Breakaway Cable Attachment in Holland

just had a westfalia fitted to my jeep and has a point which I took as the breakaway cable fixing point but when I rang chester towbars and trailers who fitted bar they said not to use and wrap around neck of towbar as this is the way in this country.

GTP

Didn't you have your cable attached as per this photo which according to the ANWB website is perfectly acceptable? Interesting they are still using the old spring clip type rather than the carabiner. 

David

apparantly DK that is wrong and should go round the bar itself. I think we all need VOSA to tell us what is correct don't you think.

That should be acceptable in Holland according to the ANWB Website and should be acceptable here. 

The picture I posted was from the ANWB (Dutch AA) website as an acceptable form of attachment. When the OP posted  a picture of his attachment it looked very similar hence the question.

David

That is the arrangement that should have picked up a fine as it is simply wrong in not being used as designed.

Here the load to failure is only that to unfold the clip, whereas if looped twice that load plus a contribution from friction would be needed for it to unravel. Without looping back the load to failure could well not be high enough to set the van's brakes fully on.

I would agree if the OP had been using the sort of clip illustrated in the photo from the ANWB website  but he was using a carabiner type clip which should be perfectly safe and effective if directly attached to an eye? It seems the Dutch require a belt and braces approach to attachment or perhaps they have to legislate for the possibility that caravan may have either type of clip and find it easier to have the same rule for each whether it's necessary or not? Perhaps someone should point out to the ANWB that their illustrations of attachment are not all acceptable by the Dutch police and that is where the CMC could help.

David

David, I full understood that the Op had the Al-Ko carabiner version, which is excellent IMO. I have a low opinion of the looped "dog lead clip" system.

The Dutch inspector introducing a second carabiner just adds a possible extra weakness, wholly unnecessary and anything but "belt & braces". Technically it beggars belief anyone would do that.

Hope it has its safe working load stamped on it and that value meets Al-Ko's requirements

Although the picture you posted David is headed good on the ANWB web site, when I ran the other text through a translation programme it said

This may be, although research has shown that the force, which is transferred during the Losbreken to the braking of the caravan, is so far from optimal. This will make the stopping distance of the caravan longer.

Losbreken does not translate.

So they would seem to be saying it is OK  but not the best form of attachment. I can't see wether a clip type or Carabiner type, as I use, would make any difference to these findings.

It would be nice to have some non contradictory guidance.

 Thoughts and personal beliefs don’t carry much weight with authorities unless they can be backed up with official/ manufacturer’s advice.

Here’s Alko’s Advice on attachment.

https://www.al-ko.com/shop/media/uploads/NCC_breakaway_cable_advice.pdf.pdf

And here’s their instructions for karabina type clips.

https://www.al-ko.com/shop/uk_vt/breakaway-cable-with-caribena-clip.html

And here are their instructions for non karabiner clips

https://www.al-ko.com/shop/uk_vt/breakaway-cable-for-looped-attachment.html

The information above makes it clear that you should always use a fixed attachment point where one exists and that you should only use a cable type which is designed for your specific attachment method.

Any official or member who believes and acts differently is acting in contravention of the trailer manufacturer’s design criteria.