🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 22:28:36 +0800, Andrew Priest
<andrew@aushiker.com> wrote:

>I appreciate that this posting may be a off-topic for some of the
>groups I have posted it to, but I hope you will indulge me, as it is
>walking related (gear related to be specific) and may be of interest
>to some members. 
>
>Following a recent discussion on BackpackGearTest.org, which come out
>of the Field Reports for the Macabi Skirts for Men and for Women, a
>rather specialised group for discussing the merits or otherwise for
>hiking in skirts has been formed.
>
>Those curious or interested in the subject may wish to wonder over to
><http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HikingSkirts/>.
>
>BTW I am not the owner or moderator of this group, but I have joined
>the group as it intrigues me.
>
All things become new again.

The Appalachian Mountain Club, based in Boston, MA, was founded in
1876. There are pictures of some of the early AMC hiking groups, where
the men wore essentially business suits, including ties, for hiking,
and the women wore ankle length skirts. Not sure what you can find
directly on the Web, but they have published books with lots of
pictures from their archives.
www.outdoors.org

What the women were wearing was not unlike what women were wearing as
part of the westward expansion of the US at that time, perhaps even
more formal, as the original AMC members were part of the educated
upper-class elite of Boston.

There are groups in the US and elsewhere, where the women NEVER wear
pants, only skirts, and some of them hike.

Some Scottish, and many faux-Scottish, wear kilts of various tartans
when hiking.

A few companies have promoted kilts (Utlilikilt for example) but I
have not seen them become a major fashion trend in the city or the
hills.

Nudists must be rather amused.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

In article <93bng0lmn2m8mt9re1sr75q2nigkq2rvav@4ax.com>, Andrew Priest 
<andrew@aushiker.com> writes
>Following a recent discussion on BackpackGearTest.org, which come out
>of the Field Reports for the Macabi Skirts for Men and for Women, a
>rather specialised group for discussing the merits or otherwise for
>hiking in skirts has been formed.

Cue Fran.........
-- 
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

In message <93bng0lmn2m8mt9re1sr75q2nigkq2rvav@4ax.com>, Andrew Priest 
<andrew@aushiker.com> writes
>Hi
>
>I appreciate that this posting may be a off-topic for some of the
>groups I have posted it to, but I hope you will indulge me, as it is
>walking related (gear related to be specific) and may be of interest
>to some members.
>
>Following a recent discussion on BackpackGearTest.org, which come out
>of the Field Reports for the Macabi Skirts for Men and for Women, a
>rather specialised group for discussing the merits or otherwise for
>hiking in skirts has been formed.
>
>Those curious or interested in the subject may wish to wonder over to
><http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HikingSkirts/>.
>
>BTW I am not the owner or moderator of this group, but I have joined
>the group as it intrigues me.

Back in 1984 in his book "The Complete Walker III" Colin Fletcher 
proposed Colin's Kilt aka Everyman's Wonderful Waterproof Trash-bag 
Skirt. This consists of a large plastic rubbish bag sliced open at the 
base and then pulled up over the legs and tucked into your shorts or 
tied in place round your waist with cord. Fletcher says he designed it 
for walking through long wet vegetation to keep his shorts dry.

>
> Back in 1984 in his book "The Complete Walker III" Colin Fletcher
> proposed Colin's Kilt aka Everyman's Wonderful Waterproof Trash-bag
> Skirt. This consists of a large plastic rubbish bag sliced open at the
> base and then pulled up over the legs and tucked into your shorts or
> tied in place round your waist with cord. Fletcher says he designed it
> for walking through long wet vegetation to keep his shorts dry.


I think I'd rather have the wet legs than be seen in a bin liner skirt :-)

simon

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:52:49 GMT, "simplesimon"
<simon.elliott903@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>>
>> Back in 1984 in his book "The Complete Walker III" Colin Fletcher
>> proposed Colin's Kilt aka Everyman's Wonderful Waterproof Trash-bag
>> Skirt. This consists of a large plastic rubbish bag sliced open at the
>> base and then pulled up over the legs and tucked into your shorts or
>> tied in place round your waist with cord. Fletcher says he designed it
>> for walking through long wet vegetation to keep his shorts dry.
>
>I think I'd rather have the wet legs than be seen in a bin liner skirt :-)
>
Agreed. My usual summer hiking shorts are usually capable of being
swim shorts, and are made of light nylon like Supplex or the like.
Easy to dry in warm weather.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:42:44 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:52:49 GMT, "simplesimon"
><simon.elliott903@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Back in 1984 in his book "The Complete Walker III" Colin Fletcher
>>> proposed Colin's Kilt aka Everyman's Wonderful Waterproof Trash-bag
>>> Skirt. This consists of a large plastic rubbish bag sliced open at the
>>> base and then pulled up over the legs and tucked into your shorts or
>>> tied in place round your waist with cord. Fletcher says he designed it
>>> for walking through long wet vegetation to keep his shorts dry.
>>
>>I think I'd rather have the wet legs than be seen in a bin liner skirt :-)
>>
>Agreed...

I disagree.  I don't give a damn what other people think.  Besides, I tend
to go places where being seen is not one of my foremost concerns.

--
   Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA                    ghekhuis@earthlink.net
                     We are the CroMagnon of the future

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:53:35 -0400, Galen Hekhuis
<ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:42:44 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:52:49 GMT, "simplesimon"
>><simon.elliott903@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> Back in 1984 in his book "The Complete Walker III" Colin Fletcher
>>>> proposed Colin's Kilt aka Everyman's Wonderful Waterproof Trash-bag
>>>> Skirt. This consists of a large plastic rubbish bag sliced open at the
>>>> base and then pulled up over the legs and tucked into your shorts or
>>>> tied in place round your waist with cord. Fletcher says he designed it
>>>> for walking through long wet vegetation to keep his shorts dry.
>>>
>>>I think I'd rather have the wet legs than be seen in a bin liner skirt :-)
>>>
>>Agreed...
>
>I disagree.  I don't give a damn what other people think.  Besides, I tend
>to go places where being seen is not one of my foremost concerns.

But _I_ have to see me, and I usually hike with small groups of people
I might meet again.

There is always going to be other people you see, especially at
trailheads, unless you are really, really out there.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:46:04 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:53:35 -0400, Galen Hekhuis
><ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:42:44 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:52:49 GMT, "simplesimon"
>>><simon.elliott903@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Back in 1984 in his book "The Complete Walker III" Colin Fletcher
>>>>> proposed Colin's Kilt aka Everyman's Wonderful Waterproof Trash-bag
>>>>> Skirt. This consists of a large plastic rubbish bag sliced open at the
>>>>> base and then pulled up over the legs and tucked into your shorts or
>>>>> tied in place round your waist with cord. Fletcher says he designed it
>>>>> for walking through long wet vegetation to keep his shorts dry.
>>>>
>>>>I think I'd rather have the wet legs than be seen in a bin liner skirt :-)
>>>>
>>>Agreed...
>>
>>I disagree.  I don't give a damn what other people think.  Besides, I tend
>>to go places where being seen is not one of my foremost concerns.
>
>But _I_ have to see me, and I usually hike with small groups of people
>I might meet again.

Like I say, I don't care what others think of what I'm wearing.

>There is always going to be other people you see, especially at
>trailheads, unless you are really, really out there.

Like I say, I don't care whether others think I am wearing yuppie stuff,
cheap trash bags, proper expedition apparel, or what-have-you.  If it works
for me, I'm probably gonna wear it regardless of where I am.  Besides, I
have a special fondness for trash bags especially.  As a caver I used to
keep a couple of them stashed in my helmet for emergencies.  They can be
used for all kinds of good stuff besides just keeping your legs dry.

--
   Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA                    ghekhuis@earthlink.net
                     We are the CroMagnon of the future

Galen Hekhuis wrote:

> On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:46:04 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
> 
>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:53:35 -0400, Galen Hekhuis
>><ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:42:44 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:52:49 GMT, "simplesimon"
>>>><simon.elliott903@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Back in 1984 in his book "The Complete Walker III" Colin Fletcher
>>>>>> proposed Colin's Kilt aka Everyman's Wonderful Waterproof Trash-bag
>>>>>> Skirt. This consists of a large plastic rubbish bag sliced open at the
>>>>>> base and then pulled up over the legs and tucked into your shorts or
...
>>But _I_ have to see me, and I usually hike with small groups of people
>>I might meet again.
> 
> Like I say, I don't care what others think of what I'm wearing.
> 
>>There is always going to be other people you see, especially at
>>trailheads, unless you are really, really out there.
> 
> Like I say, I don't care whether others think I am wearing yuppie stuff,
> cheap trash bags, proper expedition apparel, or what-have-you.  If it works
> for me, I'm probably gonna wear it regardless of where I am.  Besides, I
> have a special fondness for trash bags especially.  As a caver I used to
> keep a couple of them stashed in my helmet for emergencies.  They can be
> used for all kinds of good stuff besides just keeping your legs dry.

