NEClimbs.com forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Reading the forum on your cell phone? There's an easier way. We've enabled a Tapatalk app that makes browsing the forum a whole lot easier. Check it out in the iPhone or Android store if you don't own it already.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Climbing Physics Puzzler  (Read 2306 times)

pappy

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 306
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #45 on: November 08, 2013, 01:41:20 PM »

Question: what is of bigger concern in a leader fall directly onto the belay - protection failure or sling/cordalette failure?

C. Scrambled Organs.

Seriously, a true factor 2 will break the climber's body. You'd almost wish the gear and cord failed.

yeah. what bugs me about all of these kind of on line debates is that assuming you have competent climbers who have set up an anchor with good gear then pretty much all the BS about how it lashes together and whether in the real world it actually makes a difference is so far out on the margin that it's not worth thinking about. If the leader is going to run it out off the belay where it really matters then you had both better be experienced enough to understand the risk and you'll probably do a good enough job not to require the schematic. It almost creates a false sense of security if you have your anchor system set up perfectly according to Largo when the only thing that really matters is whether your nuts and cams are placed intelligently (or that the bozo who placed the bolts knew what they were doing), and if not having everything else perfect probably won't matter.
Logged
If you're gonna be stupid, you gotta be tough.

SA

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 338
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #46 on: November 08, 2013, 02:36:36 PM »

There are very few climbers here that have been around long enough to experience the " cement block"  drop. The MIT outing club had a setup, near the Uberfall, in the Gunks, in the mid-60's, where a 200 lb. block was hauled up via pulleys, with plenty of slack out, to give the belayer practice in catching falls, using a body belay.

You would be ripped pretty violently off the ground. Perhaps that kind of practice would be more important, than all this emphasis on making things more "complicated".
Logged

sneoh

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1969
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #47 on: November 08, 2013, 02:55:18 PM »

SA, Old Eric, bring back the AMC's "BUCKET".
Logged

"You have to decide to do a flag, where you can broke your vertebrae or a barn door depending of your pro" - the poster formerly known as Champ

OldEric

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 390
  • climb on
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #48 on: November 08, 2013, 03:07:43 PM »

SA, Old Eric, bring back the AMC's "BUCKET".

It's still here!  Sitings are rare but it makes it's annual appearance in late April in the Quincy Quarries.  Seems to be more of a sport climbing bucket these days though as it's weight has dropped from a stout 175 pounds to ~125.  It does share a common heritage to the MIT bucket as the same cast of characters were involved in creating each.

When teaching with it I need to remember to swap out my teaching-in-the-gym-nice-soft-catch hat to my teaching-trad-get-tight-and-inline-with-the-anchors hat.  I think we need to have Champ as a guest lecturer speak on the perils of giving a  sport belay in a trad context (which is  almost as bad as the oppopsite in my experience).
Logged

DLottmann

  • Guest
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #49 on: November 08, 2013, 03:47:53 PM »

yeah. what bugs me about all of these kind of on line debates is that assuming you have competent climbers who have set up an anchor with good gear then pretty much all the BS about how it lashes together and whether in the real world it actually makes a difference is so far out on the margin that it's not worth thinking about... It almost creates a false sense of security if you have your anchor system set up perfectly according to Largo when the only thing that really matters is whether your nuts and cams are placed intelligently (or that the bozo who placed the bolts knew what they were doing), and if not having everything else perfect probably won't matter.

I agree that individual gear placements are more important than what one of dozen different ways you use to join them together to build anchor, except, when climbers are relatively new.

It is my experience that learning to place good solid pro is really hard for most folks to "catch on" quickly. Especially if they've never aid climbed. I know people who have been climbing trad for the better half of a decade and still struggle with their gear placements. In this situation, having anchors over designed can really compensate for 1 or 2 marginal placements...

Instead of Lucky Luke's "Don't Boulder before Trad", I bet "Aid Climb, then Sport Climb/Boulder, then hard Trad" would work great...
Logged

lucky luke

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1489
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #50 on: November 08, 2013, 05:18:43 PM »

Instead of Lucky Luke's "Don't Boulder before Trad", I bet "Aid Climb, then Sport Climb/Boulder, then hard Trad" would work great...

I don't think so. Sport is very interesting in that way that the focus is on movement. You learned to have reflex to use with some obvious piece of protection, fix or cam, to make the harder move.

The reflex that you learned is what you are going to do when the brain don't have time to make a clear decision.

Trad climber begin byeasy route where they are safe and gradually learned what they need. They work there weak aspect. It could be protection, it can be control of yourself, it can be strenght and it could be move. Actually, me level of safety is higher than before. But I have a plateau at 5.x. I want to climb 5.x+1. So, I need to do sport to master the technique. Actually, movement is my weaker part.

Conclusion. sport and trad are equal in quality as a sport. If you want to trad, acquire the reflex of trad. If you like to sport, acquire the reflex of sport.
Logged

Bill

  • NEClimbs Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • It's All Good, Just Climb!
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #51 on: November 08, 2013, 10:30:32 PM »

Yikes! What a thread! 

So I can catch Eric who probably weighs 125 on a good day but XYV (unnamed to protect their identity but they do have a significant ice cream addiction) who is on the far side of 200 is SOL?!?!?!  But wait I have already caught him successfully a couple of times.  (For the record: That would be every time a couple of times. No kersplat. Yet!)  I'm so confused!     

