Sweet. Is that the intended belay station?

T -4, for lack of originality, obviousness, and sheer waste of bandwidth.

Lets have a little poll. How solid would you consider this anchor?

Image and various other garbage.

I always thought binar rubbing against binar was bad...

I would have equalized the bolt and the pine tree.

I would have equalized the bolt and the pine tree.

I always thought binar rubbing against binar was bad... also, I dont know about all those links in the chain, I guess the whole is as weak as its weakest link, which in this case, all links have the same strength.. apart from binar against biner, it looks alright... of course I would never do it. HA!

Tony

I trust my life to three points no matter what, UNLESS it is a BIG tree then that is fine.

but I'm sure you could have found a place close by to throw a nut, or a small cam and then equalize the three.

sometimes, though, you have to make due with what is there.

with out reading any other repleys and bein somewhat of a beginer this is not an "anchor" it is protection and not very good at that. to many points of failure to be good pro or included in an anchor and bad anchor cause no redundency.

But if you are lowering off then sometimes you have to take some risk or you'll leave too much stuff, espeically on a Trad TR.

Lets have a little poll. How solid would you consider this anchor?

2. The four quickdraws were used as extension since I used all slings on the route and the rope ran out.

I agree. If you clipped one of the draws on the pine tree (no need for a girth hitch, its small enough to just clip onto), then equalized, you'd have a bomber anchor. Pine tree = redundancy. Keep crankin' hard brother.

You're anchoring off one bolt. You know this is dumb, I know this is dumb, the noobs reading "Climbing Anchors" under the covers with a flashlight know this is dumb.

2. This is where the second simulclimbing with the leader until an adequate belay is reached is the likely appropriate course of action. You did know you could do that?

Where's a die-thread-die pic when you really need one?

In most areas i climb, there is in 80% of the routes ONE bolt, for rappeling or belaying.

Why is using one bolt dumb?
In most areas i climb, there is in 80% of the routes ONE bolt, for rappeling or belaying. as long as it is a beefy glue in, i dont see anything wrong with it.
qwert

dude, where do you climb?

I had some 20 meter runout before the stand. I didn't like the idea of holding my second falling on the 5.9 offwith crux right after the start of the pitch. Good idea, though.

Europe. Different philosophy.

-Jay

deffinitely.
Its kust very common to fin one bolt, as belay point...

Do you also run the rope through the last en-route bolt? If not, do use locking biners on the draw attached to the 1-bolt anchor?

People do belay on 1 bolt or pin in the Alps. Common. Not the way you did though. They usually have good stances as well. If you look at how many people die in the Alps yearly, it's not encouraging.

Just to keep things in perspective. Adnix is the same clown who claims to have carried a toy biner and then rapped off it on an alpine climb.

Give me a cordellette and ten seconds and I'm mint on Claude's anchor.

JL

I count 13 potential points of failure, any one of which would cause the belayer to be pulled down the face. 13...how appropriate for this death anchor.

Give me a cordellette and ten seconds and I'm mint on Claude's anchor.

Claude most likely placed that glue-in bolt himself doing a FA. A well placed glue-in is wicked strong, but if it is the ampule style and doesn't get mixed properly... You don't know who placed it or what glue they used.

(two died when a wiggling bolt hanger unscrewed its nut – they were relying on a single bolt.)"...

Europe. Different philosophy.

-Jay

This almost happened to me last week on a top-rope... two-bolt anchor, one hanger spinning... tighten it up as best I could and throw a bomber backup around several big, solid trees...

Of course one should do a back up, when one point is defenitely suspect, but a backup around several big trees?

Read this as an example for some actual stats: and this is on granite in the land of solid anchors (generally):
http://www.nps.gov/yose/sar/climbsafe.htm#tbc

"The Belay Chain


Whether you are climbing, rappelling, or just sitting on a ledge, the belay chain is what connects you to the rock. There are many links, and mistakes with almost every one have killed 22 climbers, 40% of all Yosemite climbing fatalities. In every case the cause was human error. In every case the death was completely preventable, not by the subtle skills of placing protection on the lead, but by some simple precaution to keep the belay chain intact. Experienced climbers outnumbered the inexperienced in this category, two to one.