The ones I know about:

Emergency bivouac, poncho, additional windproofing, quick and dirty 
groundcloth for lunch, etc.

-- 
Pat O'Connell
[note munged EMail address]
Take nothing but pictures, Leave nothing but footprints,
Kill nothing but vandals...

In message <L6ePc.1468$aR2.1@okepread04>, Pat O'Connell 
<nvcaver.FIGUREITOUT@cox.net> writes
>
>
>Galen Hekhuis wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:46:04 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:53:35 -0400, Galen Hekhuis
>>><ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:42:44 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:52:49 GMT, "simplesimon"
>>>>><simon.elliott903@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Back in 1984 in his book "The Complete Walker III" Colin Fletcher
>>>>>>> proposed Colin's Kilt aka Everyman's Wonderful Waterproof Trash-bag
>>>>>>> Skirt. This consists of a large plastic rubbish bag sliced open at the
>>>>>>> base and then pulled up over the legs and tucked into your shorts or
>...
>>>But _I_ have to see me, and I usually hike with small groups of people
>>>I might meet again.
>>  Like I say, I don't care what others think of what I'm wearing.
>>
>>>There is always going to be other people you see, especially at
>>>trailheads, unless you are really, really out there.
>>  Like I say, I don't care whether others think I am wearing yuppie 
>>stuff,
>> cheap trash bags, proper expedition apparel, or what-have-you.  If it works
>> for me, I'm probably gonna wear it regardless of where I am.  Besides, I
>> have a special fondness for trash bags especially.  As a caver I used to
>> keep a couple of them stashed in my helmet for emergencies.  They can be
>> used for all kinds of good stuff besides just keeping your legs dry.
>
>The ones I know about:
>
>Emergency bivouac, poncho, additional windproofing, quick and dirty 
>groundcloth for lunch, etc.

Pack cover, pack liner, vapor barrier shirt, storage for gear outside 
shelter, groundcloth for feet when sleeping under the stars on a 3/4 
mat.
>

In article <1r7qg0pb5ub0r4hshi5mcegq3qjvtgr80g@4ax.com>,
Galen Hekhuis  <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:42:44 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:52:49 GMT, "simplesimon"
>><simon.elliott903@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>I think I'd rather have the wet legs than be seen in a bin liner skirt :-)

>>Agreed...

>I disagree.  I don't give a damn what other people think.

I used to think like Galen.  Or at least I thought I used
to think like him.  I've recently been made aware that I
am very fashion conscious in the backcountry... I never knew
I was, but the photographs don't lie.

Maybe related to my latent homosexuality... something else I
didn't know about, and came as a surprise to me.

HOwever, in spite of it all... I WOULD wear a skirt!  As long
as the colours went with the rest of my wardrobe.
-Pete




-- 

    "It's a sad day for american capitalism when a man 
     can't fly a midget on a kite over Central Park."
                                                J. Moran

In message <QdhQc.5708$T5.327974@weber.videotron.net>, Pete Hickey 
<pete@bitman.uottawa.ca.DELETE.ME> writes
>In article <1r7qg0pb5ub0r4hshi5mcegq3qjvtgr80g@4ax.com>,
>Galen Hekhuis  <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:42:44 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:52:49 GMT, "simplesimon"
>>><simon.elliott903@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>>I think I'd rather have the wet legs than be seen in a bin liner skirt :-)
>
>>>Agreed...
>
>>I disagree.  I don't give a damn what other people think.
>
>I used to think like Galen.  Or at least I thought I used
>to think like him.  I've recently been made aware that I
>am very fashion conscious in the backcountry... I never knew
>I was, but the photographs don't lie.
>
>Maybe related to my latent homosexuality... something else I
>didn't know about, and came as a surprise to me.
>
>HOwever, in spite of it all... I WOULD wear a skirt!  As long
>as the colours went with the rest of my wardrobe.
>-Pete

Black goes with everything!

I was criticised - lightly - recently for wearing a pair of rather 
bland, dull looking trail shoes in the hills. "You don't look like a 
hillwalker", I was told, as if the appearance mattered more than the 
reality.

Be bold Pete, set the fashions, don't follow them!

In article <Ijjb2lBnlgEBFw8L@auchnarrow.demon.co.uk>, Chris Townsend 
<Chris@DELETEauchnarrow.demon.co.uk> writes
>Be bold Pete, set the fashions, don't follow them!

Take care with the fashion you set though - you may be followed :-)

There are some peculiar people around.
-- 
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

Chris Townsend >
> Black goes with everything!

Uhm, actually, black sucks. 

Never mind the looks, but black isn't a very good
choise for outer clothing, or eg sleeping bags. It's hot 
in the sunny summer, and cold in the dark winter, as it 
absorbs or emits thermal radiation efficiently, respectively. 
From the point of view of thermal effiency, white, and 
better still, shiny silver, is cooler in summer and warmer 
in winter. Yet, the "technical" gear seldom comes in white, 
silver being rarer still. 

Another rationale for choosing the colour of one's 
gear is observability. I can somehow understand the 
desire for "noisy" high-visibility gear from a safety 
point of view on high-risk trips - not that I'd 
approve of being noisy in vain though. Another approach, 
usually much more sound imo, is to be "quiet", and go 
with minimum visual impact, ie camouflage(*). And, again, 
typically the fancy "technical" gear - from respected 
manufacturers too - comes in colours and patterns
that represent pitful compromizes in this respect, not
being good at either. But, the colours of which are 
consistent with current outdoor fashion. So much for 
being "technical"... <g>

(*) Usually, when visual camo is discussed, people point
out that "animals" don't perceive colours. This, of course,
is nonsense.

In article <Ijjb2lBnlgEBFw8L@auchnarrow.demon.co.uk>,
Chris Townsend  <Chris@DELETEauchnarrow.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <QdhQc.5708$T5.327974@weber.videotron.net>, Pete Hickey 
><pete@bitman.uottawa.ca.DELETE.ME> writes


>>  I've recently been made aware that I
>>am very fashion conscious in the backcountry... 

>Be bold Pete, set the fashions, don't follow them!


I tried that once:

   http://mudhead.uottawa.ca/~pete/beard.html

It didn't catch on.

>>.. I never knew
>>I was, but the photographs don't lie.

Well, by chance, I was wearing colors that happened to go together.
My wife's pants, and my top.  I was ridiculed for being colour
co-ordinated,  I've come to the realization that it was my
subconsciounce that made me to that, and I must be true to that,
whether I like it or not.

Chris:  Got you postcard.  Thanks.

-Pete (always serious)

-- 

    "It's a sad day for american capitalism when a man 
     can't fly a midget on a kite over Central Park."
                                                J. Moran

Pete Hickey wrote:
> I tried that once:
> 
>    http://mudhead.uottawa.ca/~pete/beard.html
> 
> It didn't catch on.

That's pure gold!  I'd never do it, but I'm glad it's been done :-).

In message <7uvekmlu6rj.fsf@ipana.research.nokia.com>, MB <*@*.*> writes
>Chris Townsend >
>> Black goes with everything!
>
>Uhm, actually, black sucks.

I don't think a black trash bag skirt is going to have deleterious 
effects. At least not in terms of performance :-)
>
>Never mind the looks, but black isn't a very good
>choise for outer clothing, or eg sleeping bags. It's hot
>in the sunny summer, and cold in the dark winter, as it
>absorbs or emits thermal radiation efficiently, respectively.
>From the point of view of thermal effiency, white, and
>better still, shiny silver, is cooler in summer and warmer
>in winter. Yet, the "technical" gear seldom comes in white,
>silver being rarer still.

And black is currently very popular - most soft shell clothing seems to 
be black.

I can't say though that I've really noticed the difference between pale 
and dark coloured clothing in terms of warmth. Dark clothing shows the 
dirt less and isn't good for photography however.

I suspect "technical" clothing doesn't come in white or silver often 
because it shows the dirt.

I like black sleeping bags - they absorb heat and dry fast when damp.
>
>Another rationale for choosing the colour of one's
>gear is observability. I can somehow understand the
>desire for "noisy" high-visibility gear from a safety
>point of view on high-risk trips - not that I'd
>approve of being noisy in vain though. Another approach,
>usually much more sound imo, is to be "quiet", and go
>with minimum visual impact, ie camouflage(*). And, again,
>typically the fancy "technical" gear - from respected
>manufacturers too - comes in colours and patterns
>that represent pitful compromizes in this respect, not
>being good at either. But, the colours of which are
>consistent with current outdoor fashion. So much for
>being "technical"... <g>

I agree completely here. I don't wear camo but I do prefer dull greens 
and browns.

I did raise the question of "fashion" colours with an outdoor company 
once and they told me that it was what they were offered and that 
technical clothing didn't utilise enough material for fabric makers to 
make it in special colours. This may be partly true.
>
>(*) Usually, when visual camo is discussed, people point
>out that "animals" don't perceive colours. This, of course,
>is nonsense.

