SummitPost.org

The Chief wrote:

mrchad9 wrote:

Bob Burd wrote:My point is that mountaineering involves a great many tradeoffs and it's simply impossible to say that having a 60m rope is always better than having a 30m rope.

You seem to have a really hard time understanding that point. Just because someone doesn't do something your way doesn't mean that they are unsafe. It doesn't even mean that your way is better. Don't be so butthurt everyone doesn't do things the exact same way you do.

The Manufactures of those 30m cords specifically state NOT TO BE USED FOR MOUNTAINEERING OR ROCKCLIMBING!

Thus Bob Burds post goes counter what the manufactures instructions dictate. Just cus Bob Burd says it so, does not make it safe either.


I have learned to use all my gear according to how an what the manufacture intends/instructs it to be used for. I DO NOT IMPLEMENT unsafe mannerism of using it to make things lighter nor faster. That practice kills as evidenced by the many of the latest operational fatalities throughout the mountaineering and climbing community in the past 5 or so years.

I think the problem is that the manufacturers are thinking of "climbing" differently-- several pitches on 5.scary, lots of vertical rock with a potential for fall factors >0.5. They would rather people do that with two 8.2mm ropes, or one 10.5 mm rope.

I think what the OP meant was: a section or two of 4+ that gets in the way of the summit and the return, and the rope is most likely to be used on the return. Canyoneers do some pretty long rappels off 8.2mm ropes with pull lines; but they rarely load the rope with much more force than static body weight. But then again, the rope is typically static.

The most useful emergency gear is that which you will actually carry. If weight is a major factor in your decisions, and you have just one heavy rope, then you may choose not to take a rope at all (and later regret it). Or you may take the heavy rope and leave out emergency bivy stuff, which could be the gear that saves your life.

I am glad someone here understands this process.

On most of those routes, such as Mount Humphreys, the rope was only used on the return.

Clear cut Chad per the OP.

The manu's ARE NOT thinking anything regardless how short surmounting any 5th Class section (NOT JUST MOUNT HUMPHREYS) may entail per the OP as I posted. Doing so is not considered an emergency either. Rather it is a preplanned excursion that requires the proper equipment to do so.

A SINGLE 30m 8.0mm rope IS NOT DESIGNED NOR INTENDED for any type of MOUNTAINEERING or ROCKCLIMBING (which includes RAPPELING) where a DYNAMIC fall (regardless if it is a Leader or Second) may/can occur. Achieving any 5th Class section/summit block regardless how short it may be, entails a belay. If one intends to do so in just that fashion, then the rope you posted Chad, IS NOT INTENDED NOR DESIGNED for doing so. Period.


Also, as I posted earlier, far too many these days are posting information on using equipment in the manner which manufactures distinctly warn against doing so. The record of occurrences and then their fatal demise by those doing so speaks for itself.

UTILIZE AND PROMOTE the equipment ONLY as the manufactures specifically designed it to be used for. Not how one "thinks" it should be used.

It still worked.

Imagine how different a world we'd live in if folks only used duct tape for sealing ducts.

Chief, I know you understand the physics of climbing and equipment as well as anyone alive. As in any good engineering, a manufacturer designs his equipment to take the worst possible forces that can be imagined. For a rope, this is probably going to be a full length 2x fall with a very big climber on the end of it. So the manufacturer makes the rope thick enough and strong enough for this purpose, tests it, and judges it safe for rock climbing. The thinner ropes are unable to take these types of forces and are deemed UNSAFE for climbing purposes by the manufacturer. Fine, we all get that. But if we use them for rappel and short sections of typical, far-from-vertical Sierra rock, they are more than adequate. You seem to take the position that climbers are not smart enough to make these types of judgments and should therefore never doing anything against the manufacturer recommendation. We understand your position as a guide means you can't recommend anything against institutionalized safety protocol. Your continuing in your job capacity depends on it. We get that too. But do you have to be so damned insistent that the rest of us are always so damned wrong?

I'm guessing that The Chief is picturing something like a belay on the summit block of Thunderbolt (stretching the 4+ criterion). The purpose of that belay seems to be: keep a 10' fall from turning into a 500' fall.

But I think that most of us lesser types would, in that case, opt for the lasso method, and not attempt a 5.8 block directly. Then the leader would top-belay the rest, or they would simply climb the rope. We would self-limit.

Bob,

If the rope is NOT specifically designed to take any type fall, dynamic or static, regardless of length, diameter or climbers size, no one should publicly endorse it's use to be used as such. The manu's specifications/instructions are just that and should not be compromised in any public forum such as this one by you nor anyone. That is totally irresponsible to do so.

This has nothing to do with me insisting that you or anyone else is "wrong". Has to do with the promoting of equipment and it's use for/in the "wrong" application and in doing so, possibly setting someone up for injury or death in doing so. That my friend is indeed "wrong" and irresponsible no matter how you or anyone looks at it.

