Zeppelin Bend look-alike

[knottnautnot]

Hello: I am new to the forum, so pardon me if I bring up something already covered.
I am interested in a knot that looks a lot like the Rosendahl/zeppelin bend, but IMHO, a prettier knot. I will try to describe it, and perhaps someone can tell me the name as well as how safe and useful it is. To my beginner's eye, this knot looks better, and appears to be just as secure and just as easy to untie.
This knot is exactly like the zeppelin with one exception: the right hand loop is exactly reversed from what is shown in the zepplelin: the loop goes to the left instead of the right, with the bitter end under the standing line, just as in the zeppelin. The result is a pretty knot with two symmetrical loops, one on either side of the knot. As I see the zeppelin, it comes out with two loops on one side, and only one on the other.
The knot I have (tried to) describe[d] is perfectly symmetrical, with the bitter ends protruding at right angles to the dressed knot's two loops.
Thanks,
ps as soon as I figure out how, I will enclose a picture of this knot.

[Dan_Lehman]

Welcome, KnotNautNot (!    ) !

Your description stands in need of clarity.
Let me ask and try to make it perspicuous.

Are you --in making this questioned knot-- essentially
removing one end from the zeppelin and then bringing it
back into the knot (w/o changing the other end's shape)
so that it turns in the opposite direction (anti-clockwise if
it originally was clockwise, e.g.), and still goes around and
forms a complementary overhand component such that
the tail will exit the way it had originally --in opposite direction
to the other tail, as for the z. ?!

THAT knot is known, and regarded as a mistake --and not of
good value : it is less stable in form and tends to jam (more so).
(And it has been discussed on this forum (someone might find
the thread(s)).)


--dl*
====

[knottnautnot]

Dan: Let me try again. Here is one way to tie a zeppelin: you lay out two loops; the left loop is a "6" and the right loop is a "9". The bitter end of the "6" goes over the standing part, and the bitter end of the "9" goes under the standing part. You then put the "6" over the "9" then bring the bitter end of the "6" around and through the loop(s). You bring the bitter end of the "9" around and through the same loop(s). This makes the zeppelin bend. Have I described what you already know clearly? I hope so.

In the knot I am trying to describe, you lay out the "6" as before, but instead of a "9" you reverse the direction of the loop, making it counter-clockwise, with the bitter end still under the standing part. You have a mirror image "9". How am I doing? From this point, you proceed as in the regular zeppelin bend, and you come out with a perfectly symmetrical knot, viewed from either side (front or back). The regular zeppelin is not the same on the front as on the back.

I hope this clears up my inadequate explanation---the sage was right---a picture is worth at least a thousand words...
knotnautnot

[Dan_Lehman]

you lay out two loops; the left loop is a "6" and the right loop is a "9".

Check.

The bitter end ...

Um, let's *check* that term : it should denote the "end" as in
"side" / "half" / "part" (i.e., that bunch o' rope over there...)
of a line at the bits
--and not some *ultimate*/absolute end-of-ends point (which
is, sadly, the vogue use of it by those ignoring the history).
As we still use bitts, it seems worth fighting to preserve and
continue the historical sense of this term, and not to stoop
to commoners' parlance who come without nautical seasoning.

In the knot I am trying to describe, you lay out the "6" as before, but instead of a "9" you reverse the direction of the loop, making it counter-clockwise

Whoa : flowing down the line into the '6' or '9' takes one
into an anti-clockwise rotation (towards the tail, into the
knot from the to-be-tensioned SPart).  (You must be seeing
the movement going the opposite way.)
In either case, though, in the zeppelin and several other
interlocked-overhands end-2-end knots, the SParts turn
such that they rotate the same way (and so give a quite sure
grip and twist to the nipped parts --unlike the butterfly, e.g.!).

... have a mirror image "9". How am I doing?

On explanation, fine ; on reading my reply, maybe not-so-good :
I described this knot, which as noted is one brought up previously
(and accidentally/mistakenly, in some cases, for the zeppelin).

you come out with a perfectly symmetrical knot, viewed from either side (front or back). The regular zeppelin is not the same on the front as on the back.

I will leave it to others to indulge the nature of symmetry,
but suffice it to say I regard both as such ; the z. has the
quality of looking the same from *top* & *bottom* (in the
sense of in each case one SPart's collar goes under and the
other's over, and so on).

Also, the knot you describe is superfically like SmitHunter's bend
(but that knot's overhands interlock).


Thanks,
--dl*
====

postscript

---the sage was right---a picture is worth at least a thousand words...

Hardly : one needs closer attention to language use, and not
dismiss it or take it cavalierly ; it should work, but it takes
some work & discipline to keep this tool sharp --such as slapping
away degradation & abuse.