In message <XWpQc.14951$DP2.82930@wagner.videotron.net>, Pete Hickey 
<pete@bitman.uottawa.ca.DELETE.ME> writes
>In article <Ijjb2lBnlgEBFw8L@auchnarrow.demon.co.uk>,
>Chris Townsend  <Chris@DELETEauchnarrow.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <QdhQc.5708$T5.327974@weber.videotron.net>, Pete Hickey
>><pete@bitman.uottawa.ca.DELETE.ME> writes
>
>
>>>  I've recently been made aware that I
>>>am very fashion conscious in the backcountry...
>
>>Be bold Pete, set the fashions, don't follow them!
>
>
>I tried that once:
>
>   http://mudhead.uottawa.ca/~pete/beard.html
>
>It didn't catch on.

Wonderful.

The problem was that you didn't have product to sell.

>
>>>.. I never knew
>>>I was, but the photographs don't lie.
>
>Well, by chance, I was wearing colors that happened to go together.
>My wife's pants, and my top.  I was ridiculed for being colour
>co-ordinated,  I've come to the realization that it was my
>subconsciounce that made me to that, and I must be true to that,
>whether I like it or not.
>
>Chris:  Got you postcard.  Thanks.
>
>-Pete (always serious)

Of course. You can't joke about the outdoors.

In article <Ijjb2lBnlgEBFw8L@auchnarrow.demon.co.uk>,
Chris Townsend  <Chris@DELETEauchnarrow.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <QdhQc.5708$T5.327974@weber.videotron.net>, Pete Hickey 
><pete@bitman.uottawa.ca.DELETE.ME> writes
>>In article <1r7qg0pb5ub0r4hshi5mcegq3qjvtgr80g@4ax.com>,
>>Galen Hekhuis  <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 16:42:44 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>>>>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:52:49 GMT, "simplesimon"
>>>><simon.elliott903@ntlworld.com> wrote:
...
>>I used to think like Galen.  Or at least I thought I used
>>to think like him.  I've recently been made aware that I
>>am very fashion conscious in the backcountry... I never knew
>>I was, but the photographs don't lie.
>>
>>Maybe related to my latent homosexuality... something else I
>>didn't know about, and came as a surprise to me.
>>
>>HOwever, in spite of it all... I WOULD wear a skirt!  As long
>>as the colours went with the rest of my wardrobe.
>>-Pete
>
>Black goes with everything!
>
>I was criticised - lightly - recently for wearing a pair of rather 
>bland, dull looking trail shoes in the hills. "You don't look like a 
>hillwalker", I was told, as if the appearance mattered more than the 
>reality.
>
>Be bold Pete, set the fashions, don't follow them!



Gawd, you guys must be embarassments to your women.


Add Markus and Pat, too.


You guys should go out in complete drag one Halloween.
Penny and the vixen must be rolling their eyes to say nothing of the
women lurkers......


Bring back the bare-foot and nude hiking threads.

-- 

Chris Townsend >
> And black is currently very popular - most soft shell clothing seems
> to be black.

That sucks <g>

> I can't say though that I've really noticed the difference 
> between pale and dark coloured clothing in terms of warmth. 

I guess Chris means in winter. Being cold or warm
depends on so many factors that it's difficult
to notice the relatively minor effect of exterior colour. 
However, if you check with a thermal imager, you'll notice 
a marked difference. Silvery stuff, such as those mylar 
bags, is actually pretty good at stopping radiative 
heat loss due to the very low emissivity of the
material. Mylar is good as thermal camo too, btw, when 
you really don't want those SAR people to find you... ;) 

In summer, in sunshine, the difference in "hotness"
of black vs white is so obvious that I'm sure everyone 
is familiar with it. It's easy to notice when wearing 
eg woodland camo: the black spots feel much more hot 
than the dark green and brown ones and the light green 
is even less hot.

> I suspect "technical" clothing doesn't come in white or 
> silver often because it shows the dirt.

This, of course, is yet another reason why it should be 
white or silver. It's useful that the dirt shows. Dirt 
typically degrades performance (like breathability or
insulation) and if the dirt shows clearly, it's easier 
to judge when the stuff needs to get washed. 

> I like black sleeping bags - they absorb heat and dry fast 
> when damp.

Sure. But only if you have a significant source of thermal 
radiation visible, like sunshine or fire. In midwinter 
cold-camping (eg above treeline or environmental policy) 
you have neither. And, that's presicely when bag warmth 
really matters. Moreover, you should be using a VB liner 
in such conditions, and thus, hopefully, have much less 
need for drying the insulation of the bag.

Agreeably, radiative heat loss isn't that much of an 
issue with bags, as one usually uses the bag inside 
a confined space, like a tent. Moreover, if 
the bag is warm enough, it's exterior temperature 
is close to ambient, which again reduces the 
relevance of the emissivity. Otoh, if you'll forced
to use the bag without a shelter or cover, and the 
bag isn't warm enough, it's exactly the conditions 
where the radiative loss is biggest. And, also, it's 
the conditions where you could do without any extra
heat loss... (These are qualitative comments though,
one would have to do calculations and measurements in
order to check the relevance of the quantitative 
difference.)

Nevertheless, I agree that it's mostful if the bag
is black with open fire or sunshine available. Imo,
however, it's sufficient that the _inside_ of the 
bag is black, as it's typically turned inside out
for drying. I'd like a winter bag to be silver or
white (added benefit of being visual camo too) on 
the outside and black on the inside. The only winter 
bag that comes to mind with silver colour is 
Stephenson's Warmlite Triple, the VB of which
is silver coloured on the _inside_ of the tops. As
far as I can see, silver on the inside isn't very
useful - it's actually just the exterior colour that 
matters - ie the emissivity of the outermost layer
wherefrom the thermal radiation escapes into cold
space (see eg Glen Randall's 'Cold Comfort').

Otoh, silverized insides of shelters is useful,
especially in case of tarps used with a fire in 
front. Acts as a thermal mirror. 

Oh well, I seem to have got carried away...

In message <7uv4qngmy5r.fsf@ipana.research.nokia.com>, MB <*@*.*> writes
>Chris Townsend >
>> And black is currently very popular - most soft shell clothing seems
>> to be black.
>
>That sucks <g>
>
>> I can't say though that I've really noticed the difference
>> between pale and dark coloured clothing in terms of warmth.
>
>I guess Chris means in winter.

Yes.

>Being cold or warm
>depends on so many factors that it's difficult
>to notice the relatively minor effect of exterior colour.
>However, if you check with a thermal imager, you'll notice
>a marked difference. Silvery stuff, such as those mylar
>bags, is actually pretty good at stopping radiative
>heat loss due to the very low emissivity of the
>material. Mylar is good as thermal camo too, btw, when
>you really don't want those SAR people to find you... ;)

I don't think heat loss is significant though. Any tightly woven 
clothing will prevent most of it. Convection, conduction and evaporation 
are far more important and with these colour is irrelevant.
>
>In summer, in sunshine, the difference in "hotness"
>of black vs white is so obvious that I'm sure everyone
>is familiar with it. It's easy to notice when wearing
>eg woodland camo: the black spots feel much more hot
>than the dark green and brown ones and the light green
>is even less hot.

True, but do you feel hotter inside at those spots? I've tried black 
T-shirts in hot weather and although the fabric feels hotter than a 
white one I don't feel noticeably warmer.
>
>> I suspect "technical" clothing doesn't come in white or
>> silver often because it shows the dirt.
>
>This, of course, is yet another reason why it should be
>white or silver. It's useful that the dirt shows. Dirt
>typically degrades performance (like breathability or
>insulation) and if the dirt shows clearly, it's easier
>to judge when the stuff needs to get washed.

True again, but pale clothing can look grubby in a few hours.
>
>> I like black sleeping bags - they absorb heat and dry fast
>> when damp.
>
>Sure. But only if you have a significant source of thermal
>radiation visible, like sunshine or fire. In midwinter
>cold-camping (eg above treeline or environmental policy)
>you have neither. And, that's presicely when bag warmth
>really matters. Moreover, you should be using a VB liner
>in such conditions, and thus, hopefully, have much less
>need for drying the insulation of the bag.

I've tried VB liners and I have to say I don't find them comfortable. 
The longest trip I've done in really cold weather (overnight lows -5 to 
-12F) lasted 13 days. I used a down bag with a water resistant shell. It 
had a red outer and a dark purple inner. I didn't use a VB liner. I 
aired the bag most days (some were too stormy) and it stayed dry. 
Although there was little heat in the sun (and most days it was cloudy 
or hazy anyway) there was a breeze and the air was dry, which is why I 
think any moisture in the bag soon evaporated.

Now it maybe that on a much longer trip there would be problems with 
condensation. I wouldn't fancy a longer trip in such cold conditions 
anyway :-).
>
>Agreeably, radiative heat loss isn't that much of an
>issue with bags, as one usually uses the bag inside
>a confined space, like a tent. Moreover, if
>the bag is warm enough, it's exterior temperature
>is close to ambient, which again reduces the
>relevance of the emissivity. Otoh, if you'll forced
>to use the bag without a shelter or cover, and the
>bag isn't warm enough, it's exactly the conditions
>where the radiative loss is biggest. And, also, it's
>the conditions where you could do without any extra
>heat loss... (These are qualitative comments though,
>one would have to do calculations and measurements in
>order to check the relevance of the quantitative
>difference.)