The Chief wrote:If the rope is NOT specifically designed to take any type fall, dynamic or static, regardless of length, diameter or climbers size, no one should publicly endorse it's use to be used as such.

What exactly does that mean? They make ropes that can't take ANY type of fall? These thinner ropes are designed to be used as doubles and used as doubles, they can handle a fall per the manufacturer specifications. Simple maths suggests a single one of these ropes can take half the maximum load of the double system. I know that's over-simplifying. But in the applications we're talking about (rappelling, short belays) where the forces are on the order of 1/10 to 1/100th the maximum specification, I judge them to be more than adequate. The manufacture can't recommend this because someone might run out the entire length over a vertical wall or otherwise compromise the rope's strength. They have lawyers and insurance companies telling them to be ultra-conservative in what they claim to avoid lawsuits.

I believe one can use good judgment based on sound principles to use equipment outside it's intended use. Am I right that you vehemently disagree with this statement?

x15x15 wrote:
it sound like the chief is erroring on the safe side, EXACTLY how it should be on the funny SP discussion boards. personally, i find these discussions scary. but hey, cool with me. i like being scared.

Personally I believe the best defense against an accident is having enough fear/being secure enough to back out of something that is over your head. All people have different comfort levels and skills levels. I know some 5.10 leaders who are not comfortable with 5.8 R or RX runouts and know some 5.8 leaders who are comfortable with these same 5.8 runouts. Alex Honnold free soloed routes that some of us will not be able to climb free, ever. Is it right to ONLY climb well protected routes with solid rock, or to climb 5.8 runouts when 5.8 is your limit, or to solo routes of insane difficulty as long as the rock is solid? I don't know, I think all of these are personal choices we have to respect.

I do agree with you and The Chief that it may not be the best thing to advertise own use of ropes that were not designed for a particular activity, but I think OP wants an honest answer. What OP will do with collection of responses (from different individuals with different comfort levels that use ropes on all kinds of different routes) is HIS choice to make. Mountaineering is a complex activity with complex choices. Our fear should be first line of defense against an accident, and what we bring on a climb should be adequate with what we think we will need to get out of it. If something ends up harder than we thought it would be and what we brought is not adequate than we should be comfortable to back out.

I carry all the rope I need in my shorts. Not even a single meter long, but he and his two little friends get me anywhere I want to go.

goldenhopper wrote:I carry all the rope I need in my shorts. Not even a single meter long, but he and his two little friends get me anywhere I want to go.

In other words, a lot of free soloing?

Dave K wrote:

goldenhopper wrote:I carry all the rope I need in my shorts. Not even a single meter long, but he and his two little friends get me anywhere I want to go.

In other words, a lot of free soloing?

At least it doesn't cost anything!

Bob...

Judgement comes from years of experience. It is called wisdom.

Not from hearing or reading it on the internet from someone who has applied their information once or twice, gotten away with it and then having the individual asking the question going out and applying it on their first endeavor.

Endorsing the every day use of any piece of equipment other than what the manu specs state and not heeding the manu's warnings in doing so, is not good judgement imo btw.

Also, I believe it is the responsibility of everyone who has been at this game for a while to call folks on doing so.

There is a lot of stuff I do and have done technique wise that is not nor should it be ever endorsed in public. I will never divulge it in a public forum nor tell anyone that is new to this game to do so. Like rapping off a cut off shoestring girth hitched off on an manky pin or a duck tapped hook in the middle of an electrical storm etc.



VM: Just cus someone gives an "honest answer" does not necessitate that it is the right, appropriate or correct answer. Big difference on the perspective of safety and the proper every day use of equipment.

The Chief wrote:Judgement comes from years of experience. It is called wisdom.

Not from hearing or reading it on the internet from someone who has applied their information once or twice, gotten away with it and then having the individual asking the question going out and applying it on their first endeavor.

I agree that judgment comes from experience, but experience comes from many sources, including message boards. If I can learn from others' experiences, I'm all ears. If others think they can benefit from mine, I'm happy to help out. I try to be honest in my responses and give sound advice. If I think something is sketchy, I wouldn't hesitate to say so. I assume people will use good judgment and that includes whether to take someone's advice or not. You seem to assume they aren't capable of making such judgments and must therefore follow the most conservative path. Or perhaps it's just that you'd feel responsible if someone misapplied your advice and ran into trouble. I can appreciate that, even if I don't feel the same way myself.

In the middle of the Yosemite brochure they hand out to every visitor, in bright red letters on the map it reads "Tenaya Canyon is extremely dangerous and you should stay out." or something to that effect. If everyone followed that sound advice, lives would undoubtedly be saved. I would also have missed out on one of Yosemite's great adventures.

Bob... I did that route yesterday.

That is an outstanding page you submitted for it. Your writeup on SP and a printout of three of your route pictures was the perfect beta.

My favorite trip so far this year and my new favorite in Yosemite as well. Probably will do it every year or so now (dispite the Yosemite brochure's manufacturer's recommendations).

Thanks!