|
dbrayack
Apr 6, 2007, 7:37 PM
Post #1 of 53
(24995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Here's an anchoring article that may be a good resource for those looking to "get away from the big butt and hang on a rope"
http://www.brayackmedia.com/anchart1.html
Enjoy, and take some good shots!
-Dan
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Apr 6, 2007, 7:44 PM
Post #2 of 53
(24982 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
not a big nit-pick, but why do you advocate tying off one bolt, then clove hitching the next? Why not just equalize the two?
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Apr 6, 2007, 8:22 PM
Post #3 of 53
(24939 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
Static lines are easier to jug than dynamic. The decreased stretch also results in less chafing.
I agree with CI... why the clove/quickdraw & 8 on a bight (not "bite")? I prefer a double loop figure 8 to fix a line to a 2-bolt anchor. All you need is 2 biners to attach. To each his own...
With the subject of chafing in mind, you might want to mention padding edges and wear points.
When fixing a line directly to a tree, a tensionless hitch is generally the strongest and safest option. Why do you use a bowline?
I don't like the idea of the self-lowering rig. Too hard on the rope.
Personally, I feel it would be more helpful to people to provide little tips and tricks rather than just basic rigging. Anchoring a fixed line isn't rocket science. Tell us how you safely and comfortably carry your camera. Do you use a chest harness? Mention stuff like like setting up a tag line anchored out away from the base of the cliff so you can use it to pull yourself out and away from the rock. Two tag lines (one angling off in each direction) gives you lateral control as well. Put info in there that can't be found elsewhere.
(This post was edited by trenchdigger on Apr 6, 2007, 8:25 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
wes_allen
Apr 6, 2007, 8:23 PM
Post #4 of 53
(24934 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2002
Posts: 549
|
Looks pretty cool, but jugging a dynamic line the teh suck! I just bring in a 100 foot static and/or a 200 foot static, and use that. 100 is nice, since it is lighter, though you can't get down with just it usually.
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Apr 6, 2007, 10:57 PM
Post #5 of 53
(24865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Thanks for the info :)
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Apr 6, 2007, 10:58 PM
Post #6 of 53
(24861 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Man, I've tried static, but the dynamic just goes so much smoother through the gri-gri and ascender.
Besides....its a pain to carry a static line out, + you have to haul it up.
On long ascends, I found that if I match the bouncing on the dynamic line, its actually easier.
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Apr 6, 2007, 10:59 PM
Post #7 of 53
(24859 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
I use the bowline because i can easily cinch it down so it doesn't slip up a tree. Also, its much much easier to un-tie after loading it HARD.
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Apr 6, 2007, 11:02 PM
Post #8 of 53
(24857 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
caughtinside wrote: not a big nit-pick, but why do you advocate tying off one bolt, then clove hitching the next? Why not just equalize the two?
I consider a one bolt anchor to not need the redundancy, but just to be sure, I clip the other incase of a failure (though more likely the rope breaking).
I found this is more efficient and uses only two biners. It seems that this type of anchoring is all about speed and efficiency. I have enough trouble getting models to wait for me to rig.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Apr 7, 2007, 12:01 AM
Post #9 of 53
(24832 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
dbrayack wrote: I use the bowline because i can easily cinch it down so it doesn't slip up a tree. Also, its much much easier to un-tie after loading it HARD.
Dan, for the friction wrap on the tree mentioned above, the knot will never be loaded. It'll be even easier to untie than the bowline. I also prefer the two-loop fig-8 or atomic clip for double-bolt rope fixin' (assuming I trust the bolts, which isn't always a given). Both also require only two biners, and since there's only one knot to tie, I assume its faster than your method.
Mostly good stuff in that article, though! Thank you for being my camera tech support on numerous occasions!
(This post was edited by j_ung on Apr 7, 2007, 12:03 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Apr 7, 2007, 12:18 AM
Post #10 of 53
(24822 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Thanks for the info; I'll revise the article.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Apr 7, 2007, 3:18 AM
Post #11 of 53
(24784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
dbrayack wrote: Thanks for the info; I'll revise the article.