I think if you're forced to use the bag without shelter or cover you 
have problems anyway :-). Of course bags with waterproof or water 
resistant covers have built-in protection.
>
>Nevertheless, I agree that it's mostful if the bag
>is black with open fire or sunshine available. Imo,
>however, it's sufficient that the _inside_ of the
>bag is black, as it's typically turned inside out
>for drying.

Agreed that only the inner or outer needs to be black. I prefer it to be 
the outside as I find light coloured inners more "friendly".

> I'd like a winter bag to be silver or
>white (added benefit of being visual camo too) on
>the outside and black on the inside. The only winter
>bag that comes to mind with silver colour is
>Stephenson's Warmlite Triple, the VB of which
>is silver coloured on the _inside_ of the tops. As
>far as I can see, silver on the inside isn't very
>useful - it's actually just the exterior colour that
>matters - ie the emissivity of the outermost layer
>wherefrom the thermal radiation escapes into cold
>space (see eg Glen Randall's 'Cold Comfort').

Silver inside certainly doesn't seem to make any difference. I've tried 
bags with silver linings and with sheets of silver foil in between 
layers of insulation and I don't think they make any difference, except 
that the foil makes the bag less breathable.

Winter for me usually means high winds, wet snow and rain and 
temperatures around 25-35F. I use a three season down bag, currently one 
with a mid blue shell and a grey lining, and a tent. If using a snow 
shelter I use a breathable bivi bag. My red/purple winter bag (rated to 
-15F) is too cold for home conditions though I will take it on a Nepal 
trip this autumn where temperatures could be as low as -15.
>
>Otoh, silverized insides of shelters is useful,
>especially in case of tarps used with a fire in
>front. Acts as a thermal mirror.

Good in the desert too. I found that a space blanket kept me cooler with 
the silver side facing the sun than facing me when used as a sun shade.
>
>Oh well, I seem to have got carried away...

It's an interesting discussion.

And a long way from hiking in skirts :-)

> True, but do you feel hotter inside at those spots? I've tried black 
> T-shirts in hot weather and although the fabric feels hotter than a 
> white one I don't feel noticeably warmer.

Black trousers can get very hot in the sun, but I only really notice this 
when the fabric is against my skin - say when sitting or stratched out on 
the grass.  I'll have to borrow some chefs trousers & conduct some 
experiments.

"Chris Townsend" <Chris@DELETEauchnarrow.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:TUTt7NElk2EBFw9u@auchnarrow.demon.co.uk...
> In message <7uv4qngmy5r.fsf@ipana.research.nokia.com>, MB <*@*.*> writes

> >Otoh, silverized insides of shelters is useful,
> >especially in case of tarps used with a fire in
> >front. Acts as a thermal mirror.

Also handy for photography, where the silver side can be used to push a little
extra light into shadows.

> Good in the desert too. I found that a space blanket kept me cooler with
> the silver side facing the sun than facing me when used as a sun shade.
> >
> >Oh well, I seem to have got carried away...
>
> It's an interesting discussion.
>
> And a long way from hiking in skirts :-)

For which praise the lawd and hallelooooooja!
-- 
Mark South: World Citizen, Net Denizen

Chris > 
> I don't think [radiative] heat loss is significant though. Any 
> tightly woven clothing will prevent most of it. Convection, 
> conduction and evaporation are far more important and with 
> these colour is irrelevant.

I think that Chris got it a bit wrong here. The heat loss 
_through_ a fabric is mostly by conduction and radiation 
(assuming no forced convection, ie wind blowing through, or
pumping air through by movement). High-density materials, 
like woven fabrics, are indeed effective in blocking the
radiative heat loss through the material [1], being 
effectively non-transparent at thermal wavelenghts. And, 
consequently, the radiative silvery barriers sometimes found 
within such fabrics, or, more commonly, on the interior surface, 
are just wasted excess weight. (Radiative heat loss through a 
low-density insulation can be significant though, and,
thus, radiative barriers within it, or on the interior
surface, may be useful. So, Stephenson probably got
it right here, although down typically is less transparent
to thermal radiation than volumeous synthetic insulators. 
Ref. [1])

But, that's not the whole story. At the exterior surface
of the garment, rouhgly half of the thermal radiation is 
emitted into the space outside, and is thus lost. The 
only things that matter here are 1) the temperature of the 
surface, and 2) the emissivity of the surface. The Stefan-
Bolzmann law. It's just the surface visible to the outside 
that matters, not what the material hidden within the garment
was. The net flux of heat due to radiation at the surface 
depends on the temperature of the surroundings too, of course,
as the surroundings emit thermal radiation too: The Sun is very 
hot, the empty space (clear sky) is very cold, and the rest 
(vegetation, snow, clouds, tent interior) are somewhere in-
between.

The emissivity of the surface at thermal wavelenghts can 
be greatly reduced by making it silvery shining. In contrast,
matt black is the worst possible choise. When emissivity 
goes down, so does absorptivity. Thus, the silvery parka,
tent or sleeping bag is cooler in the sunshine and warmer 
under the clear night sky. 

Unfortunately, I don't have any figures for the relative
importance of radiative heat loss vs the conductive and/or
spontaneous convective ones. I'm quite confident however, 
that raditive heat loss (at the surface) can be significant, 
depending on the conditions. 

Glenn Randall's otherwise usually most excellent book [1], 
however, blatantly dismisses silver-coloured outdoor clothing 
with - of all things - a fashion argument! 

Quoting directly: "While the "wet looks" may once have been 
fashionable at downhill ski areas, few people want to look 
like a walking advertisement for Reynolds Wrap."

I guess Glenn wouldn't get caught wearing a skrit eihter... ;)

[1] Glenn Randall, 'Cold Comfort', Lyons&Burford (1987).
It's a secondary reference though, except for the direct
quote.

In message <7uvzn58newv.fsf@gina.research.nokia.com>, MB <*@*.*> writes
>Chris >
>> I don't think [radiative] heat loss is significant though. Any
>> tightly woven clothing will prevent most of it. Convection,
>> conduction and evaporation are far more important and with
>> these colour is irrelevant.
>
>I think that Chris got it a bit wrong here. The heat loss
>_through_ a fabric is mostly by conduction and radiation
>(assuming no forced convection, ie wind blowing through, or
>pumping air through by movement). High-density materials,
>like woven fabrics, are indeed effective in blocking the
>radiative heat loss through the material [1], being
>effectively non-transparent at thermal wavelenghts. And,
>consequently, the radiative silvery barriers sometimes found
>within such fabrics, or, more commonly, on the interior surface,
>are just wasted excess weight. (Radiative heat loss through a
>low-density insulation can be significant though, and,
>thus, radiative barriers within it, or on the interior
>surface, may be useful. So, Stephenson probably got
>it right here, although down typically is less transparent
>to thermal radiation than volumeous synthetic insulators.
>Ref. [1])
>
>But, that's not the whole story. At the exterior surface
>of the garment, rouhgly half of the thermal radiation is
>emitted into the space outside, and is thus lost. The
>only things that matter here are 1) the temperature of the
>surface, and 2) the emissivity of the surface. The Stefan-
>Bolzmann law. It's just the surface visible to the outside
>that matters, not what the material hidden within the garment
>was. The net flux of heat due to radiation at the surface
>depends on the temperature of the surroundings too, of course,
>as the surroundings emit thermal radiation too: The Sun is very
>hot, the empty space (clear sky) is very cold, and the rest
>(vegetation, snow, clouds, tent interior) are somewhere in-
>between.

I think we're talking about relative amounts here. I know there is some 
heat loss due to radiation, I just don't think it's very significant 
compared with the other types of heat loss. If enough warm air is 
trapped inside the clothing to keep the wearer warm and the outer of the 
clothing repels water, snow and wind then I don't think the radiation 
heat loss matters. Once heat has reached the outside of your clothing 
you've lost it anyway. The key is to keep the heat inside - or at least 
as much of it as you need to stay comfortable.
>
>The emissivity of the surface at thermal wavelenghts can
>be greatly reduced by making it silvery shining. In contrast,
>matt black is the worst possible choise. When emissivity
>goes down, so does absorptivity. Thus, the silvery parka,
>tent or sleeping bag is cooler in the sunshine and warmer
>under the clear night sky.
>
>Unfortunately, I don't have any figures for the relative
>importance of radiative heat loss vs the conductive and/or
>spontaneous convective ones. I'm quite confident however,
>that raditive heat loss (at the surface) can be significant,
>depending on the conditions.

