|
Arrogant_Bastard
Jan 3, 2008, 6:02 PM
Post #101 of 120
(5245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
tradmanclimbs wrote: Thanks Curt for the spell check. Thanks reno for provideing the propper link to the frankenstine acciden t thread. I imagin you guys will want to get over there on neclimbs to flame the poor guy and point out all his mistakes 
I'd like to buy a vowel
|
|
|
|
|
socalclimber
Jan 4, 2008, 2:41 PM
Post #102 of 120
(5200 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437
|
Well, I know it's already been said, but I will say it again. Things like middle marks, taped ends etc are not dangerous, just like the GriGri is not dangerous. What's dangerous is the person using the gear. CHECK THE ENDS! If the rap is long or multi pitch, tie knots in the ends if you wish. Be prepared and know how to ascend the rope.
It's not complicated.
(This post was edited by socalclimber on Jan 4, 2008, 2:47 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Jan 4, 2008, 3:37 PM
Post #103 of 120
(5190 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
socalclimber wrote: Well, I know it's already been said, but I will say it again. Things like middle marks, taped ends etc are not dangerous, just like the GriGri is not dangerous. What's dangerous is the person using the gear. CHECK THE ENDS! If the rap is long or multi pitch, tie knots in the ends if you wish. Be prepared and know how to ascend the rope. It's not complicated.
Well put. The thread I see running through all these reports is a lack of knowledge about the gear people are using. (If I had a rope with both middle and end marks, I'd feel compelled to inform partners at least the first time we used the rope together.) On top of that, there have not been adequate procedures in place to prevent these accidents and close calls. I find that much more concerning.
If you manage to pull 10 meters of rope and stop at the end mark without a warning bell going off, there should still be ample opportunity to realize your error. There must be no visual inspection to confirm that the ends are where you want them (both before and during the rappel). If your partner is on the ground, there must be no effort to check your ends or provide a fireman's belay. There must be no knots on the ends of your rope.
Putting blind faith in a rope marking and paying little attention to the task at hand while rappelling are two bad habits that I'd expect to catch up with someone. None of us are perfect, which is exactly why we try to build in so much redundancy and checks. That's what I really see breaking down here.
|
|
|
|
|
wmfork
Jan 5, 2008, 4:43 PM
Post #104 of 120
(5155 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 4, 2006
Posts: 348
|
I don't know why this is still being argued, either. But it's really quite simple. If end marks can provide significant life saving benefit after we, the consumers gets familiarized with it, then it may be a good design choice. Otherwise, the numerous accidents or near accidents have already proven it to be a really bad idea in the real world. What climbers should or should not do is irrelevant to the discussion.
markc wrote: If you manage to pull 10 meters of rope and stop at the end mark without a warning bell going off, there should still be ample opportunity to realize your error. There must be no visual inspection to confirm that the ends are where you want them (both before and during the rappel). If your partner is on the ground, there must be no effort to check your ends or provide a fireman's belay. There must be no knots on the ends of your rope.
And I bet these were the arguments the rope designers were going thru their head when they thought end marks can't be that confusing. But, there existed real world situations (with potentially fatal consequences) where you did not need to pull the rope through the anchor (carabiners already on the anchor), you partner and you are both at the anchor, there is a drop off prevent you from visually inspect the ends and tying knots would have increase the chance of the rope getting caught on trees/bushes.
Now is there something the climber could have done to ensure a safe rappel? sure, but so much for the redundancy, huh?
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jan 5, 2008, 8:07 PM
Post #105 of 120
(5142 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
Some of these guys just like to argue. I am quite sure that if we switched the trafic lights so that green was stop and red was go these assholes would be argueing that your supposed to look both ways at the intersection and only noobs would run the light and get in a wreck.
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Jan 5, 2008, 9:39 PM
Post #106 of 120
(5132 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
tradmanclimbs wrote: Some of these guys just like to argue. I am quite sure that if we switched the trafic lights so that green was stop and red was go these assholes would be argueing that your supposed to look both ways at the intersection and only noobs would run the light and get in a wreck.
That's bullshit and you know it. I could point out at least 10 examples of how your wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jan 5, 2008, 10:32 PM
Post #107 of 120
(5130 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
Bullshit on you an all you fucking jerks who keep saying that there is nothing wrong with that rope marking system regardless of how many accidents happen with it and even more near misses. You guys are so fucking cool and your answers for just about every accident on this board seems to boil down to that guy should have known better yada yada ya.... fact is there seem to be a lot of incidents with the end marking system and that makes it an unsafe system. Defending the system by calling all the victims and near victims morons is beyond stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Jan 6, 2008, 5:08 AM
Post #110 of 120
(5102 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
tradmanclimbs wrote: ...these assholes would be argueing that...
I don't recall ever calling you an asshole. While I admit I have my moments, I don't see how it's relevant to the discussion.
tradmanclimbs wrote: Bullshit on you an all you fucking jerks who keep saying that there is nothing wrong with that rope marking system regardless of how many accidents happen with it and even more near misses...Defending the system by calling all the victims and near victims morons is beyond stupid.
