|
tradalltheway
May 24, 2004, 4:37 AM
Post #26 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 133
|
I'll critique it first. if you can't see the pieces, its a piton on the left, #1 camalot center, and pink tricam right.
the outer pieces are a little far apart.
on the center anchor i hooked two biners together instead of just clipping biner to sling.
i have a couple of biner gates facing the rock.
|
|
|
|
|
bootybean
May 24, 2004, 5:14 AM
Post #27 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 2, 2004
Posts: 10
|
Looks just ok to me. Here is how I'd comment if I was being overly anal about it.
1) I prefer 4 pieces of gear in an anchor.
2) angle is a little wide as was already noted
3) I can't see the middle camelot but it looks like it is in a horizontal with the stem sticking out so when weighted, the cam's stem would bend over the edge. Would probably hold but worth checking to make sure the cam would be ok for such a pull.
4) Camelot has a biner hooked into a biner. I don't have a big problem with this as I can't see the anchor fluttering around enough to unhook but still worth noting.
So nothing serious but I would definately like to see another piece of pro in there, especially considering one of the 3 you have it a old piton.
|
|
|
|
|
dlintz
May 24, 2004, 1:00 PM
Post #28 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 9, 2002
Posts: 1982
|
As mentioned already the angle is concerning. Is the horizontal crack protectable between the left and center points? A fourth piece here would personally make me feel better.
I'm assuming this is a toprope setup. Is there another pitch above this and if so is there a ledge to stand on while bringing up a second?
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
May 24, 2004, 2:52 PM
Post #29 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
if you had opened that sling up on the #1 camalot, you would have given yourself enough cordlette to bring it down further and decrease the angle. take away that extra biner and your anchor is fine.
|
|
|
|
|
jkarns
May 24, 2004, 3:07 PM
Post #30 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 542
|
In reply to: 1) I prefer 4 pieces of gear in an anchor.
This is unnecessary. It eats up another piece of gear that you may need on the next pitch, and it takes longer to set up, all for a marginal increase in safety. I always liked to include "timely" in my anchor analysis. It is imperative to be able to set good anchors fast. Adding more gear than necessary will kill time faster than anything out there.
|
|
|
|
|
meataxe
May 24, 2004, 3:40 PM
Post #31 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 23, 2002
Posts: 1162
|
If this is multipitch, you should have somp protection against an upward pull. If the leader takes a fall on the next pitch, the belayer could be vaulted into the overhang above.
|
|
|
|
|
esoteric1
May 24, 2004, 4:11 PM
Post #32 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2002
Posts: 705
|
id rather be dogging on the first one. but if you dont have a whole rack to use as the anchor, i would settle on the second one, with another piece above the rope, im assuming the one to the far left is so the powerpoint doesnt get pulled way to the right.
|
|
|
|
|
tech_dog
May 24, 2004, 4:39 PM
Post #33 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2004
Posts: 224
|
The bigget problem here is that the "best" anchor, i.e. the one with near zero angle, appears to have three non-locking biners, some or all of which have their gates facing the rock..
The angle of the outside pro isn't what you'd want, but it's not terrible either.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
May 24, 2004, 4:46 PM
Post #34 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
In reply to: holy jeez....if anything, it fufills the Solid and Redundant requirements.
Or does it? Granted, out of that mess, something would probably hold :? , but I don't think it's possible to be certain, even if we were all standing right there next to it. This anchor's problem is its lack of simplicity, which is so pronounced that I don't feel comfortable making judments about any other quality of the anchor.
Man, oh man... It must have taken the poor bastard all day to set up! :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
tedc
May 24, 2004, 4:50 PM
Post #35 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2003
Posts: 756
|
Obviously, I don't know what the rack was and what the leader had left; but if I came upon this belay stance I'd have stuck two pieces in the crack right under the pin. Maybe a big cam or BEST a big hex in the constriction right below the pin and then a #1 or #2 camalot a little lower. this would solve the big angle problem (the worst part of which is loading the pin with an outward pull), and made for a much more multi-directionally equalized anchor. Perfect world.
Anyway, I'd climb above this anchor as is.
Oh. WTF with the pin. Absolutely not necessary??? here.
Edited to indicate that I was refering to the three piece anchor.
In regards to the 30 piece anchor. "Anchor done. I guess we'll have to climb tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
May 24, 2004, 4:52 PM
Post #36 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
On that second anchor, The biggest things I see are the two biners hooked to each other and their gates facing the rock. The angle can be lessened easily by extending the middle piece. Also, if this is a TR anchor, you might want two biners at the master point.
