|
jape
Jun 13, 2010, 3:14 PM
Post #1 of 191
(26947 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2009
Posts: 51
|
RRG doesn't really go into what happened in terms of this accident. Previous thread locked. Tragic ending to all this. So what happened...? This has personal relevance as I frequently sport climb at the Red and most everyone considers clipping bolts "safe"...
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Jun 13, 2010, 4:06 PM
Post #2 of 191
(26884 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
jape wrote: RRG doesn't really go into what happened in terms of this accident. Previous thread locked. Tragic ending to all this. So what happened...? This has personal relevance as I frequently sport climb at the Red and most everyone considers clipping bolts "safe"...
add link so we know what you are talking about
|
|
|
|
|
jjhellstrom
Jun 13, 2010, 4:25 PM
Post #3 of 191
(26863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 31, 2005
Posts: 20
|
If you 'consider' any type of climbing as "safe" you are making a very poor assumption.
Also, could be the thread is locked in RRC for a reason??
|
|
|
|
|
jape
Jun 13, 2010, 9:09 PM
Post #4 of 191
(26712 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2009
Posts: 51
|
http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2321037;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;page=unread#unread
Obviously, climbing is inherently dangerous. But come on, use some common sense. Dying on a 5.13 sport route is not "normal" in the parameters of climbing accidents....
Wutever, I'm just trying to get some information...blown clip, belay error, skipping bolt, who knows.
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Jun 13, 2010, 9:12 PM
Post #5 of 191
(26709 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
jape wrote: http://www.rockclimbing.com/...d;page=unread#unread Obviously, climbing is inherently dangerous. But come on, use some common sense. Dying on a 5.13 sport route is not "normal" in the parameters of climbing accidents.... Wutever, I'm just trying to get some information...blown clip, belay error, skipping bolt, who knows.
Clicky
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jun 13, 2010, 11:50 PM
Post #6 of 191
(26644 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
This is the reason why I don't think accident threads should be locked simply because people are discussing the accident.
People withheld information at the time and post the event it doesn't even get discussed.
Ask user: lena_chita
She implied that she knew more information.
We have gotten to the stage where even Mike's grandfather is looking for more information online.
http://www.redriverclimbing.com/...ccident&start=90
(This post was edited by patto on Jun 14, 2010, 1:37 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
bigjonnyc
Jun 15, 2010, 3:12 PM
Post #7 of 191
(26316 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
Bump...
I was just looking to see if anything new was reported in the original thread and found it locked. I too have been wondering about the particulars of this incident, and hoping that those withholding information shortly after the accident had ever come out with a statement. Does anyone know of an official report or something?
|
|
|
|
|
sidepull
Jun 15, 2010, 3:35 PM
Post #8 of 191
(26287 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335
|
weird
|
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
Jun 16, 2010, 12:15 AM
Post #9 of 191
(26139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
bigjonnyc wrote: Bump... I was just looking to see if anything new was reported in the original thread and found it locked. I too have been wondering about the particulars of this incident, and hoping that those withholding information shortly after the accident had ever come out with a statement. Does anyone know of an official report or something?
By "those witholding information" do you mean the badly traumatized partner, the one who will have the scene playing over and over in his head for the rest of his life? Or the family, grieving over a lost loved one?
They are under no obligation to share anything. If they choose to, then they will start a thread on the subject. If they choose not to, then tough.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Jun 16, 2010, 1:02 AM
Post #10 of 191
(26087 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
blondgecko wrote: bigjonnyc wrote: Bump... I was just looking to see if anything new was reported in the original thread and found it locked. I too have been wondering about the particulars of this incident, and hoping that those withholding information shortly after the accident had ever come out with a statement. Does anyone know of an official report or something? By "those witholding information" do you mean the badly traumatized partner, the one who will have the scene playing over and over in his head for the rest of his life? Or the family, grieving over a lost loved one? They are under no obligation to share anything. If they choose to, then they will start a thread on the subject. If they choose not to, then tough.
