|
k.l.k
Jun 1, 2011, 4:39 PM
Post #101 of 182
(11529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
funnelator wrote: Standardization is great for newbies. After that people improvise. That they improvise in a way you don't agree with doesn't necessarily make them any less safe.
Standardization is absolutely crucial in precisely the most routine of settings: the gym and roadside crag. Improvisation is for experienced parties up high in difficult terrain where communication is often not possible.
Standardization is crucial everywhere else. Standardization is the professional norm in all other dangerous activities: flying, diving, skydiving-- folks don't "improvise" depending on how they feel.
It is really depressing that someone could make this argument in this thread of all places.
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Jun 1, 2011, 4:41 PM
Post #102 of 182
(11527 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
no one ive ever met has considered "off belay" ... to mean anything other than "take me off belay"
maybe you yanks have a different meaning?
|
|
|
|
|
michael1245
Jun 1, 2011, 4:43 PM
Post #103 of 182
(11525 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2010
Posts: 247
|
John Long's How To Rock Climb has a command-vocab section. I read it, and tried to put it to use.
Then I actually go and climb with my buddies and it's all "I'm done", "you got me", "lower me", "no, not yet", "DUDE!", and "ok".
In the Army, we referred to this as "Bastardizing Standards".
In all seriousness, as long as you and your partner clearly understand each other.
(This post was edited by michael1245 on Jun 1, 2011, 4:49 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
csproul
Jun 1, 2011, 4:47 PM
Post #104 of 182
(11523 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769
|
bearbreeder wrote: no one ive ever met has considered "off belay" ... to mean anything other than "take me off belay" maybe you yanks have a different meaning?
|
|
|
|
|
k.l.k
Jun 1, 2011, 4:48 PM
Post #105 of 182
(11521 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
jt512 wrote: Take a look at any popular climbing instruction book written by a North American author in the last...oh...40 years, I'd guess. Same commands, give or take a word. Someone with a better understanding of history than I should be able to tell you what organization introduced the standard belay commands and how they propagated.
The RCS of the Sierra Club developed an early version of the standard North American system back in the late 1930s. It was popularized by the various Clubs and again in the armed forces. For many of the middle decades of the century, only climbers certified by the relevant clubs were allowed to climb in places like Yosemite and Rainier. That sort of standardization was one of the keys to making climbing a (marginally) acceptable activity in many National Parks and Monuments.
One of the ironies of our current situation, is that the theoretically safest modes of climbing-- gym and half-pitch sport --have done so much to unravel that older culture and introduced entirely novel and dangerous modes of failure.
Gyms are now the default learning environment for new climbers, and what I see from gym to gym is frickin appalling.
The gym and the roadside crag are in some ways the most dangerous environments simply because it's so easy for everything to become casual.
This accident is especially sobering because it happened to Phil Powers.
|
|
|
|
|
madscientist
Jun 1, 2011, 4:51 PM
Post #106 of 182
(11516 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2002
Posts: 159
|
It does appear, to me, that the meaning of "off belay" is ambiguous to some climbers. I do believe that this contributed to some accidents, although not the one that started this thread.
Before the climber starts up, I get information about whether they are going to lower or rappel. At the anchor, I have adapted using full sentences and names. If I am going to rappel, I state "Chad, you can take me completely off belay. I will rappel. Chad". I expect a response something like, "Elijah, You are completely off belay. Elijah". If I lower, I state that I expect to be lowered. Using unambiguous commands like these is not difficult most of the time and adds a little safety, thus I think they should become more common.
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Jun 1, 2011, 4:55 PM
Post #107 of 182
(11512 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
which isnt best practice .. but as long as they understand that they are really off belay .... and dont forget ...
when in doubt ... just rap or self lower
or just wait to feel a significant amount of tension ....ie you being pulled into the rock
its that simple IMO ...
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jun 1, 2011, 5:08 PM
Post #108 of 182
(11502 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
madscientist wrote: It does appear, to me, that the meaning of "off belay" is ambiguous to some climbers. I do believe that this contributed to some accidents, although not the one that started this thread.
Why do you say that? From what I've heard there was a miscommunication. As to exactly what happened, no-one seems to know. If you have first-hand knowledge, or second-hand from several independent parties, please share. If what you say above is merely hearsay, then perhaps it would be best to not say anything.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
robdotcalm
Jun 1, 2011, 5:16 PM
Post #109 of 182
(11495 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027
|
cracklover wrote: madscientist wrote: It does appear, to me, that the meaning of "off belay" is ambiguous to some climbers. I do believe that this contributed to some accidents, although not the one that started this thread. Why do you say that? From what I've heard there was a miscommunication. As to exactly what happened, no-one seems to know. If you have first-hand knowledge, or second-hand from several independent parties, please share. If what you say above is merely hearsay, then perhaps it would be best to not say anything. GO
Correct. Through the link below, Phil posted the following.