Nice work...info like this is tough to find. I have Jeff Achey's book but it includes far less on the rigging and far more on photography. Honestly, I'd love to see a climbing photo book just dedicated to climbing photo rigging.
I hate jugging dynamic myself but there are two ways to skin a cat (or something like that).
|
|
|
|
|
csgambill
Apr 7, 2007, 6:12 AM
Post #13 of 53
(24726 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2004
Posts: 607
|
Not sure how the hell i got logged in under ragnar17, but that was me. Weird...
ragnar17 wrote: You really shouldn't use a bowline for an anchor knot. When I anchor to trees for solo aiding the first pitch and such I prefer the method shown in my crappy little pic here: [image]www.csgambill.org/climbing/images/better.jpg[/image] |
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Apr 7, 2007, 12:48 PM
Post #14 of 53
(24679 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
I'm not sure I understand why that anchor needs to be so complicated, "ragnar." (Is that your troll account?  )
I prefer the friction wrap, too, but what's so wrong with a bowline that you "really shouldn't use" it? Also, why the webbing back-up to the climbing rope? To me it looks like it can only protect against the rope breaking where it wraps around the tree. Are you really worried about that?
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Apr 7, 2007, 12:49 PM
Post #15 of 53
(24676 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Also, the rope in your diagram doesn't appear to have an end. Pretty sure I know what you intended to draw, though. 
Edited to laugh at you.
(This post was edited by j_ung on Apr 7, 2007, 12:50 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
wes_allen
Apr 7, 2007, 2:26 PM
Post #16 of 53
(24644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2002
Posts: 549
|
What kind of static where you using? 11/12mm? Get a good 10 mm and it feeds just fine. And to me, the difference is night and day between the two. Eh, it isn't all the heavy to carry out or to trail behind when you are climbing, just think if it as training weight!
Also, with the one ascender + Gri - Gri setup, you can clip a biner through the top hole of the ascender and run the rope back through that to give you a two to one, which will help some as well.
One other point, is that you don't want to jug with any kind of back pack, without a chest harness. It will make things way harder. So, I usually haul my gear up if I think I will want to have a few lenses and both bodies up there with me. I jugged with all my stuff in a back pack once and it sucked.
dbrayack wrote: Man, I've tried static, but the dynamic just goes so much smoother through the gri-gri and ascender. Besides....its a pain to carry a static line out, + you have to haul it up. On long ascends, I found that if I match the bouncing on the dynamic line, its actually easier. |
|
|
|
|
csgambill
Apr 7, 2007, 2:30 PM
Post #17 of 53
(24643 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2004
Posts: 607
|
Just a matter of personal preference. Bowlines untie more easily than I'd like a an anchor knot to. It just doesn't offer the level of security I like. Now, given that I tie in almost exclusively with a bowline that sounds kind of stupid. Plus, if the bowline is under tension your knot probably isn't going anywhere. So, use whatever knot you want when making your anchors.
What you don't have one of those new endless ropes? Dude you've got to get with the times.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Apr 7, 2007, 2:42 PM
Post #18 of 53
(24630 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Hmm... maybe I can score one to review. 
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Apr 7, 2007, 9:12 PM
Post #19 of 53
(24590 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
A good start and rough draft, although I am not sure how of the information is all that valuable. Setting up a fixed line isn't that complicated.
One of you asked about a rigging book for photography. Instead of looking in the climbing photography books, look in the rescue/self rescue books. I too like Jeff's book, but I think it is dated and a newer version is needed. Maybe I should seat down and write one. Let me know what you would like to see in it...
I too love the bowline and recomend it. I use a retraced bowline for almost everything I do.
When fixing a line on two bolts, I sometimes put a clovehitch on each bolt too. I think one bolt is fine if it is back up, but I prefer to equalize most of the time. At the very least in put two opposite and apposed draws and hange from that. it's not equalized, but safer then a single bolt backed to another. (Not as much shock load if a bolt fails.)
