|
billl7
Sep 16, 2008, 12:08 AM
Post #151 of 228
(8398 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
jt512 wrote: Well, if Bill has the factual knowledge he claims to have, then he must know some source for this information. Otherwise, he would be bullshitting.
Given the lack of further facts/information so far, all the possible cases I listed for the anchor failing are still reasonable including the one that matches Zeke's last point and the one that matches a point recently made by alleyehave.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 16, 2008, 12:08 AM
Post #152 of 228
(8397 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
zeke_sf wrote: BTW, I hear report that at least the second is climbing with a cast on now. It would be interesting to hear her take on what happened. Helping all of us avoid this situation, however rare, is a worthy impetus for them to tell the tale.
Classic example of someone who is spending too much time climbing, and not enough time posting on the Internet.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
zeke_sf
Sep 16, 2008, 12:10 AM
Post #153 of 228
(8391 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 18730
|
jt512 wrote: zeke_sf wrote: BTW, I hear report that at least the second is climbing with a cast on now. It would be interesting to hear her take on what happened. Helping all of us avoid this situation, however rare, is a worthy impetus for them to tell the tale. Classic example of someone who is spending too much time climbing, and not enough time posting on the Internet. Jay
Her silent scorn causes me to place all blame (including the piece on lead) squarely in her corner.
|
|
|
|
|
moose_droppings
Sep 16, 2008, 1:24 AM
Post #154 of 228
(8356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Posts: 3371
|
zeke_sf wrote: I too have been of the opinion that - while not ideal - two, well-placed, larger pieces (a larger cam/nut) should hold the fall in question. Considering three pieces failed, I'm thinking the leader's ability to place gear should be in question. Link that with his inexperience, and that becomes the more likely conclusion.
My guesstimation is in this camp.
Can't buy into the idea that she was lifted high enough to pull a piece of the anchor upward and then the top piece fail.
|
|
|
|
|
onceahardman
Sep 16, 2008, 2:17 AM
Post #155 of 228
(8330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2007
Posts: 2493
|
jt512 wrote: onceahardman wrote: In reply to: Why did they only use a 2-piece anchor? This has been discussed at length, but I'd like to point out that many "classic" routes in places as well-frequented as Tuolomne or Yosemite will find climbers at anchors consisting of two 30-year old quarter inchers at some belays. And climbers occasionally fall on them, usually without incident, despite a fairly low strength. Oh, really? You claim factual knowledge of that. Fine. Then list -- let's make it easy -- just 2 documented incidents in which a climber has taken a factor-2 fall onto an anchor consisting solely of two 30-year-old quarter-inch bolts without incident. Jay
Well, there is little "documented" evidence for disasters which did not happen...but I do have an anecdote...
Late 1980s, my brother fell directly onto the belay on Green Dragon, 11b, in the Valley. Two quarter inchers.
No harm done, he went right back at it, and climbed thru to the anchors, Then we did Mr. Natural as a third pitch.
In Tuolomne, there are several bent hangers on quarter inch belay bolts... Can't remember the route, a polished awatercourse runoff on Daff Dome...?
(This post was edited by onceahardman on Sep 16, 2008, 3:02 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 16, 2008, 2:29 AM
Post #156 of 228
(8321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
onceahardman wrote: jt512 wrote: onceahardman wrote: In reply to: Why did they only use a 2-piece anchor? This has been discussed at length, but I'd like to point out that many "classic" routes in places as well-frequented as Tuolomne or Yosemite will find climbers at anchors consisting of two 30-year old quarter inchers at some belays. And climbers occasionally fall on them, usually without incident, despite a fairly low strength. Oh, really? You claim factual knowledge of that. Fine. Then list -- let's make it easy -- just 2 documented incidents in which a climber has taken a factor-2 fall onto an anchor consisting solely of two 30-year-old quarter-inch bolts without incident. Jay Well, there is little "documented" evidence for disasters which did not happen...but I do have an anecdote... Late 1980s, my brother fell directly onto the belay on Green Lightning, 11b, in the Valley. Two quarter inchers.
So, those bolts were placed in the 1950s?