Various Swedish companies like Fjallraven used to make tents with silver 
flysheets to keep out the sun during the long hours of northern summers. 
I didn't find when I tried one that it was noticeably cooler than non 
silver tents. (It was much darker - you needed a flashlight at midday). 
The coolest tents I've used were cotton ones (with bright orange 
flysheets).

Most down jackets seem to be black these days.
>
>Glenn Randall's otherwise usually most excellent book [1],
>however, blatantly dismisses silver-coloured outdoor clothing
>with - of all things - a fashion argument!
>
>Quoting directly: "While the "wet looks" may once have been
>fashionable at downhill ski areas, few people want to look
>like a walking advertisement for Reynolds Wrap."
>
>I guess Glenn wouldn't get caught wearing a skrit eihter... ;)
>
>[1] Glenn Randall, 'Cold Comfort', Lyons&Burford (1987).
>It's a secondary reference though, except for the direct
>quote.

On 5 Aug 2004 23:46:40 -0700, eugene@cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) wrote:


>>Be bold Pete, set the fashions, don't follow them!
>
>
>
>Gawd, you guys must be embarassments to your women.
>
>
>Add Markus and Pat, too.
>
>
>You guys should go out in complete drag one Halloween.
>Penny and the vixen must be rolling their eyes to say nothing of the
>women lurkers......
>
>
>Bring back the bare-foot and nude hiking threads.


Oh, I dunno.  I've been told by my kids that they're just waiting for
me to start going in full camo.  I'm only partial so far.   Except
when I'm in what the youngest used to call bag lady mode.  "Mom,
polyester is OUT!"   Yeah, but it's brown and doesn't show mud and I
don't care what happens to it.

And I see nothing wrong with the trash bag rain gear.  Nor has anyone
ever commented negatively on it.  A few have said, "Gee, I wish I'd
thought of that when the rain surprized me."  My nice dark green wind
/ rain jacket may not be with me always (should be.  I know.), but
there's almost always a trash bag in my fanny pouch.  More portable in
smaller space.

Nude hiking?  No problem.  I'm not going to do it, but don't mind if
others do, unless they start waggling stuff at me or following me.
Barefoot hiking?   No problem.  I've done a 25 pound pack (mostly
water) while wearing water walkers for a few miles. Almost as good as
barefoot. Better in some ways than with shoes or boots, but not good
if you pound down on your heels.  You have to walk differently.  And
more carefully.

And it's hard to care what lurkers think, innit?  It's like caring
much what the people two tables down at Perkins think.

BTW, Eugene, there's some guy with a user name of Mitch something on
one of the magic (as in sleight of hand, rather than supernatural)
groups talking flame thrower stuff of a home made kind.  Rather
amusing.



Cyli
http://www.visi.com/~cyli

>>>Be bold Pete, set the fashions, don't follow them!

In article <erf8h0190tppcacj8sa76ii5cs4jb73b9d@4ax.com>,
Cyli  <cyli@visi.com> wrote:
>On 5 Aug 2004 23:46:40 -0700, eugene@cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) wrote:
>>Gawd, you guys must be embarassments to your women.
>>Add Markus and Pat, too.
>>You guys should go out in complete drag one Halloween.
>>Penny and the vixen must be rolling their eyes to say nothing of the
>>women lurkers......
>>Bring back the bare-foot and nude hiking threads.
>
>
>Oh, I dunno.  I've been told by my kids that they're just waiting for
>me to start going in full camo.  I'm only partial so far.   Except
>when I'm in what the youngest used to call bag lady mode.  "Mom,
>polyester is OUT!"   Yeah, but it's brown and doesn't show mud and I
>don't care what happens to it.

I'm with Galen on the fashion statement.

I was casting more toward the skirt/kilt-ware.

>And I see nothing wrong with the trash bag rain gear.  Nor has anyone
>ever commented negatively on it.  A few have said, "Gee, I wish I'd
>thought of that when the rain surprized me."  My nice dark green wind
>/ rain jacket may not be with me always (should be.  I know.), but
>there's almost always a trash bag in my fanny pouch.  More portable in
>smaller space.

Yeah, as an alternate I think it's mostly okay.

>Nude hiking?  No problem.  I'm not going to do it, but don't mind if
>others do, unless they start waggling stuff at me or following me.
>Barefoot hiking?   No problem.  I've done a 25 pound pack (mostly
>water) while wearing water walkers for a few miles. Almost as good as
>barefoot. Better in some ways than with shoes or boots, but not good
>if you pound down on your heels.  You have to walk differently.  And
>more carefully.

I've got photos of both with friends in remtoe places.

>And it's hard to care what lurkers think, innit?  It's like caring
>much what the people two tables down at Perkins think.

Well, there are undercurrent mailings which go on off thhe broadcast.
One just got the Svea pump.  And I have similarly gotten gears,
journals, books, tours/visits, topos, etc.  It depends on the group
and te people (Reingold would say virtual community).


>BTW, Eugene, there's some guy with a user name of Mitch something on
>one of the magic (as in sleight of hand, rather than supernatural)
>groups talking flame thrower stuff of a home made kind.  Rather
>amusing.

Oh yeah, there are a lot of home made jobs.
My acquaintance Ken has a web site about this, but he got
dropped from an important Conference during one of his demos.

FTs will be in the new week as the new AVP film come out.
Those guys like to use flame in their films.
Unfortunately, I will be travelling back from work in Europe
to defer a shopping trip.  There was a good description in the
Time magazine about D-Day in June by one operator who survived WWII.
And I recommend the film Them with James Arness and James Whitmore.
Or if Maohai were here, the remake of The Thing with Kurt Russell
(required viewing in remote parts of the world).

-- 

In message <cf247a$nmr$1@scotsman.ed.ac.uk>, Chris Malcolm 
<cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> writes
>Chris Townsend <Chris@DELETEauchnarrow.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>>In message <7uv4qngmy5r.fsf@ipana.research.nokia.com>, MB <*@*.*> writes
>
>>>In summer, in sunshine, the difference in "hotness"
>>>of black vs white is so obvious that I'm sure everyone
>>>is familiar with it. It's easy to notice when wearing
>>>eg woodland camo: the black spots feel much more hot
>>>than the dark green and brown ones and the light green
>>>is even less hot.
>
>>True, but do you feel hotter inside at those spots? I've tried black
>>T-shirts in hot weather and although the fabric feels hotter than a
>>white one I don't feel noticeably warmer.
>
>It all adds up. You might end up needing to eat less food if you lose
>less body heat.

Maybe. I doubt it' significant.

>
>Have you seen those photographs of Hiroshima survivors who have burn
>scars in the pattern of the T-shirt they were wearing when exposed to
>the heat blast? Serious burns under the dark bits, undamaged skin
>under the light bits.

Grim.

These days wearing natural rather than synthetic fabrics would be 
significant. I've seen burns photos showing the difference.

We aren't that close to the sun.

Chris >
> True again, but pale clothing can look grubby in a few hours.

Sure, but that's because it has such a wide range of dirt
indication. It takes quite a while before it's as dark as
something that's dark to start with. :)

> I've tried VB liners and I have to say I don't find them
> comfortable. The longest trip I've done in really cold weather
> (overnight lows -5 to -12F) lasted 13 days. I used a down bag with a
> water resistant shell. It had a red outer and a dark purple inner. I
> didn't use a VB liner. I aired the bag most days (some were too
> stormy) and it stayed dry. Although there was little heat in the sun
> (and most days it was cloudy or hazy anyway) there was a breeze and
> the air was dry, which is why I think any moisture in the bag soon
> evaporated.

In my experience, keeping a bag dry in mid-winter (northern 
Finland and some NW Russia) without VB in cold-camp on 
several consequtive nights simply doesn't work. 13 nights 
sure is well beyond that. Otoh, in spring winter, even in 
relatively cold weather, keeping the bag dry usually seems 
trivial by comparision... long days, often with sunshine, 
vs polar night with a few hours of twilight.

Airing out humid warm air of a relatively warm sleeping 
bag before the bag cools and the moisture starts to condense,
works, of course. But, if the ambient temperature is low, and 
the bag has sufficient insulation, there will be a large 
temperature gradient through the bag insulation, and 
the exterior parts never have a chance to warm. Without 
VBL, evaporative transpiration will then condense and
accumulate frost within the cold bag insulation. 

Note that the tent interior may be significantly warmer 
than ambient, which improves the chanses of drying the
bag by airing it. Also, more of the evaporative transpiration
will then get through the bag and condense on the cold 
interior walls of the tent rather than inside the bag
insulation. Getting the tent warm enough for this 
typically requires some form of heating, a stove or such.

If outer parts of the bag insulation remain cold after 
the night, and there's condense and even frost inside, 
there's no way one can simply air it away. After all, 
there's snow in the surroundings too, and that doesn't 
get aired away either...

Sunshine absorbed in the (preferably) black (interior) 
fabric will of course warm the bag, evaporating some 
moisture, and also result in a vapour pressure pushing 
moisture through the bag and out of it.