Mistakes with the belay chain occur at any time. Make one and you?ll fall to the end of the rope ? or farther. Minor injuries are rare. Here are some key points to remember:

· Before you commit yourself to a system, always apply a few pounds of tension in the direction in which it will be loaded, analyze it like an engineer ? what if this happens ? or that? Check every link, from the buckle of your harness to the rock around your anchor. You would be amazed at the inadequate systems often used by experienced climbers, even though it takes only a few seconds to run a proper check.

· Both lives depend on that system, so go through it with your partner. Nine climbers have died in multi-victim accidents.

· Check the system periodically while you?re using it. Forces may change direction (two died when their anchors failed for this reason), ropes and slings can wear through (serious injuries and one death) and gear can come undone (two died when a wiggling bolt hanger unscrewed its nut ? they were relying on a single bolt.)"...

........ "Three climbers were killed and one critically injured by ?failures? of single-carabiner tie-ins and rappel anchors. Be careful of relying on a single non-locking carabiner for any link in the chain. The rope or sling may flip over the gate and unclip itself, especially if it is slack, or shock-loaded. Even if you watch it carefully and/or it is ?safely? under tension, you may become distracted. One climber died while his Figure Eight descender unclipped while he was busy passing a knot on rappel. (He should have tied in short.) For those critical points, use either two non-locking carabiners with gates opposed and reversed, or a locking carabiner. Don?t forget to lock it! For many applications the two-carabiner method is safer and faster to operate."

Hope this doesn't sound too preachy, and I'll most likely get flamed since I'm following the guy who literally wrote the book and he only wanted a cordelette and 10 min. but here it is:

You can be an expert and have crap pull out on you. Claude most likely placed that glue-in bolt himself doing a FA. A well placed glue-in is wicked strong, but if it is the ampule style and doesn't get mixed properly, or it is colder than recommended or even if some jackass comes along accidently tugs it right out before it sets and then embarrassed just sticks it back in, they are not all 100 percent sure and the strength ranges all ove the place. You don't know who placed it or what glue they used.

Sorry. Thats the facts. To this day I carry a bolt in my chalkbag that pulled out in the valley under bodyweight in like 1983 or so. And the weight was signifigantly less than now!

"Gravity does not take a holiday for the famous, you have to be ever vigalent"

Regards:

Bill

Just for the record about cordalettes. The current insight within European instructors and guides is not to advise the use of cordalette for beginners. This is true especially if the belayer is less heavy than the leader.

The reason for this recommendation is that in tests environment and hard falls it has been very common for the belayer to slam into the wall and lose control of the rope.

That problem can be alleviated by placing a piece to counteract an upward pull. A cordellete does not preclude placing such a piece.

On a limestone wall like in the picture on the previous page?

In theory perhaps but in practise nobody will do that. I hope I was clear the advice was given for bolt and/or pin belays. Most people don't carry anything but quickdraws on such routes, which usually suggests placing such piece pretty demanding.

Thats why i prefere glue ins. Of course one should do a back up, when one point is defenitely suspect, but a backup around several big trees?
dont you think that this is a bit overkill?
qwert

We use loads of these Fixe bolts, which are individually tested, and have a rating of 35kN. Once you place them correctly, the hole is sloping downwards and the bolt will hold downward pull even if there was no glue at all.

http://www.students.tut.fi/...ics/fixe-install.gif http://www.fixeclimbing.com/...sor_014_A__small.jpg

So, what you are saying is that the current recommendation is to belay the leader directly off the anchor?

If the anchor seems normal and there is no special reason to question it, the answer is yes.

Let's assume most bolt hangers take two carabiners (CE-norm requires this). If you clip the ATC above and clove hitch yourself below, you could think the system as an extended ATC with the advantage of no body lifting and no slamm effect if the leader falls. If the worst case happens and the bolt rips, you'll be hanging in the void with "normal" body belay.

And almost all climbers around here are too cheap to install such fine bolts as you show... Do anchors Never fail in Germany because of the DAV inspections you mentioned?

If the bolt rips won't both you and climber go to the ground?

