|
phlsphr
Oct 3, 2007, 8:51 PM
Post #76 of 86
(2048 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2003
Posts: 262
|
According to Carlos, the climber's helmet was never visible over top of the ledge. So, there was always a wall of rock between the climber and the belayer that blocked her from sight, and made audio communication at least more difficult than normally would be the case. I'll be curious to see, next time I'm on the climb, just how hard it is to hear the climber from the belay when the climber is on the hardest part of the route. From the descriptions above it would seem the climber at least made one request for the belayer to take up slack while she removed gear, and from Carlos' account it would seem he heard nothing from her at all.
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Oct 3, 2007, 9:03 PM
Post #77 of 86
(2042 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
phlsphr wrote: According to Carlos, the climber's helmet was never visible over top of the ledge. So, there was always a wall of rock between the climber and the belayer that blocked her from sight, and made audio communication at least more difficult than normally would be the case. I'll be curious to see, next time I'm on the climb, just how hard it is to hear the climber from the belay when the climber is on the hardest part of the route. From the descriptions above it would seem the climber at least made one request for the belayer to take up slack while she removed gear, and from Carlos' account it would seem he heard nothing from her at all.
personally, I am not doubting their ability to communicate or not. I am doubting the estimates of height. I am suggesting support for a fall of around 10 feet as the belayer said. In fact, after you make it 10 feet, the crux was mostly over despite not being able to see over the top of the climb yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Oct 4, 2007, 3:12 AM
Post #79 of 86
(1977 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
Your image:
I think the next two moves are the crux if I remember correctly, and that seems to be about 10 feet above the ledges. It is also clear that if the climber makes it 20 feet, then they are going to be at 5.0 climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
hyhuu
Oct 4, 2007, 11:52 AM
Post #80 of 86
(1938 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2001
Posts: 492
|
I find it interesting that eyewitnesses can account for the length of the fall without actually seeing the fall itself. From the description in the thread, it was only upon the sound of the impact that others realized she fell.
|
|
|
|
|
gimmeslack
Oct 4, 2007, 12:30 PM
Post #81 of 86
(1929 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2006
Posts: 136
|
microbarn wrote: I think the next two moves are the crux if I remember correctly, and that seems to be about 10 feet above the ledges. It is also clear that if the climber makes it 20 feet, then they are going to be at 5.0 climbing.
I've only followed it once (a couple of weeks before this incident) and so my recollection may be flawed and worse yet, noob distorted:
I think the ledge visible at bottom of photo is a several feet (4-5'?) above belay stance. It's easy getting there. Beyond that ledge it seemed pretty easy climbing with only the slightly leaning stance (beginning where climber is shown) starting to get akward. There's a two move crux right above his head. I would not call the ramp which follows 5.0, but yes, it's low 5. My leader's pro was all accesible from pretty good stances (and adequate), but if you were trying to clean a little over your head at the last pre-crux stance, it would be easy to slide off. My guess is that if you were moving up into the crux and slid off, you 'd be falling an easy 10-15 feet and then could bounce/roll off another couple of feet onto LeGourmet ledge.
I also recall that it was not easy to hear my belayer until I "rounded the corner".
Lastly, I think that unless the belayer has extended themselves down near the ramp (and is instead belaying further up near the tree), there might be rope drag, communication, and visibility issues (would not see helmet till climber is solidly on the ramp).
If Naitch is reading, he can correct my errors :-]
For the sake of "lessons for noobs" it would be nice if Carlos or someone else who was there could get the "fallers" story? I can't imagine taking much of a 2nd fall on this climb unless something "abnormal" was in play as others have suggested (climbing past pro, hung-up rope, way too much slack given...).
FWIW that's not my photo. Apologies to whomever it belongs to. Can't recall if I found it on RC or just googling... was fishing for beta.
Cheers,
|
|
|
|
|
phlsphr
Oct 4, 2007, 1:03 PM
Post #82 of 86
(1915 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2003
Posts: 262
|
Thanks for posting the picture. That helps a lot. As to the distance of the fall, it should be noted that the main Le Gormet ledge is a bit lower yet--note the rope continues to go down past the small ledge at the bottom of the picture. I take it from the description that the climber hit the ledge at the bottom of the picture on the way down and then really slammed into the main Le Gormet ledge (which is huge).
I was just remembering wrong about the inverted C crap I posted above--the C is the whole climb and it faces in the right direction. But the basic point I was making is still true. Early on there is a lot of rock between the climber and the the end of the route which is at the base of the rightmost tree you see at the top of the picture. Moreover, the climber in that picture is climbing the climb well (except, dude, where's your helmet?). An inexperienced climber will often get pulled more more into the corner and consequently have more trouble communicating.
The picture also leaves me even more doubtful about the climbing past gear theory posted above. She'd have to climb waaaay past some gear to fall free all the way down to the Le Gormet ledge.
|
|
|
|
|
naitch
Oct 4, 2007, 3:35 PM
Post #83 of 86
(1879 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2002
Posts: 539
|
Yeah, the C is in the correct orientation as you corrected yourself. I was going to mention that. and pint people to a picture in the guide, however the posted picture does an excellent job of that. If the belayer is anchored at the rap tree, I would guess that the belayer would not be able to see the follower for at least 50% of the climb.
The book lists the climb as 50'. I think if you go all the way to the rap tree and anchor there, it's probably more. I think at least a 15' fall would be possible (I'm not saying that this was the case) depending upon whether you measure from the head of the follower to the belayer ledge or if you're measuring from follower's feet to ledge.
Communication is most definitely an issue because I've taken numerous fairly new trad followers and have been concerned about this very fact. Thus my practice of always tying in to the rap/belay tree and then walking back down the top of the "C" a ways. Even then I can not see the climber for the whole climb. It's not till they are at the top of the crux that I can start to see their helmet. There are numerious climbs as Seneca where communication is an issue even with the belayer trying to do everything possible to stay in contact with the follower. This definitely adds to the difficulty factor with new trad climbers and new partners.
I'm sure that all this conjecture could be cleared up if the follower remembers exactly was she was doing before the fall. Given the facts and what Carlos has said, I still feel the only explanation is climbing past a piece of gear.
|
|
|
|
|
mountainman
Dec 13, 2007, 5:21 AM
Post #84 of 86
(1669 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 29, 2003
Posts: 337
|
Has Katrina recovered? Did she go climbing again?
I ask because I was on the rescue. I can still hear the fall.
|
|
|
|
|
mountainman
Jan 19, 2008, 5:19 AM
Post #86 of 86
(1432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 29, 2003
Posts: 337
|
Still hoping to hear how Katrina is doing. This accident haunts me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seneca Front C 2 sm.jpg
