Forums: Climbing Information: Accident and Incident Analysis:
Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Accident and Incident Analysis

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All


sandstone


Oct 17, 2011, 12:53 PM
Post #51 of 144 (12525 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 21, 2004
Posts: 324

Re: [JimTitt] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
The difficulty I and many others have is the emphasis being on buddy-checks (which is clear from the number of previous posts) whereas the emphasis must be on self-reliance...beginner groups being taught to tie-in they check each others knots before they are even remotely competent to tie them which unconciously reinforces the reliance on others, leading to the ludicrous (and not so rare) situation that they lead their first route and can´t re-thread to lower because they aren´t sure of their knot...pressure on instructors to get the climber through the course and on the rock in the shortest possible time before the customers for this `adventure sport´ get bored...

Yikes, that IS bad. I see more of where you are coming from now.

Neither self reliance nor buddy checks are perfect, but given our fallible nature, we need both. Leave out one or the other, and we fall quite short of the best we can do for ourselves, and for our partners.


ACJ


Oct 17, 2011, 2:05 PM
Post #52 of 144 (12495 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2008
Posts: 162

Re: [sandstone] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

Hoping for a good recovery to the climber.

My thoughts on the accident and the whole buddy check debate:

1. Even the fact that it was an "off duty" guide looks poorly upon the ranch and it's staff. He had a radio on him at the time of the accident? That sounds like 1/2 duty or something to me... I think that as a guide (I am one myself) that you never really get an off day. Even when I'm out with my friends I understand that my training and experience alters their expectation of the day. That's just how it is. I wouldn't want to live a double life of checking knots one day and not the next.

2. Buddy checks... Why not? I grab my belayers attention and run the check every time. When I am climbing recreationally here is exactly what I say and I touch the system parts while doing it... "correctly tied knot through both loops autoback buckle (that's my side) climbers on top breaks on the bottom (reference to the belay device) locked and double buckle." That honestly takes less than 10 seconds to do and is just a part of the ritual of climbing for me. Touch is huge, if I don't touch the pieces then I'm not really checking. Some research was done on this to back up the whole touch thing... I also can't imagine any time that I can't slow down a system to do checks. Multipitch climbing we never untie. Cleaning an anchor, weigh the rope before unclipping after tying back in.

I think these checks enforce that we are a team, they don't breed complacency. Usually when you catch something wrong with your partners gear the look on their face is oh crap dude I am so sorry. It's embarrassing to screw up with your friends life in your hands. It's never, haha man on belay have fun!

A long time ago I started to feel as though climbing wasn't that much fun. It's climbing with my friends that I really enjoy. As a result, when I head to the crag I don't expect them to be on their own. We take care of each other. I honestly wouldn't want to climb if the mentality at the cliff was more about we're both on our own, we just happen to be sharing gear today...


sandstone


Oct 17, 2011, 3:40 PM
Post #53 of 144 (12470 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 21, 2004
Posts: 324

Re: [patto] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I think two of the most dangerous mindsets in climbing are:

- Thinking you have enough control over yourself that you will not screw up.

- Being experienced and good.

The first is just a delusion, a situation that can only exist in our minds, not in reality. Cockiness is usually easy to spot, even online. A dose of reality, through making a mistake or two, or learning from someone else's, can go a long way toward resolving it.

The second is far more sinister. We normally think of those things as assets, things that will help protect us. Familiarity can breed complacency, which can lead to the tragic situation where even our brightest stars are taken down by blunders that can only be classified as beginner mistakes. Lynn Hill's close call due to an unfinished knot has already been mentioned. Todd Skinner knowingly chose to climb on a harness that was so worn that probably most noobs would have been scared to use it. Mugs Stump, one of the greatest alpinists ever, walked to an unstable crevasse edge with a bunch of slack in the rope -- a beginner mistake that cost him his life.

I'm not belittling those people -- far from it -- they are some of my heroes. I am truly awed by their accomplishments, and truly humbled that greatness did not protect them from even the simplest of dangers.

patto wrote:
I have never said don't do partner checks. But if you think that they are necessary then I question the your own competence and reliability.