If you review my comments in the thread, you'll see I've never defended the 10-meter marks. I've never referred to the OP as a moron, but I've expressed a lot of concern with the breakdown in what I consider important checks. You seem to minimize that in order to lambast end marks. I realize you feel strongly about this, but I don't think your rants advance your case.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jan 6, 2008, 12:45 PM
Post #111 of 120
(5080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
Sorry for being so general but it is a sad fact that a large part of the response to most accident reports on this site boils down to a bunch of elitest crap. Look back to the start of this thread and you will see that the OP was repetdly refered to as a moron. I just cant see how normaly intelegent people would look at a significant number of accidents involving the end marking system and go out of their way to blame those accidents on other factors ignoring the common factor in all the incidents which is the partys involved being missled by the marking system. If we are to follow the theory that you are not supposed to rely on rope marks for safe rope handeling then there should be NO bi colored ropes and No middle marks on any ropes. If that is what you want then why defend the end mark system?
|
|
|
|
|
timd
Jan 6, 2008, 1:46 PM
Post #112 of 120
(5075 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2003
Posts: 862
|
tradmanclimbs wrote: Sorry for being so general but it is a sad fact that a large part of the response to most accident reports on this site boils down to a bunch of elitest crap. Look back to the start of this thread and you will see that the OP was repetdly refered to as a moron. I just cant see how normaly intelegent people would look at a significant number of accidents involving the end marking system and go out of their way to blame those accidents on other factors ignoring the common factor in all the incidents which is the partys involved being missled by the marking system. If we are to follow the theory that you are not supposed to rely on rope marks for safe rope handeling then there should be NO bi colored ropes and No middle marks on any ropes. If that is what you want then why defend the end mark system?
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Jan 6, 2008, 2:47 PM
Post #113 of 120
(5071 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
personally, I NEVER realy on just a middle mark when I rap. I also rely on flaking out both sides of rope from the ends, on feeling for equal weight on each side after I've thrown the rope, andd on tying knots if there is any doubt.
anyway, this thread reminds me of something I decided re: grigris: if you try to make something idiot-proof, idiots will use it.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 6, 2008, 4:12 PM
Post #114 of 120
(5059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
tradmanclimbs wrote: Sorry for being so general but it is a sad fact that a large part of the response to most accident reports on this site boils down to a bunch of elitest crap. Look back to the start of this thread and you will see that the OP was repetdly refered to as a moron. I just cant see how normaly intelegent people would look at a significant number of accidents involving the end marking system and go out of their way to blame those accidents on other factors ignoring the common factor in all the incidents which is the partys involved being missled by the marking system. If we are to follow the theory that you are not supposed to rely on rope marks for safe rope handeling then there should be NO bi colored ropes and No middle marks on any ropes. If that is what you want then why defend the end mark system?
If you think you can blindly trust rope markings then you are a moron.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jan 7, 2008, 12:44 AM
Post #115 of 120
(5030 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
I certainly don't blindly trust the rope marks but that does not excuse a bad system. I would venture a guess that a manufacturer who sold a product that experienced a high accident rate would be considered fairly moronic if they did not modify the product to address the problem. See CCH. Additionaly many of you are likly full of crap if you claim that you never use the bi weave or rope mark to help manage your rope. Its real easy to make claims of never this and never that but if you climb a lot in many diferent circumstances then you just may find yourself doing things that you swore on the internet that you would never do
|
|
|
|
|
rgold
Jan 7, 2008, 1:14 AM
Post #116 of 120
(5028 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1804
|
I'm not about to call anyone in this discussion an idiot. Most of the points make sense, even when they represent opposite positions. As someone who, many years ago now, pulled the Lynne Hill trick of leading without being tied in (ended up soloing the pitch after the rope dropped off), I'm in a weak position to pontificate about never losing focus.
On the other hand, the increasingly common inclination to guard against every conceivable mistake in every circumstance seems to me to be slow and cumbersome, and sometimes comes with a safety backlash. Part of this is because, in my experience, the folks who embrace extra safety measures don't just do one or two; there's a whole slew of them, and even if no one measure consumes much time, together they can start to be a problem on long routes or with approaching bad weather. I'm speaking from somewhat unfortunate experience here.
I've had ropes with knots in the end hang horizontally to the side in a wind---I will never again tie knots in a situation like that.
If the rationale for tying knots is because attention lapses are possible, then the very same attention lapses lead to pulling the rap line without undoing the knot---epic city.
I've tried at various points to tie both ends of the rappel back to me, but have occasionally built massive tangles that were a real hassle to undo. Besides, this can make it very hard to judge whether your lines reach a stance you would like to aim for. Gave up on that, with one exception: simulrapping, which very occasionally has its uses.
Uneven rap lines have been getting a lot of press recently, with some tragic fatalities to very experienced climbers. When a guy with 40 years experience on all kinds of hard climbs dies because of uneven lines, a reasonable person has to wonder whether their vigilence is absolutely always going to be up to the task.