In midwinter, at high latitude, the Sun won't rise, so 
waiting for sunshine to dry the bag isn't really practical
:). Moreover, very cold weather in the Arctic is typically 
associated with windstill, so airing is the least efficient 
when it'd be needed most. And, wind is typically associated
with low-pressure fronts, and that means it tends to be
snowing or raining sleet or whatever.

Typically, in midwinter, the relatively few people 
who backpack over here (Fin), seldom use cold shelters 
for more than occasional single nights. By far, most 
nights tend to get spent in the warmth of wilderness 
cabins. Some may use tarps with live fires, fortunately 
the all-night buring traditional log fires are rarely used 
nowadays (lots of impact). In this light, it's perhaps not
so surprizing that sleeping bag VBL's used to be practically 
unknown over here. 

But, imo, VBL is the way to go, if one is to cold-camp in 
midwinter cold conditions on consequtive nights. The slight 
uncomfort of VBL is a low price for retaining the insulative 
loft of one's bag.

Chris Townsend >
> I think we're talking about relative amounts here. I know there is
> some heat loss due to radiation, I just don't think it's very
> significant compared with the other types of heat loss. 

It'd be very interesting to see some figures, but I agree,
it can't be that big. Otoh, the cost of reducing the radiative
heat loss by making, say, a down jacket in white rather 
than black is zero. An alu coating would add cost and some
weight (impairs breathability?), but would weight-wise 
most probably be worthwile [Randall].

> Various Swedish companies like Fjallraven used to make tents with
> silver flysheets to keep out the sun during the long hours of northern
> summers. I didn't find when I tried one that it was noticeably cooler
> than non silver tents. (It was much darker - you needed a flashlight
> at midday). The coolest tents I've used were cotton ones (with bright
> orange flysheets).

I'm a bit surprized, as I would have expected that they'd be 
markedly cooler in hot sunshine. Just like the shiny tarp
works in the desert? But, I never tried a silver Pop-out, nor 
have I been hiking in desert.

A big advantage with the shiny alu-coating is that it also 
blocks UV. Stephenson continues to offer their tents with 
aluminized flies, but at a substantial surcharge.

At least latter Fj�llr�vens with silver-coloured flies had
the lower parts of the flies in some ordinary colour that 
wouldn't block light so badly. For the same reason Stephenson 
recommends choosing a light-coloured fabric for the ends of 
their tunnels.

On 6 Aug 2004 23:09:31 -0700, eugene@cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) wrote:


>
>I was casting more toward the skirt/kilt-ware.
>

No problem to look at.   I'd not wear a skirt myself.  Long pants or a
swim suit with a big shirt over are my usual outdoors wear, though I
have and sometimes wear shorts.   A kilt would be a bit precious, but
fine  to see on a guy.  I've seen a lot of them at re-enactment sorts
of things and when I used to go to SF Cons.  However, a non kilt skirt
on a guy just seems, umm, neurotic in some way?  Most safely to the
world as in just an attention getting ploy.  Generally speaking, I'd
give it a fair sized ho hum.

However, if I saw a big furry guy hiking toward me down a trail in a
drindel skirt and peasant off the shoulder blouse, it could be
hazardous to my health if the effort not to laugh hysterically made me
choke or fall down.  And then he'd want to talk to me, of course.
There may be some strange men out in the woods who've not decided to
talk to me, but they're probably very strange and very hidden.  They
sort of ooze out of the woods or up the stream when I come around.
All have been very interesting, though.

Cyli
http://www.visi.com/~cyli

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 13:06:04 +1000, David Springthorpe
<david.springthorpeGOAWAY@idx.com.au> wrote:

>On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 22:28:36 +0800, Andrew Priest <andrew@aushiker.com> wrote:
>
>Andrew, if you happen to have a photo of yourself in a skirt, please direct us
>to it and we'll decide for ourselves whether we think it suits you.....

Gee thanks David. I didn't say I was wearing, rather that the idea
intrigued me.

Andrew

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 09:56:55 +0000 (UTC), cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk (Chris
Malcolm) wrote:

>The key to the original kilt concept was a multiple use outdoor
>clothing and sleeping kit. 
>
>What would be interesting would be to see a modern development of the
>same concept. With such modern inventions as zips, I'm sure some kind
>of kit of general purpose zippable bits could be devised which you
>could wear in the day and sleep in at night, with some kind of
>waterproof poncho adapting a rainproof fly, and walking poles which
>doubled as tent poles.

There was the elephant foot sleeping bag, now rather difficult to
find, which is a sleeping bag that comes up to slightly above the
waist. Combined with an insulated parka, it replaced carrying a
sleeping bag with considerable weight savings.

I am surprised the ultralight crowd has not revived it, but they seem
rather focused on sleeping quilts.

The Army shelter-half concept, where each half doubled as a poncho is
not new. Ponchos are not ideal for all activities and conditions.

Also, in the rain, you may want your shelter to stay up when you go
outside wearing your rainwear.

The BD Betamid, and other tarp-tent shelters, is designed around using
your hiking poles as its support structure.

There are some interesting possibilities for multi-use designs,
however the market would be limited.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 18:23:29 +1000, David Springthorpe
<david.springthorpeGOAWAY@idx.com.au> wrote:

>On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 14:33:12 +0800, Andrew Priest <andrew@aushiker.com> wrote:
>
> >Gee thanks David. I didn't say I was wearing, rather that the idea
> >intrigued me.
>
>Never let the truth stand in the way of a good story.....

LOL ...should have known better ...

Andrew

In article <cf4td7$7i$1@scotsman.ed.ac.uk>,
Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>The key to the original kilt concept was a multiple use outdoor
>clothing and sleeping kit. 
>
>What would be interesting would be to see a modern development of the
>same concept. With such modern inventions as zips, I'm sure some kind
>of kit of general purpose zippable bits could be devised which you
>could wear in the day and sleep in at night, with some kind of
>waterproof poncho adapting a rainproof fly, and walking poles which
>doubled as tent poles.

Zippers are comparatively heavy.

But people have tried "space aged" designs, usually one piece suits are
common.  But these get hot.  The people at Holubar tried this, the
people working on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) had lots of money to
burn.  The snowmachiners are also into one piece suits as do downhill skiers.

In the TAPS Holubar case, you could take the -60F down snow pants or
suit and turn them into sleeping bags, but these weren't things you did
much physical activity in.

There is an old Ome Daiber (Snow seal name) film which had him and his
wife in sleeping bags with arms and legs.  In summer I use a down jacket
and a half bag, which has more temperature control than just a sleeping bag.

But the diversity of calorie burning is mostly beyond what normal
clothing can provide.  Right now the only real extensive clothing are
pants which zippable legs (I do have a couple of pair, but they are thin
and you would have to improvise some dead air for a forced bivvy).

Now some of the clothing worn by normadic Arabian people might have some
dual use.

-- 

eugene@cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) wrote in news:4118065f$1@darkstar:

> In article <cf4td7$7i$1@scotsman.ed.ac.uk>,
> Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>The key to the original kilt concept was a multiple use outdoor
>>clothing and sleeping kit. 
>>
> There is an old Ome Daiber (Snow seal name) film which had him and his
> wife in sleeping bags with arms and legs.  In summer I use a down
> jacket and a half bag, which has more temperature control than just a
> sleeping bag. 

Saw one of these in a local shop about 30 years ago.  Made by French 
company, Pierre Jamet, IIRC.  (They still in business?) Clerk said it 
was stocked "as a joke".  I suspect it was sold in bankruptcy sale in 
early 80's.

> But the diversity of calorie burning is mostly beyond what normal
> clothing can provide.  Right now the only real extensive clothing are
> pants which zippable legs (I do have a couple of pair, but they are
> thin and you would have to improvise some dead air for a forced
> bivvy). 

My kids have "tear-aways" and "zip-aways".  Heven't tried them myself.  
I always figured the joints would be uncomfortabley stiff.

> Now some of the clothing worn by normadic Arabian people might have
> some dual use.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
  A L B E R T A         Alfred Falk               falk@arc.ab.ca 
R E S E A R C H         Information Systems Dept   (780)450-5185
  C O U N C I L         250 Karl Clark Road
                        Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
http://www.arc.ab.ca/   T6N 1E4
http://www.arc.ab.ca/staff/falk/

"Alfred Falk" <falk@arc.REMOVE.ab.ca> wrote
in message news:Xns95416CB30DCEfalkarcabca@198.161.157.145...
> eugene@cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) wrote
>
> > [...] sleeping bags with arms and legs.
>
> Saw one of these in a local shop about 30 years ago.  Made by French
> company, Pierre Jamet, IIRC.  (They still in business?) Clerk said it
> was stocked "as a joke".  I suspect it was sold in bankruptcy sale in
> early 80's.

The Feathered Friends line has bags with armholes and drawstring feet
for "walking around" and "cooking" while in your sleeping bag according to
marketing copy at their website:

http://www.featheredfriends.com/ProductDetails.aspx?productId=80&CatId=1&ProductName=Chickadee
http://www.featheredfriends.com/ProductDetails.aspx?productId=82&CatId=1&ProductName=Rock%20Wren
http://www.featheredfriends.com/ProductDetails.aspx?productId=84&CatId=1&ProductName=Winter%20Wren


Jon Meinecke

>>multiple use outdoor clothing and sleeping kit. 

