Forums: Climbing Information: General: Re: [jomagam] Belay from the Top: Edit Log

Partner cracklover

Sep 6, 2012, 3:37 PM

Views: 5697

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [jomagam] Belay from the Top
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  

jomagam wrote:
jt512 wrote:

Because when you self-belay, you have to allow slack to accumulate in the rope, since you can't continuously take in rope while you're climbing. An alert belayer, on the other hand, can keep almost no slack in the rope at all times.

Sure, point is that you have to be more attentive belaying from top than from bottom.

No you don't. I can eat a sandwich and keep a few pounds of force on the belay rope at all times just as well from the bottom as from the top. Either way, as soon as the climber moves up, I take in slack. Of course if the climber wants to move down, I may have to drop my sandwich, but I'll make that rat bastard pay for his insolence!

In reply to:
jt512 wrote:
There is a big difference between taking a short fall onto a short segment of semi-static rope, and just sagging on to the rope with no slack in it. The latter has a fall factor of zero, and so it really doesn't matter how much rope is in the system or even whether it is a dynamic rope or not. The maximum impact force will be low (twice your weight, theoretically).

Why max impact force of twice the weight for 0 fall factor ? My guts say that the max force would be the weight of the climber.

Your guts are apparently not all that knowledgeable in the realm of physics. Don't take it hard, though - my guts are much better about selecting which toppings to select to make a pizza yummy for me than they are at solving physics problems.

Hmm, all this talk about pizza and sandwiches is making me hungry. Think I'll go have a snack.


(This post was edited by cracklover on Sep 6, 2012, 3:38 PM)

Edit Log:
Post edited by cracklover () on Sep 6, 2012, 3:38 PM

Search for (options)

Log In:

Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?