Again, a nice rough draft, you could do a lot with this piece. I hope you develop it more. I will look into that book.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Apr 8, 2007, 12:11 AM
Post #20 of 53
(24548 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
I don't really think Jeffs book is dated.
I mean yes it's mostly film talk, but film translates to digital far better then digital to film.
I agree the self rescue stuff is probably a better place to look but it would be nice to have a book that cuts through all the crap and is just about climbing photography/rigging.
Like detailed instructions on how to make a bi-pod (as you noted not the complicated like a fixed line but thats what good books are for). I think Jeffs book explained it well but without any diagram, but I don't have the book handy, I just moved and it's still boxed so I'm not sure.
When things get detailed I like diagrams. Much easier to visualize a complicated (or seemingly complicated, yet simple) setup.
I guess picture Freedom of the Hills without the illustrations. Some of the stuff is simple but complex only in words. Jeffs book lacks the illustrations necessary to clearly see the setups.
On the flip side, my favorite photo book is galen rowells "Vision" which is the opposite. It explains photography without being a how to book. You basically take from it what you want, but it's not an instructional book even if it contains more useful info then most instructional books.
(This post was edited by pico23 on Apr 8, 2007, 12:13 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Apr 9, 2007, 2:38 PM
Post #21 of 53
(24494 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
dbrayack wrote: trenchdigger wrote: When fixing a line directly to a tree, a tensionless hitch is generally the strongest and safest option. Why do you use a bowline? I use the bowline because i can easily cinch it down so it doesn't slip up a tree. Also, its much much easier to un-tie after loading it HARD.
|
|
|
|
|
rocknice2
Apr 9, 2007, 3:00 PM
Post #22 of 53
(24474 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2006
Posts: 1221
|
The rigging is fine. Most of the time it's a matter of preference or circustance. One thing I would like to add is that if jugging a fixed line that goes over an edge it a good idea to make a rebelay.
A Rebelay is to tie-off the nearest pro under edge with a clove hitch(or other preferred knot)
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Apr 10, 2007, 12:01 PM
Post #23 of 53
(24395 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
rocknice2 wrote: The rigging is fine. Most of the time it's a matter of preference or circustance. One thing I would like to add is that if jugging a fixed line that goes over an edge it a good idea to make a rebelay. A Rebelay is to tie-off the nearest pro under edge with a clove hitch(or other preferred knot)
Excellent Suggestion...I've been thinking about that a lot....I do, infact, try to pad the edge, but it usually doesn't happen. I just have my "old haul" line that I use and abuse.
-Dan
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Apr 10, 2007, 10:36 PM
Post #24 of 53
(24308 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
rocknice2 wrote: The rigging is fine. Most of the time it's a matter of preference or circustance. One thing I would like to add is that if jugging a fixed line that goes over an edge it a good idea to make a rebelay. A Rebelay is to tie-off the nearest pro under edge with a clove hitch(or other preferred knot)
Very true.
If you are shooting from a fixed line often, I recomend you make yourself a bolsoms chair to sit on. You can hange the chair from a Jumar, shunt, or pruick and seat comfortably instead of hanging in your harness the whole time.
|
|
|
|
|
codhands
Apr 10, 2007, 11:47 PM
Post #25 of 53
(24273 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 21, 2005
Posts: 499
|
guangzhou wrote: I recomend you make yourself a bolsoms chair
Not trying to be a dick, but it's boson chair.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Apr 11, 2007, 1:25 PM
Post #26 of 53
(6910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
codhands wrote: guangzhou wrote: I recomend you make yourself a bolsoms chair Not trying to be a dick, but it's boson chair.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
deepplaymedia
Apr 29, 2007, 9:21 AM
Post #27 of 53
(6835 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 192
|
Good on you for taking the time to write this up- personally I don't agree with much of what you have said, but as long as you have a grasp of the basic concepts of how to safe- everything further is just developing a system that works efficiently for you.
