your introspection and analysis, and your model has given me (and others)thought for concern.... a comment for those that might live in areas with a little higher heat index...my 72hr bag is a Blackhawk with 100oz internal hydration bladder I picked up off the prize table at Ft Bragg. The drinking tube makes it a lot easier to keep hydrated if you don't want to stop to remove the pack... my external water bottles..SweetWater filter bottle with nested cup, and stainless 1/2 liter as you observed are also difficult to reach.. regards Les


My BOB is a 3ltr hydration pack as well. I do like the convenience a hydration pack offers. For a GHB, I made several compromises between size, weight, price, and features. Built-in hydration lost out in this case, but it may be worth re-visiting in the future. Also, my current GHB is so packed, there is not really any room for an add-on hydration bag. Maybe another reason to "lighten up". smile

Top
#205744 - 08/08/10 04:50 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: hikermor]
wolfepack Offline
Journeyman

Registered: 01/25/07
Posts: 52
Loc: Lynnwood, WA, USA
Originally Posted By: hikermor
I totally agree with Teslinhiker's choice of footgear - low cuts are much preferable to high top leather shoes. Their lighter weight will significantly increase the distance you can hike, as well as your comfort. I would recommend after market insoles, like Superfeet or Spenco (my preference), especially on concrete surfaces.


As I stated previously, I prefer a high-top boot due to past ankle injuries. It is possible that it is all psychological, but I feel much more stable in a high-top over a low-top. I normally play volleyball in a high-top court shoe. Every once in a while I forget them and use a low-cut pair and I really notice a difference.

Quote:
I know your circumstances apparently rule out using a bicycle, but this may not be the case for others. They should consider that while 20 miles is a long day's walk, it is an easy two hour bike ride. I can consistently average ten mph with a fully loaded touring bike, covering seventy to eighty miles a day, carrying enough gear to remain self sufficient for days at a time. If equipping for a GBH situation, the load could be decreased and bike durability enhanced to deal with the complications preset in a post earthquake situation.

I also live in earthquake country, but my part time job is only five miles away. I usually commute on my touring bike, and I always have what is required to walk the distance if necessary.

Congratulations on being proactive about this situation.


The bicycle is definitely the way to go. Just wish I had a way to keep one at work. All the worst case scenarios I have been running through my head generally rule out a bicycle as well. However, I need to keep reminding myself that these are the "worst-case" scenarios and "better-case" scenarios are possible/probable and I need to plan for them as well.

Top
#205745 - 08/08/10 04:56 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: rebwa]
wolfepack Offline
Journeyman

Registered: 01/25/07
Posts: 52
Loc: Lynnwood, WA, USA
Originally Posted By: rebwa
I don't know as high tops seem to give me more support. I'd use a hiking boot rather than a backpacking boot. And in the PNW at least 3 seasons of the year the high tops are going to probably keep your feet drier. Even if you are lucky to have a dry day, which can be far and few between around here, with a major earthquake there undoubtedly will be broken water mains (and probably worse) with runoff to navigate through and around. Fall through spring I'd probably include a pair of gaiters as well.


I'm with you that the high-tops feel like they offer much more support for me as well. I'm less sure about the extra inch or two of height will make a great deal of difference in places where you need to get through water. Dealing with water is another reason not to have breathing holes in the sides of your shoes though. Still prefer the high-tops though!

The gaitors are a great idea! Tend to think of those in terms of snow, but I can see them providing additional lower leg protection as well as helping keep dust, dirt, gravel, etc. out of your boots. Wonder how much a pair weigh...

Top
#205746 - 08/08/10 05:16 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: Teslinhiker]
wolfepack Offline
Journeyman

Registered: 01/25/07
Posts: 52
Loc: Lynnwood, WA, USA
Originally Posted By: Teslinhiker
High tops do seem to offer more support (which is very often at debate) The problem with high top boots (whether you classify them as hiking or backpacking boots, it doesn't matter) is the weight of them. It has been proven by numerous studies that the heavier weight of the boot (which the OP has stated he wears heavy boots) makes a huge difference when you count the number of average steps per mile a person makes. The average is around 2000 steps on flat easy ground. So taking that number and multiplying it by 3 lbs for an average heavy boot is 2000 x 3= 6000 lbs of weight lifted by your legs and feet. Compare this to hiking shoes that only weigh 1.4 lbs: 2000 steps x 1.4 = 2800 lbs.

