|
acorneau
Feb 1, 2012, 3:50 PM
Post #51 of 65
(7134 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: I work at a summer climbing camp and another counselor and I used to have contests on who could make the most bompproof anchor. I often wonder if someone took a picture and put it up on rc.com. Let me know if you see a pic a single top rope anchor that uses two 150 foot static lines, approximately eight anchor legs, and 17 biners.  Josh
Picture?!?
Psshh... they got it on VIDEO!
http://www.youtube.com/...;v=bsAiOYXC-k0#t=80s
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Feb 1, 2012, 3:55 PM
Post #52 of 65
(7131 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
acorneau wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: I work at a summer climbing camp and another counselor and I used to have contests on who could make the most bompproof anchor. I often wonder if someone took a picture and put it up on rc.com. Let me know if you see a pic a single top rope anchor that uses two 150 foot static lines, approximately eight anchor legs, and 17 biners. Josh Picture?!? Psshh... they got it on VIDEO! http://www.youtube.com/...;v=bsAiOYXC-k0#t=80s
NICE! I always thought they would get Brad Pitt to play me though. 
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Feb 1, 2012, 4:06 PM
Post #53 of 65
(7130 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: lena_chita wrote: Th[is] one had me baffled:  Rather creative, imo, given not enough length of runner to go to the rope itself: the single blue sling is backing up both carabiners for the rigging, to back-up for either anchor blowing out.
Creative-- yes. Completely unnecessary- also yes.
Do you wrap a bungee cord around the bumper of your car? NO? How come? It would be a backup for the bumper randomly falling off...
And the way it is set up, if either bolt did blow out, it would be the other bolt catching the weight, and not that triangular-configuration sling, because it would be still too slack, by the time the second bolt caught the weight.
Rmsyll2 wrote: These third lines are a) Trad tradition; b) recognition that the anchors are not new; c) pro forma cover for liability for group leaders. In first one copied here, note extra width of webbing, common for Boy Scouts.
a) The whole point of installing these anchors is to get away from the 'trad tradition' of anchoring to the trees and thus contributing to killing the vegetation at the top of the cliff in popular areas, and clifftop erosion. And I don't know any competent gear climbers who would consider backing up a bomber 2-bolt anchor by a 3rd point, just because "it is a tradition" that ideal gear anchors have 3 points.
b) how "not new" are those bolted anchors? And has there been a rush of bolt failures in the area? As far as I know, the area is not known for outrageously-fast corrosion rate, and the bolts look pretty new to me...
c) "common for boy scouts"-- now, that is a great rationalization for something... And pro forma cover for liability -- yeah, great!
I know your intent was to just have a library documenting the anchors you have seen. Great idea.
Maybe as a side benefit you will also get to see what is a good solid anchor, and what is a ridiculously-festooned over-engineered anchor that takes way too much time, with no added benefit whatsoever.
(This post was edited by lena_chita on Feb 1, 2012, 4:07 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Feb 1, 2012, 4:15 PM
Post #54 of 65
(7123 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
acorneau wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: I work at a summer climbing camp and another counselor and I used to have contests on who could make the most bompproof anchor. I often wonder if someone took a picture and put it up on rc.com. Let me know if you see a pic a single top rope anchor that uses two 150 foot static lines, approximately eight anchor legs, and 17 biners. Josh Picture?!? Psshh... they got it on VIDEO! http://www.youtube.com/...;v=bsAiOYXC-k0#t=80s
There were some really awesome videos submitted that year! If I recall correctly, the Vertical World and Shallow Water Soloing submissions were pretty funny.
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Feb 1, 2012, 4:43 PM
Post #55 of 65
(7113 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
lena_chita wrote: I know your intent was to just have a library documenting the anchors you have seen. Great idea. Maybe as a side benefit you will also get to see what is a good solid anchor, and what is a ridiculously-festooned over-engineered anchor that takes way too much time, with no added benefit whatsoever.
I liked it better when he wrote:
Rmsyll2 wrote: No comments, just photos of what people do at two bolted rim anchors for single-pitch Top-rope routes at one location.
I agree that you reach a point of diminishing returns if you keep adding to a solid anchor. While it doesn't necessarily hurt, every new component requires additional time to rig, it may make a quick visual inspection more difficult, and it's beyond what is adequate for the task.
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Feb 1, 2012, 5:01 PM
Post #56 of 65
(7104 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: Where you and 'bearbreeder' and others get the notion of telling everyone what they should and should not do, you will not be able, or feel any need, to explain. .
ahh poor baby ,,, upset are we ...
i rarely criticize peoples anchors these days ... unless its obviously very dangerous
but then you really need to ask yourself why most guides, who set up more anchors for TR than anyone here does for clients, keep it simple
you generally dont see em teach any fancy anchors for a TR anchor on 2 bolts to new clients ... and they have liability in what they do and teach ...
maybe you know beter
for some reason hardcore newbie TRers get all insulted when they cant show off their hardcore TR anchor skills
(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Feb 1, 2012, 5:03 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
bill413
Feb 1, 2012, 7:56 PM
Post #57 of 65
(7076 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 19, 2004
Posts: 5674
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: Third image is the same idea as first, made from an article he read, and placed for the photo. It took the guy a long time fiddling with the setting, which he couldn't really judge with it on the rim, and couldn't manipulate over the rim either. He eventually got on rappel to fix it with the rope in place.
I remember an instructor saying "how would you like 20-30% more time for climbing?"
The answer was to speed up your anchor building.
|
|
|
|
|
qwert
Feb 1, 2012, 8:23 PM
Post #58 of 65
(7069 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 2394
|
Rmsyll2 wrote:
a whole bunch of Rmsyll2 quotes that essentially boil down to:
"Dont be mean to beginners in the beginners room!"
