kamil wrote:Are yous thinking of adding peak pages?

As the peaks of this royal ridge are not that distinct, I'd propose adding routes instead of peaks. A description of the ridge would be extremely helpful (this would also deal with all the peaks) for example. Than the chains (Deubel) route, very scenic and popular, plus those unmarked ledges: BdM, BC, BR and of course the padinas

peterbud wrote:

kamil wrote:Are yous thinking of adding peak pages?

As the peaks of this royal ridge are not that distinct, I'd propose adding routes instead of peaks. A description of the ridge would be extremely helpful (this would also deal with all the peaks) for example. Than the chains (Deubel) route, very scenic and popular, plus those unmarked ledges: BdM, BC, BR and of course the padinas

Of course it will be routes not peaks . I will try to start with the north ridge soon that I can, still need some details photos from there. About the unmarked routes, I had already some arguings with the rescue team that is not good to give details about it, most to make routes pages because of posible accidents or getting lost (to get lost yes it is so easy, I lost the path myself in my last out there and wasnt easy to get back)... But in a way on romanian sites you can find plenty of this descriptions so Im not sure how is better ... Otherwise some of climbers that post TR about unmarked routes they dont give you the keys infos... they want to keep it secret for not being destroyed by too many that will go there...

Kamil,

Thanks - I've read more about those US classes, then replaced the controversial piece with around the upper limits of YDS class 4 - this seems to be more suitable.

andreeacorodeanu wrote:the north ridge soon that I can, still need some details photos from there. About the unmarked routes, I had already some arguings with the rescue team that is not good to give details about it, most to make routes pages because of posible accidents or getting lost (to get lost yes it is so easy, I lost the path myself in my last out there and wasnt easy to get back)... But in a way on romanian sites you can find plenty of this descriptions so Im not sure how is better ... Otherwise some of climbers that post TR about unmarked routes they dont give you the keys infos... they want to keep it secret for not being destroyed by too many that will go there...

Good points there, pro and contra. I understand the viewpoint of the rescue team, they want less problem for the visitors and also for themselves But, as you say there is definitely information out there, well enough to raise interest and get people into going up the unmarked routes, but not good enough to provide them a solid reference to rely on, therefore increasing the chance to get in trouble. It is very important to stress out clearly that these paths are for people who are already 1) familiar with PC 2) familiar with rock climbing and the safety issues concerning it 3) have no problems with orientation, and if they get lost, they are prepared to bivouac. Perhaps this sounds like scaring off, but that's how it should be presented to prevent unskilled hikers from entering the territory which they are not comfortable with.

Anyway, just start off with the ridge as you mentioned, then you'll have time to think over the disclosure of hidden paths Btw, where did you get lost?

Yes you understand so well .

Hahaha, I wanted to go from Padina Lancii to Poiana Inchisa then getting out through a chimney to the ridge but... We done a mistake on Padina Lancii, after some rocksteps we should go in right but we keep it in the left looking for us like a main line. We find another rocksteps till we got to one that we couldnt pass it. (Pass through my mind that is too hard the route then the description from the book but my partner wanted so bad to try furthur...) Then we try to see if we can detour it from the right and climb another hard rockstep. We got somewhere on some goats paths very steep and I understand that we will not get out anywhere so we decide to go back. Descending the last rockstep without a rope was a big chalange hahahah. To be everything much nicer start to rain and the rock become slippy . Now I know how to get there, but look how easy you can wrong the way even with a description with you...

Andreea, that reminds me of one day in Snowdonia many years ago when we went up in a completely wrong place. We were prepared for an easy scramble so no rope, no gear, no nothing, ended up on steep choss and grass of III-IV UIAA. Finally climbed to the ridge somehow, but boy was it well scary
I like Peter's points but those are not my mountains (yet ) so you both decide what to publish. Anyway, when I go there I can always ask you in person for some secret beta

borutb wrote:

yatsek wrote: Actually, IMO the very bottom grades of the UIAA scale (0 to I) aren't very helpful at all.

Do you know if and/or how they are defined (by UIAA)?

Not really, I've just seen, in some route descriptions, things like UIAA 0+/I. I've always had the feeling this may refer to exposure rather than "difficulty", so maybe the US definition for a class 4 scramble really does describe them best.

I invite everyone to participate in this :
north-carpatian-regional-discussion-and-conditions-reports-t55451.html
Thanks !

kamil wrote:Andreea, that reminds me of one day in Snowdonia many years ago when we went up in a completely wrong place. We were prepared for an easy scramble so no rope, no gear, no nothing, ended up on steep choss and grass of III-IV UIAA. Finally climbed to the ridge somehow, but boy was it well scary
I like Peter's points but those are not my mountains (yet ) so you both decide what to publish. Anyway, when I go there I can always ask you in person for some secret beta

Hahaha, like us, just that we couldnt climb up anywhere, we could get stuck and for sure couldnt get down, I asked somebody... Also I saw 1 piton, very old, so others got lost also and rapel from there...
Glad to hear that you plann to climb here and of course you can ask anything you want !

Borut, I think you're right.
I know the scrambling route to Gierlach is I UIAA. I found the hardest place of scrambling to Maja Jezerce in Prokletije from south-west of similar technical difficulty and then found an American report grading it as class 3. So I can imagine that scrambling more difficult than this would be class 4, where those not used to it would prefer to rope up, which is exactly the definition of II UIAA for me. III or 5.x is where even most climbers would rather rope up.

I am pretty sure UIAA IV = YDS 5.5/5.6
So, UIAA III must be about YDS 5.3/5.4
Then UIAA II = YDS 5.2/5.3
And UIAA I = YDS class 4 to 5.1

class 4 = approx. UIAA 0+

I thought so some time ago too. But read a few American TRs here with descriptions and pics of class 4 and it looks like our II. I guess III is all from 5.0 to 5.4. May look weird but that's the only logical explanation to me.
Anyway, let's ask Michael (mvs) or someone who's familiar with both systems.

Don't remember those theoretical details... I just know when I've got to actively use hands (not just for balance or supporting myself) then it's at least grade I. When it gets a bit harder it's II.
On III I may feel like roping up or not, depending on the place, the route and how I feel that day
And all that precisely fits the definitions of YDS class 3, 4 and low 5 that were quoted above.

kamil wrote:Anyway, let's ask Michael (mvs) or someone who's familiar with both systems.

This is such an answer, it looks like it's from Oregon.

borutb wrote:kamil, do you know of any "official' description of UIAA I ?

I remember that for grade IV, easy overhang climbing (big holds, only a few moves) may appear for the first time.

This is it, I'd say. (A grade V overhang was too much for me.)