If we ever share a rope I will welcome you to question my competence and reliability by asking you to give me a quick check before I head up. We can argue semantics, that buddy checks are not necessary (i.e. required, essential, or a necessity), but that is missing the point. No one can rise to a level that they cannot benefit from a simple buddy check. If you think you have, then you fall squarely into that first category.


Bats


Oct 17, 2011, 4:02 PM
Post #54 of 144 (12460 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 26, 2007
Posts: 485

Re: [dindolino32] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I am so sorry for this accident and wish well to the injured as well as the belayer. I have climb with my favorite guide for years, and we always go through the buddy check. He said that he goes through the check with his wife/partner of 20+ years. He told me that he knows too many experienced climbers that have made beginners' mistakes and ended up dead or severely injured.
I am so glad medical attention was given so fast consider where HCR is located in Arkansa.
Please keep us inform of the climber's well being.


(This post was edited by Bats on Oct 17, 2011, 7:05 PM)


majid_sabet


Oct 17, 2011, 5:28 PM
Post #55 of 144 (12437 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 12, 2002
Posts: 8390

Re: [dindolino32] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

There are reasons on why planes come with two seats in the front and why two pilots are required on most flights

one guy is to check and another guy to double check

both flying and climbing have one thing in common

gravity is their biggest enemy


superchuffer


Oct 17, 2011, 7:54 PM
Post #56 of 144 (12400 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 9, 2011
Posts: 294

Re: [JimTitt] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I am not hearing a counter argument for non-buddy checks. anyone?


JAB


Oct 18, 2011, 1:53 AM
Post #57 of 144 (12367 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 26, 2007
Posts: 373

Re: [superchuffer] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I think the main argument against buddy checks was that since you can't always do them, it's not fool-proof and thus not worth doing at all.

Besides the obvious counter-argument that some double checks are better than none, ACJ also raised the good counter-argument against the multi-pitch / rappel non-check argument. To reiterate: on multi-pitch you don't untie. On rappell, instead of the double check, you weigh the rope while still being tied into the anchor (with slings, PAS or whatever).

When starting up on lead you don't weigh the rope, so the double check is essential.


JimTitt


Oct 18, 2011, 3:15 AM
Post #58 of 144 (12356 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002

Re: [rrrADAM] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rrrADAM wrote:
JimTitt wrote:
I´m the one tying-in with the rethreaded bowline anyway so most buddy-check fans would be screwed to start with.
That would be me... I can't check those knots, and in the few instances I've climbed with one who ties in with it, I can only ask them to double check it while I check their harness.



And question regarding checking your knot whilst making the first clip...
In reply to:
...since there I can clip in and do something about it...

How are you clipping in if your knot isn't any good? I'm trying to imagine up on a route, placing a stopper, biner/draw, then reaching down to clip and noticing that your knot is fuxored... Clipping in and weighting an unfinished knot doesn't sound like a good plan.

One of the virtues of the rethreaded bowline is you will have checked the first knot when you thread back through again.

If you´re arriving at the first piece and you haven´t got anything to clip your harness into the gear then by definition a buddy check was rather irrelevant and needs to be expanded to cover a lot more than just the tie-in!

A healthy awareness of all the things around you and their potential to hurt is essential to climbing, learning safety rules by rote means anything outside of those rules is in danger of being ignored. Having a climbing partner who takes an alert interest in how you buckle your harness or tie-on amongst all the other things that we do is desirable but in no way a substitute for learning to do these things properly oneself.
As has been mentioned previously, your partner is not always with you and your survival depends on your own abilities and self-checks and this principle should never be diluted by learning to rely on an rule which is only sometimes effective.


rsmillbern


Oct 18, 2011, 3:54 AM
Post #59 of 144 (12351 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 29, 2005
Posts: 319

Re: [JimTitt] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
rrrADAM wrote:
JimTitt wrote:
I´m the one tying-in with the rethreaded bowline anyway so most buddy-check fans would be screwed to start with.
That would be me... I can't check those knots, and in the few instances I've climbed with one who ties in with it, I can only ask them to double check it while I check their harness.



And question regarding checking your knot whilst making the first clip...
In reply to:
...since there I can clip in and do something about it...

