|
sungam
Jan 30, 2012, 11:25 AM
Post #26 of 65
(19845 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Dear gawd, so my memory of that place wasn't exaggerating the noob levels.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 30, 2012, 12:52 PM
Post #27 of 65
(19832 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: j_ung wrote: I was pleasantly surprised that, of the few I looking through, I didn't see anything really fucked up. Can you help a n00b and give me your feedback on this one: 
Well, like I said, I didn't look through all of them. But even that one isn't certain death.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jan 30, 2012, 1:16 PM
Post #28 of 65
(19825 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
j_ung wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: j_ung wrote: I was pleasantly surprised that, of the few I looking through, I didn't see anything really fucked up. Can you help a n00b and give me your feedback on this one: [image]http://climbpilotnc.us/ClimbingAreas/ParkingLot/ThinUpper%20anchors6a%20sm.jpg[/image] Well, like I said, I didn't look through all of them. But even that one isn't certain death.
Mismatched bolt and hanger? YORE GUNNA DIE!
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Jan 30, 2012, 1:43 PM
Post #29 of 65
(19821 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: j_ung wrote: I was pleasantly surprised that, of the few I looking through, I didn't see anything really fucked up. Can you help a n00b and give me your feedback on this one:
LOL!
I think there was more than one crossloaded 'biner if you look through all of the pictures. As a side note, I do wonder how they decided which bolt of the two to put an extra biner+webbing on? Did they flip a coin?
Obviously not an imminent death waiting to happen (after all, this is exactly why you are using two bolts, instead of one), but it is a very good illustration of things that could, and do happen to unattended anchors.
As a general thing, I like the idea of having a lot of anchor pictures from the same route, showing what different people do. Good collection of photos.
And while i didn't look through all photos, most of them looked O.K. My main thought on the entire collection of photos was HOLLY OVERKILL BATMAN!!!!!
Seems like quite a few people do not consider two bomber bolts to be enough, and they put a 3rd point to a BFT, or back up two bolts with gear placements or wrapping a 3rd point around big rocks. like this one.
Two 'biners to each bolt, two slings -- O.K., I am following along-- but then there is that rope?
The one had me baffled:
Oh, and I really liked the gear tags on this one:
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Jan 30, 2012, 3:29 PM
Post #32 of 65
(19781 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
qwert wrote: But i wouldnt climb on any single one of the bunch - not because they are not strong enough, but rather because of what such anchors imply about the persons that constructed them, and their skills…
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jan 30, 2012, 3:44 PM
Post #33 of 65
(19776 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
qwert wrote: lena_chita wrote: Oh, and I really liked the gear tags on this one: [image]http://climbpilotnc.us/ClimbingAreas/SchoolRoom/PlaceBet%20anchors10%20sm.jpg[/image] WTF? I havent looked at all of them yet, but so far i would say all of them should easily hold a climber (and his/her offensively obese grandmother in her offensively large pickup truck) with some strength to spare. But i wouldnt climb on any single one of the bunch - not because they are not strong enough, but rather because of what such anchors imply about the persons that constructed them, and their skills… qwert
|
|
|
|
|
atdrennen
Jan 30, 2012, 4:00 PM
Post #34 of 65
(19769 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2010
Posts: 31
|
Aside from the tags, just noticed they have the biner hooked round the bolt. Looks like it'll cross load the spine.....not that the other wouldn't hold, or that you could generate catastrofic forces on top rope...
I might climb on it - but I wouldn't let that rigger belay me.
|
|
|
|
|
macblaze
Jan 30, 2012, 4:39 PM
Post #35 of 65
(19757 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2005
Posts: 807
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: As in another reply, face anchors are for lead routes, meaning starting from the bottom with no rope until the leader puts it in something. That route can be led with gear, so does have rappel rings mounted on the face. Two quick-draws will do for such anchors. It is usually done as top-rope, because the anchors can be reached by laying on one's belly, so the rigging is usually what TR climbers carry. .
The one I encountered was a 5.6 and while there may have been a place for one or two pieces, leading it would definitely be more like free soloing...