[knottnautnot]

I'm sorry I asked in the first place. I know less than I did before. I expected some kind of assistance, but wound up not knowing if I have been insulted for my use of language or exactly what was the point of your comments.
Thanks anyway. I  will not bother the site with any more stupid questions.

[SS369]

I'm sorry I asked in the first place. I know less than I did before. I expected some kind of assistance, but wound up not knowing if I have been insulted for my use of language or exactly what was the point of your comments.
Thanks anyway. I  will not bother the site with any more stupid questions.

Hi knottnautnot, you asked a legitimate question and there is a legitimate answer. Some of us could be more helpful if you were to use the sage's advice.
If you would care to do it, you could email the picture to one of us (me perhaps) or experiment with posting it here. If you have a picture online somewhere post a link here.

Too often what one sees and then gets verbally described by them goes awry because of imperfections in the art of communication.
Kind of like when a man describes something to a woman or vice versa.   
Please don't give up, some of us are interested. Be persistent!

SS

[Dan_Lehman]

I'm sorry I asked in the first place. I know less than I did before. I expected some kind of assistance, but wound up not knowing if I have been insulted for my use of language or exactly what was the point of your comments.
Thanks anyway. I  will not bother the site with any more stupid questions.

Hi knottnautnot, you asked a legitimate question and there is a legitimate answer.

Which was given --twice!
(Should I feel "insulted" when after my initial read & guess
--which proved correct, and thus should've been "helpful"--
was seemingly ignored with "Let me try again ... " vice the
simple "Yes, that's it." ?!)

Compare :
essentially removing one end from the zeppelin and
then bringing it back into the knot (w/o changing the other end's shape)
so that it turns in the opposite direction

with

you lay out the "6" as before, but instead of a "9" you reverse the direction of the loop,

!  This language should suffice.

you could email the picture to one of us

But it sounds as though language is an impediment rather
than aid, to some.  I'm reluctant to concede chaos to it;
that is not a helpful direction to take --alas, it's one that
the USA primary dictionary in its old but still latest edition
("3rd New International") took in 1961.
(cf. Dictionaries and THAT Dictionary )

Too often what one sees and then gets verbally described by them goes awry because of imperfections in the art of communication.

Quite true especially if one is limited to single utterances
without chance for question/answer (such as the USA political
soundbites and other "news" utterances tend to be);
but, here, we had and used the Q/A option.

I know less than I did before. I expected some kind of assistance, but wound up not knowing if I have been insulted for my use of language or exactly what was the point of your comments.

Then you should read slowly and carefully.  The answer
was given twice, and reiterated here.  Taking insult from
this is quite a mis-reading!  As for your "use of language"
in re "bitter end", please understand that it's a battle to
retain a historical and viable current meaning for this term
without the vogue corruption of it sadly furthered by knots
books and common chatter; I gave not only this admonition
but a rationale --sadly, the usually lacking ingredient for
understanding criticism/diff.points-of-view-- for this.
Language moves by popular *votes* of individuals' usage,
and it takes some vigilance to try to steer it.


--dl*
====

ps:  Although I'm sure that we've discussed this knot --and I
think WITH images-- in this forum (i.e., somewhere among
the various New/Practical/ChitChat umbrellas), I searched
on "zeppelin" but didn't see (in 7pp of hits) any post that
seemed to lead to this knot.

[Luca]

Hi Dan,

Unfortunately I do not understand any of the explanations (but due to MY lack!), I can imagine that the bend may be this:

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1992.msg13968#msg13968

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3204.msg19163#msg19163


                                                                                                         Bye!

[Dan_Lehman]

Hi Dan,

Unfortunately I do not understand any of the explanations (but due to MY lack!), I can imagine that the bend may be this:

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1992.msg13968#msg13968

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3204.msg19163#msg19163


                                                                                                         Bye!

Double BINGO ! !

Thanks.  (And now I'll continue to wonder why I didn't come up
with these in my "zeppelin" search.  I knew we'd showed them.)


--dl*
====

[Luca]

Hi Dan,

I do not think I'm better than you to search in the forum, I only mentioned it in another thread, , forgetting to specify, among other things,that to be the properly reversed  version of Abok # 1425, must have the tails crossed in the appropriate way.I have just remembered that X1 had given a link where was talked about this bend at the beginning of the thread(in which even Edmund later speaks of some bend more symmetrical than the  Zeppelin).
For those to whom it may concern, I'll add the link to that thread (Edmund, excuse me for not immediately understood that the importance of your speech is greater in those eight loops!)

http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3929.msg23323#msg23323

                                                                                                    Bye!

[knottnautnot]

Dan's responses have been condescending at best, making my first and last experience on this site unsatisfactory. I am sure I will not be missed.