Personally, I started out using systems adapted from recreational climbing (because I am a climber!) that were not significantly different from what you suggest, but after (aside from hundreds of days hanging on jumars with a camera) several seasons as a rock/canyon guide & working contracts as a Rope Access Tech. I have adopted various systems from those industries that I believe to work the best for me....
I feel I should add a couple specific safety points though.
*I disagree strongly with working on a dynamic line- whatever you say it IS easier to ascend, and much safer because your rope is not being bounced up and down over sharp edges as you ascend.
*While I use a clove hitch on a locker (on a single bolt) for a rebelay, the main anchor IMO should be equalised between min. 2 points for redundancy. I suppose this come down to what you are comfortable with, but when you're 8 pitches up, hanging over the void as your climbers come past, you want to be concentrating on photos not wondering about your anchor. I have also seen aparently 'bomber' bolts pull out with out much force. It doesn't take much, just back it up.
The thing is, if one bolt does pull and you just have a clove hitch on the other, you will end up shockloading the remaining anchor (OK, it will probably hold, but maybe not. And what about that $2k lens you're just about to put on? bye bye!)
It is not any extra work to make it equalised, so why not?
By the way, the american death triangle (which i saw suggested somewhere) is NOT equalised. if you dont know what it is, GOOGLE!
(This post was edited by deepplaymedia on Apr 29, 2007, 9:26 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Apr 29, 2007, 5:17 PM
Post #28 of 53
(6804 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
deepplaymedia wrote: Good on you for taking the time to write this up- personally I don't agree with much of what you have said, but as long as you have a grasp of the basic concepts of how to safe- everything further is just developing a system that works efficiently for you. Personally, I started out using systems adapted from recreational climbing (because I am a climber!) that were not significantly different from what you suggest, but after (aside from hundreds of days hanging on jumars with a camera) several seasons as a rock/canyon guide & working contracts as a Rope Access Tech. I have adopted various systems from those industries that I believe to work the best for me.... I feel I should add a couple specific safety points though. *I disagree strongly with working on a dynamic line- whatever you say it IS easier to ascend, and much safer because your rope is not being bounced up and down over sharp edges as you ascend. *While I use a clove hitch on a locker (on a single bolt) for a rebelay, the main anchor IMO should be equalised between min. 2 points for redundancy. I suppose this come down to what you are comfortable with, but when you're 8 pitches up, hanging over the void as your climbers come past, you want to be concentrating on photos not wondering about your anchor. I have also seen aparently 'bomber' bolts pull out with out much force. It doesn't take much, just back it up. The thing is, if one bolt does pull and you just have a clove hitch on the other, you will end up shockloading the remaining anchor (OK, it will probably hold, but maybe not. And what about that $2k lens you're just about to put on? bye bye!) It is not any extra work to make it equalised, so why not? By the way, the american death triangle (which i saw suggested somewhere) is NOT equalised. if you dont know what it is, GOOGLE!
The death triangle, like the EDK or the bowline works. It just has limitations. The limitation being it's designed for bomber anchors (or really poor ones which have no chance of holding otherwise).
It equalizes the anchors but it's not equalized. If one pulls the other gets the full load in a bit of a shock.
I'd venture to say it's better then no equalization because it allows the anchor some flexibility and perhaps prevents it from blowing out in the first place. Of course that might just be optimism speaking.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Apr 29, 2007, 6:37 PM
Post #29 of 53
(6790 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
ragnar17 wrote: dbrayack wrote: I use the bowline because i can easily cinch it down so it doesn't slip up a tree. Also, its much much easier to un-tie after loading it HARD. You really shouldn't use a bowline for an anchor knot. When I anchor to trees for solo aiding the first pitch and such I prefer the method shown in my crappy little pic here: [image]www.csgambill.org/climbing/images/better.jpg[/image]
You need some basic help on understanding the concept of building anchors.I mean, you should ask yourself this:
Why do I need to use a perfectly good rope which is anchored via a simple bowline or 8 then add another butterfly knot in to equation and reduce the strength of the anchor by some 30% then make it weaker by linking it to another higher point anchor on that tree via another webbing with is weaker by an additional 30 % reduction in strength in the second anchor.