“All climbing accidents have causes, subtle and otherwise. This one is no different. It would be unfair to the rigorous investigation now underway to prematurely release reports or to posit theories about what happened before all the facts are known. Trust that I, like you, will be extremely interested in what is to be learned here, and I will be supplying you with information as it becomes available and understood.”]
http://www.americanalpineclub.org/p/status
Rob.calm
|
|
|
|
|
funnelator
Jun 1, 2011, 6:15 PM
Post #110 of 182
(11468 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2005
Posts: 83
|
k.l.k wrote: funnelator wrote: Standardization is great for newbies. After that people improvise. That they improvise in a way you don't agree with doesn't necessarily make them any less safe. Standardization is absolutely crucial in precisely the most routine of settings: the gym and roadside crag. Improvisation is for experienced parties up high in difficult terrain where communication is often not possible. Standardization is crucial everywhere else. Standardization is the professional norm in all other dangerous activities: flying, diving, skydiving-- folks don't "improvise" depending on how they feel. It is really depressing that someone could make this argument in this thread of all places.
This is addictive.
Standardization is useful. Improvisation is a more important skill to have than the ability to follow rules however.
Even skydiving. Have you ever experienced a dual deployment? What's the standard response to that? Think fast. You don't have much time.
I tell you what. You climb the way you want and I'll climb the way I want.
Next time I go craggin' I think "toothbrush" will mean I'm off belay and "floss" will mean climb on.
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Jun 1, 2011, 6:34 PM
Post #111 of 182
(11455 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
funnelator wrote: Next time I go craggin' I think "toothbrush" will mean I'm off belay and "floss" will mean climb on.
I think floss is best reserved for someone being lowered with their legs on either side of the rope. Maybe mouthwash?
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jun 2, 2011, 12:24 AM
Post #112 of 182
(11383 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
jt512 wrote: The last signal you want to have a personal definition of is "off belay."
bearbreeder wrote: no one ive ever met has considered "off belay" ... to mean anything other than "take me off belay"?
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jun 2, 2011, 12:27 AM
Post #113 of 182
(11380 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
patto wrote: jt512 wrote: The last signal you want to have a personal definition of is "off belay." Again you are assuming there are universal standards and anything else is a personal standard. As I have said when I climb with my partners the word 'SAFE' is used as it is a statement. bearbreeder wrote: no one ive ever met has considered "off belay" ... to mean anything other than "take me off belay"? I've have never learnt or used "off belay" to mean "take me off belay". I have always used it to mean "[you are] off belay".
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jun 2, 2011, 12:42 AM
Post #114 of 182
(11371 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
redlude97 wrote: patto wrote: I have always used it to mean "[you are] off belay". Curious, what does "on belay" mean to you then?
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jun 2, 2011, 12:53 AM
Post #115 of 182
(11365 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
patto wrote: redlude97 wrote: patto wrote: I have always used it to mean "[you are] off belay". Curious, what does "on belay" mean to you then? To me it means "[you are] on belay". Again a statement, not a request.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jun 2, 2011, 12:57 AM
Post #116 of 182
(11361 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
redlude97 wrote: Ok, then "belay on"
The calls that I used are posted on the previous page. I believe that the calls are more in line with the British mountaineering heritage than the later influence and change in north america.
(Again I'm not saying other methods are wrong.)
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Jun 2, 2011, 1:39 AM
Post #117 of 182
(11337 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
bearbreeder wrote: no one ive ever met has considered "off belay" ... to mean anything other than "take me off belay" maybe you yanks have a different meaning?
HOLY SHIT I TOTALLY AGREE WITH BEARBREADER.
Like. Woah.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jun 2, 2011, 1:44 AM
Post #118 of 182
(11336 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
did some posts magically disappear or am I just crazy? I swear I was in the middle of responding to one
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Jun 2, 2011, 2:21 AM
Post #119 of 182
(11327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
redlude97 wrote: did some posts magically disappear or am I just crazy? I swear I was in the middle of responding to one
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Jun 2, 2011, 4:52 AM
Post #120 of 182
(11292 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
Yeah, that came out wrong. I meant once I'm on the ground and stable.
|
|
|
|
|
kaizen
Jun 2, 2011, 4:10 PM
Post #122 of 182
(11225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2009
Posts: 154
|
patto wrote: jt512 wrote: The last signal you want to have a personal definition of is "off belay." Again you are assuming there are universal standards and anything else is a personal standard. As I have said when I climb with my partners the word 'SAFE' is used as it is a statement. bearbreeder wrote: no one ive ever met has considered "off belay" ... to mean anything other than "take me off belay"? I've have never learnt or used "off belay" to mean "take me off belay". I have always used it to mean "[you are] off belay".