In article <bcech01ukksapur6fjktdvg76peasr6tg5@4ax.com>,
Gary S.  <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>There was the elephant foot sleeping bag, now rather difficult to
>find, which is a sleeping bag that comes up to slightly above the
>waist. Combined with an insulated parka, it replaced carrying a
>sleeping bag with considerable weight savings.

I inherited one.
My 1st mentor bought one for one of his young kids (who grew up prefering
golf).  I suspect when it gets ratty enough, I may rebuild it (Alp Sport
no longer exists).

The combo isn't much of a weight savings over a sleeping bag.

What you gain is versatility: you can just use the down jacket say while
sitting around after dinner or before breakfast.

>I am surprised the ultralight crowd has not revived it, but they seem
>rather focused on sleeping quilts.

Too small a market.

>The Army shelter-half concept, where each half doubled as a poncho is
>not new. Ponchos are not ideal for all activities and conditions.

No bug protection.
Too few people want to bivvy.


>Also, in the rain, you may want your shelter to stay up when you go
>outside wearing your rainwear.
>
>There are some interesting possibilities for multi-use designs,
>however the market would be limited.

That's the nature of markets.

-- 

Eugene Miya wrote:

>>>multiple use outdoor clothing and sleeping kit. 
> 
> 
> In article <bcech01ukksapur6fjktdvg76peasr6tg5@4ax.com>,
> Gary S.  <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
> 
>>There was the elephant foot sleeping bag, now rather difficult to
>>find, which is a sleeping bag that comes up to slightly above the
>>waist. Combined with an insulated parka, it replaced carrying a
>>sleeping bag with considerable weight savings.
> 
> 
> I inherited one.
> My 1st mentor bought one for one of his young kids (who grew up prefering
> golf).  I suspect when it gets ratty enough, I may rebuild it (Alp Sport
> no longer exists).
> 
> The combo isn't much of a weight savings over a sleeping bag.
> 
> What you gain is versatility: you can just use the down jacket say while
> sitting around after dinner or before breakfast.
> 
> 
>>I am surprised the ultralight crowd has not revived it, but they seem
>>rather focused on sleeping quilts.
> 
> 
> Too small a market.
> 
> 
>>The Army shelter-half concept, where each half doubled as a poncho is
>>not new. Ponchos are not ideal for all activities and conditions.
> 
> 
> No bug protection.
> Too few people want to bivvy.
> 
> 
> 
>>Also, in the rain, you may want your shelter to stay up when you go
>>outside wearing your rainwear.
>>
>>There are some interesting possibilities for multi-use designs,
>>however the market would be limited.
> 
> 
> That's the nature of markets.

My wife and I both have our kilts, and they certainly aren't going up 
into the mountains.  Alexandria has a pre-Christmas parade; the perfect 
place for them.  But we aren't going to blow our money on the fancy 
extras, like Prince Charles sports.  It's nice to feel your balls bounce 
without that stupid leather pouch.

Eugene, start getting a grip on this news group.  What was all that John 
Kerry stuff?  I didn't look at a one.

jimbat

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:24:08 -0500, "Jon Meinecke"
<jonmein@nospam.net> wrote:


>The Feathered Friends line has bags with armholes and drawstring feet
>for "walking around" and "cooking" while in your sleeping bag according to
>marketing copy at their website:
>
During the first energy crisis (70s), they were fairly popular for a
while for home use.  That's the time I learned to wear silk long
sleeved and legged undies with fleece over when invited to some homes
for dinner or parties.  Some people got very strange about energy
costs.   Mostly those who could afford to pay them, which is the
oddest part.


Cyli
http://www.visi.com/~cyli

emergency pack lightener when faced with an unstable trail that just slid.
We had four trash bags, split our packs apart into the bags, and carefully
tossed each bag over.  It was quite fun :) and I was damned glad for the
trash bags.  Who cares what one looks like in wilderness?  In the end, looks
ought to not matter.  So says the girl who forgot to see what colour my
packs were when I bought them :o

-- 
kay Laughter

-If you Understand or if you Don't,
if you Believe or if you Doubt,
there's a Universal Justice,
and the Eyes of Truth are always
Watching You.....


> >The ones I know about:
> >
> >Emergency bivouac, poncho, additional windproofing, quick and dirty
> >groundcloth for lunch, etc.
>
> Pack cover, pack liner, vapor barrier shirt, storage for gear outside
> shelter, groundcloth for feet when sleeping under the stars on a 3/4
> mat.
> >
>

In message <7uvzn56lm1p.fsf@gina.research.nokia.com>, MB <*@*.*> writes
>Chris Townsend >
>> I think we're talking about relative amounts here. I know there is
>> some heat loss due to radiation, I just don't think it's very
>> significant compared with the other types of heat loss.
>
>It'd be very interesting to see some figures, but I agree,
>it can't be that big. Otoh, the cost of reducing the radiative
>heat loss by making, say, a down jacket in white rather
>than black is zero.

The cost is only zero if the white fabric is the same price as the 
black, which it may not be if it's non-standard. Many specialist makers 
only use small amounts of material. They buy the colours and shades 
available.

> An alu coating would add cost and some
>weight (impairs breathability?), but would weight-wise
>most probably be worthwile [Randall].

I've tried garments with alu layers inside and they do impair 
breathability. Alu on the outside would make for a highly visible 
garment,
>
>> Various Swedish companies like Fjallraven used to make tents with
>> silver flysheets to keep out the sun during the long hours of northern
>> summers. I didn't find when I tried one that it was noticeably cooler
>> than non silver tents. (It was much darker - you needed a flashlight
>> at midday). The coolest tents I've used were cotton ones (with bright
>> orange flysheets).
>
>I'm a bit surprized, as I would have expected that they'd be
>markedly cooler in hot sunshine. Just like the shiny tarp
>works in the desert? But, I never tried a silver Pop-out, nor
>have I been hiking in desert.

I haven't used a tent with a silver flysheet in very hot temperatures 
(probably no higher than 20-25C). I did find tents with such flysheets 
hot and stuffy inside.
>
>A big advantage with the shiny alu-coating is that it also
>blocks UV. Stephenson continues to offer their tents with
>aluminized flies, but at a substantial surcharge.
>
>At least latter Fj�llr�vens with silver-coloured flies had
>the lower parts of the flies in some ordinary colour that
>wouldn't block light so badly. For the same reason Stephenson
>recommends choosing a light-coloured fabric for the ends of
>their tunnels.

The one I tried was a Fjallraven with a complete silver flysheet. This 
was back in the 80s.

In message <7uvfz6ykdjp.fsf@gina.research.nokia.com>, MB <*@*.*> writes
>Chris >
>> True again, but pale clothing can look grubby in a few hours.
>
>Sure, but that's because it has such a wide range of dirt
>indication. It takes quite a while before it's as dark as
>something that's dark to start with. :)

Wade through a Scottish peat bog and it can happen quickly :-)
>
>> I've tried VB liners and I have to say I don't find them
>> comfortable. The longest trip I've done in really cold weather
>> (overnight lows -5 to -12F) lasted 13 days. I used a down bag with a
>> water resistant shell. It had a red outer and a dark purple inner. I
>> didn't use a VB liner. I aired the bag most days (some were too
>> stormy) and it stayed dry. Although there was little heat in the sun
>> (and most days it was cloudy or hazy anyway) there was a breeze and
>> the air was dry, which is why I think any moisture in the bag soon
>> evaporated.
>
>In my experience, keeping a bag dry in mid-winter (northern
>Finland and some NW Russia) without VB in cold-camp on
>several consequtive nights simply doesn't work. 13 nights
>sure is well beyond that. Otoh, in spring winter, even in
>relatively cold weather, keeping the bag dry usually seems
>trivial by comparision... long days, often with sunshine,
>vs polar night with a few hours of twilight.

The trip I described was in spring - April in Spitsbergen. I haven't 
done any midwinter trips of more than a few days and these have mostly 
been in Scotland with wet cold conditions and temperatures around -5 to 
+5 C.

