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


socalclimber


Oct 19, 2011, 7:29 PM
Post #101 of 144 (10266 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437

Re: [jt512] 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

jt512 wrote:
robdotcalm wrote:
JimTitt wrote:
I was born in 1952, not yesterday.

Jim

Big deal! I was born in 1930.

Robertus Vetus

^^^^^^^^^

Rob's so old that at the time of his birth people were still actually speaking Latin.

Jay

This accident was pure and simple partnership failure. Don't like it, don't climb with partners. Just solo.


Partner robdotcalm


Oct 19, 2011, 7:41 PM
Post #102 of 144 (10261 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027

Re: [jakedatc] 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

jakedatc wrote:
sunday i was rapping off a trad route and realized my ends weren't even.. i stopped on a ledge, placed a piece, clipped in and fixed it. 1 cam, good ledge.

It creates an unnecessary danger lowering the ropes so that the ends are not even. There's no excuse for doing that. Minimally, it's inefficient, and maximally sets the stage for a serious accident. Of course, one should know how to fix uneven ends while hanging in space during a rappel without the benfit of a convenient ledge and gear placements.

rob.calm


bearbreeder


Oct 19, 2011, 10:00 PM
Post #103 of 144 (10239 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [robdotcalm] 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

as long as its through rings or biners ... all one has to do is grab the short end tightly and feed the long end through the respective atc grove ... self lower till the ends are even ...

helps if there are knots in the rope so you dun die
Wink


patto


Oct 20, 2011, 12:26 AM
Post #104 of 144 (10228 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1453

Re: [socalclimber] 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

socalclimber wrote:
This accident was pure and simple partnership failure. Don't like it, don't climb with partners. Just solo.

Pure and simply false.


socalclimber


Oct 20, 2011, 2:40 AM
Post #105 of 144 (10213 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437

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

A simple backup check of the knot would have been enough to prevent this.


Partner rrrADAM


Oct 20, 2011, 4:04 AM
Post #106 of 144 (10203 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553

Re: 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

Setting up a rap, double or songle rope... You thread the station, tie knots in the ends, and toss your line(s) over... You ask someone at the bottom if your lines are on the ground (buddy check).

Good practice, or not?

Or, someone on the bottom climbing a route next to you offers up that your lines are or are not reaching the bottom (buddy check)

Would you appreciate it?

Pumped before an overhanging crux, you place a solid piece but backclip the rope... Would you appreciate your belayer or climber in another group letting you know this before you get into the crux? (buddy check)


jakedatc


Oct 20, 2011, 5:49 AM
Post #107 of 144 (10192 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054

Re: [robdotcalm] 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

robdotcalm wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
sunday i was rapping off a trad route and realized my ends weren't even.. i stopped on a ledge, placed a piece, clipped in and fixed it. 1 cam, good ledge.

It creates an unnecessary danger lowering the ropes so that the ends are not even. There's no excuse for doing that. Minimally, it's inefficient, and maximally sets the stage for a serious accident. Of course, one should know how to fix uneven ends while hanging in space during a rappel without the benfit of a convenient ledge and gear placements.

rob.calm

no shit, i didn't do it on purpose. I took much more care the rest of the weekend on that rope (no middle mark) to tie knots and feed the ends together more carefully. trust me i was not happy with how it went.


socalclimber


Oct 20, 2011, 10:22 AM
Post #108 of 144 (10157 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437

Re: [jakedatc] 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

jakedatc wrote:
robdotcalm wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
sunday i was rapping off a trad route and realized my ends weren't even.. i stopped on a ledge, placed a piece, clipped in and fixed it. 1 cam, good ledge.

It creates an unnecessary danger lowering the ropes so that the ends are not even. There's no excuse for doing that. Minimally, it's inefficient, and maximally sets the stage for a serious accident. Of course, one should know how to fix uneven ends while hanging in space during a rappel without the benfit of a convenient ledge and gear placements.

rob.calm

no shit, i didn't do it on purpose. I took much more care the rest of the weekend on that rope (no middle mark) to tie knots and feed the ends together more carefully. trust me i was not happy with how it went.

Granted it was a less than optimal situation, but at least you caught the mistake and fixed it. Therefore you're still alive.


Partner j_ung


Oct 20, 2011, 11:35 AM
Post #109 of 144 (10132 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:
socalclimber wrote:
This accident was pure and simple partnership failure. Don't like it, don't climb with partners. Just solo.

