|
Aequitas
Nov 17, 2009, 6:39 PM
Post #26 of 124
(17495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 36
|
got it
|
|
|
|
|
subantz
Nov 17, 2009, 7:22 PM
Post #27 of 124
(17452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2007
Posts: 1247
|
Wheres all the gear placements? I see some bolts and such but not gear placed. What gives SON
|
|
|
|
|
Aequitas
Nov 17, 2009, 7:53 PM
Post #28 of 124
(17426 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 36
|
I'm noticing the same thing, there are a few placements but many are simply shots of bolts.
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Nov 17, 2009, 8:10 PM
Post #29 of 124
(17408 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
Still uploading stuff, so be patient.
I may have more pictures of anchor systems (both gear and bolts) than I have just of gear placements, but I know I've got a bunch.
Again, be patient, as I have a lot to get through.
|
|
|
|
|
subantz
Nov 17, 2009, 8:18 PM
Post #30 of 124
(17396 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2007
Posts: 1247
|
We want to see GEAR PLACEMENTS SON!!!
Bolts are not gear. All though I would clip those clunkers.
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Nov 17, 2009, 8:34 PM
Post #31 of 124
(17378 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
subantz wrote: We want to see GEAR PLACEMENTS SON!!! Bolts are not gear. All though I would clip those clunkers.
You'll take what I give you and you'll like it!!!
Now STFU and keep watching for more pix.
|
|
|
|
|
subantz
Nov 17, 2009, 8:44 PM
Post #32 of 124
(17362 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2007
Posts: 1247
|
GEAR PICS PECKER HEAD!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
scotty1974
Nov 17, 2009, 8:52 PM
Post #33 of 124
(17355 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 31, 2006
Posts: 248
|
105938840_4688ba
Two slung chicken heads as an anchor?
That isn't questionable, that's the flatirons!!
Viva' le Flatiorns!
|
|
|
|
|
robdotcalm
Nov 17, 2009, 8:54 PM
Post #34 of 124
(17352 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027
|
#6 Camalot before the crack really gets wide.
|
|
|
|
|
boymeetsrock
Nov 17, 2009, 9:54 PM
Post #35 of 124
(17298 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2005
Posts: 1709
|
shimanilami wrote: Aequitas wrote: ... questionable tricam placement ... That statement is redundant.
This is incorrect.
|
|
|
|
|
Aequitas
Nov 17, 2009, 10:11 PM
Post #36 of 124
(17285 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 36
|
robdotcalm wrote: #6 Camalot before the crack really gets wide. [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/2/435072-largest_Camalot_in_Crack_75rc.jpg[/image]
Is this another example of a "textbook" bad placement because of the flare above the piece in the crack?
|
|
|
|
|
robdotcalm
Nov 17, 2009, 10:14 PM
Post #37 of 124
(17280 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027
|
Aequitas wrote: robdotcalm wrote: #6 Camalot before the crack really gets wide. [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/images/photos/assets/2/435072-largest_Camalot_in_Crack_75rc.jpg[/image] Is this another example of a "textbook" bad placement because of the flare above the piece in the crack?
No. I slung the gear properly, and it didn't move. Anyone who needs a better placement than that, ought not to be climbing trad.
Cheers,
Rob.calm
|
|
|
|
|
Aequitas
Nov 17, 2009, 10:23 PM
Post #38 of 124
(17266 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 36
|
Hexentric placement, Comments?
|
|
|
|
|
Aequitas
Nov 17, 2009, 10:59 PM
Post #41 of 124
(17226 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 36
|
dugl33 wrote: [image]http://www.rockclimbingcompany.co.uk/images/hexentric-placement-5.png[/image] Aequitas wrote: Hexentric placement, Comments? Looks like one of those "best you can do in a given situation" placements. Hex acting like a tri-cam. Clever. Depending on the lip at the top of that pocket, might just hold. Reminds me of one of many reasons why wire cabled hexes are l_a_m_e! Did you tie a clove hitch in the top strand and clip this?
