|
|
|
|
I_do
Nov 11, 2009, 3:08 PM
Post #51 of 75
(3682 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 2, 2008
Posts: 1232
|
jakedatc wrote: jonathan.gaillard wrote: I_do wrote: Just on the sum thing, it's still gonna be a pain in the ass, because you need to hold the device when giving out slack. It would also make it much harder to hold on to the brake strands, which I would deem much more important then the "redundancy"you're so keen on. To me it seems that there is a safe system out there, with harnesses that will only fail if you're an idiot, semi-fool proof belay devices and very strong ropes. If you just stay away from sharp edges it would do much more for your safety then any of the suggestions you made here. And believing you're safer with the sling-swami is just ludacris, I don't have it and my harness is just as safe as yours in because in the real world neither will fail. Cheers So you DO have to hold a SUM to feed slack? That was one thing I was wonder as I mentioned before. If you didn't have to touch the cam to feed slack fast in a grigri, then you wouldn't have to touch it, so why do you need to hold a SUM? (sorry I don't have one to test) And just for the record, harnesses HAVE failed, look up the reports if you guys want, I have seen it through the years and it does happen, but its rare obviously. Most things in climbing are rare, but we do protect ourselves from rare events, because the consequences are so dire. through the year's my ass noob. No one that's been climbing for any amount of time would be so irrationally paranoid and trying to fix it in all the wrong ways. we all call Bullshit.. YOU provide some proof. please go take up chess before you hurt someone else with your ridiculous ideas. That's another way of putting it, I just find it curious that this man seems to be able to do some form of reasoning and then comes to such ridiculous conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
qtm
Nov 11, 2009, 3:41 PM
Post #52 of 75
(3680 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2004
Posts: 548
|
airscape wrote: WIth the 2 grigri idea for half ropes, I find it strange that no one mentioned a grigri only takes 10mm + ropes. That's because you're wrong in that the Grigri "only takes 10mm + ropes." You can most certainly use smaller diameter ropes, even a half rope, with a Grigri. But as I mentioned upthread, you *must* treat the Grigri like an ATC with skinny ropes. What that means is the "autolock" feature doesn't work with half ropes. But if you lock off the rope as you would an ATC, the Grigri works just fine as a belay device on skinny ropes. In reference to the OP, using two Grigris on halfs/twins would be pointless because with skinny ropes, they will not autolock which is what the OP was looking for.
|
|
|
|
|
dr_feelgood
Nov 11, 2009, 3:59 PM
Post #53 of 75
(3677 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 26060
|
jonathan.gaillard wrote: I_do wrote: Just on the sum thing, it's still gonna be a pain in the ass, because you need to hold the device when giving out slack. It would also make it much harder to hold on to the brake strands, which I would deem much more important then the "redundancy"you're so keen on. To me it seems that there is a safe system out there, with harnesses that will only fail if you're an idiot, semi-fool proof belay devices and very strong ropes. If you just stay away from sharp edges it would do much more for your safety then any of the suggestions you made here. And believing you're safer with the sling-swami is just ludacris, I don't have it and my harness is just as safe as yours in because in the real world neither will fail. Cheers So you DO have to hold a SUM to feed slack? That was one thing I was wonder as I mentioned before. If you didn't have to touch the cam to feed slack fast in a grigri, then you wouldn't have to touch it, so why do you need to hold a SUM? (sorry I don't have one to test) And just for the record, harnesses HAVE failed, look up the reports if you guys want, I have seen it through the years and it does happen, but its rare obviously. Most things in climbing are rare, but we do protect ourselves from rare events, because the consequences are so dire. The human body is only rated to around 10 kn.
|
|
|
|
|
lostlazy
Nov 11, 2009, 5:23 PM
Post #54 of 75
(3663 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2004
Posts: 136
|
qwert wrote: lostlazy wrote: jonathan.gaillard wrote: I use a strap of webbing around me like a swami belt to make my harness redundant... i finally found my signature I would take another one too, to make my signature reduntant... qwert LMAO
|
|
|
|
|
bill413
Nov 11, 2009, 6:06 PM
Post #55 of 75
(3654 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 19, 2004
Posts: 5674
|
dr_feelgood wrote: jonathan.gaillard wrote: I_do wrote: Just on the sum thing, it's still gonna be a pain in the ass, because you need to hold the device when giving out slack. It would also make it much harder to hold on to the brake strands, which I would deem much more important then the "redundancy"you're so keen on. To me it seems that there is a safe system out there, with harnesses that will only fail if you're an idiot, semi-fool proof belay devices and very strong ropes. If you just stay away from sharp edges it would do much more for your safety then any of the suggestions you made here. And believing you're safer with the sling-swami is just ludacris, I don't have it and my harness is just as safe as yours in because in the real world neither will fail. Cheers So you DO have to hold a SUM to feed slack? That was one thing I was wonder as I mentioned before. If you didn't have to touch the cam to feed slack fast in a grigri, then you wouldn't have to touch it, so why do you need to hold a SUM? (sorry I don't have one to test) And just for the record, harnesses HAVE failed, look up the reports if you guys want, I have seen it through the years and it does happen, but its rare obviously. Most things in climbing are rare, but we do protect ourselves from rare events, because the consequences are so dire. The human body is only rated to around 10 kn. So are you suggesting that I should use two bodies?