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Jan 30, 2012, 5:45 PM
Post #36 of 65
(19737 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
I'm a fan of the way-too-many-biners rigging here:
Better safe than sorry, but you have to know where to draw that line.
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Jan 30, 2012, 6:22 PM
Post #37 of 65
(19728 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
Both bolts are in the same cliff, isn´t this potentially dangerous if it fell down?
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Jan 31, 2012, 1:50 AM
Post #38 of 65
(19688 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
I think someone was going for extra credit on these...
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jan 31, 2012, 10:18 AM
Post #39 of 65
(19657 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
What's up with the prussics? Do people do this (other then what I assume is one dude). Is it meant to absorb some energy or something?
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Jan 31, 2012, 2:02 PM
Post #40 of 65
(19619 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
sungam wrote: What's up with the prussics? Do people do this (other then what I assume is one dude). Is it meant to absorb some energy or something?
I'm pretty sure it comes from the rescue rigging world as that's the only other place I've seen this kind of thing. Supposedly the Prusiks are used as some sort of "tension indicator" as they will start to slip at a some point.
But honestly... two pieces of 7/16" static rope isn't enough?!?
Edit to add: http://www.rockclimbing.com/...rum.cgi?post=1824803
(This post was edited by acorneau on Jan 31, 2012, 2:06 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 1, 2012, 3:38 AM
Post #41 of 65
(19542 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
sungam wrote: Dear gawd, so my memory of that place wasn't exaggerating the noob levels.
This and similar comments here are only despising beginners for being beginners, which is cruel, imo, and also ignoring that this is the Beginner forum.
.
(This post was edited by Rmsyll2 on Feb 1, 2012, 5:34 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 1, 2012, 4:04 AM
Post #42 of 65
(19537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
lena_chita wrote: Th[is] one had me baffled:
Rather creative, imo, given not enough length of runner to go to the rope itself: the single blue sling is backing up both carabiners for the rigging, to back-up for either anchor blowing out. These third lines are a) Trad tradition; b) recognition that the anchors are not new; c) pro forma cover for liability for group leaders. In first one copied here, note extra width of webbing, common for Boy Scouts.
In reply to: Oh, and I really liked the gear tags on this one:
They were a nice couple who literally stopped at the store on the way, with no time left to lose getting on a route.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 1, 2012, 4:35 AM
Post #43 of 65
(19531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
atdrennen wrote: Aside from the tags, just noticed they have the biner hooked round the bolt. Looks like it'll cross load the spine.
It cannot take a load, because for these anchors, two equal lengths of anything will not be equalized. One side will be slack, as shows rather well in that image. If there were a cordelette knot, as is done at this location, it would only shorten both sides.
In reply to: I might climb on it - but I wouldn't let that rigger belay me.
No necessary connection, and this is another example of despising beginners for being beginners. There may be more people climbing indoors now than outside, until those same ones finally go outside. They may be expert with belay, as well as very skilled for movement. But rigging is not, so far as I've encountered, taught at indoor climbing facilities; and it is comically recurring that someone will show up with shoes, harness, rope, maybe two slings, and probably not enough carabiners to rig anyway. I recently loaned two lockers to a nice couple who had specifically asked a director of the wall where they had been learning what they would need. The fact that he is the current president of the state climbing association makes that case especially bitter imo.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 1, 2012, 4:49 AM
Post #44 of 65
(19526 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
markc wrote: I'm a fan of the way-too-many-biners rigging....Better safe than sorry, but you have to know where to draw that line.
He was quite old, and was climbing back in the days of Goldline rope. He said that was how they did it to be safe: opposing pairs, of what they had. He was out with his grandkids, showing them about climbing. They all had a wonderful time. He said that if he did get back into climbing, he would get new carabiners. He is not the only one to keep the carabiners separate for each sling, another point of interest there. And for those anchors and that rim, two equal slings do seem to equalize.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 1, 2012, 5:30 AM
Post #45 of 65
(19514 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
acorneau wrote: I think someone was going for extra credit on these...
The first image is of a rig made by a climbing shop owner for $35. The black static rope is long enough for any likely setting. The red cords provide a way to adjust tension for true equalization, because they are taking the load for their length. He was very grateful for having it, but had not used it much.
The second image is a Quadralette made (and re-tied per route, rather than kept as a common tool) by an engineer, chosen after extensive research and observations. There is a special pad between the rigging and the rope, which he is very proud of for saving abrasion at a critical part of the system. He is very conscious and concerned about "galvanic corrosion" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_corrosion
visible there as rust on the bolt but not the hanger, so always uses a back-up static line, properly connected to the rope with its own carabiner.
Third image is the same idea as first, made from an article he read, and placed for the photo. It took the guy a long time fiddling with the setting, which he couldn't really judge with it on the rim, and couldn't manipulate over the rim either. He eventually got on rappel to fix it with the rope in place.
'acorneau' adds that the two lengths of static rope would be enough. Yes, and could be equally equalized if one line used a Clove Hitch instead of a connection loop. However, that use of two pieces of rope is not seen at this location. A long loop of rope with end loops, or very long webbing tied as a loop for the route, is used with a cordelette knot.
.
(This post was edited by Rmsyll2 on Feb 1, 2012, 2:22 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Feb 1, 2012, 6:57 AM
Post #46 of 65
(19500 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: acorneau wrote: I think someone was going for extra credit on these... The first image is of a rig made by a climbing shop owner for $35. The black static rope is long enough for any likely setting. The red cords provide a way to adjust tension for true equalization, because they are taking the load for their length. He was very grateful for having it, but had not used it much.
For perhaps the 1000th time, you do realize that for the this situation of good anchor bolts for a top rope the potential forces involved are not large, that "true equalization" is not necessary, and the vast majority of the examples are needlessly complex and over engineered, yes? In fact, some are so complex that it's difficult to tell if they are actually correct and safe.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Feb 1, 2012, 8:48 AM
Post #47 of 65
(19488 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: sungam wrote: Dear gawd, so my memory of that place wasn't exaggerating the noob levels. This and similar comments here are only despising beginners for being beginners, which is cruel, imo, and also ignoring that this is the Beginner forum. .
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 1, 2012, 3:01 PM
Post #48 of 65
(19456 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
marc801 wrote: For perhaps the 1000th time,
For about the 1758th time, you have posted for the main purpose of declaring yourself to be the ideal to which others could only aspire. What you do and what you know is all there should be.
Having spoken with so many people at this location that four (I think) are named Aaron, it is obvious that people who are trying to climb encompass the usual variety found everywhere among numbers of people. Some of them are able to deal with possibilities and complexity beyond what you seem to be limited to. Where you and 'bearbreeder' and others get the notion of telling everyone what they should and should not do, you will not be able, or feel any need, to explain.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Feb 1, 2012, 3:46 PM
Post #50 of 65
(19436 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: markc wrote: I'm a fan of the way-too-many-biners rigging....Better safe than sorry, but you have to know where to draw that line. He was quite old, and was climbing back in the days of Goldline rope. He said that was how they did it to be safe: opposing pairs, of what they had. He was out with his grandkids, showing them about climbing. They all had a wonderful time. He said that if he did get back into climbing, he would get new carabiners. He is not the only one to keep the carabiners separate for each sling, another point of interest there. And for those anchors and that rim, two equal slings do seem to equalize.
As I said, better safe than sorry. I'd prefer to see overblown anchors rather than subpar anchors any day of the week. If that's the standard he's used to and what he's comfortable with, more power to him. That said, I think most would agree that you wouldn't compromise the safety of that party if you cut the number of biners in half. YMMV.
There was a guy I used to bump into who rigged static line to a tree, connected the middle of the run to webbing, then swapped back to static line for going over the edge and creating his maser point. He did that for each limb, and had two opposed biners at each connection. Every toprope he rigged used 10 carabiners, two lengths of webbing, and at least three pieces of static rope. I didn't even need to see him to know he was at the crag. Was it safe? Sure. Was it excessively convoluted with more links than I liked? Sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