Pure and simply false.

While I actively disagree with anybody in this thread who says buddy checks are worthless, I agree with this statement, patto. The lack of a buddy check was certainly not the root cause of this accident.


erisspirit


Oct 20, 2011, 12:08 PM
Post #110 of 144 (10119 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2004
Posts: 3770

Re: [j_ung] 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

j_ung wrote:
patto wrote:
socalclimber wrote:
This accident was pure and simple partnership failure. Don't like it, don't climb with partners. Just solo.

Pure and simply false.

While I actively disagree with anybody in this thread who says buddy checks are worthless, I agree with this statement, patto. The lack of a buddy check was certainly not the root cause of this accident.

I tend to agree with this too. While I do partner checks, and do not find them worthless, if I tie my knot wrong and I don't catch it, that's my fault. I do however think that having a quick partner check doesn't take a lot of extra time, and it could have caught the climbers mistake before it became and accident.


hyhuu


Oct 20, 2011, 12:37 PM
Post #111 of 144 (10108 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 25, 2001
Posts: 492

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

j_ung wrote:
patto wrote:
socalclimber wrote:
This accident was pure and simple partnership failure. Don't like it, don't climb with partners. Just solo.

Pure and simply false.

While I actively disagree with anybody in this thread who says buddy checks are worthless, I agree with this statement, patto. The lack of a buddy check was certainly not the root cause of this accident.

This.


Rocquestar


Oct 20, 2011, 8:43 PM
Post #112 of 144 (10043 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 15, 2011
Posts: 14

Re: [vencido] 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

Buddy Checks...

When I, as the climber, consider the buddy check as part of the routine, it leads to complacency, since it gives me a 'safety' that is my partner's responsibility, not mine. So, if I don't get it right, that's okay. (forgive me for spelling out what may be an obvious cause of complacency)

As a belayer, it is my responsibility to ensure that my rigging, device, etc., is configured properly for belaying before I tell my partner that (s)he is on belay. I do not rely on buddy check, but should my partner wish to check my setup, I welcome it.

As a climber, it is completely reasonable that I would check my belayer's setup, when possible. However, if my partner *requires* that I 'buddy check' them, they are relying on me to validate their setup, and they have the same potential for complacency.

The buddy check is, I think, not a bad thing to do, but making it a taught part of the routine is where lies the problem.

By all means, double-check your partner's setup/knot, but take responsibility for that for which you are responsible.


JAB


Oct 20, 2011, 11:39 PM
Post #113 of 144 (10024 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 26, 2007
Posts: 373

Re: [Rocquestar] 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

Rocquestar wrote:
When I, as the climber, consider the buddy check as part of the routine, it leads to complacency, since it gives me a 'safety' that is my partner's responsibility, not mine. So, if I don't get it right, that's okay. (forgive me for spelling out what may be an obvious cause of complacency)

Actually, I think it is exactly the opposite. Humans are social beings, and the fear of being embarrased is quite strong. In a buddy check context, it means that you unconciously will check your own knot extra well, since you don't want to face the embarrasment of your buddy seeing you screw up.


patto


Oct 21, 2011, 12:11 AM
Post #114 of 144 (10012 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1453

Re: [JAB] 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

If fear of embarrassment is stronger than your fear of death or serious injury then your need to reassess your approach to climbing.

I check my knot and my systems multiple times. My own paranoia has me looking down at my knot, my harness, my belayer and my gear at the first whiff of exposure. I check my anchor several times before it is weighted.


JAB


Oct 21, 2011, 6:46 AM
Post #115 of 144 (9969 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 26, 2007
Posts: 373

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

Isn't this the same as why solo climbers feel strongly about only climbing alone. I often see them argue that if they'd solo with their buddies around, there is a much larger risk of them starting up stuff they shouldn't climb in the first place.