Midwinter camping in the arctic is not a common backcountry activity :-)
>
>Airing out humid warm air of a relatively warm sleeping
>bag before the bag cools and the moisture starts to condense,
>works, of course. But, if the ambient temperature is low, and
>the bag has sufficient insulation, there will be a large
>temperature gradient through the bag insulation, and
>the exterior parts never have a chance to warm. Without
>VBL, evaporative transpiration will then condense and
>accumulate frost within the cold bag insulation.
>
>Note that the tent interior may be significantly warmer
>than ambient, which improves the chanses of drying the
>bag by airing it. Also, more of the evaporative transpiration
>will then get through the bag and condense on the cold
>interior walls of the tent rather than inside the bag
>insulation. Getting the tent warm enough for this
>typically requires some form of heating, a stove or such.
>
>If outer parts of the bag insulation remain cold after
>the night, and there's condense and even frost inside,
>there's no way one can simply air it away. After all,
>there's snow in the surroundings too, and that doesn't
>get aired away either...
>
>Sunshine absorbed in the (preferably) black (interior)
>fabric will of course warm the bag, evaporating some
>moisture, and also result in a vapour pressure pushing
>moisture through the bag and out of it.
>
>In midwinter, at high latitude, the Sun won't rise, so
>waiting for sunshine to dry the bag isn't really practical
>:). Moreover, very cold weather in the Arctic is typically
>associated with windstill, so airing is the least efficient
>when it'd be needed most. And, wind is typically associated
>with low-pressure fronts, and that means it tends to be
>snowing or raining sleet or whatever.
>
>Typically, in midwinter, the relatively few people
>who backpack over here (Fin), seldom use cold shelters
>for more than occasional single nights. By far, most
>nights tend to get spent in the warmth of wilderness
>cabins. Some may use tarps with live fires, fortunately
>the all-night buring traditional log fires are rarely used
>nowadays (lots of impact). In this light, it's perhaps not
>so surprizing that sleeping bag VBL's used to be practically
>unknown over here.
>
>But, imo, VBL is the way to go, if one is to cold-camp in
>midwinter cold conditions on consequtive nights. The slight
>uncomfort of VBL is a low price for retaining the insulative
>loft of one's bag.
>
In those conditions I would use a VBL too.

Chris Townsend >
> I've tried garments with alu layers inside and they do impair
> breathability.

Typically, I think, shiny alu coatings are found on 
non-breathable fabrics, tarps, 'space blankets' and such. I 
think it's possible to make shiny coatings highly breathable 
too, applying the coating in small enough particles, or whatever. 
I guess thermal efficiency and durability might be lowered 
though. Radiant barriers within insulation, such as the multiple 
ones within some synth sleeping bags [Randall, again] must 
obviously be highly breathable in order for the product to be 
usable.

> Alu on the outside would make for a highly visible
> garment.

Indeed so, in most conditions at least. I wouldn't typically
want to wear alu-coated clothing because of the visual 
signature. My point, though, was that the outdoor garments 
industry, making the "technical" gear, doesn't seem to 
choose colour for some functional rationale: not minimal 
visual impact, not max visual impact, not thermal efficiency. 
Instead I strongly suspect that "technical" designs follow 
fashion too. I certainly agree though that availability and 
price are problems for small specialized companies, not to 
mention for making gear oneself.

Btw, in a snowy landscape, the shiny silvery colour might 
not stick out that badly in overcast weather at least. 
Eg Stephenson "warns" that their silvery tents blend into 
the shadows in snowy conditions. I haven't really tried 
much shiny stuff though, but (snow) white, perhaps the 
second best from a thermal point of view, is often 
excellent winter camouflage too.

In message <7uv1xibgxpl.fsf@ipana.research.nokia.com>, MB <*@*.*> writes
>Chris Townsend >
>> I've tried garments with alu layers inside and they do impair
>> breathability.
>
>Typically, I think, shiny alu coatings are found on
>non-breathable fabrics, tarps, 'space blankets' and such. I
>think it's possible to make shiny coatings highly breathable
>too, applying the coating in small enough particles, or whatever.
>I guess thermal efficiency and durability might be lowered
>though. Radiant barriers within insulation, such as the multiple
>ones within some synth sleeping bags [Randall, again] must
>obviously be highly breathable in order for the product to be
>usable.

Unfortunately in my experience radiant barriers in sleeping bags and 
synthetic filled jackets aren't breathable enough. I've tried several 
examples of both and found them sweaty (and one of the sleeping bags was 
quite noisy too). There may be models that perform better of course.

>
>> Alu on the outside would make for a highly visible
>> garment.
>
>Indeed so, in most conditions at least. I wouldn't typically
>want to wear alu-coated clothing because of the visual
>signature. My point, though, was that the outdoor garments
>industry, making the "technical" gear, doesn't seem to
>choose colour for some functional rationale: not minimal
>visual impact, not max visual impact, not thermal efficiency.
>Instead I strongly suspect that "technical" designs follow
>fashion too. I certainly agree though that availability and
>price are problems for small specialized companies, not to
>mention for making gear oneself.

I agree here. The outdoor industry doesn't generally give much if any 
thought to the function of colour even for technical gear. How it looks 
in photographs is much more important :-).  As well as availability 
consumer choice comes into it of course. Some colours sell well, some 
don't.  Different markets like different colours. Hunters need 
camouflage and dull colours, mountaineers like bright reds and yellows. 
Hikers like me prefer greens and browns.
>
>Btw, in a snowy landscape, the shiny silvery colour might
>not stick out that badly in overcast weather at least.
>Eg Stephenson "warns" that their silvery tents blend into
>the shadows in snowy conditions. I haven't really tried
>much shiny stuff though, but (snow) white, perhaps the
>second best from a thermal point of view, is often
>excellent winter camouflage too.

Chris Townsend >
> Unfortunately in my experience radiant barriers in sleeping bags and
> synthetic filled jackets aren't breathable enough. I've tried several
> examples of both and found them sweaty (and one of the sleeping bags
> was quite noisy too). There may be models that perform better of
> course.

Interesting. If it isn't practical to make radiant 
barriers breathable enough, it seems that they wouldn't 
be a good idea within loft insulation, after all. 
Especially multiple barriers with insufficient 
breathability might act as nasty moisture traps.

Otoh, the VBL, which of course mustn't breath at all, 
can well double as a radiant barrier. Incidentally, I 
find that mylar "emergency" bags, especially if bothering 
to modifying the neck area, make good lightweight VBL's. 
Being nominally single-use items, the ones I've used aren't 
very durable though, lasting perhaps a couple of weeks 
of usage. They're noisy too.

Otoh, with hermetically sealed loft insulation, 
such as down-air-mats (like Stephenson's), or DAM 
type bag/shelters (Cocoon), lack of breathability is
of course irrelevant, and multiple radiant barriers 
would seem like a good idea especially for the upper 
parts of the latter.

In message <7uvpt5vkwse.fsf@ogre1.research.nokia.com>, MB <*@*.*> writes
>Chris Townsend >
>> Unfortunately in my experience radiant barriers in sleeping bags and
>> synthetic filled jackets aren't breathable enough. I've tried several
>> examples of both and found them sweaty (and one of the sleeping bags
>> was quite noisy too). There may be models that perform better of
>> course.
>
>Interesting. If it isn't practical to make radiant
>barriers breathable enough, it seems that they wouldn't
>be a good idea within loft insulation, after all.
>Especially multiple barriers with insufficient
>breathability might act as nasty moisture traps.

I can see in problems in making a radiant barrier breathable enough for 
a sleeping bag or garment.
>
>Otoh, the VBL, which of course mustn't breath at all,
>can well double as a radiant barrier. Incidentally, I
>find that mylar "emergency" bags, especially if bothering
>to modifying the neck area, make good lightweight VBL's.
>Being nominally single-use items, the ones I've used aren't
>very durable though, lasting perhaps a couple of weeks
>of usage. They're noisy too.

I think the noise would put me off. I've had a Rab VBL for several years 
but have always overheated the few times I've used it. If I ever go 
camping in the arctic in midwinter I'll take it.
>
>Otoh, with hermetically sealed loft insulation,
>such as down-air-mats (like Stephenson's), or DAM
>type bag/shelters (Cocoon), lack of breathability is
>of course irrelevant, and multiple radiant barriers
>would seem like a good idea especially for the upper
>parts of the latter.
>
I've never used one a down filled mat.

MB wrote:

> Chris Townsend >
> 
>>Unfortunately in my experience radiant barriers in sleeping bags and
>>synthetic filled jackets aren't breathable enough. I've tried several
>>examples of both and found them sweaty (and one of the sleeping bags
>>was quite noisy too). There may be models that perform better of
>>course.
> 
> 
> Interesting. If it isn't practical to make radiant 
> barriers breathable enough, it seems that they wouldn't 
> be a good idea within loft insulation, after all. 
> Especially multiple barriers with insufficient 
> breathability might act as nasty moisture traps.
> 
> Otoh, the VBL, which of course mustn't breath at all, 
> can well double as a radiant barrier. Incidentally, I 
> find that mylar "emergency" bags, especially if bothering 
> to modifying the neck area, make good lightweight VBL's. 
> Being nominally single-use items, the ones I've used aren't 
> very durable though, lasting perhaps a couple of weeks 
> of usage. They're noisy too.
> 
> Otoh, with hermetically sealed loft insulation, 
> such as down-air-mats (like Stephenson's), or DAM 
> type bag/shelters (Cocoon), lack of breathability is
> of course irrelevant, and multiple radiant barriers 
> would seem like a good idea especially for the upper 
> parts of the latter.
> 

It has to be porous, like the aluminized fabric from Stephenson's.

jimbat