|
|
|
|
|
airscape
Nov 11, 2009, 6:15 PM
Post #56 of 75
(3649 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240
|
bill413 wrote: dr_feelgood wrote: jonathan.gaillard wrote: I_do wrote: Just on the sum thing, it's still gonna be a pain in the ass, because you need to hold the device when giving out slack. It would also make it much harder to hold on to the brake strands, which I would deem much more important then the "redundancy"you're so keen on. To me it seems that there is a safe system out there, with harnesses that will only fail if you're an idiot, semi-fool proof belay devices and very strong ropes. If you just stay away from sharp edges it would do much more for your safety then any of the suggestions you made here. And believing you're safer with the sling-swami is just ludacris, I don't have it and my harness is just as safe as yours in because in the real world neither will fail. Cheers So you DO have to hold a SUM to feed slack? That was one thing I was wonder as I mentioned before. If you didn't have to touch the cam to feed slack fast in a grigri, then you wouldn't have to touch it, so why do you need to hold a SUM? (sorry I don't have one to test) And just for the record, harnesses HAVE failed, look up the reports if you guys want, I have seen it through the years and it does happen, but its rare obviously. Most things in climbing are rare, but we do protect ourselves from rare events, because the consequences are so dire. The human body is only rated to around 10 kn. So are you suggesting that I should use two bodies? Like The island. I bought two copies in case one of them stopped working.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Nov 11, 2009, 7:14 PM
Post #57 of 75
(3635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Thank you Mr Gaillard. This thread is the epitome of rc.noobishness. If anyone ever asks me what this place is about, I can simply point them to your thread. BTW, what you really need to increase your safety factor is not an auto-locking device for two ropes, but rather you need a belayer for each rope, each with a single auto-locking device (like a gri-gri or cinch). This is far more redundant, as it is very unlikely that *both* of your belayers would load the device wrong. You don't get that redundancy with a single belayer. Cheers! GO
|
|
|
|
|
gunkiemike
Nov 11, 2009, 9:16 PM
Post #58 of 75
(3623 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 1, 2002
Posts: 2266
|
Can I get a show of hands of who would be willing to climb with someone with a backed up harness and a pair of Grigris? Anybody?? <crickets> Thought so.
|
|
|
|
|
coastal_climber
Nov 11, 2009, 9:52 PM
Post #59 of 75
(3620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2006
Posts: 2542
|
gunkiemike wrote: Can I get a show of hands of who would be willing to climb with someone with a backed up harness and a pair of Grigris? Anybody?? <crickets> Thought so. By the time he gets the belay/rap rigged, he'll be dead from exposure.
|
|
|
|
|
dr_feelgood
Nov 11, 2009, 10:52 PM
Post #60 of 75
(3611 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 26060
|
gunkiemike wrote: Can I get a show of hands of who would be willing to climb with someone with a backed up harness and a pair of Grigris? Anybody?? <crickets> Thought so. My first time climbing with Jason, I looked at him with the doubles in my hand and a dumb expression on my face, and asked him how I was supposed to feed doubles through my grigri. He thought I was serious until I started cracking up.
|
|
|
|
|
dugl33
Nov 11, 2009, 11:20 PM
Post #61 of 75
(3606 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2009
Posts: 740
|
qtm wrote: airscape wrote: WIth the 2 grigri idea for half ropes, I find it strange that no one mentioned a grigri only takes 10mm + ropes. I mentioned this earlier, look again... That's because you're wrong in that the Grigri "only takes 10mm + ropes." You can most certainly use smaller diameter ropes, even a half rope, with a Grigri. But as I mentioned upthread, you *must* treat the Grigri like an ATC with skinny ropes. Where exactly in the petzl documentation is this stated. Smallest diameter I can find is 9.7mm look here... http://www.petzl.com/...vices-descenders.pdf also, given this would just be an unreliable, heavy single strand version of an atc, how would this be anything but idiotic, especially since this thread is about double rope systems? What that means is the "autolock" feature doesn't work with half ropes. But if you lock off the rope as you would an ATC, the Grigri works just fine as a belay device on skinny ropes. In reference to the OP, using two Grigris on halfs/twins would be pointless because with skinny ropes, they will not autolock which is what the OP was looking for. OP, buy a guide atc, get an experienced, reliable belayer, and move on with your life.