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Sep 16, 2008, 8:43 AM
Post #157 of 228
(8243 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
jt512 wrote: zeke_sf wrote: BTW, I hear report that at least the second is climbing with a cast on now. It would be interesting to hear her take on what happened. Helping all of us avoid this situation, however rare, is a worthy impetus for them to tell the tale. Classic example of someone who is spending too much time climbing, and not enough time posting on the Internet. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Sep 16, 2008, 1:39 PM
Post #158 of 228
(8202 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
This is not a direct response to anything that has been posted in this thread ...
As has been said, current information is limited as to why the anchor failed. So there are a number of possible reasons for that failure. One possibility is just to default to "the leader did not recognize good quality individual placements." Another is that both anchor pieces were solid and set for downward pull given the perceived runout terrain up ahead. If the belayer was initially pulled up by the leader fall then one or both pieces could be dislodged or compromised. Of course, this kind of anchor failure can be mitigated by including an upward pull piece in the anchor. That is all.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
shermanr6
Sep 16, 2008, 2:50 PM
Post #159 of 228
(8176 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2006
Posts: 79
|
Ok, here is what I don't understand; The leader was 40 feet above the belay when he fell, and it was 100 ft to the ground. Why was it that he did not pull the belayer off of the ledge if then anchor pulled out? I would think that even if she did not have a hand on the rope, that the friction of the rope goingt through an atc would be enough to pull her off. Can anyone shed some light on this?
matt
|
|
|
|
|
k.l.k
Sep 16, 2008, 4:29 PM
Post #160 of 228
(8135 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
Here's what I don't understand: how we could fill up 7 pages of pointless speculation on this thread, instead of devoting ourselves to more important online exchanges, like scoth and porn. Seriously, does this country have just enough reserves of the Protestant ethic that folks are willing to spend 7 pages jacking so long as the title seems to offer something serious?
How many of you on this thread live in SoCal? Drive out to the frickin crag and climb the thing, check out the placements, look over the topography, and then post back with something that at least has a few shreds of empirical detail.
If you want to pull sf out of yr ass, why this thread? Just go all out. Dope planes in Yos, Lynn Hill topless photos, community, even, God help us, ST or b.com
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 16, 2008, 5:15 PM
Post #161 of 228
(8100 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
k.l.k wrote: How many of you on this thread live in SoCal? Drive out to the frickin crag and climb the thing. . .
And you expect that suggestion to result in fewer accident threads?
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
climbingaggie03
Sep 16, 2008, 5:48 PM
Post #162 of 228
(8070 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: 1173
|
shermanr6 wrote: Ok, here is what I don't understand; The leader was 40 feet above the belay when he fell, and it was 100 ft to the ground. Why was it that he did not pull the belayer off of the ledge if then anchor pulled out? I would think that even if she did not have a hand on the rope, that the friction of the rope goingt through an atc would be enough to pull her off. Can anyone shed some light on this? matt
Matt, I agree with you, this is something that is still sticking in my mind. Someone in the original accident thread did a couple of home made tests and found that rope would run through an ATC pretty easily at some angles. I'm still skeptical, but lacking a better explanation, I've kinda gone with while it's unlikely, it seems like it did happen this time anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
yokese
Sep 16, 2008, 6:10 PM
Post #163 of 228
(8058 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 18, 2006
Posts: 672
|
climbingaggie03 wrote: shermanr6 wrote: ... if she did not have a hand on the rope, that the friction of the rope goingt through an atc would be enough to pull her off. Can anyone shed some light on this? matt ... Someone in the original accident thread did a couple of home made tests and found that rope would run through an ATC pretty easily at some angles...
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...ost=1959881;#1959881
|
|
|
|
|
snoopy138
Sep 17, 2008, 12:30 AM
Post #164 of 228
(7976 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28992
|
jt512 wrote: k.l.k wrote: How many of you on this thread live in SoCal? Drive out to the frickin crag and climb the thing. . . And you expect that suggestion to result in fewer accident threads? Jay
I have no real interest in climbing it again. I have better things to do out there.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Sep 17, 2008, 2:34 AM
Post #165 of 228
(7946 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
The focus on a 2 piece anchor vs a 3 piece anchor is erroneous.
A decent 2 piece anchor should EASILY handle anything you throw at it. In fact in a decent 2 piece anchor I would almost expect the belay carabiner to be the weak point. Either forces on the anchor aren't likely to be exceeding 12kN and are likely to be considerably less.