How are you clipping in if your knot isn't any good? I'm trying to imagine up on a route, placing a stopper, biner/draw, then reaching down to clip and noticing that your knot is fuxored... Clipping in and weighting an unfinished knot doesn't sound like a good plan.

One of the virtues of the rethreaded bowline is you will have checked the first knot when you thread back through again.

If you´re arriving at the first piece and you haven´t got anything to clip your harness into the gear then by definition a buddy check was rather irrelevant and needs to be expanded to cover a lot more than just the tie-in!

A healthy awareness of all the things around you and their potential to hurt is essential to climbing, learning safety rules by rote means anything outside of those rules is in danger of being ignored. Having a climbing partner who takes an alert interest in how you buckle your harness or tie-on amongst all the other things that we do is desirable but in no way a substitute for learning to do these things properly oneself.
As has been mentioned previously, your partner is not always with you and your survival depends on your own abilities and self-checks and this principle should never be diluted by learning to rely on an rule which is only sometimes effective.

Just a couple comments. Only my opinion...

Every climber is responsible for their own safety, but also for the safety of their partner. This means, for me, checking their knots, harness, ect... However the this is not an excuse for my partner to be irresponsible and I won't climb with someone who is.

Checking the knot at the first clip sounds sketchy to me. I can think iof at least 2 climbs where the first bolt is 10-15 m up and the clip is from crappy holds (Stone Mtn, NC).

Rethreaded bowline, if your partner is using it you owe it to them to know how to check it. I only recently got comfortable checking this, but I feel like I owe it to my partner to learn that.

In reply to:
A healthy awareness of all the things around you and their potential to hurt is essential to climbing, learning safety rules by rote means anything outside of those rules is in danger of being ignored. Having a climbing partner who takes an alert interest in how you buckle your harness or tie-on amongst all the other things that we do is desirable but in no way a substitute for learning to do these things properly oneself.
As has been mentioned previously, your partner is not always with you and your survival depends on your own abilities and self-checks and this principle should never be diluted by learning to rely on an rule which is only sometimes effective.

Very nicely said!


Partner rrrADAM


Oct 18, 2011, 4:07 AM
Post #60 of 144 (12344 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553

Re: [JimTitt] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
One of the virtues of the rethreaded bowline is you will have checked the first knot when you thread back through again.
Ummm... We can say the same thing about the fig 8 rethread, so this isn't a valid argument, especially given that a rethread fig 8 yields a neat symmetrical knot that is easily checked, even by a n00b, where a rethread bowline doesn't yield a knot with any symmetry.

In reply to:
If you´re arriving at the first piece and you haven´t got anything to clip your harness into the gear then by definition a buddy check was rather irrelevant and needs to be expanded to cover a lot more than just the tie-in!
I don't understand your answer here as it relates to your 'best practice' of checking your knot when you reach down to grap the rope to clip in to the first piece en route. If you, doing your best practice, find that your knot is bad, what are you going to clip into while UP (meaning there is now a potential fall DOWN associated with a bad knot) on a route? That was the question I asked.


Again... I agree that we need to know what we are doing, and we don't RELY on buddy-checks, but rather it is a form of redundancy that we can utilize when available, and it seems absurd, to me, to proactively discourage this, and to posit that a "better" way is to check your knot while up on a route.


(This post was edited by rrrADAM on Oct 18, 2011, 5:24 AM)


patto


Oct 18, 2011, 5:29 AM
Post #61 of 144 (12327 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1453

Re: [sandstone] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Why stop at buddy checks. Why not have a third party come in a check. Why not fourth person checks?

How is your buddy checking you better than you checking yourself a second and a third time? Would two self checks equal a buddy check? What about three?

I check everything I do. I then check it again. I don't NEED a buddy check EVER. If I did then I shouldn't be climbing.

Am I infallible? No. But my failings aren't things that a token buddy check will pick up on.

If I am THAT worried about "redundancy" then I would climb on two separate alternating single ropes with independent belayers and backup belayers. Sure we can always improve safety, but 'buddy checks' are well down the list for me.

rrrADAM wrote:
Again... I agree that we need to know what we are doing, and we don't RELY on buddy-checks, but rather it is a form of redundancy that we can utilize when available, and it seems absurd, to me, to proactively discourage this, and to posit that a "better" way is to check your knot while up on a route.
Nobody is proactively discouraging buddy checks. And nobody is stating that a "better" way to check is up on a route.


