|
ammon
Apr 21, 2004, 4:24 AM
Post #1 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 27, 2004
Posts: 220
|
Ok, I'm not posting this pic so everyone can poke fun at the setup..... which is inevitable. I just think everyone can learn from it.
This is a perfect example of what NOT to do when setting up a solo anchor. Look closely at the carabiners. No lockers, and every one is cross-loaded.
A better way would have been to equalize the bottom two pins and then clove-hitch the top piece under tension. So that the bottom two carabiners are held tight and can not flop around, causing a cross-loaded situation.
BTW- This is an actual pic taken with a very high powered camera of someone soloing a trade route in Zion.
Climb safe!! Cheers, Ammon
http://rocknrun.net/Photos/NoGood.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
socalclimber
Apr 21, 2004, 4:28 AM
Post #2 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437
|
Oh God.... Not much else to say....
Robert
|
|
|
|
|
holdplease2
Apr 21, 2004, 5:00 AM
Post #3 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 18, 2002
Posts: 1733
|
Wow.
Also note the clove hitch on the top biner...the biner is small and non locking and one can see how the rope could easily unclip itself if weighted...based on the way the clove is wrapping around the biner...
That, of course, is the least of the problems here.
-Kate.
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Apr 21, 2004, 5:19 AM
Post #4 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
Oh, dear God. That is truely unbelievable. A better way for this person to have set up anchor would have been to STAY HOME! How and why would someone feel safe with that set up? Hope the dude/dudette didn't fall. And would anyone else in their right mind trust a single drilled angle as their solo anchor? Oh, sure -- the next piece and every piece that is clove hitched is part of the system, but there's really not much keeping this guy from the abyss.
|
|
|
|
|
valeberga
Apr 21, 2004, 5:42 AM
Post #5 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2003
Posts: 434
|
sick! :shock:
I think I might just tie in directly to the bottom pin, then tie webbing loops on the upper pins, attach lockers, toss clove hitches on the lockers. Or if I was worried about kinking the rope on the bottom pin I would sling that one two. I agree on tying the hitches under tension. But I'm a hack when it comes to rope-soloing...
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Apr 21, 2004, 5:45 AM
Post #6 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
Dude, I gotta say, that's not a good hobby to be a "hack" at. :wtf:
|
|
|
|
|
valeberga
Apr 21, 2004, 5:47 AM
Post #7 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2003
Posts: 434
|
In reply to: Dude, I gotta say, that's not a good hobby to be a "hack" at. :wtf:
Oh whatever dude, at least I'm not crossloading non-locking 'biners!
I know you can recognize a little self-effacement, can't you? :roll: Ok, I didn't immediately realize that they were pins and not bolts. oops!
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Apr 21, 2004, 5:51 AM
Post #8 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
Hack away, my friend.
|
|
|
|
|
junnos
Apr 21, 2004, 12:37 PM
Post #9 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2003
Posts: 217
|
O my God, that's my anchor! Just so you all know, it's a STATIC rope, and those are not real binners ok. They're off my key chain!
:lol: :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Apr 21, 2004, 1:28 PM
Post #10 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: O my God, that's my anchor! Just so you all know, it's a STATIC rope, and those are not real binners ok. They're off my key chain! :lol: :lol:
Well the key chain biners would add a dynamic element to the system, as they bent to the breaking point. Of Course that's right before the catastrophic failure..... :wink:
josh
|
|
|
|
|
glockaroo
Apr 21, 2004, 1:58 PM
Post #11 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2001
Posts: 149
|
glockaroo looks at that anchor and goes... uuuuuuughgghhhhhh.... SHUDDER!! Thanks for the pic Ammon.
|
|
|
|
|
pieter
Apr 21, 2004, 2:56 PM
Post #12 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2003
Posts: 43
|
you've got to admire the double fishermans knot though.
|
|
|
|
|
powen
Apr 21, 2004, 3:38 PM
Post #13 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2003
Posts: 201
|
In reply to: you've got to admire the double fishermans knot though.