I often rely on two piece anchors a well placed large cam, large nut, or hex I would happily rely on to hang my car off. If you can't trust your placing of totally bomber gear in anchors why do you trust it leading?
It seems clear here that those on the cliff were either not competent with their gear placements or there was very poor protection on the climb.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 17, 2008, 5:09 AM
Post #166 of 228
(7913 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
patto wrote: The focus on a 2 piece anchor vs a 3 piece anchor is erroneous. A decent 2 piece anchor should EASILY handle anything you throw at it. I often rely on two piece anchors[.]
We won't be climbing together anytime soon, then.
In reply to: If you can't trust your placing of totally bomber gear in anchors why do you trust it leading?
By that logic you should only build 1-piece belay anchors.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
alleyehave
Sep 17, 2008, 7:00 AM
Post #167 of 228
(7882 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2005
Posts: 461
|
Would anyone like to go climb this route with me? I'll bring the camera :)
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Sep 17, 2008, 11:39 AM
Post #168 of 228
(7867 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
patto wrote: It seems clear here that those on the cliff were either not competent with their gear placements or there was very poor protection on the climb.
Bill
(This post was edited by billl7 on Sep 17, 2008, 11:43 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Sep 17, 2008, 1:05 PM
Post #169 of 228
(7836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
jt512 wrote: patto wrote: The focus on a 2 piece anchor vs a 3 piece anchor is erroneous. A decent 2 piece anchor should EASILY handle anything you throw at it. I often rely on two piece anchors[.] We won't be climbing together anytime soon, then. In reply to: If you can't trust your placing of totally bomber gear in anchors why do you trust it leading? By that logic you should only build 1-piece belay anchors. Jay
Jay, it all a continuum. Why stop at three pieces in an anchor, why not four why not five?
My risk assesment says that two absolutely bomber pieces are enough. If I need can't trust two good pieces the I would be facing a hitting the deck in most of my leads.
I have bailed off a single piece before. I was more than happy to trust my life to a single piece. For a solid metal hex placed in a constricting crack to fail the whole cliff would have had to cleave apart.
My brother took a mine rescue course the other month. Mining is one of the most safety concious industry around. Do you know how many points they have in their anchors? 1. Be it a stout beam or a tree, one is enough if it is good.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Sep 17, 2008, 1:09 PM
Post #170 of 228
(7835 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Sketched out next pitch or chance of big fall onto the anchors?
I DO put in 4 or 5 pieces. (obviously only when this is possible. But I have no ego issues- possible fall onto poor anchors= rap off.)
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Sep 17, 2008, 1:35 PM
Post #171 of 228
(7819 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
Adding another perspect on number of pieces in an anchor ...
Some of us will throw away a cam that has been dropped from 50 feet even if there is no discernable damage. What is the history of the rock in contact with an anchor piece? We don't know.
I nominally trust my life to two independent pieces of climbing gear, be that biners or slings or isolated strands of an equalette. And not only do I know the history of my climbing gear, I also know it was made by a company for the purpose.
What is really within that load bearing part of that rock? We don't know other than by what is on the surface.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Sep 17, 2008, 1:39 PM
Post #172 of 228
(7815 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
patto wrote: jt512 wrote: patto wrote: The focus on a 2 piece anchor vs a 3 piece anchor is erroneous. A decent 2 piece anchor should EASILY handle anything you throw at it. I often rely on two piece anchors[.] We won't be climbing together anytime soon, then. In reply to: If you can't trust your placing of totally bomber gear in anchors why do you trust it leading? By that logic you should only build 1-piece belay anchors. Jay Jay, it all a continuum. Why stop at three pieces in an anchor, why not four why not five? My risk assesment says that two absolutely bomber pieces are enough. If I need can't trust two good pieces the I would be facing a hitting the deck in most of my leads.
I've built four-piece anchors when I'm dealing with small pro, or when I'm not in love with one of the placements. Besides, both anchor pieces and subsequent piece the leader placed blew. We don't know exactly why, but by definition none of them were bomber. When someone is new to leading, I'd much rather see over-built anchors than skimping. It's pure speculation, but an upward directional might have kept that nut properly seated.
patto wrote: I have bailed off a single piece before. I was more than happy to trust my life to a single piece. For a solid metal hex placed in a constricting crack to fail the whole cliff would have had to cleave apart.