even when they do, you are ready to shut things down just because you do not like the harsh content.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jun 16, 2010, 1:38 AM
Post #11 of 191
(26045 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
blondgecko wrote: bigjonnyc wrote: Bump... I was just looking to see if anything new was reported in the original thread and found it locked. I too have been wondering about the particulars of this incident, and hoping that those withholding information shortly after the accident had ever come out with a statement. Does anyone know of an official report or something? By "those witholding information" do you mean the badly traumatized partner, the one who will have the scene playing over and over in his head for the rest of his life? Or the family, grieving over a lost loved one? They are under no obligation to share anything. If they choose to, then they will start a thread on the subject. If they choose not to, then tough.
Hey. 
There was considerable debate in the last thread concerning this. You can see my posts and others regarding this matter.
EDIT: Oh you shut the last thread down. Then you should know and understand the issue.
To summerise. Of course there is no obligation for anybody to talk about the accident. However actively repressing infomation when it is fresh in peoples minds is counterproductive. Furthermore coming into threads to post that you know stuff but your not telling seems kinda petty.
Take the recent analysis of the Kaymoor incident. Details were discuss issue were learnt and reinforced and it may save a life in the future. Discussion certainly has a place beyond morbid curiousity.
We now have family members looking for an thorough explanation online but coming up short.
(This post was edited by patto on Jun 16, 2010, 1:54 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
Jun 16, 2010, 3:41 AM
Post #12 of 191
(25998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
patto wrote: blondgecko wrote: bigjonnyc wrote: Bump... I was just looking to see if anything new was reported in the original thread and found it locked. I too have been wondering about the particulars of this incident, and hoping that those withholding information shortly after the accident had ever come out with a statement. Does anyone know of an official report or something? By "those witholding information" do you mean the badly traumatized partner, the one who will have the scene playing over and over in his head for the rest of his life? Or the family, grieving over a lost loved one? They are under no obligation to share anything. If they choose to, then they will start a thread on the subject. If they choose not to, then tough. Hey. There was considerable debate in the last thread concerning this. You can see my posts and others regarding this matter.
EDIT: Oh you shut the last thread down. Then you should know and understand the issue. To summerise. Of course there is no obligation for anybody to talk about the accident. However actively repressing infomation when it is fresh in peoples minds is counterproductive. Furthermore coming into threads to post that you know stuff but your not telling seems kinda petty. Take the recent analysis of the Kaymoor incident. Details were discuss issue were learnt and reinforced and it may save a life in the future. Discussion certainly has a place beyond morbid curiousity. We now have family members looking for an thorough explanation online but coming up short.
What information was "actively repressed"? The only thing that was repressed in that thread was the same thing that led to it being locked - rampant speculation by people who weren't there.
The only people who know anything about the accident are the belayer and anyone who he confided in - and as far as I'm aware, that doesn't include anyone here.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Jun 16, 2010, 4:17 AM
Post #13 of 191
(25962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
patto wrote: blondgecko wrote: bigjonnyc wrote: Bump... I was just looking to see if anything new was reported in the original thread and found it locked. I too have been wondering about the particulars of this incident, and hoping that those withholding information shortly after the accident had ever come out with a statement. Does anyone know of an official report or something? By "those witholding information" do you mean the badly traumatized partner, the one who will have the scene playing over and over in his head for the rest of his life? Or the family, grieving over a lost loved one? They are under no obligation to share anything. If they choose to, then they will start a thread on the subject. If they choose not to, then tough. Hey. There was considerable debate in the last thread concerning this. You can see my posts and others regarding this matter.