Oh yeah, wouldn't want that tail to mess up a perfect setup;)
|
|
|
|
|
aulwes
Apr 21, 2004, 4:19 PM
Post #14 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 26, 2001
Posts: 703
|
Is that for real? :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
tedc
Apr 21, 2004, 4:42 PM
Post #15 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2003
Posts: 756
|
That is a high powered camera. Now if you just posted a name you could be in the climbing paparazzi. 8^)
Yea. thank goodnes for the back up overhand. :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
ammon
Apr 21, 2004, 8:22 PM
Post #16 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 27, 2004
Posts: 220
|
In reply to: Is that for real?
I'm AFRAID so.
In reply to: That is a high powered camera. Now if you just posted a name you could be in the climbing paparazzi.
Haaaa, I don't think I would do that, even if I knew who he was.......
|
|
|
|
|
wanlessrm
Apr 21, 2004, 8:29 PM
Post #17 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2002
Posts: 333
|
I guess its safe to say this is one case where the leader must not fall!
|
|
|
|
|
bigwalling
Apr 21, 2004, 9:50 PM
Post #18 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 29, 2001
Posts: 728
|
In reply to: Oh, dear God. That is truely unbelievable. A better way for this person to have set up anchor would have been to STAY HOME!
I love how some people bash others mistakes, telling them to stay home and all this other bullshit!
Do you know what Tomaz Humar soloed the Reticent with?
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Apr 21, 2004, 10:06 PM
Post #19 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: Do you know what Tomaz Humar soloed the Reticent with?
Hmmm...
A roll of duct tape
Some strong whiskey...
and a box of twinkies???
josh
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Apr 21, 2004, 10:14 PM
Post #20 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
One feather duster, a rabbit, and a tub of whipped cream? And is it a mistake to solo with these items?
What, is that a photo of you?
|
|
|
|
|
tedc
Apr 21, 2004, 10:39 PM
Post #21 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2003
Posts: 756
|
In reply to: I love how some people bash others mistakes, telling them to stay home and all this other s---!
Yea, I hear ya man. We should just be like whoa dude that's sick. You are so totally bold and sh!t. We should reserve the bashing for after they f@ck up and die/almost die.
Anyone who built this anchor because they thought it was safe enough for the intended purpose likely doesn't give a sh!t what anyone on rc.com thinks, says or posts.
|
|
|
|
|
bigwalling
Apr 21, 2004, 11:12 PM
Post #22 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 29, 2001
Posts: 728
|
Tomaz soloed the Reticent with some sort of ascender. It was only good to 1000 pounds or something I rememeber reading in his interview a long time ago. He found out later he should have never been soloing with it. Go ahead bash him and tell him he should have been at home. Or you can just come to the conclusion that he was up there climbing and you/us were on the ground.
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Apr 21, 2004, 11:15 PM
Post #23 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: Tomaz soloed the Reticent with some sort of ascender. It was only good to 1000 pounds or something I rememeber reading in his interview a long time ago. He found out later he should have never been soloing with it. Go ahead bash him and tell him he should have been at home. Or you can just come to the conclusion that he was up there climbing and you/us were on the ground.
Yeah, yeah...but what about the TWINKIES???I heard all he had to eat was plain old twinkies!! Not even the strawberry ones!!!
josh
|
|
|
|
|
bouldertom
Apr 21, 2004, 11:43 PM
Post #24 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 4, 2003
Posts: 140
|
In reply to: In reply to: Tomaz soloed the Reticent with some sort of ascender. It was only good to 1000 pounds or something I rememeber reading in his interview a long time ago. He found out later he should have never been soloing with it. Go ahead bash him and tell him he should have been at home. Or you can just come to the conclusion that he was up there climbing and you/us were on the ground. Yeah, yeah...but what about the TWINKIES???I heard all he had to eat was plain old twinkies!! Not even the strawberry ones!!! josh
Are you saying that plummeting to his death didn't weigh too heavily on his mind whenever he was faced with the prospect of only eating twinkies the whole time? hmmmm....
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Apr 21, 2004, 11:44 PM
Post #25 of 37
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
In reply to: Tomaz soloed the Reticent with some sort of ascender. It was only good to 1000 pounds or something I rememeber reading in his interview a long time ago. He found out later he should have never been soloing with it. Go ahead bash him and tell him he should have been at home. Or you can just come to the conclusion that he was up there climbing and you/us were on the ground.
