|
|
Forums:
Climbing Information:
Accident and Incident Analysis:
Re: [drector] Lowering accident. Serious Injuries:
Edit Log
|
|
jakedatc
Jun 3, 2011, 3:46 PM
Views: 13199
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
drector wrote: cracklover wrote: sticky_fingers wrote: jakedatc wrote: sticky_fingers wrote: redlude97 wrote: sticky_fingers wrote: redlude97 wrote: sticky_fingers wrote: redlude97 wrote: sticky_fingers wrote: To avoid all the miscommincations, why not come up with new terms right now? Something simple, something easily understood (both interms of sound and definition), something like: "Anchor" - what the climbers yells to the belayer when the climber clips into the anchors. At this point the belayer can do whatever he/she feels like; untie, walk away, etc. (2-syllable) "Take" - what the climber yells to the belayer when the climber wants the belayer to take in all the slack. The climber does not issue another command to the belayer UNTIL the climber is pulled up into the anchor. (1-syllable) "Lower" - what the climber yells to the belayer when the climber wants to be lowered to the ground. (2-syllable) Thoughts? What does a climber yell when they clip in direct to the anchor but are expecting to be lowered? The climber still yells what they want. In this case just "lower". If the climber sees there's a lot of slack in the rope after clipping, the climber can say "Take", then "Lower". What if they are going to rethread before lowering? When the climber yells "Anchor" that's the cue for the belayer to a) give a ton of slack or b) unclip belay device, eat, etc. So by saying "Anchor" the climber should have plenty of slack with which to rethread. Hell, at that point, the climber can rappel. You said you wanted them to have simple meanings, but now you want it to have 2? It could mean that the climber is intending to lower or rappel? What part of what I wrote sounded like it has double meaning? If a climber wants to be lowered, then after yelling "Anchor" they'll yell "Take" and "Lower". If a climber wants to rappel, they don't have to say anything after "Anchor". How is any of that a double-meaning??? Your thinking is exactly why these accidents happen. you DO NOT take someone off if they intend to be lowered. you have said if you say Anchor then they can take you off and walk away. I could be climbing another route by the time you say "take" again. Slack, take, lower... that is it.. there is no question what those terms mean. Are you that selfish and impatient that you can't wait until your partner is back on the ground before you start climbing another route? The belayers I've climbed with are not Me Centered Me Fixed (MCMF). However, I have no problem with the series "Slack", "Take", "Lower" when/if it becomes commonplace. I was just offering another possibility. Yes, you were offering a possibility that is a really crappy solution to a nonexistent problem. It was explained to you why it was a terrible solution, and you got all uppity about how the climber should respect the belayer, and let the belayer off the hook. I mean, it's not like they should have to actually belay, right? I mean, what the fuck, what if they're getting kinda hungry? They shouldn't be a slave to the climber and have to belay all the time, right? They deserve a snack break. Oh, and a nap. And recess, too. What is this, kindergarten? It's ridiculous. If I'm climbing a single pitch route, and expect to be lowered, I expect to be on belay from the moment I leave the ground until I get back to the ground. No recess. No nap time. I get to the top of a route I'm going to clean, I usually clip into one or both of the draws, and if there's a good stance, I don't even bother with "Take". I just clip in direct, call "Slack", and proceed to work on threading etc. If, for some reason, you're held up either mid climb or at the anchors, and want to let your belayer take his nap time, call "In Direct". That means I'm clipped directly to a piece, and he can put a knot behind the belay device and stop focusing on me until I tell him I want to start climbing again, by saying "On You" or "Take". At that point I expect him to take hard so I can feel he's back in the game. That's the only reason he should ever take a break, and it's definitely an exceptional circumstance, not a usual one. GO The "in direct" thing seems excessive by your own "rules." It's not ambiguous like "anchor" but is still superfluous. There is no reason for the belayer to ever take a nap while a climber is tied in and on a climb. It's still one more thing that can be miscommunicated and I would never let my belayer relax at any point. Dave
Dave that is a special case while projecting a route where you clip into a bolt direct with a draw or a sling. It is a courtesy to your belayer so they can rest their neck and not have to hold you hanging there while you rest. There is usually a lot of communication and even eye contact when this is going on and both people know wtf is going on.
I haven't climbed with Gabe in months but we'd still both be on the same page. This is standard stuff.
(This post was edited by jakedatc on Jun 3, 2011, 3:48 PM)
|
|
|
Edit Log:
|
|
Post edited by jakedatc
() on Jun 3, 2011, 3:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