This is a picture i found so I did not place it. Is the advantage of the clove hitch (rather than clipping the sling) to create more of a camming action?
|
|
|
|
|
dugl33
Nov 17, 2009, 11:17 PM
Post #42 of 124
(17199 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2009
Posts: 740
|
In reply to: Is the advantage of the clove hitch (rather than clipping the sling) to create more of a camming action?
Yes, that's what I'm thinking. Seems like it would probably cam either way, but with a clove you could make sure the pull hit the top strand first and it would have a better chance of rotating and not just popping free.
Kind of looks like an aid placement, although sometimes all you can do is get creative whether its aid or free.
|
|
|
|
|
john_itis
Nov 18, 2009, 12:24 AM
Post #43 of 124
(17161 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2009
Posts: 6
|
acorneau wrote: Aequitas wrote: [image]http://www.rockclimbingcompany.co.uk/images/hexentric-placement-5.png[/image] Hexentric placement, Comments? Quite a unique placement! Looks useable, assuming the rock is good.
I wouldn't trust hanging my shoes on this placement let alone take a whip on it.
|
|
|
|
|
dugl33
Nov 18, 2009, 12:53 AM
Post #44 of 124
(17139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2009
Posts: 740
|
Two nominations for the stupid award...
|
|
Attachments:
|
wtf.jpg
(74.1 KB)
|
|
|
stupid_rig.jpg
(84.3 KB)
|
|
|
|
|
dugl33
Nov 18, 2009, 1:14 AM
Post #45 of 124
(17119 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2009
Posts: 740
|
I just hope the noobs looking at these pictures realize many, maybe even most, are examples of sketchy anchors, stupid rigging, poor placements, or all of the above.
|
|
|
|
|
Aequitas
Nov 18, 2009, 1:45 AM
Post #46 of 124
(17089 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 36
|
dugl33 wrote: Two nominations for the stupid award... [Inline wtf.jpg] [Inline stupid_rig.jpg]
Ok so the first one is obvious, whats the deal with the 2nd picture?
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Nov 18, 2009, 1:49 AM
Post #47 of 124
(17084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
Aequitas wrote: dugl33 wrote: Two nominations for the stupid award... [Inline wtf.jpg] [Inline stupid_rig.jpg] Ok so the first one is obvious, whats the deal with the 2nd picture?
Honestly?
|
|
|
|
|
Aequitas
Nov 18, 2009, 1:53 AM
Post #48 of 124
(17079 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 36
|
Yeah, its not something i would try but i don't see whats wrong
(This post was edited by Aequitas on Nov 18, 2009, 1:54 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
dugl33
Nov 18, 2009, 2:02 AM
Post #49 of 124
(17077 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2009
Posts: 740
|
Aequitas wrote: Ok so the first one is obvious, whats the deal with the 2nd picture?
Clipping the lower nut through the upper nut has several real problems.
1.) First, the pulley effect. For example, if you have a 5kn load on the biner, the 5kn load transfers through the loop and to the lower nut, with an equal and opposite 5kn load on the other side. So, the load on the upper nut will be 10 kn (less some reduction for friction). So a reasonable load is doubled and the upper piece can simply fail. And obviously, the lower nut will be worthless for the direction of pull when this happens.
2.) If the lower nut fails, it will simply pull through the loop. You are not attached to the upper nut.
3.) The upper nut is not bad looking -- why not clip it directly?
4.) The intent is obviously opposition of the nuts, but this is tricky when the placements are too close. You might be able to rig this with a sling in a way that the load goes directly to the top nut, yet you have some opposition tied off to the lower nut.
does all that make sense?
|
|
Attachments:
|
stupid_rig.jpg
(84.3 KB)
|
|
|
|
|
Aequitas
Nov 18, 2009, 2:10 AM
Post #50 of 124
(17068 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 36
|
yeah, it does now. I didn't think about the fact that the forces on the upper nut would be increased, i just thought it would have been easier to clip the top nut by itself
|
|
|
|
|
|