(This post was edited by patto on Oct 18, 2011, 5:34 AM)


lena_chita
Moderator

Oct 18, 2011, 6:52 AM
Post #62 of 144 (12308 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087

Re: [ACJ] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

ACJ wrote:
2. Buddy checks... Why not? ...

I think these checks enforce that we are a team, they don't breed complacency. Usually when you catch something wrong with your partners gear the look on their face is oh crap dude I am so sorry. It's embarrassing to screw up with your friends life in your hands. It's never, haha man on belay have fun!

A long time ago I started to feel as though climbing wasn't that much fun. It's climbing with my friends that I really enjoy. As a result, when I head to the crag I don't expect them to be on their own. We take care of each other. I honestly wouldn't want to climb if the mentality at the cliff was more about we're both on our own, we just happen to be sharing gear today...

I just wanted to quote this because it was very well said!


sandstone


Oct 18, 2011, 7:59 AM
Post #63 of 144 (12290 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 21, 2004
Posts: 324

Re: [patto] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
...I don't NEED a buddy check EVER. If I did then I shouldn't be climbing...

Patto, you're just as human as anyone else. I got a feeling it's going to be really hard for you to eat your humble pie when you make a simple yet potentially fatal blunder that you thought you were immune from. I hope for you and your partners that it's only "potentially" fatal.

In reply to:
...Nobody is proactively discouraging buddy checks....

That may not be the intent you and Jim have in your minds, but it's coming off that way in this forum. That's why so many have spoken up in favor of the practice.

If the dead had wifi there would be even more posts in support of buddy checks.


Partner rrrADAM


Oct 18, 2011, 10:20 AM
Post #64 of 144 (12243 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553

Re: [patto] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
Why stop at buddy checks. Why not have a third party come in a check. Why not fourth person checks?

How is your buddy checking you better than you checking yourself a second and a third time? Would two self checks equal a buddy check? What about three?

I check everything I do. I then check it again. I don't NEED a buddy check EVER. If I did then I shouldn't be climbing.

Am I infallible? No. But my failings aren't things that a token buddy check will pick up on.

If I am THAT worried about "redundancy" then I would climb on two separate alternating single ropes with independent belayers and backup belayers. Sure we can always improve safety, but 'buddy checks' are well down the list for me.

rrrADAM wrote:
Again... I agree that we need to know what we are doing, and we don't RELY on buddy-checks, but rather it is a form of redundancy that we can utilize when available, and it seems absurd, to me, to proactively discourage this, and to posit that a "better" way is to check your knot while up on a route.
Nobody is proactively discouraging buddy checks. And nobody is stating that a "better" way to check is up on a route.


Ummmmm.....
Jim wrote:
I have a simple rule to check my own knot when I reach down to clip the first piece and consider this the best habit to get into.
How do you read this? "best habbit", by definition, would be a habbit that is "better" than any other, hence the word BEST.

And....
In reply to:
...I refuse to teach partner check...
That is proactively refusing to teach (i.e., discourage) this. See, he doesn't just not teach it, but he does so proactively, as in, for a reason.



As for the rest of your post... Really?

[butt hurt?]

Stop taking oyurself so seriously, brutha... Nobody here is trying to chop anyone else down, so no need for egos to start sounding off.



To put it bluntly... What would YOU think better:

1. Your belay catching your knot wasn't finished BEFORE you blasted off.

2. You reaching down to make your first clip, 20' up over sketchy ground, finding your knot not quite right?


Or...

1. Before you blast off, finding your belayer's biner not locked and having them lock it.

2. Taking a fall 30' up and having your rope come out of the biner and ATC on your belayer's harness?



I eagerly await your answer?


(This post was edited by rrrADAM on Oct 18, 2011, 5:10 PM)


JimTitt


Oct 18, 2011, 11:04 AM
Post #65 of 144 (12227 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002

Re: [rrrADAM] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rrrADAM wrote:
JimTitt wrote:
One of the virtues of the rethreaded bowline is you will have checked the first knot when you thread back through again.
Ummm... We can say the same thing about the fig 8 rethread, so this isn't a valid argument, especially given that a rethread fig 8 yields a neat symmetrical knot that is easily checked, even by a n00b, where a rethread bowline doesn't yield a knot with any symmetry.