(This post was edited by majid_sabet on Apr 29, 2007, 6:38 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
nefarius
May 8, 2007, 5:00 PM
Post #30 of 53
(6702 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2003
Posts: 128
|
I'll post more later, as I'm pressed for time right now...
First off... Nice! Thanks for taking the time to put this together and post it up for people. I'm sure it's helpful to many as a place to get a conversation like this going, as well as to see diagrams, etc...
As far as two-bolt belays... You're simply not going to beat the equalizing figure 8 (Bunny ears). It's simple, equalizes, requires no runners and only 2 lockers so therefore saves a ton of weight too. It's a bomber knott. You'll find that this is what most skilled solo'ers use for their setup, as well as what is the most commonly used for short fixing when leading in blocks.
I'd definitely say that using a static rope is best. Yes, you can time the bounce and get a rhythm going on a dynamic line to some degree, but it's still slower and it hard on your line. As someone else posted above, have a look at thinner static lines. You certainly don't have to go with some huge 7/16" or 11mm line...
Someone above posted about bipods.. This info is out there. They're not hard to make and I suppose we all have to learn the hard way... The reason you don't see tons of stuff out there about them is that most guys use them for a very short time when they do. They're heavy, bulky, a pain to setup, finicky to use and in the end, if you're creative, you can get the angle you're looking for some other way. You might also think about trying different angles and different ideas, rather than the same ol' "overhead, away from the wall" view. Regardless, most people who have used them retire them due to what PITA they are...
|
|
|
|
|
boku
May 8, 2007, 5:38 PM
Post #31 of 53
(6687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2004
Posts: 278
|
codhands wrote: guangzhou wrote: I recomend you make yourself a bolsoms chair Not trying to be a dick, but it's boson chair.
Hmmm... I always knew it as a "bosun's chair."
|
|
|
|
|
nefarius
May 8, 2007, 5:43 PM
Post #32 of 53
(6682 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2003
Posts: 128
|
Save yourself the time of researching it... A bosun's chair is used for sailing rigs. As climbers, our equivalent would be a belay seat. Depending on your tastes, there are hard and soft belay seats. I find the hard, homemade belay seats to be the most comfortable, but typically take a soft one on shorter shoots, as it is easier to transport, lighter, etc. If on a wall, a hard seat is the way to go as weight is all relative when hauling.
|
|
|
|
|
sgauss
May 8, 2007, 6:27 PM
Post #33 of 53
(6663 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 138
|
codhands wrote: guangzhou wrote: I recomend you make yourself a bolsoms chair Not trying to be a dick, but it's boson chair.
Oh, man. Same disclaimer, but it is "bosuns" chair. A boson is a sub-atomic particle. Now someone should feel free to come along and correct me!
|
|
|
|
|
bigfatrock
May 8, 2007, 7:05 PM
Post #34 of 53
(6650 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2006
Posts: 1321
|
I would like to see how you can get out from the rock. The aren't many routs adjacent to anything in Texas. It's mostly just walls with routes lined up. You can't get a great perspective unless you are able to be out from the rock more. I have seen one before that involved PVC pipe and webbing hooked into two bolts, but even that isn't always possible and carrying PVC pipe to the crag would be a pain. Any suggestions?
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
May 8, 2007, 7:12 PM
Post #35 of 53
(6645 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Man, I never have that problem...I'm usually more worried about getting "IN" Hanging in Space really sucks.
One suggestion though: Tie the bottom of your haul line Loosly (so you can still ascend it) to a tree or other fixed point a good bit back. Once you get your height, you can pull on the lower rope, moving your backwards (either pull and tie or use an ascender.)