EDIT: Oh you shut the last thread down. Then you should know and understand the issue. To summerise. Of course there is no obligation for anybody to talk about the accident. However actively repressing infomation when it is fresh in peoples minds is counterproductive. Furthermore coming into threads to post that you know stuff but your not telling seems kinda petty. Take the recent analysis of the Kaymoor incident. Details were discuss issue were learnt and reinforced and it may save a life in the future. Discussion certainly has a place beyond morbid curiousity. We now have family members looking for an thorough explanation online but coming up short.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Jun 16, 2010, 5:04 AM
Post #14 of 191
(25934 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
blondgecko wrote: patto wrote: blondgecko wrote: bigjonnyc wrote: Bump... I was just looking to see if anything new was reported in the original thread and found it locked. I too have been wondering about the particulars of this incident, and hoping that those withholding information shortly after the accident had ever come out with a statement. Does anyone know of an official report or something? By "those witholding information" do you mean the badly traumatized partner, the one who will have the scene playing over and over in his head for the rest of his life? Or the family, grieving over a lost loved one? They are under no obligation to share anything. If they choose to, then they will start a thread on the subject. If they choose not to, then tough. Hey. There was considerable debate in the last thread concerning this. You can see my posts and others regarding this matter.
EDIT: Oh you shut the last thread down. Then you should know and understand the issue. To summerise. Of course there is no obligation for anybody to talk about the accident. However actively repressing infomation when it is fresh in peoples minds is counterproductive. Furthermore coming into threads to post that you know stuff but your not telling seems kinda petty. Take the recent analysis of the Kaymoor incident. Details were discuss issue were learnt and reinforced and it may save a life in the future. Discussion certainly has a place beyond morbid curiousity. We now have family members looking for an thorough explanation online but coming up short. What information was "actively repressed"? The only thing that was repressed in that thread was the same thing that led to it being locked - rampant speculation by people who weren't there. The only people who know anything about the accident are the belayer and anyone who he confided in - and as far as I'm aware, that doesn't include anyone here.
this is true in every case however, there are others who have access and in some case by far more information that you could ever imagine. still, all information should be left alone in public forum.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jun 16, 2010, 5:11 AM
Post #15 of 191
(25927 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
marc801 wrote: You have zero say in what does or does not get posted in a public forum by those involved. What you think does not matter.
Nobody is suggesting otherwise marc. What I think matters as much as what you think. It is a public forum with limitted censorship. I can choose only what I say not what others say. That is fairly obvious.
I have chosen to express my view on this matter.
|
|
|
|
|
jomagam
Jun 16, 2010, 5:43 AM
Post #16 of 191
(25909 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2008
Posts: 364
|
In reply to: They are under no obligation to share anything.
I actually feel there is a moral obligation to do so after a period of grieving. I hope everyone is coping as well as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
bigjonnyc
Jun 16, 2010, 2:08 PM
Post #17 of 191
(25795 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
blondgecko wrote: The only people who know anything about the accident are the belayer and anyone who he confided in - and as far as I'm aware, that doesn't include anyone here.
This incident involved a death, from which I surmise that a police report was taken from those involved, and that an investigation, albeit likely short, was carried out. All I was wondering was if the findings of this investigation had been made public. I was not, in any way, demanding information from anyone directly related to the accident, as I had assumed any pertinent information had already been passed on to someone less emotionally involved.
Your responses, blondgecko, are unneeded and entirely counterproductive. Those involved do not need to you to play the part of their protector. Likewise, you easily could have made the point you were trying to without taking such a defensive and incendiary tone.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jun 16, 2010, 2:41 PM
Post #18 of 191
(25747 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
bigjonnyc wrote: Your responses, blondgecko, are unneeded and entirely counterproductive. Those involved do not need to you to play the part of their protector. Likewise, you easily could have made the point you were trying to without taking such a defensive and incendiary tone.
That's not my take on the above exchange. The response was in equal measure to the innuendo. In a couple words: even handed.
Obviously, I do think this site needs to sometimes stand between subjects of threads who are suffering and us onlookers. It may not be perfect but it needs to be looked after in the name of decentness.