So there doesn't seem to me to be any perfect answer, and I don't feel all that exercised that other people choose to do more or less than I might.
Getting back to rappelling, the biggest problem is that we do much too much of it. We ought to be a little bit scared every time, but it has gotten far too routine. We look up, we look at the scenery, we inspect nearby climbs, etc., and forget to look down where the ropes are---or aren't.
Here are the various compromises I've made. I offer them as an example with no recommendation or even much justification. Other choices may be as good or better.
Extremely uneven ends. This has never happened to me, and I'd like to be able to claim (in spite of my comments above) that it never will. Basically, I don't use the middle marks that much, because as a half-rope user I usually go for the longer rap with both ropes. Even if only one rope is needed, it is often faster to pull a few feet of a rope through the anchor and knot it to the other rope, rather than pulling half of one rope through and making sure the ends are even. Of course, if I know the rock below is hungry for a knot sandwich, I'll go with the single rope when I can.
When I do use a single rope, I usually coil from the ends to make sure they are even, but of course a middle mark is very helpful for multiple rappels when one is feeding one end through the anchor while pulling.
I don't own any ropes with marks near the ends, so that hasn't been an issue. It seems very unlikely that anyone would pull a few meters through the anchor and rappel. But it seems quite a bit more possible to pull past the real middle mark on to the warning mark for the other end. I think, on balance, I'd rather not have the additional marks, and people that do own such ropes ought to say something to their partners to alert them.
Slightly uneven ends/rapping off the ends. Over the years, I've had too many bad experiences throwing ropes with knots in the ends to make that a universal practice. Since I feel I've protected myself from extremely uneven ends, the issue is whether the ropes are long enough to reach the next stance. I try to stop when I'm thirty feet or so from hanging ends and make a decision about knots. If the landing looks tricky or close to the end of the lines, I'll pull them up and knot them, and try to activate the extra vigilence required to unknot them before pulling the rappel.
In situations that are clearly dicey because of weather or uncertainty, I think it best to lower the first person down. This simple and safe alternative probably should be used more than it is. If communication is a serious problem, occasionally a simul rap might be a good idea. But you have to be certain you will reach a stance, otherwise two people have to prussik back up. As I said, for simul rapping I do tie the ends of the rope back to my harness.
I'm a pretty firm believer in the "fireman's belay" for everyone down after the first person. Adds immediate safety, is much better than a friction-knot back-up, and consumes no significant extra time.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 7, 2008, 2:52 AM
Post #117 of 120
(5013 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
rgold wrote: I'm a pretty firm believer in the " fireman's belay" for everyone down after the first person. Adds immediate safety, is much better than a friction-knot back-up, and consumes no significant extra time.
Don't you hate it when really old guys use archaic idioms without realizing just how many orbits the Earth has made around the sun since the last time it was used. One really old guy to another, I'm guessing you may want to elaborate on that expression if you want to get your point across.
|
|
|
|
|
rgold
Jan 7, 2008, 5:23 AM
Post #118 of 120
(4986 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1804
|
Well, when I use archaic idioms with or without realizing how many earth orbits have elapsed since their last use, I am filled, not with self-hatred, as the logic of your comment suggests, but rather with the warm glow of being incomprehensible and therefore deep.
Feelin' it now...can barely drag myself out of the euphoria to clarify...
Phew, ok. Y'know Joe, I don't think it's an archaic term. Stupid maybe, but reasonably current. I suspect I learned it from some pimply-faced noob on the internet, and now am trying to show off how au courant I am. (Damn: is au courant archaic, or just French?)
A fireman's belay is effected by someone at the bottom of a rappel who holds the ropes and, if the rappeller needs to be slowed or stopped, weights the ropes to achieve this end. What this has to do with Firemen or Firewomen is beyond the horizons of my almost entirely archaic knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
guzzi
Jan 11, 2008, 3:34 AM
Post #119 of 120
(4934 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 5
|
damn the gods must have been looking out for you
|
|
|
|
|
clintcummins
Jan 14, 2008, 10:17 PM
Post #120 of 120
(4869 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2002
Posts: 135
|
Rich,
Well stated, as usual. If it helps, I use the same methods for rappelling that you do (no end knots by default, add them when 30' above the end if it looks close, no middle mark except I do use a biweave rope sometimes). I've been climbing for 35 years; maybe not quite as long as you have. Although you (cleverly?!) did not discuss the knot used to join the rappel ropes - a wise idea since it's not relevant to this thread.
"Fireman's belay" is not archaic around here - the young folks at Stanford say this routinely. I'm sure it just depends on the terminology used by the person who taught a given person.
Lowering one partner on a tricky rappel could be good if it's very windy or there are some deep cracks where a thrown rope could hang up. I think you would want to have the next anchor in sight if you were lowering a partner, to make sure you could communicate.
Another way to go in this situation (windy or major hangup hazards visible from above) is to have the first person coil the doubled ropes over their shoulder and pay out a few coils at a time while rapping. This takes extra time, though (but faster than dealing with a big hangup).
(This post was edited by clintcummins on Jan 15, 2008, 1:29 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