In one mile that is 1/3 less the weight and may not seem impressive, however in the course of 20 miles, the numbers are even more dramatic: 2000 steps x 20 miles x 3 lbs = 120,000 lbs compared to 2000 steps x 20 miles x 1.4 lbs = 56000 lbs of weight lifted. For any person who is even slightly out of walking/physical shape and carrying a 20 lb+ GHB, these are big differences which could be the deciding factor in you getting home before your legs and feet call it a day, especially on concrete.

If your trek home stretches into an overnight one and you stop and sleep somewhere, I can guarantee the next morning, your feet and legs are going to be hurting and you will have a rough few hours until you make it home.


I fully believe the science of what you are saying about weight on the feet. However, in my case, I think I'll take the known psychological and protective benefits over the science. Extending the science to the ridiculous, a simple pair of flip-flops would be far better than the light hiking shoe. Your point about the affects of weight are well taken though. While I will stick with my high-top, that doesn't mean I can't look for the lightest one possible that still offers the protective qualities I want.

BTW. The pair of hiking boots I have been using with my GHB weigh in at 2lbs 1oz. I selected this particular boot simply because it was relatively cheap and seemed to fit. As a GHB boot, it is basically for one time use as it will be stored permanently at the office. (though, as somebody else pointed out, wearing it every once in a while will help keep both my feet and the boot fitted better).

Quote:
As for the broken water mains flooding the street, I don't think there are very many (if any) mains big enough that would cause enough flooding to completely obiberate a street in deep enough water that I would be worried about. Also these types of breaks are very localized, meaning if you see the water flowing due a mains break in one block and flooding the street in a few inches of water, chances are that the next block over, there would be no flooding as all the water pressure is being released in the area of the break.


I agree with you that when it comes to getting through water, where and how you decide to cross makes a far greater difference then whether you wear a high or low top boot. The high top would offer marginally more protection, but not enough to be a deciding difference between a low and high top.

Top
#205747 - 08/08/10 05:20 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: wolfepack]
rebwa Offline
Enthusiast

Registered: 01/25/09
Posts: 295
Originally Posted By: wolfepack
Originally Posted By: rebwa
I don't know as high tops seem to give me more support. I'd use a hiking boot rather than a backpacking boot. And in the PNW at least 3 seasons of the year the high tops are going to probably keep your feet drier. Even if you are lucky to have a dry day, which can be far and few between around here, with a major earthquake there undoubtedly will be broken water mains (and probably worse) with runoff to navigate through and around. Fall through spring I'd probably include a pair of gaiters as well.


I'm with you that the high-tops feel like they offer much more support for me as well. I'm less sure about the extra inch or two of height will make a great deal of difference in places where you need to get through water. Dealing with water is another reason not to have breathing holes in the sides of your shoes though. Still prefer the high-tops though!

The gaitors are a great idea! Tend to think of those in terms of snow, but I can see them providing additional lower leg protection as well as helping keep dust, dirt, gravel, etc. out of your boots. Wonder how much a pair weigh...


6.8 oz on these

http://www.outdoorresearch.com/site/m_s_rocky_mtn_high_gaiters.html


Top
#205749 - 08/08/10 05:30 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: wolfepack]
sak45acp Offline
Stranger

Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 16
Loc: ct
I have actually been thinking about your GHB thread the last few days and have some extra thoughts on that: Essentially what you are doing is planning for a three day hiking/camping trip, with additional considerations. What I was going to suggest is that (if you have the time) is to start hiking for recreation, with some occasional overnighters. Use your intended GHB load. You are now shaking out your plans to see what actually works and what doesn't, plus getting into better shape, plus just getting outdoors away from the rat race. You have taken a good step with this trial run.

