|
|
|
|
bighigaz
Jan 24, 2006, 3:24 PM
Post #1 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 696
|
I haven't picked one up yet, but I will be shortly, and I had a thought after reading the review by vegastradguy...
It seems the only real "problem" he encountered was the difficulty of releasing a belay with the new release tab while on a hanging belay. (though it was a lot easier than the Reverso, since the ATC-Guide is the only one with the tab...)
If I understood the release method properly, it might help on a hanging belay to extend the runner or cordlet used for release THROUGH last caribiner in the belayers release point (on his harness) and back up to the top anchor/release point. Although making a more complicated system, this might allow the belayer to use the tab with his own bodyweight without having to take is weight of the belay... It could even be made a little easier by using a loose runner through the last top point I just mentioned to extend the release line back down to the belayer creating 2-1 sytem (or is it 3-1?!)
Anyway, I would need to get out and give it a try, but my point is, there HAS to be a way to make a hanging release a little easier...
Did that make any sense? :?
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
Jan 24, 2006, 4:06 PM
Post #2 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
um, no! :)
if you read the captions in the review- you'll discover the best option for controlling the release- redirecting the brake line to one of the anchor points, which keeps the brake line in a position where you can control the release.
the biggest problem with the hanging belay release is that you're hanging and cannot control your weight easily- which basically is going to fully release the device no matter what you do- but with a redirected brake line, its a mute point.
btw- also remember how gear intensive the release is as it is- tossing more runners in to create a complicated pulley system simply may not be an option!
|
|
|
|
|
bighigaz
Jan 24, 2006, 4:15 PM
Post #3 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 696
|
Hmmm... I see your point, but STILL, if the release point were kept loose for easy grabbing by the belayer, then it could be leveraged at any time... but the fuster-cluck might still be a problem...
I'm going to buy one today and figure this out!
I WILL be victorious... no matter what!!!
:deadhorse:
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Jan 24, 2006, 4:18 PM
Post #4 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
In all honesty, I'm not sure why anyone would lower someone off of an autolocking device such as the XP Guide, Reverso, or B52 withouth redirecting the brake side of the rope. It's easy to control the lowering if the rope is redirected (which takes only one additional carabiner!) and flat out dangerous if it's not.
|
|
|
|
|
bighigaz
Jan 24, 2006, 4:21 PM
Post #5 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 696
|
In reply to: In all honesty, I'm not sure why anyone would lower someone off of an autolocking device such as the XP Guide, Reverso, or B52 withouth redirecting the brake side of the rope. It's easy to control the lowering if the rope is redirected (which takes only one additional carabiner!) and flat out dangerous if it's not.
Shees. :roll: Oversimplifier! Taking away my fun!
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Jan 24, 2006, 4:43 PM
Post #6 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
We have two on the way right now. They should be here by Friday. I can't wait to try them out.
I have a friend who has been using the ATC Guide since Sept. He says they kick ass!
|
|
|
|
|
bighigaz
Jan 24, 2006, 5:57 PM
Post #7 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 696
|
In reply to: In all honesty, I'm not sure why anyone would lower someone off of an autolocking device such as the XP Guide, Reverso, or B52 withouth redirecting the brake side of the rope. It's easy to control the lowering if the rope is redirected (which takes only one additional carabiner!) and flat out dangerous if it's not.
Oops, I think I misread your statement the first time. We're talking about redirecting the RELEASE lever, NOT the rope.
So it's back to :deadhorse:
I see the difficulty in a hanging belay release, but instead of hooking it up to your harness for the release, simply run it through, and back up and through the anchor point with a loose end (runner) hanging down for a simple pull/release... I guess it won't matter until I get out there and try it!
:deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse:
I will find a way!
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 24, 2006, 6:20 PM
Post #8 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
another thought would be extending the release runner (I know, more gear), and instead of clipping it to your harness, standing in the extended loop w/ a foot. That way, you wouldn't have to stand up or gain some purchase to un-release. You could just unweight that foot, or step out of the loop.
|
|
|
|
|
bighigaz
Jan 24, 2006, 6:31 PM
Post #9 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 696
|
In reply to: In all honesty, I'm not sure why anyone would lower someone off of an autolocking device such as the XP Guide, Reverso, or B52 withouth redirecting the brake side of the rope. It's easy to control the lowering if the rope is redirected (which takes only one additional carabiner!) and flat out dangerous if it's not.