(I can't tell 100% from the picture, but I see a lot of pink on the .5 tricam and the angle of the it's sling seems weird to me. The placement may be a little shallow, even for a tricam. I'll reserve judgment, however.)
|
|
|
|
|
flashsixteen
May 24, 2004, 6:05 PM
Post #37 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2002
Posts: 159
|
Dude, I am loving that first anchor. I have been having a rough day at work so I keep coming back to this post to look at it. It makes me laugh and feel better. Part of me thinks that this must have been for a class where the professor goes, "There are fifty things wrong with this anchor, start listing them." Oh well, I love it.
|
|
|
|
|
thedesertnomad
May 24, 2004, 6:18 PM
Post #38 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2003
Posts: 216
|
With the first set up.... ahhhhhh........... save some webbing for the rest of us !!! All it reminds me of is a rappel anchor that a very very very stoned and exceptionally paranoid, noob friend of mine set up once. I swear it took him 2 hrs to set it up, had well over 8 pieces and ENDED with a single loop of 5mm OVER the edge. I convinced him to redo it... :shock: :idea: :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
fenix83
Moderator
May 24, 2004, 6:35 PM
Post #39 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 23, 2004
Posts: 2397
|
What I found impressive about the first piture is the amount of rope that is attached to it, they must be belaying a grand piano aff that thing... kinda reminded me of that scene in Disney's Fantasia with the alligators and the hippos doing ballet... :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
sarcat
May 24, 2004, 7:37 PM
Post #40 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 1560
|
Man my anchors have been way wrong. I'm off to the store for a 300' roll. I'll need to start a post "how do you coil 300' of webbing"? and make sure I'm doing it right.
|
|
|
|
|
meataxe
May 24, 2004, 7:47 PM
Post #41 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 23, 2002
Posts: 1162
|
I think my main critique of the first anchor would be that it is so complex that it would be difficult to check. You have to go on the assumption that there is so much stuff there, something has to hold.
|
|
|
|
|
thedesertnomad
May 24, 2004, 8:56 PM
Post #42 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2003
Posts: 216
|
In reply to: I think my main critique of the first anchor would be that it is so complex that it would be difficult to check. You have to go on the assumption that there is so much stuff there, something has to hold.
very scary assumption.....
|
|
|
|
|
sarcat
May 24, 2004, 9:10 PM
Post #43 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 1560
|
I the first pic I think I see an ADT in there threaded through biners instead of hanger botls.
A nicely placed yellow lab, aussie or declawed neutered calico would have been plenty for a bomber anchor. Cheaper to including the adoption fee and food.
|
|
|
|
|
mrdtm
May 24, 2004, 9:25 PM
Post #44 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2004
Posts: 23
|
well all I have to say about the first one is.. WHY?!?!?!?! my gosh... do you weigh like 1 tons??.. if so you might wanna add just one more peice hehe. I would climb on the second one by what I can see... I would put one more locker at the main point though..
|
|
|
|
|
bandycoot
May 24, 2004, 9:25 PM
Post #45 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2002
Posts: 2028
|
Is that first crappy anchor a rescue anchor? Rescue groups often don't know how to make a good CLEAN anchor, and overdo certain aspects. I watched a bunch of wanna be rescue gumbies set up one HELL of a cluster off of a boulder that had 2 solid, large, newer bolts in the top on saturday. They had static line all over the place, in huge wide angles, and some of the strands were completely slack so they weren't equalized at all. It was pretty funny!
|
|
|
|
|
skiorclimb
May 25, 2004, 1:19 AM
Post #46 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 16, 2003
Posts: 169
|
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=32865
The branch on the left is a little slack. All the peices were good. If the belayer was out-wieghed by the leader significantly than you would want a peice for upward pull tied in tight to the power point. As is plenty good enough.
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
May 25, 2004, 1:33 AM
Post #47 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
i dunno about that left piece. i probably would have tried to get a piece in that little slot above the other two, that way i wouldnt have that slack in the line. you'd also want an upward pull, depending on the stance and situation.
|
|
|
|
|
far_east_climber
May 25, 2004, 1:57 AM
Post #48 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2003
Posts: 873
|
The angle of the anchor is pretty large. May have been better to add in a 4th piece (multi-directional or not)
|
|
|
|
|
meataxe
May 25, 2004, 2:12 AM
Post #49 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 23, 2002
Posts: 1162
|
The left piece looks pretty bad being slack, plus the angle is a bit wide.
The locking biner is right on the rock edge which is bad positioning. Also, the clove hitch is inadequate as the only attachment to the anchor--an 8-on-a-bight would be better. You could even throw on another locker.
As mentioned, there is no upward protection.
|
|
|
|
|
feedmerocks
May 25, 2004, 2:23 AM
Post #50 of 135
(19429 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 10, 2004
Posts: 109
|
Yeah, angle is pretty large. I assume this is a multipitch anchor, because there is no reason to build a toprope anchor this poorly... As such I would certainly climb above it if I was comfortable with the next moves before getting pro. But ideally I would have extended the two right pieces, but if the leader couldn't spare any slings, this is an ok alternative assuming there are not any closer-spaced placements: if the knot had been moved to the left, overall force on the pieces would be much increased.
In this configuration, I would expect that you MUST be comfortable that the two on the right are bomber, since third will be shock loaded if they fail. The third is an "optimistic" backup for the worst-case scenario only.
But why assume that the leader can't spare any slings? If you ran out completely except for the web-o-lette, you can always add more slings when your second brings them up. Or you could just tie into the pieces with the rope in the first place: there is no reason to subject yourself to this anchor configuration. And if you're worried about the time it takes to tie in and out of the individual anchor pieces, so you use the web-o-lette instead, then I would assume that you're bringing up a second who can't swap leads onto the next pitch. But if you're really doing a seriously long route, and you're worried about efficiency and time, perhaps it's worth asking yourself whether you should be climbing with a second who's much weaker than yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