Bill L
|
|
|
|
|
bigjonnyc
Jun 16, 2010, 2:49 PM
Post #19 of 191
(25720 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
billl7 wrote: bigjonnyc wrote: Your responses, blondgecko, are unneeded and entirely counterproductive. Those involved do not need to you to play the part of their protector. Likewise, you easily could have made the point you were trying to without taking such a defensive and incendiary tone. That's not my take on the above exchange. The response was in equal measure to the innuendo. In a couple words: even handed. Obviously, I do think this site needs to sometimes stand between subjects of threads who are suffering and us onlookers. It may not be perfect but it needs to be looked after in the name of decentness. Bill L
My apologies then, if my original tone had seemed accusatory in any way. I meant in no way to sound negative or condescending. Information was withheld, not necessarily contemptuously so, but I guess some find the term "withhold" to carry a negative connotation. For that, again I apologize.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jun 16, 2010, 2:56 PM
Post #20 of 191
(25701 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
bigjonnyc wrote: My apologies then, if my original tone had seemed accusatory in any way. I meant in no way to sound negative or condescending. Information was withheld, not necessarily contemptuously so, but I guess some find the term "withhold" to carry a negative connotation. For that, again I apologize.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jun 16, 2010, 3:30 PM
Post #21 of 191
(25647 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
billl7 wrote: Obviously, I do think this site needs to sometimes stand between subjects of threads who are suffering and us onlookers. It may not be perfect but it needs to be looked after in the name of decentness.
I'm confused why. The thread was started requesting information and containing discussion about the accident.
If those involved for whatever reasons don't want to discuss or read such thread then they don't have to. However I don't see why that needs to be a reason why such threads are closed.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jun 16, 2010, 3:42 PM
Post #22 of 191
(25621 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
patto wrote: billl7 wrote: Obviously, I do think this site needs to sometimes stand between subjects of threads who are suffering and us onlookers. It may not be perfect but it needs to be looked after in the name of decentness. I'm confused why. The thread was started requesting information and containing discussion about the accident. If those involved for whatever reasons don't want to discuss or read such thread then they don't have to. However I don't see why that needs to be a reason why such threads are closed.
Don't get me wrong - I'd like the details as well for use in my own self evaluation.
|
|
|
|
|
jape
Jun 16, 2010, 3:55 PM
Post #23 of 191
(25600 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2009
Posts: 51
|
blondgecko wrote: patto wrote: blondgecko wrote: bigjonnyc wrote: Bump... I was just looking to see if anything new was reported in the original thread and found it locked. I too have been wondering about the particulars of this incident, and hoping that those withholding information shortly after the accident had ever come out with a statement. Does anyone know of an official report or something? By "those witholding information" do you mean the badly traumatized partner, the one who will have the scene playing over and over in his head for the rest of his life? Or the family, grieving over a lost loved one? They are under no obligation to share anything. If they choose to, then they will start a thread on the subject. If they choose not to, then tough. Hey. There was considerable debate in the last thread concerning this. You can see my posts and others regarding this matter.
EDIT: Oh you shut the last thread down. Then you should know and understand the issue. To summerise. Of course there is no obligation for anybody to talk about the accident. However actively repressing infomation when it is fresh in peoples minds is counterproductive. Furthermore coming into threads to post that you know stuff but your not telling seems kinda petty. Take the recent analysis of the Kaymoor incident. Details were discuss issue were learnt and reinforced and it may save a life in the future. Discussion certainly has a place beyond morbid curiousity. We now have family members looking for an thorough explanation online but coming up short. What information was "actively repressed"? The only thing that was repressed in that thread was the same thing that led to it being locked - rampant speculation by people who weren't there. The only people who know anything about the accident are the belayer and anyone who he confided in - and as far as I'm aware, that doesn't include anyone here.
Jmo but you are a not a very good moderator for locking up a discussion, claiming "rampant speculation"
This forum is reserved for polite discussion of specific accidents. Please keep posts on subject and respectful of both the people involved and other users.