Oops, I think I misread your statement the first time. We're talking about redirecting the RELEASE lever, NOT the rope.
So it's back to :deadhorse:
I see the difficulty in a hanging belay release, but instead of hooking it up to your harness for the release, simply run it through, and back up and through the anchor point with a loose end (runner) hanging down for a simple pull/release... I guess it won't matter until I get out there and try it!
:deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse:
I will find a way!
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 24, 2006, 6:44 PM
Post #10 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Vegastradguy, you mentioned in your review that the device can "invert". Could you explain what you meant by this?
Thanks!
GO
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Jan 24, 2006, 6:54 PM
Post #11 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Is it necessary to have a separate redirect to pull the release sling through?
What about throwing a single carabiner on the shelf of the knot, and just redirecting through there? Was this tried?
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Jan 24, 2006, 7:03 PM
Post #12 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
In reply to: Is it necessary to have a separate redirect to pull the release sling through? What about throwing a single carabiner on the shelf of the knot, and just redirecting through there? Was this tried?
I guess you could redirect the rope through the same 'biner as the sling, but then you'll have the rope running over the stationary sling in the 'biner as you're lowering the person. Not so good... I'd rather just throw in a second biner.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Jan 24, 2006, 7:08 PM
Post #13 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: In reply to: Is it necessary to have a separate redirect to pull the release sling through? What about throwing a single carabiner on the shelf of the knot, and just redirecting through there? Was this tried? I guess you could redirect the rope through the same 'biner as the sling, but then you'll have the rope running over the stationary sling in the 'biner as you're lowering the person. Not so good... I'd rather just throw in a second biner.
Trench, I agree. When I redirect the rope, I use a different biner. I'm talking about the brake release sling. Have you looked at VTG's front page review of the Guide? Some good explanatory photos in there.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 24, 2006, 7:09 PM
Post #14 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
In reply to: Vegastradguy, you mentioned in your review that the device can "invert". Could you explain what you meant by this? Thanks! GO
Hi Gabe,
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that, by "invert," VTG meant "open 'er wide." If I'm right, then this is a shot of the device inverted...
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=68110
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Jan 24, 2006, 7:21 PM
Post #15 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Is it necessary to have a separate redirect to pull the release sling through? What about throwing a single carabiner on the shelf of the knot, and just redirecting through there? Was this tried? I guess you could redirect the rope through the same 'biner as the sling, but then you'll have the rope running over the stationary sling in the 'biner as you're lowering the person. Not so good... I'd rather just throw in a second biner. Trench, I agree. When I redirect the rope, I use a different biner. I'm talking about the brake release sling. Have you looked at VTG's front page review of the Guide? Some good explanatory photos in there.
I guess I'm confused...
The only way I can imagine to release the device under load in autolock mode is to weight a redirected sling attached to the release point or locking carabiner on the back of the device. That sling needs to be redirected somewhere off of the anchor above the device. The "shelf" is a great place put a carabiner to do just that. That all makes sense...
In reply to: Is it necessary to have a separate redirect to pull the release sling through?
What I'm confused about is what you meant by a "separate redirect."
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Jan 24, 2006, 7:24 PM
Post #16 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: In reply to: Is it necessary to have a separate redirect to pull the release sling through? What I'm confused about is what you meant by a "separate redirect."
Sorry, should have been more clear. In VTG's review, his redirects employ extra biners and slings, well off to the side. It's a way's away, which means more slingage is needed. I proposed what I did, to see if you can cut down on the gear required to redirect the brake release.
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Jan 24, 2006, 7:31 PM
Post #17 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Is it necessary to have a separate redirect to pull the release sling through? What I'm confused about is what you meant by a "separate redirect." Sorry, should have been more clear. In VTG's review, his redirects employ extra biners and slings, well off to the side. It's a way's away, which means more slingage is needed. I proposed what I did, to see if you can cut down on the gear required to redirect the brake release.