I don't know about you, but I don't fear imminent death when tying my knot, nor when starting up the climb. That feeling can creep up when runout over sketchy gear, but if I feared death when safely on the ground I would not even start the climb.


bearbreeder


Oct 21, 2011, 7:04 AM
Post #116 of 144 (9959 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [JAB] 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

theres a very simple selfish reason one should do buddy checks IMO ... if your buddy misses something, falls and gets hurt .. youre up shiets creek and at best need to call in the SAR chopper, at worst needs to self rescue leaving all your shiet behind ...and at the very worst, make plans to attend a funeral, god forbid

now we all know and like to believe that the people we climb with will never make mistakes ...ever ... accident reports suggest otherwise

you are responsible for your own checks, but theres absolutely no reason to not check the other persons as well ... at least until REAL data comes forth about checks reducing safety ...


viciado


Oct 21, 2011, 8:04 AM
Post #117 of 144 (9939 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 9, 2003
Posts: 429

Re: [rrrADAM] 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

rrrADAM wrote:
Setting up a rap, double or songle rope... You thread the station, tie knots in the ends, and toss your line(s) over... You ask someone at the bottom if your lines are on the ground (buddy check).

Good practice, or not?

Or, someone on the bottom climbing a route next to you offers up that your lines are or are not reaching the bottom (buddy check)

... etc.

Your examples are fine in as much as they demonstrate how a buddy check can help, but a buddy check can never be the first line of risk management. This is what I hear Jim Titt arguing. There are several normally occurring scenarios in relation to your examples in which a buddy cannot see the rope ends or what you are doing on the wall. I certainly appreciate it when someone calls those things to my attention. However, it is still my reposnibility to have my "stuff" together.

Best practice (as opposed to good prcatice) is to avoid needing the buddy check altogether. Anyone who has climbed for long enough can easily document cases in which a buddy has caught potentially fatal errors. In any of those cases, we would each have said "oops" because we failed in our Best Practice of self-check. Yes, we make mistakes, but the buddy system should be considered good practice as a secondary system to a best practice primary system in which we are individually responsible to check, re-check and final check. Best practice avoids the possibly false assumption that "someone has your back."


JAB


Oct 21, 2011, 8:41 AM
Post #118 of 144 (9929 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 26, 2007
Posts: 373

Re: [viciado] 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

viciado wrote:
Your examples are fine in as much as they demonstrate how a buddy check can help, but a buddy check can never be the first line of risk management.

I don't know where you got the strange idea that someone claimed the buddy check is the first line of risk management. At least nobody in this thread has ever claimed that.


Partner j_ung


Oct 21, 2011, 10:58 AM
Post #119 of 144 (9894 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690

Re: [viciado] 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

viciado wrote:
rrrADAM wrote:
Setting up a rap, double or songle rope... You thread the station, tie knots in the ends, and toss your line(s) over... You ask someone at the bottom if your lines are on the ground (buddy check).

Good practice, or not?

Or, someone on the bottom climbing a route next to you offers up that your lines are or are not reaching the bottom (buddy check)

... etc.

Your examples are fine in as much as they demonstrate how a buddy check can help, but a buddy check can never be the first line of risk management. This is what I hear Jim Titt arguing. There are several normally occurring scenarios in relation to your examples in which a buddy cannot see the rope ends or what you are doing on the wall. I certainly appreciate it when someone calls those things to my attention. However, it is still my reposnibility to have my "stuff" together.

Best practice (as opposed to good prcatice) is to avoid needing the buddy check altogether. Anyone who has climbed for long enough can easily document cases in which a buddy has caught potentially fatal errors. In any of those cases, we would each have said "oops" because we failed in our Best Practice of self-check. Yes, we make mistakes, but the buddy system should be considered good practice as a secondary system to a best practice primary system in which we are individually responsible to check, re-check and final check. Best practice avoids the possibly false assumption that "someone has your back."

What Jim originally argued, and what a few others have echoed, is that teaching buddy checks to beginners builds a complacent beginner. To me that sounds off葉hat teaching vigilance somehow equals the opposite of vigilance.

But whatever. I think we all have enough common ground on this issue that it's not so much an outright disagreement as it is a nuanced one.


viciado


Oct 21, 2011, 3:41 PM
Post #120 of 144 (9856 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 9, 2003
Posts: 429

Re: [JAB] 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 overstated my case. You are correct, no one has made that explicit statement. However, there have been a variety of posts that attempt to identify a buddy check failure as the root cause while others have been diligent in pointing out that personal checks come before the buddy check to the point of excluding them entirely from a didactic presentation. It seemed to be me to be a very polarized and resulted in my post in which I again, overstaed my point. Jung is more correct (and less wordy) in pointing out that it is probably more about nuances in how we do things than fundamental differences in safe practice. Thanks for pointing out my error in expression.