Let's assume most bolt hangers take two carabiners (CE-norm requires this). If you clip the ATC above and clove hitch yourself below, you could think the system as an extended ATC with the advantage of no body lifting and no slamm effect if the leader falls. If the worst case happens and the bolt rips, you'll be hanging in the void with "normal" body belay.

If the anchor seems normal and there is no special reason to question it, the answer is yes.

Let's assume most bolt hangers take two carabiners (CE-norm requires this). If you clip the ATC above and clove hitch yourself below, you could think the system as an extended ATC with the advantage of no body lifting and no slamm effect if the leader falls. If the worst case happens and the bolt rips, you'll be hanging in the void with "normal" body belay.

The two problems with glue-in stuff are that they are b---- to place on overhanging stuff since they take some time to dry.

People are downright gullable on this site.

Anyone that carries toy biners is a fool.

All of the hardware in the photos looks American, not euro.

What's up with people thinking you can use a glue in on a ground up FA???

So back to the OP anchor. He describes a climb with an offwidth and runnout 20 meter chimney culminating in a rap placed single bolt anchor. That makes sense??? Not.


As for Largo and his cordellete advice. Largo pretty much never carried a cordelette when I knew him. Mainly at a number of bolted slab crags.

That must have been about 50 years ago, smarty pants. Half of the time we used to fiddle around on bolted slabs we didn't even use a rope, which ain't exactly textbook technique, but don't hold me to it.

Anyhow, I reserve the right to update my technique when something comes along worth using--re: a coredllette. But it's not essential gear, just handy.


JL

The worst-case scenario is that the first bolt fails, resulting in the second bolt being shock loaded, causing it to fail, and both partners fall to their deaths.

A 1/2 inch mechanical bolt is more than plenty strong, and, in my opinion, difficult to screw-up when placing.

You've now made it much more difficult to effect a self-rescue by placing a loaded biner (ATC) on top of your tie-in biner.

So back to the OP anchor. He describes a climb with an offwidth and runnout 20 meter chimney culminating in a rap placed single bolt anchor. That makes sense??? Not.

So, what you are saying is that the current recommendation is to belay the leader directly off the anchor?

That problem can be alleviated by placing a piece to counteract an upward pull. A cordellete does not preclude placing such a piece.

I'd say I can start rescue within 10 seconds. I just add one mule knot to the ATC and I've escaped the belay.

No, all you've done is tied off the climber. You now have a biner loaded with bodyweight trapping your tie-in biner in the bolt hanger.

Yeah, smarty pants. Oh, and Dan, some asshole has gotten ahold of your user ID and password and is posting assholish things as you. 8^)

Curt

If there is any rope in the system, there is no such thing as shock loading. Typical "shock loads" will be about 200daN.

It would be interesting to see some experimental results in which the force on the second piece was measured after controlled "failure" (ie, at a known force) of a first piece.

I have a graph that describes pretty much the same thing.

http://www.students.tut.fi/~viper/pics/rope.jpg

You get such results if you belay with munter hitch. If you belay with something softer like ATC, the slippage will begin at 500daN. In other words for falls more than five meters it makes no difference. Unless you belay with something hard or there is a lot of friction near the last piece, of course

Nice graph, but its releveance to the question at hand cannot be assessed without the details of the experiment it arose from.

You think so? First of all, my logic can't reason any trapping if the belay biner is above and my tie-in biner is below.

And secondly, even if the biner was somehow trapped why can't I open the biner and unclip the rope?

Actually, the orientation of your biner vs. ATC biner doesn't matter. An incapacitated 2nd will trap your biner if you've clipped below the ATC biner. An incapacitated leader will trap your tie-in if you've clipped in above the ATC biner.

It's a result of the Italian computer model describing "a typical fall". It's an average of 10 years of experimental testing.

You could assume that rope properties jump at maximun from 700 to 800 with with one piece blowing up. And from 800 to 900 and so on... The jumps are roughly on that scale in with UIAA falls, which are very hard static falls.

The whole point of experiments is that they test the assumptions. None of the experiments used to derive the model were tests in which one piece failed and the force on the second piece was measured, were they?

We must have some kind of misunderstanding here.