In reply to:
If you´re arriving at the first piece and you haven´t got anything to clip your harness into the gear then by definition a buddy check was rather irrelevant and needs to be expanded to cover a lot more than just the tie-in!
I don't understand your answer here as it relates to your 'best practice' of checking your knot when you reach down to grap the rope to clip in to the first piece en route. If you, doing your best practice, find that your knot is bad, what are you going to clip into while UP (meaning there is now a potential fall DOWN associated with a bad knot) on a route? That was the question I asked.


Again... I agree that we need to know what we are doing, and we don't RELY on buddy-checks, but rather it is a form of redundancy that we can utilize when available, and it seems absurd, to me, to proactively discourage this, and to posit that a "better" way is to check your knot while up on a route.

On a rethreaded fig 8 the first 8 has no function whatsoever and the rethreeading has to be completed to achieve a functioning knot. This you may wish to get checked since a failure to complete all the steps may be fatal. With a rethreaded bowline the first bowline is a functional tie-in and by rethreading you both enhance the security and strength of the knot and check the first was correctly tied. It is also easily recognisable as a bowline to any competent climber with a basic knowledge of knots.

The first clip is the first time your knot (good or bad) will be of any use to you and the first clip is the first opportunity you have to clip into the piece with the entire rest of your rack, sit back, reflect and make corrections. Or climb back down. This is better than checking the hard way at the top.

You are correct in that I am actively against the teaching of the buddy check system as a primary safety goal in climbing, it is my opinion that it must be correctly put into the wider context of safety and not taught as a simpe, catch-all solution.
Clearly, according to the account above a culture which depends on buddy checking even involving climbing professionals has its drawbacks and is not 100% safe since nobody appears to have noticed the check was missed.


Partner rrrADAM


Oct 18, 2011, 11:11 AM
Post #66 of 144 (12223 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553

Re: [JimTitt] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
It is also easily recognisable as a bowline to any competent climber with a basic knowledge of knots.
Then I must be an incompetent climber, as I could not recognize if a bowline were tied corectly or not, as I have little use for the knot... And get this, I sail too, quite a bit, and still don't use that knot.


(This post was edited by rrrADAM on Oct 18, 2011, 11:12 AM)


Partner j_ung


Oct 18, 2011, 12:14 PM
Post #67 of 144 (12200 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690

Re: [patto] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
Nobody is proactively discouraging buddy checks. And nobody is stating that a "better" way to check is up on a route.

Are we reading the same thread?


Partner j_ung


Oct 18, 2011, 12:17 PM
Post #68 of 144 (12197 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690

Re: [JimTitt] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
You are correct in that I am actively against the teaching of the buddy check system as a primary safety goal in climbing, it is my opinion that it must be correctly put into the wider context of safety and not taught as a simpe, catch-all solution.

Now that I agree with.

In reply to:
Clearly, according to the account above a culture which depends on buddy checking even involving climbing professionals has its drawbacks and is not 100% safe since nobody appears to have noticed the check was missed.

And that I don't understand. Are you saying that buddy checking is fallible because we may forget to do it?


(This post was edited by j_ung on Oct 18, 2011, 12:19 PM)


sandstone


Oct 18, 2011, 1:46 PM
Post #69 of 144 (12178 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 21, 2004
Posts: 324

Re: [JimTitt] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
... I am actively against the teaching of the buddy check system as a primary safety goal in climbing...

"Primary" is the critical word. I don't think anybody is advocating that the buddy check be the primary method of safety. Certainly no one in this thread has said that. I think we can all agree that the primary responsibility for safety falls on yourself.

You feel that buddy checks erode that sense of personal responsibility. I'm happy (and I think many others are also) to leave it that we just disagree on that point.

ACJ's post hit that nail right on the head.

In reply to:
... it must be correctly put into the wider context of safety and not taught as a simpe, catch-all solution.

It sounds like you have seen some very sloppy guiding/teaching, but were they actually teaching that the buddy check is the primary safety method? I find that hard to fathom.