Got it... clear as mud now :wink:
Makes sense... I should have looked at the pictures more closely.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 24, 2006, 8:10 PM
Post #18 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: In reply to: Vegastradguy, you mentioned in your review that the device can "invert". Could you explain what you meant by this? Thanks! GO Hi Gabe, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that, by "invert," VTG meant "open 'er wide." If I'm right, then this is a shot of the device inverted... http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=68110
Yup, that's all I saw too. But that doesn't look like anything I'd call "inverted", which is why I went digging.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 24, 2006, 8:39 PM
Post #19 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
I concede the point. It's not fully inverted. Since I'm the editor, I'll go ahead and edit the text.
Edit: Done and done. "Inverted" changed to "wide-open." Thanks for the help. :)
|
|
|
|
|
cchildre
Jan 24, 2006, 9:05 PM
Post #20 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2004
Posts: 671
|
A little off topic here.
Thoughts about the extra slings that are needed to enact the release of the autoblock. How many carry an 'emergency' basic gear setup/kit in case a situation should arise?
I took a high angle rescue coarse last year. Teaching me that I should have at the very least a 20' cordellette, two prussik cords, and four lockers that never come off unless there is an emergency. It provides me various options in an emergency. I can escape the belay, ascend the rope to asses the nature of the emergency, descend, reenter the belay, also from the above the accident; release an autoblock, lower the injured, descend the rope, and even raise the injured.
I was just thinking that if I am using this new toy, I would probably be working on some multipitch stuff, and thus have my emergency kit on me and the 20 cord will cover any slings that would be utilized in the release.
Also, if you carry a kit. What gear have you included in yours?
Till I took that rescue class, I thought I could cover most situations. The class opened my eyes to the numerous problems that arise in an emergency, and if your not trained for said situation, you can almost guarantee that you will screw something up. Escaping the belay seemed to be a simple matter at first, but then you have to be able to re-enter the belay, which adds elements that I had never considered. In an emergency, no way I could do any of it without being trained first.
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Jan 24, 2006, 9:13 PM
Post #21 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
In reply to: Also, if you carry a kit. What gear have you included in yours?
seems this would be better served as it's own topic...anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
crackboy
Jan 24, 2006, 9:16 PM
Post #22 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 14, 2003
Posts: 323
|
i am eagerly awaiting mine. probably won't get ordered til the end of the month. Dave, once i get it you are welcoe to play with it
|
|
|
|
|
piton
Jan 24, 2006, 9:58 PM
Post #23 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1034
|
Vegastradguy,
just wondering if you used the atc guide in autolock mode while belaying 2 people up at same time on 2 different diameter ropes? if so how was did the atc perform with autolocking?
i have done this with a reverso, but the diameters were not much difference 9.0 & 9.5
thanks
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
Jan 25, 2006, 4:16 AM
Post #24 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
okay, i'll answer what i can for your questions.
gabe- i called it inverted because the device is upside down- sorry if that confused folks.
caughtinside- i did actually try to redirect the release off of the powerpoint, but the device did funny things that made me nervous. because its so close, the device wanted to not only release but also to rotate three dimensionally. one time it actually completely flipped back through itself on the locker it was hanging on- i'd highly recommend against doing this.
also note that the setup i was using was in the gym with three perfectly spaced bolts and a web-o-lette. outside, YMMV.
by the way, in all scenarios the device release quickly and easily- which makes redirecting the rope so important. at a hanging belay where you cannot control your weight as easily, the thing will pop to full open instantly.
i also suspect that you could almost release the thing by just pulling back on it with your hand (although i did not try this method- too busy working out the actual one recommended by BD).
finally- i did not have a chance to run with two seconds simultaneously on different lines with this device, so i really cannot comment on how well it would function. my suspicion is that it would fare better than the reverso due to the grooves, but thats just a guess.
hopefully that clarifies some things. let me know if you have any more questions!
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 25, 2006, 3:47 PM
Post #25 of 34
(4495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
j_ung moved this thread from General to Gear Heads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