Are you trying to tell us that Tomaz would recommend using that system or has continued to use it for future solos? I'll bet he would agree that despite whether or not he was climbing that day and I wasn't (or maybe I was -- what day was it, anyway?) it was still A BAD F'ING IDEA!
More relevant to the challenge you're posing, if you were to give Tomaz the choice of soloing the Reticent with that system again or staying at home, which do you think he would choose?
|
|
|
|
|
gunkiemike
Apr 21, 2004, 11:54 PM
Post #26 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 1, 2002
Posts: 2266
|
T2
Woulda been scored higher without that "very high powered camera" bit in there. But it looks like you filled your boat, so it's good enough.
|
|
|
|
|
bigwalling
Apr 22, 2004, 12:48 AM
Post #27 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 29, 2001
Posts: 728
|
Ed, of course he wouldn't choose to do it now. I just didn't like the comment about staying home. It just rubbed me the wrong way.
As for him going up there. Well, I'm not sure Tomaz seems pretty nuts to me.
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Apr 22, 2004, 1:12 AM
Post #28 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
I think you've seen enough of my posts to know that by and large I'm a pretty humble, self-deprecating guy who rarely knocks anyone on their abilities or ambitions. This wasn't one of those times. Dude has earned whatever criticism comes his way for that set up.
|
|
|
|
|
timpanogos
Apr 22, 2004, 2:05 AM
Post #29 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2002
Posts: 935
|
Question.
While working out in our gym I know dumb for most I was using the second bolt (actually pre-hung qd) as an OPPOSITIONAL (qd hanging down) with the focus being on the locker on the first bolt (single bolt anchor) being held in an optimal position.
One day, the owner comes by and notes hey put that in EQUALIZATION not oppositional and you will not have to worry about the 2nd piece cross loading if the first fails as the qd now fires upward. Same situation as pictured here single bolt anchor where your next 2 pieces want to be static (especially on those ½ angles in sandstone).
Im assuming the optimal situation here would be for the first and second binners to be held upwards (2 equalized) by the third directional pointing downwards.
Here is my question Ive been using a QD on the 2nd bolt for some reason in my mind I think the floppiness factor of the qd adds a bit in your favor to not cross loading as pressure slaps it to full load. The QDs are a bit stiffer than a regular runner even left doubled.
This might be pure dream land on my part? But if nothing else if that 2nd pin did not have the knot being involved with the pin/binner rope jiggle as you climbed would increase the odds of the binner falling back into a more desirable position.
Do you guys carry a few qds on you? Would you have slinged/qded that 2nd pin? Would you have pulled it tight upwards? Against the 3 pin binner pulling downwards?
Chad
p.s. in goofying around with this I also ended up duct tapping the 3rd piece in the equalized position, letting the duct tape hold the weight of the slack loop.
This brought me full circle you know how darn hard it is to get that 3 piece cord-a-let setup on natural pro (deck pitch is always natural pro) that is pointing upwards. You try holdling it in place as you climb for the 2nd placement before you can really get the 1st placement cloved in opposition.
By then your nuts have shifted, cams walked you down climb re-adjust and repeat till happy.
When up playing on the peeler it finally struck me DUCK TAPE the stupid cordalette in place as/when you set the anchor dont worry about the opposition to first piece tape it up there good and climb.
|
|
|
|
|
timpanogos
Apr 22, 2004, 3:07 AM
Post #30 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2002
Posts: 935
|
In empathy to the climber dude I have come down to clean and gone oh shizt thats scary stuff (slumped anchor). And sure clove is the solution to everything. But Ive found out it can be hard to suck a clove segment super tight. Remember how surprised you were first time you tied a water knot and realized how much length the knot actually takes.
My guess here the dude had the bottom segment synched real tight biner down to start. As he climbed past the rope pulled up, the knot slid up the spine into the pin knot loosens adding more slack and wham you have 1.5 bottom and 3 2nd of slack.
This is kind of the same dilemma with the natural anchor/cord-a-let example I gave above. Where you can not totally secure your anchor until you have clipped into the 2nd piece above the anchor (single pin in this case). So yea you go, dang I want these first two in (synched in opposition) before I go for that third piece (2 piece anchor). And yet as you climb past that first piece, and are working on the 3rd you look down and go, shizt the second binner shifted, my bottom guy is scary.
So here you go feel like a gamble? Setup the second binner in equalization position tape the rope to wall to hold it in place go for the top piece before you can secure the now 3 piece anchor. If you fall doing the top piece cross load possible on your taped piece is present.
Not feeling lucky? Tie first two in opposition get 3rd piece in, clip rope in upper so you can hold tension on it pulling 2nd binner into equalization position and getting the length cloved off right climb back up and clove the top in opposition position sucking both lower pieces tigher upward. A little flimsiness in the first two, if upward pointing, can be synched by the directional.
Hey, Ive done this dance, I know how damn easy that happens. How do you experts quickly dispatch this type of deal. Sure the guy should have down climbed and fixed things up .. well maybe
down climbing can be scarier than up. Say things looked great as you left that third tie-in. Hell you pulled it too tight actually (3rd to 2nd) allowing rope jiggle to finally let the 2nd knot pull up the spine. But now you are up 6 moves, off the ladder and one C3 stuff if you can still see it at this point its oh shixtski tie off static here and start over your ff count over? Down climb and fix it? Say a few hell Maries and go for it?
Like I say, I can empathize.
Chad
P.S. emphany based on lessons learned in useless c0 gym aiding (grin).
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Apr 22, 2004, 3:14 AM
Post #31 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: BTW- This is an actual pic taken with a very high powered camera of someone soloing a trade route in Zion. Climb safe!! Cheers, Ammon
Ammon, if it was almost anyone else other than you I wouldn't believe it wasn't a setup.
Thanks for sharing, very clear and very good pic.
For the sake of argument, you think the stuff might have held anyway? Moderate to small fall? It all backs itself up and supports each of the other weak links....?
Bill
Like Tim said, shite happens. I've wondered what would happen if I came off while roped soloing and the rope wrapped around my neck. kind of makes for severe testicular shrinkage when you think of it. And with no one around......
Whew: SHRINKAGE!!
|
|
|
|
|
timpanogos
Apr 22, 2004, 3:34 AM
Post #32 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2002
Posts: 935
|
Damn billco - thanks for sharing!
|
|
|
|
|
ammon
Apr 22, 2004, 3:56 AM
Post #33 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 27, 2004
Posts: 220
|
In reply to: T2 Woulda been scored higher without that "very high powered camera" bit in there. But it looks like you filled your boat, so it's good enough.
I have... and never will be a troll. It's funny how when someone sees something unbelievable they think they are getting tricked.
I actually cropped the date out of this pic, so I wouldn't embarrass the person who set it up. But if you HAVE to know.... the shot was taken by my friend Dennis on March 25, 2004, the day before I got a five foot flake over my cranium. The person was climbing Touchstone Wall and seemed like a good climber, other than this anchor.
Hey, I might have been guilty of the same setup, in my learning curve. So, I'm not trying to knock anybody down.
I posted this so everyone can have a civil debate.... and maybe learn something from it.
In reply to: For the sake of argument, you think the stuff might have held anyway?
Yep, it most likely would have held anyway...... but, you never know.
Cheers, Ammon
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Apr 22, 2004, 5:10 AM
Post #34 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
And a good post it was Ammon. Shuddup all you naysayers, lest I banish your posts to the black hole.
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Apr 22, 2004, 5:21 AM
Post #35 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: And a good post it was Ammon. Shuddup all you naysayers, lest I banish your posts to the black hole.
OH THE POWER!!!!!
Funny how you start to remember certain bits of rock....I took one look at that pic and said- Touchstone...Although I'd say it was right off the deck?? Ie no need for high powered camera's....well was it???
josh
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Apr 22, 2004, 8:03 PM
Post #36 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
Aside from all the crossloading, does anyone know of tests on the strength of drilled angles for upward pull? It seems like they're frequently angled down. I'd bet the numbers would be frightening.
|
|
|
|
|
junnos
Apr 22, 2004, 8:45 PM
Post #37 of 37
(4357 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2003
Posts: 217
|
In reply to: T2 Woulda been scored higher without that "very high powered camera" bit in there. But it looks like you filled your boat, so it's good enough.
You obviously don't know Ammon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