In reply to:
...Clearly, according to the account above a culture which depends on buddy checking even involving climbing professionals has its drawbacks and is not 100% safe since nobody appears to have noticed the check was missed.

Jim I really think you're off in the weeds with your assertion that there is "a culture which depends on buddy checking". No such culture exists. People do use buddy checks as a safety technique, but to say there is a culture which depends on it is distorting reality.

The closest thing I can think of to that "culture" would be a group of newbies out on their own for their first outings. They're going to be checking themselves, re-checking, checking each other, double checking, triple checking -- and rightly so.

As they get better and gain experience, that culture of checking will undoubtedly diminish. One day, one of them may forget to check their own knot before they leave the ground. That does not mean they are incompetent or dangerous, it just means they are human -- a simple distraction is all it takes.

Hence the buddy check, where we are honest with each other about our fallible human natures, and we help each other out when we can.


Partner drector


Oct 18, 2011, 2:25 PM
Post #70 of 144 (12162 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037

Re: [majid_sabet] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

majid_sabet wrote:
There are reasons on why planes come with two seats in the front and why two pilots are required on most flights

one guy is to check and another guy to double check

both flying and climbing have one thing in common

gravity is their biggest enemy

NO! The co-pilot is there because a large plane that requires two pilots has enough work to do that one person can't do it alone inthe time required to get things done. It is NOT because one guy checks the other although there is some amount of working together to be more efficient at a single task like going over checklists. It is quicker to have one guy read a checklist and the other check things, than to have one guy both read and check things while the other sits around waiting. It is about efficiency, not redundancy.

Except in the situation where one of the pilots eats the fish.

In a slower plane with one engine, the FAA has no problem requiring only a single pilot. I know this from experience as I have a private pilot license for S.E.L.

The requirements of a lone pilot in a smaller single engine plane are much higher than the requirements of a rock climber tying in and climbing a trad pitch. Procedures, actions, communications, etc., are all much more complex and numerous in actions as compared to climbing. The difference is that the pilot works very hard to learn the proper way to do things and does them without compromise less they die in a fiery crash. Climbers just go out and climb and many are not taught about how serious their inaction might be if they screw up.

Dave


Partner robdotcalm


Oct 18, 2011, 2:40 PM
Post #71 of 144 (12156 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027

Re: [JimTitt] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

"JimTitt wrote:
The first clip is the first time your knot (good or bad) will be of any use to you and the first clip is the first opportunity you have to clip into the piece with the entire rest of your rack, sit back, reflect and make corrections. Or climb back down. This is better than checking the hard way at the top..

I can't believe you are serious about this. You're 8 meters up and about to make the first clip and find that your knot is bad so you "sit back" or down climb. Both are potentially dangerous options.

Rob.calm


JimTitt


Oct 18, 2011, 2:51 PM
Post #72 of 144 (12151 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002

Re: [j_ung] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Buddy checks are clearly a good idea if they are done by someone competent to check, if there is someone there to do them and if they are actually done. The rest of the time they are clearly worthless as we have seen.


majid_sabet


Oct 18, 2011, 3:17 PM
Post #73 of 144 (12142 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 12, 2002
Posts: 8390

Re: [drector] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Dave

I got my FAA A&P in 1986 and worked around and against the safety rules too many times and yet, most of the problem I see in climing in from climbers turning their autopilot switch on and assume that the other person knows what he /she is doing or system is safe. these sort of assumption has been hurting many climbers.


patto


Oct 18, 2011, 3:44 PM
Post #74 of 144 (12134 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1453

Re: [drector] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

drector wrote:
The difference is that the pilot works very hard to learn the proper way to do things and does them without compromise less they die in a fiery crash. Climbers just go out and climb and many are not taught about how serious their inaction might be if they screw up.

If that is the case, and in many situations I believe it is, then the solution isn't to introduce buddy checks.

If the problem is complacency then the solution isn't another complacent person check 25% of the life critical aspects.


socalclimber


Oct 18, 2011, 5:20 PM
Post #75 of 144 (12109 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437

Re: [JimTitt] Horseshoe Canyon Ranch Accident [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Self reliance is a very important thing. I agree with it.

To forgo basic safety checks between partners is just plain stupid.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : Accident and Incident Analysis

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook