Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

carryology.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 63 posts

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#31

Post by [deleted] »

andrepd wrote: post #15
toomanybeersies wrote: post #9

My father had a custom-fitted backpack made back around 1980, which he gave to me, and it's the best backpack I've ever used. It goes against practically everything in the book about modern backpack design. There's about zero customisability, you can adjust the length of the shoulder straps and hip strap and that's about it, but I'm a very similar build to my old man so it fits me almost perfectly. It's an external a…

>When the Europeans were exploring and colonising the Americas they did so with nothing but timber, leather, canvas, and a bit of steel. Now we spend a couple of weekends a year in the bush, bringing a plethora of space-age technology just to try and survive: carbon fibre, nylon, and titanium gas cookers that boil water in 30 seconds. Well we use more technology today than we did before, big surprise. People didn't h…

[deleted]

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#32

Post by 7952 »

chrisseaton wrote: post #22

If you ask people who live and die by their 'backpacks' - the military (they'd call them rucksacks in the US or bergens in the UK) - you'll find that they eschew all this fancy complexity and just use something with a very basic structure. You may get an internal metal or polymer frame, but that'll be about it. Keep it simple.

I do mountain biking and lots of hiking. For years I used an Osprey bag which was super light and had lots of features. Problems was that it was hard to clean, the fabric/zips were not strong enough and it was difficult to load.

Now I just use a backpack designed for a laptop. The material is easy to wipe clean. It is rectangular which makes it far easier to load stuff than the weird semi-cylinder shape. The material is string and the zips are much more meaty. And the flat rectangular back is very comfortable for me.

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#33

Post by gonzo41 »

7952 wrote: post #32
chrisseaton wrote: post #22

If you ask people who live and die by their 'backpacks' - the military (they'd call them rucksacks in the US or bergens in the UK) - you'll find that they eschew all this fancy complexity and just use something with a very basic structure. You may get an internal metal or polymer frame, but that'll be about it. Keep it simple.

I do mountain biking and lots of hiking. For years I used an Osprey bag which was super light and had lots of features. Problems was that it was hard to clean, the fabric/zips were not strong enough and it was difficult to load. Now I just use a backpack designed for a laptop. The material is easy to wipe clean. It is rectangular which makes it far easier to load stuff than the weird semi-cylinder shape. The material…

I had the same issue for a while and I just downsized to a really nice 'cheap' osprey Rook 65 which is just a big single main compartment and a top lid. It isn't really meant for huge weight but I can easily get 5 days of food and gear for alpine conditions.

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#34

Post by sizzzzlerz »

Dowwie wrote: post #17

I'm backpacking 8 days into the backcountry this Summer. I was fitted for my pack in 2009 and used it on a few trips, carrying up to 75 pounds for several days. Even with a fitted pack, my shoulders took a beating. I don't know whether upgrading packs will make much of a difference but need to act soon.

No pack ever made will alleviate the agony of carrying 75 pounds. Until anti-gravity pods become available, your only solution is to ruthlessly pare that weight down. If you think you've gone as far as you can, make another pass.

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#35

Post by aasasd »

vanderZwan wrote: post #16
telesilla wrote: post #4

Fascinating! The entire time I was absorbing why my Osprey women's backpack is so comfortable, so interesting to get the historical breakdown. Not sure about that floating backpack though..

Funny, to me the physics of that floating backpack immediately check out on an intuitive level: the less energy I put into making the backpack move, the less energy I'll expend.

I'm poor at mechanics but afaik in racing it's considered that extra suspension absorbs energy, making the car slower. So my intuition is that the bungee cord would heat up from expanding/contracting, while taking energy for that from the person. Not sure, though, how that compares to lifting the entire weight. But then again, what happens when the person is already on a downswing and the cord belatedly jerks the backpack up?

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#36

Post by gonzo41 »

TopHand wrote: post #25
chrisseaton wrote: post #22

If you ask people who live and die by their 'backpacks' - the military (they'd call them rucksacks in the US or bergens in the UK) - you'll find that they eschew all this fancy complexity and just use something with a very basic structure. You may get an internal metal or polymer frame, but that'll be about it. Keep it simple.

When I was "in" 45+ years ago, the most important feature of our packs was the ability to shed them quickly so that we could take cover and maneuver our bodies to attack, fight, and survive.

I was 'in' 10 years ago and from my deployments in the flatter of the two sandboxes and the the hills of east Asia, I firmly believe that the military is holding onto backpacks for tradition more than anything. I was in the Infantry btw so I have a lot of Kg's carried.

Without going in depth about this, I attribute my opinion to the fact that everyone is rocking body armor these days and few teams can take big packs out for extended patrols without choosing between armor or big packs or broken backs. Time O'Brians short story, 'The things they carried' still rings true. From memory Body armor with plates and flak vests ~8kg, then 0.5Kg for every Magazine (7-10), 2 kilos of water, Radio 0-1.5, helmet, nvg, rifle or gun, and then maybe a rocket or mine. And that's stuff outside of your pack! The military is going heavy with armor so vehicles become the pack and soldiers just orbit out of those. When I was leaving the military more and more folk were moving towards having a day pack around the 25-30L mark that would be good for about 36 hours.

Anyway the only person giving me orders these days is me, so I take my suggestions from the ultralight hiking crowd.

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#37

Post by aasasd »

jotm wrote: post #14

I always thought shoulder straps need more connection between them at chest level - would that make sense? I think it would even the load better.

I'm pining for extra straps lower on the front, so my everyday-backpack sits more snugly and swings around less, and the weight isn't on the shoulder joints. However, I also need to breathe, so dunno how to resolve all of that.

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#38

Post by hyperpallium »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #9

My father had a custom-fitted backpack made back around 1980, which he gave to me, and it's the best backpack I've ever used. It goes against practically everything in the book about modern backpack design. There's about zero customisability, you can adjust the length of the shoulder straps and hip strap and that's about it, but I'm a very similar build to my old man so it fits me almost perfectly. It's an external a…

BTW TFA doesn't mention the basic idea of backpacks, except by implication: they put the weight on your hips; the shoulders straps are just for alignment.

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#39

Post by richk449 »

hyperpallium wrote: post #38
toomanybeersies wrote: post #9

My father had a custom-fitted backpack made back around 1980, which he gave to me, and it's the best backpack I've ever used. It goes against practically everything in the book about modern backpack design. There's about zero customisability, you can adjust the length of the shoulder straps and hip strap and that's about it, but I'm a very similar build to my old man so it fits me almost perfectly. It's an external a…

BTW TFA doesn't mention the basic idea of backpacks, except by implication: they put the weight on your hips; the shoulders straps are just for alignment.

From the second paragraph:

A properly fitting backpack (with hip belt) is one where the mass of the pack is evenly distributed from the C7 cervical vertebra (the bony part at the base of your neck) down to the iliac crest (top of the hips) where the majority of the weight should sit.

Re: Human Interface: Backpack harness innovation

#40

Post by magicroot75 »

lukebuehler wrote: post #23

Having walked over 4000 miles in a Deuter backpack that weighted on average about 33lbs/15kg, I would just add that while optimizing backpack fit is absolutely important, it is more important to constantly optimize how much weight you are carrying. The latter is way more an art than the former.

As a former AT thruhiker, I couldn't agree more. Though we definitely would have appreciated packs that were easier on the shoulders and gave less swampback. We had no frame ultralight packs and sort of molded the contents of the pack to fit our shorter torsos.
Post reply on HN