Very confused by the MIT reference!  Does it matter if you are catching a MIT grad Eric? If so, is it a plus or minus factor?  Dave and Susan, if you are out there pay attention to Eric's response!

However since some of you seem to be taking this thread seriously, please consider this.  As a leader do you clip the master point as you head up or depend on the belayer to take the fall off the harness?  Pluses and minuses of each scenario?
 
Recall the OP had the leader clipping the master point.  Sorry Champ if you clip the master point it isn't a FF2 onto the anchor.  But hell let's not get hung up on silly petty details at this point.

I won't be coy about my position. If the anchor is marginal in any way; yeah it does happen, sometimes your don't have a choice; I'm taking it off the harness. And for bonus consideration I would have constructed the anchor with slings (assuming I had any left after the lead) utilizing  sliding-X's.  What do you think? Plus, minus, why? Or screw it, are you are going to the fridge for more ice cream. If so, what flavor?

BTW currently out in Tinsel Town on business.  Drinking some Racer 5.  Can you carry this hops thing too far? (Note: the subtle link to the Beer thread).  Got to go.  Got to hit super taco Friday while drunk thread. (Note: subtle link to Super Topo)
« Last Edit: November 08, 2013, 10:33:47 PM by Bill »
Logged

DLottmann

  • Guest
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #52 on: November 08, 2013, 11:17:26 PM »

...As a leader do you clip the master point as you head up or depend on the belayer to take the fall off the harness?  Pluses and minuses of each scenario?...

Wow Bill, quite a post there!

Will Gadd had some good stuff on your question there;

1) http://willgadd.com/anchor-clipping/

2) http://willgadd.com/anchor-clipping-2/

PS You can never have too many hops... Triple IPA FTW!
Logged

strandman

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4633
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #53 on: November 09, 2013, 09:34:28 AM »

Bill- you want to hit A HOKIE DOG in LA  it may kill you, but it's good

Always belay off the harness..THROUGH a piece and you'll be OK
Logged

pappy

  • NEClimbs Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 306
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #54 on: November 09, 2013, 11:16:29 AM »


Always belay off the harness..THROUGH a piece and you'll be OK

Must be an old guy thing. I always belay off my harness: I used a Perverso for a few years and invariably someone would climb to the belay and say some variation of 'I can show you how to rig that to auto-block' and my response was always, 'So?'

Besides, it helps lend urgency to your voice when you shout for the second to f*&king get back on the rock.
Logged
If you're gonna be stupid, you gotta be tough.

JakeDatc

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • "Don't worry, this won't hurt me a bit"
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #55 on: November 09, 2013, 03:37:32 PM »


Always belay off the harness..THROUGH a piece and you'll be OK

Must be an old guy thing. I always belay off my harness: I used a Perverso for a few years and invariably someone would climb to the belay and say some variation of 'I can show you how to rig that to auto-block' and my response was always, 'So?'

Besides, it helps lend urgency to your voice when you shout for the second to f*&king get back on the rock.

I thought we were talking about lead belaying...  which you can't do off the anchor. 

i go back and forth with it bringing a 2nd up.  mostly depends on the route and who i'm climbing with. 
Logged
"I really don't know who act like if he have the true." -Champoing

DLottmann

  • Guest
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #56 on: November 09, 2013, 03:55:51 PM »


I thought we were talking about lead belaying...  which you can't do off the anchor. 


You can. Read Will Gadds blog. I think in some situations belaying a leader off an anchor with a GriGri might be even a good choice, however Atc off the waist is 99% the way to go for leader belay 

Forget belaying seconds off the waist on anything but moderate mountaineering routes. For vertical rock climbing direct harness belaying of second sucks IMO, no advantages.
Logged

steve weitzler

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 430
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #57 on: November 09, 2013, 07:00:10 PM »

Call me stupid John; but what is a Hokie Dog?? :( :( :(
Logged

lucky luke

  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1489
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #58 on: November 09, 2013, 10:06:16 PM »


I thought we were talking about lead belaying...  which you can't do off the anchor. 

leader fall, broken arm, one pitch from the top, belaying and they are at the top or doing seven rap in the dark: in trad, there is always a solution. some times we don't have the intelligence to find it...or the time. But belaying a leader from an anchor is possible with one hand.
Logged

Admin Al

  • NEClimbs Administrator
  • NEClimbs God
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7095
  • Climb 'till your forearms turn to jelly!
    • NEClimbs
Re: Climbing Physics Puzzler
« Reply #59 on: November 10, 2013, 04:26:57 PM »


I thought we were talking about lead belaying...  which you can't do off the anchor. 

leader fall, broken arm, one pitch from the top, belaying and they are at the top or doing seven rap in the dark: in trad, there is always a solution. some times we don't have the intelligence to find it...or the time. But belaying a leader from an anchor is possible with one hand.

LOOK... there is always the possible occasion when you need to do something that changes the equation due to a "situation". however, as I understand it in this thread we're talking about the norm. personally I always belay a leader off my harness, and I always clip into the master point as the first until the leader gets in a good 1st piece up there somewhere. those of you who feel differently, do whatever you want, but I have absolutely no interest in trying to hold a leader fall on my harness right off the belay with no gear between me & the leader!
Logged
Al Hospers
____________________________________
my music
 https://www.facebook.com/BlackMountainRamblers

web hosting, design and software programming:
 http://www.cambersoft.com
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.222 seconds with 23 queries.