Does this make sense? I've only done this a few times.
|
|
|
|
|
bandycoot
May 8, 2007, 7:18 PM
Post #36 of 53
(6642 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2002
Posts: 2028
|
For the grigri-ascender combo I recommend this:
Take the tail of the rope coming out of the grigri and run it through a carabiner at the bottom of the ascender. Now as you step up, you pull down on the tail and you've created a quick efficient ~2:1 pulley system with almost no effort and only a single carabiner.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
May 8, 2007, 7:21 PM
Post #37 of 53
(6638 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
I've tried that, but don't like it...its not as fast, and I cannot "bounce" my way up...
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
May 8, 2007, 7:32 PM
Post #38 of 53
(6631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Not sure how I feel about the bouncy thing. I usually try to be as smooth as possible and limit my bounce to limit rope-edge rubbing.
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
May 8, 2007, 7:43 PM
Post #39 of 53
(6623 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
That's why I use a crappy "haul" rope, such as the Petzl one you just gave me :). ALso, I tend to pad the edge if needed (though I'm usually going off a two bolt anchor anyways.)
And I have converted to the atomic figure 8 (two loops)
|
|
|
|
|
nefarius
May 8, 2007, 7:47 PM
Post #40 of 53
(6620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2003
Posts: 128
|
For me it really depends. If you're shooting a lot of sport stuff, on overhanging rock where the line runs freee from the rock, anchor to anchor, then bouncing shouldn't be an issue... However, when you're on a wall that is vertical or less, ascending a fixed line, bouncing would scare the hell out of me. I've seen lines on El Cap get sawed a good portion of the way through over night, just from wind blowing them back and forth on a crystal. Scary shit.
I suppose this is why I've just learned to jug as smoothly and efficiently as possible. This kinda rules out the grigri, as a second ascender, for me too. Not to mention it's hugely inefficient. I *do* use a grigri for cleaning frequently, but only as a backup when ascending fixed lines, where I pull the slack through every thirty feet or so.
Of course, everyone is comfortable with different things and has their own systems. That's the great thing about the forums is we can all share and learn from each other...
Cheers!
(This post was edited by nefarius on May 8, 2007, 7:48 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
May 8, 2007, 7:56 PM
Post #41 of 53
(6614 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
before writing anchoring articles I'd learn the difference between a "bite" and a "bight" LOL
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
May 10, 2007, 11:59 AM
Post #42 of 53
(6566 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Yah, except bite fits in my box and bight didnt
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
May 10, 2007, 12:33 PM
Post #43 of 53
(6553 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
uh change the size of the box? did bight not fit in the article either cuz you spelled it wrong there too
that's a really strange way to anchor a fixed rope to 2 bolts, but whatever floats yer boat
my guess is you really don't know the difference, but do now. fair enough.
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
May 10, 2007, 12:35 PM
Post #44 of 53
(6546 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
dynosore wrote: uh change the size of the box? did bight not fit in the article either cuz you spelled it wrong there too that's a really strange way to anchor a fixed rope to 2 bolts, but whatever floats yer boat my guess is you really don't know the difference, but do now. fair enough.
Yah, I totally spelled it wrong!
I'm going to revise it when I get a chance. I've gone to the atomic figure 8, as J_ung calls it, they two loop eight on a bite.
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
May 10, 2007, 1:28 PM
Post #46 of 53
(6535 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Right on man; I'm glad for the construtive criticism, its how you learn!
|
|
|
|
|
Paul_Y
May 10, 2007, 1:50 PM
Post #47 of 53
(6528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2007
Posts: 245
|
dbrayack, dynosore,
Thanks for the thread and the link to the animated knot site!
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
May 10, 2007, 1:55 PM
Post #48 of 53
(6520 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
That knot site is GREAT!
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
May 15, 2007, 1:00 AM
Post #49 of 53
(6472 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
My typical photo shoot setup is two rap ropes and one trolley line. I have the one main rap rope. The second rap rope is so that I can reposition easily off to one side simply by transferring weight to the other rope by either ascending it or lowering myself onto it. Having a secondary rap rope increases safety many fold. It also steadies me for that all important shot. I hate twirling about on the end of my rap rope like a Christmas decoration.