In any case, I hope the injured lady is recovering.


socalclimber


Oct 21, 2011, 5:19 PM
Post #121 of 144 (9840 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437

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

j_ung wrote:
viciado wrote:
rrrADAM wrote:
Setting up a rap, double or songle rope... You thread the station, tie knots in the ends, and toss your line(s) over... You ask someone at the bottom if your lines are on the ground (buddy check).

Good practice, or not?

Or, someone on the bottom climbing a route next to you offers up that your lines are or are not reaching the bottom (buddy check)

... etc.

Your examples are fine in as much as they demonstrate how a buddy check can help, but a buddy check can never be the first line of risk management. This is what I hear Jim Titt arguing. There are several normally occurring scenarios in relation to your examples in which a buddy cannot see the rope ends or what you are doing on the wall. I certainly appreciate it when someone calls those things to my attention. However, it is still my reposnibility to have my "stuff" together.

Best practice (as opposed to good prcatice) is to avoid needing the buddy check altogether. Anyone who has climbed for long enough can easily document cases in which a buddy has caught potentially fatal errors. In any of those cases, we would each have said "oops" because we failed in our Best Practice of self-check. Yes, we make mistakes, but the buddy system should be considered good practice as a secondary system to a best practice primary system in which we are individually responsible to check, re-check and final check. Best practice avoids the possibly false assumption that "someone has your back."

What Jim originally argued, and what a few others have echoed, is that teaching buddy checks to beginners builds a complacent beginner. To me that sounds off葉hat teaching vigilance somehow equals the opposite of vigilance.

But whatever. I think we all have enough common ground on this issue that it's not so much an outright disagreement as it is a nuanced one.

I have to disagree here. This whole argument about teaching beginners to do buddy checks builds complacent beginners. If you even have the vaguest clue of how to teach you make sure to entrench the model of self sufficiency. I do it all the time with my clients and beginners I sometimes climb with. A classic example is when I do basic classes. After the initial knots portion is done, they have to tie it themselves. Of course we check them, but when they ask "How does this look", or "Is this good enough", I always answer the same way.

"Is it good enough for you?".

Sorry, but buddy checks are essential and important, and the lack of them was a mitigating factor in this accident.


jakedatc


Oct 21, 2011, 5:54 PM
Post #122 of 144 (9829 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054

Re: [socalclimber] 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

socalclimber wrote:
j_ung wrote:
viciado wrote:
rrrADAM wrote:
Setting up a rap, double or songle rope... You thread the station, tie knots in the ends, and toss your line(s) over... You ask someone at the bottom if your lines are on the ground (buddy check).

Good practice, or not?

Or, someone on the bottom climbing a route next to you offers up that your lines are or are not reaching the bottom (buddy check)

... etc.

Your examples are fine in as much as they demonstrate how a buddy check can help, but a buddy check can never be the first line of risk management. This is what I hear Jim Titt arguing. There are several normally occurring scenarios in relation to your examples in which a buddy cannot see the rope ends or what you are doing on the wall. I certainly appreciate it when someone calls those things to my attention. However, it is still my reposnibility to have my "stuff" together.

Best practice (as opposed to good prcatice) is to avoid needing the buddy check altogether. Anyone who has climbed for long enough can easily document cases in which a buddy has caught potentially fatal errors. In any of those cases, we would each have said "oops" because we failed in our Best Practice of self-check. Yes, we make mistakes, but the buddy system should be considered good practice as a secondary system to a best practice primary system in which we are individually responsible to check, re-check and final check. Best practice avoids the possibly false assumption that "someone has your back."

What Jim originally argued, and what a few others have echoed, is that teaching buddy checks to beginners builds a complacent beginner. To me that sounds off葉hat teaching vigilance somehow equals the opposite of vigilance.

But whatever. I think we all have enough common ground on this issue that it's not so much an outright disagreement as it is a nuanced one.

I have to disagree here. This whole argument about teaching beginners to do buddy checks builds complacent beginners. If you even have the vaguest clue of how to teach you make sure to entrench the model of self sufficiency. I do it all the time with my clients and beginners I sometimes climb with. A classic example is when I do basic classes. After the initial knots portion is done, they have to tie it themselves. Of course we check them, but when they ask "How does this look", or "Is this good enough", I always answer the same way.

"Is it good enough for you?".

