Author Topic: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend  (Read 6065 times)

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #15 on: October 30, 2017, 08:42:24 AM »
Nice find roo...

It looks suspiciously like 'toggles' but only to my eye - because the lateral sides of the 'cruciform' appear too straight/rigid.
I would have expected to see less rigidity on these lateral extensions of the cruciform shapes (knot tails shouldn't necessarily be so straight)...

But - I would like to believe that this is the smoking gun we need to prove that the zeppelin bend was used as part of the ground-lines / mooring system.

Might need to recruit a few people from this forum to try and dig up some more detailed photos...

Surely this knot wasn't lost to history only to resurface in a 'Boating' magazine article in Jan 1976 ?

EDIT: I found this video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0chc_6HNR2g 

(at 9:20  there is what appears to be rope join of some sort...similar cruciform shape as per your previous photo). I think it is only a matter of time till we track down some better images/videos.

Mark
« Last Edit: October 30, 2017, 09:25:15 AM by agent_smith »

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #16 on: October 30, 2017, 01:43:40 PM »
VER 0.4 (30 OCT 2017) is uploaded.

Link to page: http://www.paci.com.au/knots.php (at #4 in the table)

Changelog:
[ ] added blueprint diagram for #1425A Riggers bend
[ ] fixed citation numbering

This is a work-in-progress...and I of course welcome any comments, and constructive feedback.

What I really need is the following:
1. The source of the Giles Camlin report which contradicts the entire Lee and Bob Payne story (which 'Knotting Matters' edition?)
2. Xarax to write how the zeppelin actually works - expanding on his 'rope made hinge theory'
3. Any historic photos showing the zeppelin bend in use during Rosendahl's command (clear images)
4. More info on the eye knot version of the zeppelin bend

Mark G

sgrandpre

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #17 on: October 30, 2017, 06:05:49 PM »
In paragraph 5, you refer to "Lee Paine," but the authors of the article are given as "Lee and Bob Payne." 

In paragraph 7 you refer to the "Lee and Bob Payne article," but you have not at this point in the paper mentioned that the Boating article was written by Lee and Bob Payne. 

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #18 on: October 31, 2017, 12:51:20 AM »
VER 0.5 (31 OCT 2017) is uploaded.

Link to page: http://www.paci.com.au/knots.php (at #4 in the table)

Changelog:
[ ] fixed page 1 citations
[ ] fixed spelling error Payne (not Paine)
[ ] fixed Dr Giles Camplin spelling (Camplin...not Camlin)
[ ] added reference to Dr Giles Camplin re his doctoral thesis on ground handling and mooring of zeppelins
[ ] improved blueprint drawing of #1425A on page 5
[ ] added new content on page 10

...

Comments:
I dont need to locate any info from 'Knotting Matters' re Giles Camplin. This was all reported in a 'Wingfoot Journal' (according to Dan Lehman). So what I now need is to track down that 'Wingfoot Journal' which has references from Dr Giles Camplin.

I need Xarax to write about the structure of the zeppelin bend (how it works and why it is jam resistant) :)

Mark

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #19 on: October 31, 2017, 01:49:05 AM »
But what I really need to find is anything on the zeppelin bend that pre-dates the Jan 1976 'Boating' magazine article authored by Lee and Bob Payne.
The earliest known published information I have is this Jan 1976 article.

Do you know if there is anything that pre-dates that Jan 1976 article?\
If yes, I would like to know about it :)
...
VOICI!  (Very sadly, by the now --2017-02-07-- *late* Bob THRUN.

 http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=983.msg6685#msg6685
Quote
My favorite bend is the Rosendahl Bend because I re-invented it and published it in 1967.
I published in a local caving club newsletter.  The club had about 70 members and a bunch
of exchanges with other clubs.  I would guess that the press run was over 100 copies.
I think that I had the first publication of this bend.  The exchanges were free to reprint my
article, but did not do so.  At the time I wondered why none of the exchanges picked up my
article.  It is not often that a knot that is new, simple, compact and useful comes along.

The Rosendahl Bend was later described in an article by Lee and Bob Payne in the March 1976
Boating magazine.  Boating has a circulation in the hundreds of thousands.  My method of tying
the bend was the same as given in the Payne article.  I can't remember the supposedly easier
method that Budworth gives.

I use the name "Rosendahl Bend" because that name has priority.  My article did not give any name.
My article was entitled "An Easily Untied Bend".  Biologists have a rule that the first person to describe
a species gives it its name.  A particular dinosaur was known for decades as Brontosaurus was found
to have been named earlier Apatosaurus.  Scientists switched to using Apatosaurus.  The Paynes
learned the knot from Joe Collins who is clearly quoted in the article "I called it the Rosendahl Bend".
The name "Zeppelin Knot" was invented by some Boating magazine editors who wanted a snappy title.
The article may be found at www.motherearthnews.com/Homesteading-and-Self-Reliance/  .
The Mother Earth article reprint is identical the the Boating article except for references to dates.

Quote
As for #1425A Riggers Bend - no, I don't think I will write a separate/distinct 'Knot Bio' on this...
But I think that it should be compared to the zeppelin bend in a knot Bio - on account of their same /class/order/family (but differing 'genus').
[ ] #1425A belongs to a 'genus' that is inter-woven overhand knots
[ ] Zeppelin belongs to a 'genus' that is inter-linked overhand knots
This displays an unhealthy bias.  Not only does one have a fairly
UNcontested/unconfused history for "SmitHunter's bend" --and
I can toss in "1973" for my self-discovery of it (and a year or few
later for the zeppelin, btw, which I too initially #'d (my then
*naming*) as a derivative of the former!)),
BUT also the knot has firmer published presence,
AND also a definite result --it's the knot that (figuratively)
tied together the IGKT (and SHOULD be(come) the logo,
and not some darn --non-practical-- mat knot!) --as #1425a
has 4 right-angle ends which nicely thus can be taken as the
major compass points indicating the "I" of "IGKT" !   IMO !!!)

Quote
I am waiting for Xarax to supply written content explaining the differences between these 2 bends - and to explain why the zeppelin is jam resistant while Riggers bend jams.
Note that a version of that latter end-2-end knot
is pretty resistant to jamming.  (Asher --sic-- sadly
rejected it as uninteresting(!?), which the original
does because the collar is able to constrict around
the SPart tightly --which mostly doesn't happen in
the zep. because of that latter's geometry in which
the it must swing wider for all it does (and nevermind
any bit about "hinge"!).)
Oh, the "false zeppelin" --i.e., where the b & q are
instead d & q (shaped SPart turns)-- can be made
more stable by a similar version twisting of tails,
AND if set from trying to make it an offset knot
--i.e., tails hauled hard for setting.

BTW, good catch on transforming#551 into that
lookalike-to-1425a structure!!  (I believe that Hansel
& Gretel/EKFRopework
show it in the obvious form,
but I don't want to wade into their swamp to confirm.)

And you should omit the fanciful conjecture about Ashley
knowing ... but disguising.  There is way too much obvious
evidence that things are simply overlooked.  (#1031/1048
e.g. have also a single-strand correlate, and also neither
of these led to the *proper* (loading-wise) shakehands
though smack before Ashley.  (And I can attest to like
overlooking of what might be considered obvious, alas.)

--dl*
====
« Last Edit: October 31, 2017, 08:54:24 PM by Dan_Lehman »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #20 on: October 31, 2017, 01:53:03 AM »
This photo is very interesting:

Dang, you keep swinging and getting runners on base;
and we're hoping for a home run, or some runners
scoring, at least.
GOOD SHOW!
It's tantalizing to think that somewhere we'll be able
to find ... .

Do note that toggled attachments are a part of ballooning,
which might have been a direct reference activity for the
airships.

 :)

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #21 on: October 31, 2017, 01:58:40 AM »
We need to keep in mind that if indeed Giles's intriguing
information of alleged note from Lee about Rosendahl's
absence of knowledge of the knot is correct (and to this
we'd want to assert that then ret'd Adm. R. was in decent
mental capacity and not forgetful ...),

THEN the Paynes' article is . . . what?  Clearly the assertion
that Joe asserted ... is false, as then Cmdr. R. didn't insist
one what he didn't know (and further from Giles, that such
a knot made no sense anyway).
Was Collins for real, and looking to make a legend for something
he might've come up with and wished to make popular?
(Roo did some research to suggest that "Collins" existed.)
Or was one of the Payne's making things up ... ?!

.:.  One can't just believe Rosendahl's claim to ignorance
and swallow the article's assertions.

Now, Bob Thrun's assertions even w/o publication **I**
will attest to :  Bob was honest, far from a showboat.


--dl*
====
« Last Edit: October 31, 2017, 08:55:48 PM by Dan_Lehman »

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #22 on: October 31, 2017, 02:26:08 AM »
Quote
My favorite bend is the Rosendahl Bend because I re-invented it and published it in 1967.  I published in a local caving club newsletter.  The club had about 70 members and a bunch of exchanges with other clubs.  I would guess that the press run was over 100 copies.  I think that I had the first publication of this bend.  The exchanges were free to reprint my article, but did not do so.  At the time I wondered why none of the exchanges picked up my article.  It is not often that a knot that is new, simple, compact and useful comes along.

The Rosendahl Bend was later described in an article by Lee and Bob Payne in the March 1976 Boating magazine.  Boating has a circulation in the hundreds of thousands.  My method of tying the bend was the same as given in the Payne article.  I can't remember the supposedly easier method that Budworth gives

Okay - wow...

All righty then, so now we have Bob Thrun pre-dating the 1976 Boating magazine article.

Bob claims he 're-invented' it in 1967 and published it in a caving club newsletter.
What are the chances of tracking down a copy of this newsletter from 1967?
Dan, do you have any ties/connections to caving clubs?

...

By the way, I have this link: https://www.scribd.com/document/313411893/The-Official-Newsletter-of-the-Naval-Airship-Association
Perhaps someone can write to Naval Airship Association to find out more about ground line handling of airships and whether the 'Zeppelin' bend was used?

...

From Dan Lehman...in relation to my reluctance to write a Knot Bio on #1425A Riggers bend:
Quote
This displays an unhealthy bias.  Not only does one have a fairly
UNcontested/unconfused history for "SmitHunter's bend" ...BUT ...

Dan, I'm not sure if you realize how much work goes into researching and writing this kind of material? Its not an easy exercise.
It consumes a lot of my time, energy and resources - and I dont get a lot of thanks for it in return...and I certainly remain poor - not getting any monetary reward for my time and effort either. Mind you, being financially poor has its rewards :) Its hard for people to sue me - they wouldn't get much from me (maybe my rope collection).

I tell you what, if you promise to help me (ie co-author) a Knot Bio on #1425A Riggers bend, I'll agree to do it  :o

Mark G
« Last Edit: October 31, 2017, 02:36:42 AM by agent_smith »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #23 on: October 31, 2017, 09:19:58 PM »
Quote
My favorite bend is the Rosendahl Bend because I re-invented it and published it in 1967.  I published in a local caving club newsletter.  ...

Okay - wow...

All righty then, so now we have Bob Thrun pre-dating the 1976 Boating magazine article.

Bob claims he 're-invented' it in 1967 and published it in a caving club newsletter.
What are the chances of tracking down a copy of this newsletter from 1967?
Dan, do you have any ties/connections to caving clubs?
Better, I have a copy of the newsletter(s),
which are in the 1st case UNdated (Vol. IX? #7)
and in a followup correction/note --Bob was upset
that his drawings were replaced w/editer's (which
look good, IMO!)-- the info is "Vol. IX (whatever)
#8 and dated December 1966 --sic : '66' (perhaps
date of receipt was in the next year, but I doubt
that the publishing was all so fouled that it was
in fact '67 that Bob got it and yet the newsletter
carried '66 as a date.  (The follow-up issue though
did try some sort of catch-up, reading "#8-12" as
though sweeping up a supposed monthly for 1966
in one fell soup?!))
Bob's "re-inventing" presumed some prior inventing
about which we, well, have some doubts.

And I now have some less then fully certain feeling
that then Adm. R. meant that he knew nothing about
the >>knot<< vs. about its being named for him!?
The latter is IMO a longer stretch, but possible; he might
have said more, afterall, if he knew zilch about it
AND considering Giles's opinion that regardless of
the name, the very function/nature of the knot
didn't well fit the supposed application !?
(And in re-reading the Paynes' article, they have it
that Joe Collins asserted that the knot was to be used
ALL OVER, not only for mooring.  And THIS sounds a
bit odd in not allowing of some hitch or eye knot,
for SOMEthing!?)
.:.  We've a lot of puzzles to solve!

Quote
By the way, I have this link: https://www.scribd.com/document/313411893/The-Official-Newsletter-of-the-Naval-Airship-Association
Perhaps someone can write to Naval Airship Association to find out more about ground line handling of airships and whether the 'Zeppelin' bend was used?
You mean like "someone" who's trying to write a knot bio?  ::)
Does your internet reach all the way to there?!

Meanwhile, I found an airships historian who even was
then going to [suspence build-up ...] Lakehurst; but he
has been kind enough to reply only to ack my msg.,
and not all so reassuringly let me know that he's going
to actually address the matter --I re-"bump"ed my query
for the now 2nd time (1sTime = May) gently letting him
know that our curiosity is no less w/time.


Quote
Dan Lehman...in relation to my reluctance to write a Knot Bio on #1425A Riggers bend:
Dan, I'm not sure if you realize how much work goes into researching ...
Well, my point was that you have a target that
requires all that much work, and spurn one that
would be much quicker to do, as its history is
pretty well known --to the extent that we're not
being deceived, and there isn't something else
to pop out of the unknown such as ancient illustrations
of the knot.