Dude, the Problem is not that we are all assholes, that just come in here to make fun of "n00bs", the problem is that there are dozens (hundreds?) of beginners that totally overthink and overenigneer something that - with just a little understanding of the subject 'climbing' - is really easy.
Its not that those anchors are deathtraps - they arent - but the mindset behind such abominations surely is!
Yes, we all have started small at some point.
We all have made mistakes, took some stupid ideas and ran with them, probably even posted them in the internet (or shown it to someone in the know, before the days of the 'net) expecting a pat on the back and a nice candy cane for our clever invention.
Guess what - the pat and the candy cane never came - except from people as clueless as us then - instead we got a slap in the face and cod liver oil 
Yes, some of us sometimes use the wrong tone - i know i do - but please understand that
a) if you are here for a while, and see "look at my clever inventshun!!11!!!" thread No. 12398798217312983129 you get bitter and bored
b) some of those abominations are just too funny to not make fun of them.
But the real Problem lies much deeper - and now feel free to call me racist, or whatever - its the stupid "american style" toproping!
the whole idea of "i rig up some overengineered crap out of a shitton of static rope, and throw down a rope, and then me and my buddies are 100% safe while we gang rope that poor rock" is so utterly wrong
(and thats not even taking into account such strange concepts as the preservation of rare cliff side plants)
If you want to toprope, you go with someone who leads the route for you and sets up the toprope for you, on an anchor below the rim. The whole toproping from above shit just attracts idiots who cant and/or wont learn anything about climbing, safety, and so on, luring them in with a false sense of security, and giving them the bragging rights of being a climber.
And no - i am not an elitist asshole who wants climbing to stay his own exclusive club, but that whole boyscout-university-commercialfuckwad-soccermomsorganizedafternoon-bringyourownbeer toproping shit is not the way to get people into climbing!
I dont know how many people i have taught about climbing and/or introduced to it, but yes, allmost all of them have been on toprope at the beginning, but it always was with the proper "education" around it, i.e. how does the rope get up there, how do i set up that anchor, how do i learn about it, why should i NOT climb over the rim, etc.
qwert
|
|
|
|
|
csproul
Feb 1, 2012, 8:36 PM
Post #59 of 65
(7065 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769
|
qwert wrote: le idea of "i rig up some overengineered crap out of a shitton of static rope, and throw down a rope, and then me and my buddies are 100% safe while we gang rope that poor rock" is so utterly wrong
(and thats not even taking into account such strange concepts as the preservation of rare cliff side plants) If you want to toprope, you go with someone who leads the route for you and sets up the toprope for you, on an anchor below the rim. The whole toproping from above shit just attracts idiots who cant and/or wont learn anything about climbing, safety, and so on, luring them in with a false sense of security, and giving them the bragging rights of being a climber.
I hear what you're saying, but this area (Pilot Mtn) has a lot of crappy rock. While there are some quality leadable lines, there are also many routes that just aren't practical or safe to lead.
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Feb 2, 2012, 6:42 PM
Post #61 of 65
(6966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
curt wrote: JimTitt wrote: Both bolts are in the same cliff, isnīt this potentially dangerous if it fell down? Only if you're beneath it. Curt
Hmm, If the cliff top is high, and you are standing on top of it when it falls, I am pretty sure that is dangerous, too.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 2, 2012, 10:36 PM
Post #62 of 65
(6926 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Rmsyll2 has argued vociferously and repeatedly over his entire time on rc.com in favor of bad systems that are needlessly complicated.
I'm not going to respond in detail to all of this. But I will say one thing: In climbing, more than enough is sometimes too much. And unlike in a toproping situation, there may be unfortunate ramifications if you consistently attempt to overdo things.
A link that may be useful:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...ew_flat;post=2321702
Cheers,
GO
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Feb 2, 2012, 11:45 PM
Post #64 of 65
(6913 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
lena_chita wrote: curt wrote: JimTitt wrote: Both bolts are in the same cliff, isnīt this potentially dangerous if it fell down? Only if you're beneath it. Curt Hmm, If the cliff top is high, and you are standing on top of it when it falls, I am pretty sure that is dangerous, too.
Nononono! You should use Hmmm... when you mean the poster is talking utter rubbish and is completely wrong on a factual matter which anyone with the intelligence if a marmot knows but you donīt actually want to to call him a dumbo because one is brought up to be polite, especially to the less favoured.
Anyway , back to the cliff. If a butterfly beating itīs wings can start the odd hurricane or two who knows what overloading a cliff might do, maybe set off Yellowstone into a super volcano which destroys the world. `The careless American topropers screw the rest of usī , another load of bad headlines for the Yankee imperialists!
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 3, 2012, 1:41 AM
Post #65 of 65
(6893 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
lena_chita wrote: if either bolt did blow out, it would be the other bolt catching the weight, and not that triangular-configuration sling, because it would be still too slack, by the time the second bolt caught the weight.
If either bolt blew out, the blue sling etc. would become slack, and be back-up if the other also then blew out, which is what back-up means.
There is a general criticism here of the thinking of the more involved riggings; but that one shows thinking that is quite creative imo. Note that there is only the single but very strong sling: not overdone in that way, sufficient and then some for the purpose, which is safety. Criticizing people for trying to be safe (which Lena is not doing) is imo taking cheap shots to boost oneself.
In reply to: Maybe as a side benefit you will also get to see what is a good solid anchor, and what is a ridiculously-festooned over-engineered anchor that takes way too much time, with no added benefit whatsoever.
Bingo! And without a word. But only for those who do look at enough to begin to make comparisons and then make some judgements. And then, make some anchors.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