A few thoughts on this thread: good idea keeping some gear on you separate from your pack, in case of separation for whatever reason.

Two trekking poles is better than one in most situations. If for whatever reason you have to get rid of one, just ditch it. You already came to that conclusion, I think.

Soap: There are numerous soaps and multi-use cleaners marketed to the backpacking crowd that are used for cleaning you, your hair, clothes, dishes, dog, whatever in cold, warm or salt water. Check out REI.

While you're at REI go find the "Shoe Guru" in the store. Based on experience I know that hiking on pavement will chew your feet to shreds, even if you are in shape and have good calluses. This, and "ankle support" are covered by haveing boots that actually fit correctly. High top shoes do not offer any extra ankle support if they don't fit correctly in the heel. Your foot will still roll if the heel isn't stabilized. High top or low top should not matter as long as it fits correctly. That being said I still recommend a higher top hiking shoe/boot for your purposes. They provide better rain protection with your rain pants pulled over the top (assuming you go with a waterproof version), and they provided better impact protection for your ankles. This is a consideration for getting out and through debris from an earthquake, flood waters that you may have to go through with nasties floating around, dog and snake bite protections, etc. Heavy duty, all leather, clodhopper hiking/mountaineering boots are probably overkill for your purposes and as someone else mentioned, save as much weight from your feet as you can. A midweight, hightop, waterproof hiker like those from Merrell and other makers should work fine, BUT GET IT FITTED CORRECTLY BY THE SHOE GURU. For extra fit/comfort/cushion REI will have numerous choices in replacable footbeds. Check again with the foot guru.

Water supply is a personal issue with most people. I have found I like the convenience of the hydration bladder, and I drink a lot more with them than from a bottle. This is a good thing, but YMMV. Having a separate small water bottle on your second kit is probably a good idea for the redundancy mentioned above.

Consider gaiters, also for protection/rain use. Good job. Get out there and keep "testing."

Top
#205761 - 08/08/10 08:40 PM Re: Seattle GHB - test run 1 [Re: wolfepack]
Am_Fear_Liath_Mor Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 08/03/07
Posts: 3078
I would personally stick with the lightweight boots rather than the lightweight hiking shoes. The aftermath of an Earthquake may make downtown Seattle look like a more rubble strewn landscape that the top of the fairy hill of the Caledonians. Twisting an ankle in this scenario would be a bad thing to happen.

I personally would go with something like the Rockport Valverde II's or one of the Clarks Active Air boots which are just slightly heavier than the Brasher Supalites.

http://www.brasher.co.uk/catalogue/products/supalite-ii-gtx-r-supaiimn

2lbs 1oz is a pretty lightweight pair of boots.


Edited by Am_Fear_Liath_Mor (08/08/10 08:41 PM)

Top
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >



Moderator:  KG2V, NightHiker 
June
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
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
Who's Online
0 registered (), 351 Guests and 73 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Explorer9, GallenR, Jeebo, NicholasMarshall, Yadav
5368 Registered Users
Newest Posts
What did you do today to prepare?
by Jeanette_Isabelle
Yesterday at 07:45 PM
EDC Reduction
by paulr
06/04/24 10:30 AM
Recent Signal Mirror Successes - more wanted
by paulr
06/03/24 08:35 AM
Hoover Stew
by dougwalkabout
05/26/24 03:03 AM
Silver
by Jeanette_Isabelle
05/23/24 06:24 PM
New Madrid Seismic Zone
by Jeanette_Isabelle
05/17/24 03:49 PM
Any shortages where you are?
by adam2
05/16/24 09:49 AM
Newest Images
Tiny knife / wrench
Handmade knives
2"x2" Glass Signal Mirror, Retroreflective Mesh
Trade School Tool Kit
My Pocket Kit
Glossary
Test

WARNING & DISCLAIMER: SELECT AND USE OUTDOORS AND SURVIVAL EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES AND TECHNIQUES AT YOUR OWN RISK. Information posted on this forum is not reviewed for accuracy and may not be reliable, use at your own risk. Please review the full WARNING & DISCLAIMER about information on this site.