The trolley line is there for when I need to haul myself away from the wall. I now have a 250 metre 5mm perlon cord, very low stretch which I typically double for ease of retrieval and for increased strength and less stretch. I place a pulley on the trolley line and have a rope attached to the trolley line. I then either set up a gri gri on a single line pull if I am going out a short distance or a more elaborate haul system if I need to gain more distance.
Being able get some distance out from the wall gives you the ability to gain a lot more persective and to choose from a lot more viewing angles. In combination with this is the ability to shift sideways via the secondary rap rope.
Yep a lot of rigging but then I am paranoid about my safety. I can also gain a lot more shots from many different angles and the end result is that I can then hone my skills in choosing which angle I prefer. It seperates my shots from the usual shots that are taken close to the wall.
Take this shot for example.
I was some 20 metres out from the wall on this occasion. That was only accomplished because of the overhanging nature of the wall. I want to get much further out from the wall so I can gain some perspective given by the surrounding countryside. Mind you I am never satisfied by any of my pics and am constantly striving for better pics and better angles.
Mind you, don't get me wrong there are some fantastic pics taken from over the climbers shoulder and I have taken exactly this type of pic. That type of pic though rarely does justice to the medium that we climb on. I want to explore giving the viewer much more of what we actually go to climb. I want to see the great expanses of rock and see the various geologic formations we move across. This can only be accomplished by way of some quite elaborate setups.
I do also like exploring the faces of climbers mid crux when their faces are all screwed up and they are exhibiting the torture that their minds are going through. But of course that is another dissertation.
I like that we climbing photographers can explore the possibilities and that we do not hold back our secrets from one another. By doing so we simply popularise our chosen pasttime and may in some small way bring the vast publics imagination to bear on policy makers.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul_Y
May 15, 2007, 2:44 PM
Post #50 of 53
(6443 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2007
Posts: 245
|
Nice shot philbox. Thanks for taking the time to write up the detailed description of your anchoring system. I like your use of that thin non-strech tolley line.
|
|
|
|
|
bigfatrock
May 30, 2007, 4:32 PM
Post #51 of 53
(2104 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2006
Posts: 1321
|
How is tying in to a tree at the base any better than a single line from the anchors? With both you have to rig or unrig the line, it's just a matter of where you unrig it. One you do at the anchor, one you do one the ground.
When you say catastrophe knots do you mean something like a prussic?
Would the ascender not act as a backup if you clipped into it?
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Jun 21, 2007, 4:59 PM
Post #52 of 53
(2032 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Its nice to tie the anchor on the ground so I do not have to go all the way to the top to un-rig, then rap.
catastrophe knots are eights on a bite, overhand knots etc, so it cannot pass through the gri-gri if it gets loaded weird.
The ascender is a backup of the gri-gri, but a lot of times, I'm moving up and down, up and down; If I'm moving down and stuff fails, I'm hosed.
I've revised my article adding some the atomic figure 8 (double eared figure eight).
Also, someone requested a piece on what I bring up with me. This one seems pretty basic; the whole time I'm like...I'm sure everyone already knows this, but what the heck.
original:
http://brayackmedia.com/anchart1.html
ascending with your camera, protecting your camera, keeping it clean, that kind of thing.
http://brayackmedia.com/anchart2.html
-Dan
|
|
|
|
|
kshon
May 26, 2010, 6:00 AM
Post #53 of 53
(1669 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2003
Posts: 16
|
As with many anchor setups, thee are many ways to approach such an art, however I find it most often comes down to a rationale/backed by able to be explained decision. Much like when one might guide. For example: Why did you hitch a clove here as opposed to a hard knot? "Well, I needed one leg to be adjustable and we are only relying on this clove for a moment, so my rationale is that is was faster and adjustable. Since these two attributes are the ones I was looking for, this is the method to my madness."
Bowlines being easier to untie, etc. I find most of it is not as far as hogwash, as has been said/responded.sprayed/all of the above, a fixed line is a fixed line. With a sound explanation, there need not be much more debate than merely that. preference backed by a rational reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