|
|
|
|
|
AndrewSp
Dec 8, 2009, 11:01 PM
Post #62 of 75
(3475 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2009
Posts: 3
|
jonathan.gaillard wrote: johnwesely wrote: Good luck with that. Why the sarcasm? It is completely possible for ever piece of gear in the chain to be redundant in some way, and mostly is except usually the rope, biners and harness. Of course anchor designs are redundant, as are your draws in leads. I use a strap of webbing around me like a swami belt to make my harness redundant, and half ropes so that bit is redundant (of course the lower drag is nice too :D). Biners are easy to make redundant where needed on anchors. I don't know why anyone Wouldn't want such a system... of course there are those that don't value their life over climbing haha. . If you fell on a harness backed up with a piece of webbing wrapped around you, and your harness broke, I think you would have a good chance to break your back. You should probably wear two harnesses instead. More climbing accidents result in broken bones than death. If you really value your life over climbing, maybe its time to invest in a treadwall. Otherwise, you should probably focus on technique and experience to keep you safe. P.s. This makes no sense (grammatically anyway): "Learning curve I imagine, but I think that is a poor excuse as are most reasons for accidents in climbing (which have been involved with every peice of equipment through the years)."
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Dec 10, 2009, 4:02 AM
Post #63 of 75
(3421 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
I really don't think you're wired right to climb. Stop wasting your time and go do something you'll enjoy. I mean that in the nicest way possible.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Dec 10, 2009, 10:57 AM
Post #64 of 75
(3399 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Another problem, and it's not just in this thread, but rather a serious misconception in climbing today, is the very notion of 'autolocking'. Grigris, Cinches, and Eddys aren't 'autolocking' devices and don't "autolock belay". That misconception alone is responsible for dropping a legion of climbers. Once engaged they will 'autolockoff' a climber, but the fact that 99 times out of a 100 they give the appearance of autolocking to stop a fall is the problem. And it's always such a damn surprise the 1 time out of 100 when it doesn't. Remember, you're the belayer, not a belay attendant.
|
|
|
|
|
naitch
Dec 10, 2009, 11:24 AM
Post #65 of 75
(3395 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2002
Posts: 539
|
angry wrote: I really don't think you're wired right to climb. Stop wasting your time and go do something you'll enjoy. I mean that in the nicest way possible. What he said
|
|
|
|
|
nikmit
Dec 10, 2009, 2:24 PM
Post #66 of 75
(3373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 10, 2009
Posts: 55
|
jonathan.gaillard wrote: I_do wrote: Just on the sum thing, it's still gonna be a pain in the ass, because you need to hold the device when giving out slack. It would also make it much harder to hold on to the brake strands, which I would deem much more important then the "redundancy"you're so keen on. To me it seems that there is a safe system out there, with harnesses that will only fail if you're an idiot, semi-fool proof belay devices and very strong ropes. If you just stay away from sharp edges it would do much more for your safety then any of the suggestions you made here. And believing you're safer with the sling-swami is just ludacris, I don't have it and my harness is just as safe as yours in because in the real world neither will fail. Cheers So you DO have to hold a SUM to feed slack? That was one thing I was wonder as I mentioned before. If you didn't have to touch the cam to feed slack fast in a grigri, then you wouldn't have to touch it, so why do you need to hold a SUM? (sorry I don't have one to test) And just for the record, harnesses HAVE failed, look up the reports if you guys want, I have seen it through the years and it does happen, but its rare obviously. Most things in climbing are rare, but we do protect ourselves from rare events, because the consequences are so dire. Dude, count the ropes... Shit, can't make the pic visible
(This post was edited by nikmit on Dec 10, 2009, 2:26 PM)
|
Attachments:
|
Ice screw blows.jpg
(98.7 KB)
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Dec 10, 2009, 4:04 PM
Post #67 of 75
(3356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Here ya go: GO
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Dec 10, 2009, 4:06 PM
Post #68 of 75
(3355 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
Edit: Nevermind, cracklover got it.
(This post was edited by acorneau on Dec 10, 2009, 4:08 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
Dec 11, 2009, 12:06 AM
Post #69 of 75
(3324 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
nikmit
Dec 11, 2009, 9:00 AM
Post #70 of 75
(3302 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 10, 2009
Posts: 55
|
cracklover wrote: Here ya go: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=4411[/image] GO Don't know what black magic you've used, but thanks
|
|
|
|
|
cantbuymefriends
Dec 11, 2009, 10:32 AM
Post #72 of 75
(3286 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2003
Posts: 670
|
FP = Front Page, I believe.
|
|
|
|
|
scottydo
Dec 12, 2009, 11:54 PM
Post #73 of 75
(3239 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2007
Posts: 121
|
a Fader's Sum might work for ya. It worked well on my 9mm
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
Dec 13, 2009, 1:00 AM
Post #74 of 75
(3230 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Dec 14, 2009, 1:50 AM
Post #75 of 75
(3064 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
adatesman wrote: Except that it will only do half of a set of halfs.... His issue isn't size as much as wanting an lock-assist device for two ropes, which pretty much means TRE Sirius or Hewbolt Double. Unfortunately both are long out of production.... Hey Aric, how's that TRE working for ya?
|
|
|
|
|
|