As we have at best NO inkling of where the zeppelin bend
came from even if we find it simply noted as being
used by the USNavy --i.e., assuming that Collins is
right, where did Rosendahl get the knot?!  He surely
didn't sound like a (assuming the Lee quote is right ...)
proud inventor.

--dl*
====

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1750
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #24 on: October 31, 2017, 10:20:44 PM »

As we have at best NO inkling of where the zeppelin bend
came from even if we find it simply noted as being
used by the USNavy --i.e., assuming that Collins is
right, where did Rosendahl get the knot?!  He surely
didn't sound like a (assuming the Lee quote is right ...)
proud inventor.

--dl*
====
It may be that neither Rosendahl nor Collins came up with the knot.  The ZR-3 Los Angeles was made by a German company.  I could imagine Rosendahl instructing duplication of pre-existing conditions found on the airship and its various rigging.

If it is ever established that Rosendahl couldn't remember the bend, that circumstance would explain why it made no lasting imprint on him.

Any German-speakers may have better luck tracking down the origin of the bend.
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #25 on: November 02, 2017, 01:02:16 AM »
It may be that neither Rosendahl nor Collins came up with the knot.  The ZR-3 Los Angeles was made by a German company.  I could imagine Rosendahl instructing duplication of pre-existing conditions found on the airship and its various rigging.

If it is ever established that Rosendahl couldn't remember the bend, that circumstance would explain why it made no lasting imprint on him.

Any German-speakers may have better luck tracking down the origin of the bend.
Yes, though if it has that sort of history,
then all the more puzzling is a lack of any
sightings of this, and the then loss of knot
knowledge!?

Going back to Collins's assertion of the knot
to be used everywhere (even allowing some
soft reading of this --to every end-2-end joint)
and Giles's questioning the use in the main,
for mooring ... :: these are problems (but as
I note, why not then re the latter any objection
from Rosendahl in his supposed note?).

 :)

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #26 on: November 03, 2017, 02:12:07 AM »
New version uploaded...

VER 0.6 (03 NOV 2017) is uploaded.

Link to page: http://www.paci.com.au/knots.php (at #4 in the table)

Changelog:
[ ] fully amended page 1 - added an 'anatomy diagram'
[ ] fully amended page 2 - citations and history is improved based on new info received.
[ ] amended page 3 - 'A trail of breadcrumbs' - also added #1062 from 'knotsaver', and the 'false' zeppelin
[ ] pages 4-6 are all a 'work-in-progress'

I need assistance to progress this paper further...

Mark G

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1750
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2017, 04:42:28 AM »
I need assistance to progress this paper further...

Mark G

Quote
For example, an examination
of illustration #582 is remarkable in that it could have been a "blueprint" for tying a zeppelin bend.
Xarax first noticed this illustration and brought it to the attention of the IGKT
in Jan 2012.
Ashley simply named it a
"lanyard knot".
Uh, no.  ABOK #582 has long been recognized as a relative of the Zeppelin Bend (well before 2012) and is often called the Blimp Knot.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2017, 04:46:02 AM by roo »
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2017, 05:33:32 AM »
reply from roo in relation to #582...
Quote
ABOK #582 has long been recognized as a relative of the Zeppelin Bend (well before 2012) and is often called the Blimp Knot.

Happy to amend the paper.

Have you got any references or anything that I can cite?

Same goes for Zeppelin eye knot...do you have any historical info on this eye knot?

MG

knotsaver

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 281
Re: Knot Bio: Zeppelin bend
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2017, 06:17:29 AM »
reply from roo in relation to #582...
Quote
ABOK #582 has long been recognized as a relative of the Zeppelin Bend (well before 2012) and is often called the Blimp Knot.

Happy to amend the paper.

Have you got any references or anything that I can cite?

Same goes for Zeppelin eye knot...do you have any historical info on this eye knot?

MG

Hi Mark,
about the Blimp (please, notice the name!), it should be in a book of G. Budworth...
about the #1062, please notice that the connection of it and the "false" Zeppelin was noticed (I don't know if for the first time) by Mandeville in KM #18 p.12 and it was in his Alphabend the letter/bend "N" ("the Neat 2c New ( Cf. A(BoK) 1062)".
Please, say somewhere that the 2 Overhand knots are of different chirality or that they are "unlike-handed" (Mandeville, cited above), whilst the "false" Zeppelin and the Hunter's comprise a pair of "like-handed" Overhand knots.
I liked the Parallel Bios (the Zeppelin in comparison with the Hunter (sorry I continue to call it in that way))... but you removed the reference to ABoK#551 (= #577 too).
Thanks.
Ciao,
s.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2017, 07:07:19 AM by knotsaver »