Sorry, but buddy checks are essential and important, and the lack of them was a mitigating factor in this accident.

I think a self check should be more emphasized than a buddy check. a bit overkill but a friend of mine used to check his buckle, leg buckles, knot and ask for a "click test" from his belayers biner. It made him sure that he was tied in correct and had his harness doubled back (before speed buckles). A simple knot check and a look to see it's through both tie ins would be a good habit.

a solid self check would have prevented this one as much as a buddy check.


socalclimber


Oct 21, 2011, 6:28 PM
Post #123 of 144 (9813 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437

Re: [jakedatc] 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

jakedatc wrote:
socalclimber wrote:
j_ung wrote:
viciado wrote:
rrrADAM wrote:
Setting up a rap, double or songle rope... You thread the station, tie knots in the ends, and toss your line(s) over... You ask someone at the bottom if your lines are on the ground (buddy check).

Good practice, or not?

Or, someone on the bottom climbing a route next to you offers up that your lines are or are not reaching the bottom (buddy check)

... etc.

Your examples are fine in as much as they demonstrate how a buddy check can help, but a buddy check can never be the first line of risk management. This is what I hear Jim Titt arguing. There are several normally occurring scenarios in relation to your examples in which a buddy cannot see the rope ends or what you are doing on the wall. I certainly appreciate it when someone calls those things to my attention. However, it is still my reposnibility to have my "stuff" together.

Best practice (as opposed to good prcatice) is to avoid needing the buddy check altogether. Anyone who has climbed for long enough can easily document cases in which a buddy has caught potentially fatal errors. In any of those cases, we would each have said "oops" because we failed in our Best Practice of self-check. Yes, we make mistakes, but the buddy system should be considered good practice as a secondary system to a best practice primary system in which we are individually responsible to check, re-check and final check. Best practice avoids the possibly false assumption that "someone has your back."

What Jim originally argued, and what a few others have echoed, is that teaching buddy checks to beginners builds a complacent beginner. To me that sounds off葉hat teaching vigilance somehow equals the opposite of vigilance.

But whatever. I think we all have enough common ground on this issue that it's not so much an outright disagreement as it is a nuanced one.

I have to disagree here. This whole argument about teaching beginners to do buddy checks builds complacent beginners. If you even have the vaguest clue of how to teach you make sure to entrench the model of self sufficiency. I do it all the time with my clients and beginners I sometimes climb with. A classic example is when I do basic classes. After the initial knots portion is done, they have to tie it themselves. Of course we check them, but when they ask "How does this look", or "Is this good enough", I always answer the same way.

"Is it good enough for you?".

Sorry, but buddy checks are essential and important, and the lack of them was a mitigating factor in this accident.

I think a self check should be more emphasized than a buddy check. a bit overkill but a friend of mine used to check his buckle, leg buckles, knot and ask for a "click test" from his belayers biner. It made him sure that he was tied in correct and had his harness doubled back (before speed buckles). A simple knot check and a look to see it's through both tie ins would be a good habit.

a solid self check would have prevented this one as much as a buddy check.

How about this. If both self checks and the "buddy" system were in place, this accident would not have occurred.


jt512


Oct 21, 2011, 6:32 PM
Post #124 of 144 (9810 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [socalclimber] 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

socalclimber wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
socalclimber wrote:
j_ung wrote:
viciado wrote:
rrrADAM wrote:
Setting up a rap, double or songle rope... You thread the station, tie knots in the ends, and toss your line(s) over... You ask someone at the bottom if your lines are on the ground (buddy check).

Good practice, or not?

Or, someone on the bottom climbing a route next to you offers up that your lines are or are not reaching the bottom (buddy check)

... etc.

Your examples are fine in as much as they demonstrate how a buddy check can help, but a buddy check can never be the first line of risk management. This is what I hear Jim Titt arguing. There are several normally occurring scenarios in relation to your examples in which a buddy cannot see the rope ends or what you are doing on the wall. I certainly appreciate it when someone calls those things to my attention. However, it is still my reposnibility to have my "stuff" together.

Best practice (as opposed to good prcatice) is to avoid needing the buddy check altogether. Anyone who has climbed for long enough can easily document cases in which a buddy has caught potentially fatal errors. In any of those cases, we would each have said "oops" because we failed in our Best Practice of self-check. Yes, we make mistakes, but the buddy system should be considered good practice as a secondary system to a best practice primary system in which we are individually responsible to check, re-check and final check. Best practice avoids the possibly false assumption that "someone has your back."