SAFE is the worst command to ever use, and I hope you do not teach anyone to use this term. SAFE is so easily confused with TAKE when it's hard to see and hear your partner. Mind you that safe means "I want off belay," while take means "I need you to catch me," and it's even worse.
Seriously, I cannot stress how dumb it is to use this word. Two seasons ago, a man was paralyzed in when he was leading, went out of site, and called take. His wife thought he said safe and the rest is history.
"Improvising" commands is dumb, and anyone who thinks that a standard set of commands would make no difference in reducing miscommunication accidents is just not paying attention.
Standardization reduces accidents. It's a fact. Apollo 13 anyone?
And STOP using the term SAFE!
|
|
|
|
|
robdotcalm
Jun 2, 2011, 4:38 PM
Post #123 of 182
(11210 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027
|
j_ung wrote: robdotcalm wrote: A few weeks ago, a climber gave me a new reason why he didn't need to tie a knot in the rope while belaying me: "The rope is 70 meters ". Oh well, another excuse for developing bad habits. Cheers, Rob.calm Depending on the length of the climb, it's a perfectly legitimate reason. If it were you and I on a 20-meter climb with a 70-meter rope I might say exactly the same thing. I mean come on, 50 meters of rope on the ground doesn't equal a closed system? There's only one habit worth developing: evaluate every situation and choose your practices accordingly.
Jung: This issue has been hashed out in detail several times, e.g.,
http://www.rockclimbing.com/..._reply;so=ASC;mh=25;
http://www.mountainproject.com/...05791322#a_105791794
"Four years ago, 2 climbers were descending from the Rincon Wall at Eldorado and arrived at a rappel station 40 feet off the ground. They had a 200 foot rope. It was dark and cold. One partner had been lowered to the ground. Once on the ground, he started to lower the other. When the second climber was about 20 feet off the ground, the rope went through the belayer’s device resulting in fatal injuries. These were competent and careful climbers, but the belayer had not realized that his partner had tied in short (not at the end of the rope). No matter how short the distance, when lowering or belaying, the system must be closed. As John Dill, NPS Ranger at Yosemite wrote http://www.friendsofyosar.org/...2-07_ChurchBowl.html:“One reason for a knot even when the rope clearly reaches the ground is to maintain good habits, so you don’t forget …when a knot really counts...” And you do not know when that will be"
You are presenting an argument why it’s OK to have a dangerous habit in the form of sophistry about evaluating situations.
Rob.calm
|
|
|
|
|
madscientist
Jun 2, 2011, 4:43 PM
Post #124 of 182
(11209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2002
Posts: 159
|
cracklover wrote: madscientist wrote: It does appear, to me, that the meaning of "off belay" is ambiguous to some climbers. I do believe that this contributed to some accidents, although not the one that started this thread. Why do you say that? From what I've heard there was a miscommunication. As to exactly what happened, no-one seems to know. If you have first-hand knowledge, or second-hand from several independent parties, please share. If what you say above is merely hearsay, then perhaps it would be best to not say anything. GO
Sorry, I was under the impression from a different source that it was not miscommunication, but reading into it more that appears to be the case. It would be nice to edit my post to make it correct, but now it is part of others posts and does little good. Forgive my faulty memory.
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Jun 2, 2011, 5:55 PM
Post #125 of 182
(11193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
funnelator wrote: Is there a "typical" lowering-vs rappelling miscommunication accident? Seems like there are lots of variations on the theme which is why, although redundant ad nauseum, perhaps it's good to keep having these kinds of discussions, at least as long as people keep having these kinds of accidents.
It has been my observation that the most common lowering-when-not-belayed is because the leader got to the top of the climb and yelled something like "I'm clipped into the anchor" and the belayer thinking the leader safe takes them off belay.
This is absolutely a mistake on the belayers part since the leader never asked to be taken "off belay".
But I think it is a terrible habbit on the part of the leader. Yelling something like "I'm clipped in" or "I'm at the anchor" invites the belayer to mistakenly take you off. If the leader just keeps his damn mouth shut, it won't occur to the belayer to take them off belay. And they will still be on belay when they go to lower.
So I am of the opinion that the leader shouldn't say anything unless they want to be taken off belay and they should say so directly.
(This post was edited by sspssp on Jun 2, 2011, 6:10 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