Apples and oranges. The forces involved in rappelling are vastly different from a fall directly on the anchors. The anchor is your last line of defense from (usually) every party member being swept off the route. I recall someone saying (here or elsewhere) that this is a G-rated climb. There's no excuse for blown anchors in that case.
|
|
|
|
|
reg
Sep 17, 2008, 2:29 PM
Post #173 of 228
(7789 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1560
|
patto wrote: Jay, it all a continuum. Why stop at three pieces in an anchor, why not four why not five? My risk assesment says that two absolutely bomber pieces are enough. If I need can't trust two good pieces the I would be facing a hitting the deck in most of my leads. I have bailed off a single piece before. I was more than happy to trust my life to a single piece. For a solid metal hex placed in a constricting crack to fail the whole cliff would have had to cleave apart. My brother took a mine rescue course the other month. Mining is one of the most safety concious industry around. Do you know how many points they have in their anchors? 1. Be it a stout beam or a tree, one is enough if it is good.
that question (bolding) is exactlly why john long coined the phrase: "good enough". two hangers on 3/8 rawls, three "bomber" pieces, a "jesus nut", etc is good enough. more if one wants but you could go to extremes, waste time and put yourself and others in danger. no point as the gains afforded by a fourth piece of gear are minimal as long as the three are in good rock, of substantial size and equalized or oriented to the expected direction of load.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Sep 17, 2008, 2:43 PM
Post #174 of 228
(7775 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
reg wrote: patto wrote: Jay, it all a continuum. Why stop at three pieces in an anchor, why not four why not five? My risk assesment says that two absolutely bomber pieces are enough. If I need can't trust two good pieces the I would be facing a hitting the deck in most of my leads. I have bailed off a single piece before. I was more than happy to trust my life to a single piece. For a solid metal hex placed in a constricting crack to fail the whole cliff would have had to cleave apart. My brother took a mine rescue course the other month. Mining is one of the most safety concious industry around. Do you know how many points they have in their anchors? 1. Be it a stout beam or a tree, one is enough if it is good. that question (bolding) is exactlly why john long coined the phrase: "good enough". two hangers on 3/8 rawls, three "bomber" pieces, a "jesus nut", etc is good enough. more if one wants but you could go to extremes, waste time and put yourself and others in danger. no point as the gains afforded by a fourth piece of gear are minimal as long as the three are in good rock, of substantial size and equalized or oriented to the expected direction of load.
Reg, why are "two hangers on 3/8 rawls, three 'bomber' pieces, a 'jesus nut'" good enough, yet two "bomber" pieces aren't?
Your answer above is just "cause I said so".
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Sep 17, 2008, 2:50 PM
Post #175 of 228
(7951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
shockabuku wrote: reg wrote: patto wrote: Jay, it all a continuum. Why stop at three pieces in an anchor, why not four why not five? My risk assesment says that two absolutely bomber pieces are enough. If I need can't trust two good pieces the I would be facing a hitting the deck in most of my leads. I have bailed off a single piece before. I was more than happy to trust my life to a single piece. For a solid metal hex placed in a constricting crack to fail the whole cliff would have had to cleave apart. My brother took a mine rescue course the other month. Mining is one of the most safety concious industry around. Do you know how many points they have in their anchors? 1. Be it a stout beam or a tree, one is enough if it is good. that question (bolding) is exactlly why john long coined the phrase: "good enough". two hangers on 3/8 rawls, three "bomber" pieces, a "jesus nut", etc is good enough. more if one wants but you could go to extremes, waste time and put yourself and others in danger. no point as the gains afforded by a fourth piece of gear are minimal as long as the three are in good rock, of substantial size and equalized or oriented to the expected direction of load. Reg, why are "two hangers on 3/8 rawls, three 'bomber' pieces, a 'jesus nut'" good enough, yet two "bomber" pieces aren't? Your answer above is just "cause I said so".
I would never belay off one piece if I had the choice.
EVEN if it was a jezuz nut. Which doesn't even have a touch on the jezuz thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