What Jim originally argued, and what a few others have echoed, is that teaching buddy checks to beginners builds a complacent beginner. To me that sounds off葉hat teaching vigilance somehow equals the opposite of vigilance.

But whatever. I think we all have enough common ground on this issue that it's not so much an outright disagreement as it is a nuanced one.

I have to disagree here. This whole argument about teaching beginners to do buddy checks builds complacent beginners. If you even have the vaguest clue of how to teach you make sure to entrench the model of self sufficiency. I do it all the time with my clients and beginners I sometimes climb with. A classic example is when I do basic classes. After the initial knots portion is done, they have to tie it themselves. Of course we check them, but when they ask "How does this look", or "Is this good enough", I always answer the same way.

"Is it good enough for you?".

Sorry, but buddy checks are essential and important, and the lack of them was a mitigating factor in this accident.

I think a self check should be more emphasized than a buddy check. a bit overkill but a friend of mine used to check his buckle, leg buckles, knot and ask for a "click test" from his belayers biner. It made him sure that he was tied in correct and had his harness doubled back (before speed buckles). A simple knot check and a look to see it's through both tie ins would be a good habit.

a solid self check would have prevented this one as much as a buddy check.

How about this. If both self checks and the "buddy" system were in place, this accident would not have occurred.

Honestly? It would have been less likely to have occurred.

Jay


socalclimber


Oct 21, 2011, 6:48 PM
Post #125 of 144 (9801 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437

Re: [jt512] 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

jt512 wrote:
socalclimber wrote:
jakedatc wrote:
socalclimber wrote:
j_ung wrote:
viciado wrote:
rrrADAM wrote:
Setting up a rap, double or songle rope... You thread the station, tie knots in the ends, and toss your line(s) over... You ask someone at the bottom if your lines are on the ground (buddy check).

Good practice, or not?

Or, someone on the bottom climbing a route next to you offers up that your lines are or are not reaching the bottom (buddy check)

... etc.

Your examples are fine in as much as they demonstrate how a buddy check can help, but a buddy check can never be the first line of risk management. This is what I hear Jim Titt arguing. There are several normally occurring scenarios in relation to your examples in which a buddy cannot see the rope ends or what you are doing on the wall. I certainly appreciate it when someone calls those things to my attention. However, it is still my reposnibility to have my "stuff" together.

Best practice (as opposed to good prcatice) is to avoid needing the buddy check altogether. Anyone who has climbed for long enough can easily document cases in which a buddy has caught potentially fatal errors. In any of those cases, we would each have said "oops" because we failed in our Best Practice of self-check. Yes, we make mistakes, but the buddy system should be considered good practice as a secondary system to a best practice primary system in which we are individually responsible to check, re-check and final check. Best practice avoids the possibly false assumption that "someone has your back."

What Jim originally argued, and what a few others have echoed, is that teaching buddy checks to beginners builds a complacent beginner. To me that sounds off葉hat teaching vigilance somehow equals the opposite of vigilance.

But whatever. I think we all have enough common ground on this issue that it's not so much an outright disagreement as it is a nuanced one.

I have to disagree here. This whole argument about teaching beginners to do buddy checks builds complacent beginners. If you even have the vaguest clue of how to teach you make sure to entrench the model of self sufficiency. I do it all the time with my clients and beginners I sometimes climb with. A classic example is when I do basic classes. After the initial knots portion is done, they have to tie it themselves. Of course we check them, but when they ask "How does this look", or "Is this good enough", I always answer the same way.

"Is it good enough for you?".

Sorry, but buddy checks are essential and important, and the lack of them was a mitigating factor in this accident.

I think a self check should be more emphasized than a buddy check. a bit overkill but a friend of mine used to check his buckle, leg buckles, knot and ask for a "click test" from his belayers biner. It made him sure that he was tied in correct and had his harness doubled back (before speed buckles). A simple knot check and a look to see it's through both tie ins would be a good habit.

a solid self check would have prevented this one as much as a buddy check.

How about this. If both self checks and the "buddy" system were in place, this accident would not have occurred.

Honestly? It would have been less likely to have occurred.

Jay

Sorry, agreed. Long day at work. 2 more to go.

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