I think this qualifies and my condolences go out to everyone involved. There seem to be a lot of accidents recently but perhaps this is just the age of digital media.
... your post insinuates more than you'd think. You seem to insinuate that maybe there was too much slack out, sport loop style, something I am acutely aware of when belaying.
Once a partner belayed me off his gear loop and actually caught a short fall before noticing. Thank goodness it didn't rip. Lesson learned, and I passed that on to many people without mentioning the name. It's something that 18 years later, I still 3x check.
What of Lauren Lee, who dropped that French girl and iirc broke her back. I was reminded once again of how even a pro can totally mess someone up. Or someone like myself, a former guide with 20 years in the game, dozens of big walls and thousands of routes under my belt. There is a local climber who has twice lowered someone off the end of the rope. I make sure I tie knots in the end...but I digress.
I climb at the Darkside when I'm in top shape. I've not tried that route but if it has a dangerous eg deadly clip, it's best to know about it and even have community change it so it shouldn't prove the scene of another tragic accident. JMO...
|
|
|
|
|
ltz
Jun 16, 2010, 5:29 PM
Post #24 of 191
(25493 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2010
Posts: 2
|
This is definitively NOT an official accident report and, to my knowledge, none of the parties involved has been contacted by any institution for an authoritative report. That said, no information is being actively repressed. There are no people to my knowledge withholding information. So, know in advance that what I post here is a third- and fourth-hand summary of what I have been able to piece together from various sources, including the belayer, who is continuing to work through his own recollection of this horrific accident. I know that the people involved in the fall and rescue intend to contact the organizations that report annually on Climbing and Alpine injuries and fatalities. For those of you seeking non-conjecture, authoritative finality, keep an eye out there.
The bottom line is that with any ground fall, if the rope or harness didn't break and bolts didn't fail - and in this case they didn't - the error is a human one. The failures that led to Mike's fall began long before his group hiked into the Darkside and they revolve around a set of beliefs and poor safety habits that are, unfortunately, all too pervasive in the climbing community. This includes “quickie” peer instruction for lead climbing/lead belaying; an over-reliance in the effectiveness of lock-assist devices; a willingness on the part of more experienced climbers to put less experienced belayers in situations requiring difficult catches (I've been told, and those of you who have belayed on Elephant man know, that it is a tough catch); and a general ambivalence toward the use of helmets - and I'm guilty of this too.
The belay device used at the time of Mike's fall was a Cinch, and the belayer inexperienced at using it. Clearly, it did not engage. Reports from the site indicate that the device was correctly loaded. Reports from the site also indicate that the belayer did not have a fixed hand on the brake. So, what this means is that the device did not engage and that the belayer was not using one of the fundamental actions required of a belayer: braking.
We know that a belayer should always have a fixed hand on the brake. But this accident presents a more complex situation that requires a look at what went wrong. On a Cinch, the device will not engage if 1) the device is manually held down, per Petzl's instructional videos on feeding rope to a lead climber; 2) the device is tipped on its side, which prevents rotation of the Cinch plates; or 3) if you belay from a position in which the pull force on the device is perpendicular to the belayer. This last scenario is particularly prevalent in a lead situation where the rope runs out (rather than up) from a belayer to the first bolt. Because of the steepness of Elephant man and the talus at the bottom, the latter situation seems to be the most likely.
Just because you know how to do something doesn't mean you know how to effectively teach it to someone else. What’s more, the people you choose to instruct become your responsibility. If you aren't qualified to teach someone don't pretend you are. Send them to someone who is qualified. And, if you're on the receiving end of instruction from your "buddy who's been doing it, like, forever and is really good" - use caution. Your instruction may well be inadequate.
|
|
|
|
|
bigjonnyc
Jun 16, 2010, 5:38 PM
Post #25 of 191
(25468 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
ltz, thank you for these details. This is all I was looking for. I appreciate it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
