|
actionfigure
Sep 3, 2004, 1:14 AM
Post #126 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2004
Posts: 107
|
5.12 is a big # no matter how you look at it.
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Sep 3, 2004, 1:17 AM
Post #127 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: 5.12 is a big # no matter how you look at it.
Wrong!
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Sep 3, 2004, 1:27 AM
Post #128 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: In reply to: Anybody who gets egotistical about their climbing grade just needs to look around a bit. -Jay dammmnit Jay! just when I was about to change my username to artm5.8
As long as I climb higher than my height (I am 5'3)...
|
|
|
|
|
artm
Sep 3, 2004, 1:33 AM
Post #129 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 22, 2001
Posts: 17990
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Anybody who gets egotistical about their climbing grade just needs to look around a bit. -Jay dammmnit Jay! just when I was about to change my username to artm5.8 heh. If we were required to append our hardest redpoint/onsight/copius-tension-TR to our names, you'd see a lot of user5.8 8-) As long as I climb higher than my height (I am 5'3)... |
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 3, 2004, 1:50 AM
Post #130 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Anybody who gets egotistical about their climbing grade just needs to look around a bit. -Jay dammmnit Jay! just when I was about to change my username to artm5.8 heh. If we were required to append our hardest redpoint/onsight/copius-tension-TR to our names, you'd see a lot of user5.8 8-) As long as I climb higher than my height (I am 5'3)... okay then I'd be artm5.easy
Art, anyone who leads 5.11 at Josh has better bragging rights than that.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
bvb
Sep 3, 2004, 4:05 AM
Post #131 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2003
Posts: 954
|
In reply to: [I can pretty well assure you that anyone who is serious about it, can sport climb 5.12
pfffft. tried any of the 12c's and 12's at Rumney? They're harder than 5.13 trad in the Valley.
jay, if you don't come bouldering with us at least one day were gonna break your fucking fingers, you puss-aaaaay
|
|
|
|
|
bvb
Sep 3, 2004, 4:08 AM
Post #132 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2003
Posts: 954
|
In reply to: A little more on this 5.12 crap. I did my first one in 1978.
'78?? man, talk about a late bloomer, eh bob?
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Sep 3, 2004, 4:52 AM
Post #133 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: '78?? man, talk about a late bloomer, eh bob?
Yeah that's because it was in the Gunk's and not in the "Valley" where the grade were soft. Hahahaha
Hey BVB---didn't some guy named Henry from the east coast do the first 5.12 in the "Valley"?
|
|
|
|
|
actionfigure
Sep 3, 2004, 10:35 PM
Post #134 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2004
Posts: 107
|
In reply to: In reply to: 5.12 is a big # no matter how you look at it. Wrong!
Yeah man, like I pulled this super sick 5.12d move right out of my moms womb. But it got downrated later. Oh yeah, and I did it in a swami and a pair of EB's. And it was all before rap bolting!
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Sep 3, 2004, 11:15 PM
Post #135 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: Yeah man, like I pulled this super sick 5.12d move right out of my moms womb. But it got downrated later. Oh yeah, and I did it in a swami and a pair of EB's. And it was all before rap bolting!
I think I tried that move but wasn't chalked up, it was waaayyy wet. I must have augered in and bonked my head: which is probably the precursor of a bunch of my other problems in life.
When did the thread hijack occur? I wasn't paying attention. I think JT's biggest problem is how often he is correct, and he wants to share the info with those too stupid to know they are wrong. His persistance in sharing the real facts causes those too stupid to know different to feel like he is making them look stupid, but they are too dumb to be aware they are causing this themselves in their ignorance. Of course, in the real technical high level discussions, (especially those involving math) I am too stupid to know if JT is correct or not. However, my own stupidity aside, I don't believe I've ever read one of his posts where he was technically wrong in those instances where math wasn't sandbagging me. I've posted this fact a few times, but no one pays any attention to me so don't expect an apology.
BTW: I agree with JT that he isn't the smartest person on this site, however don't you think it is uncanny how often he shows up first on a thread full of potential deadly misinformation with the first real truth, and then calmly dogs those who are wrong till they squeal at him.
Sincerley:
Billcoe512
Can you still use the 5,12 even if you don't have a prayer of ever getting up one again? I might change the _ at the end of my name. Hey JT, just FYI, the _ at the end of billcoe_ showed up the same way you got the 512.
Edited to fix the spelling of you. (What does that tell you?)
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Sep 3, 2004, 11:36 PM
Post #136 of 143
(7245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: Yeah man, like I pulled this super sick 5.12d move right out of my moms womb. But it got downrated later. Oh yeah, and I did it in a swami and a pair of EB's. And it was all before rap bolting! I think I tried that move but wasn't chalked up, it was waaayyy wet. I must have augered in and bonked my head: which is probably the precursor of a bunch of my other problems in life. When did the thread hijack occur? I wasn't paying attention. I think JT's biggest problem is how often he is correct, and he wants to share the info with those too stupid to know they are wrong. His persistance in sharing the real facts causes those too stupid to know different to feel like he is making them look stupid, but they are too dumb to be aware they are causing this themselves in their ignorance. Of course, in the real technical high level discussions, (especially those involving math) I am too stupid to know if JT is correct or not. However, my own stupidity aside, I don't believe I've ever read one of his posts where he was technically wrong in those instances where math wasn't sandbagging me. I've posted this fact a few times, but no one pays any attention to me so don't expect an apology. BTW: I agree with JT that he isn't the smartest person on this site, however don't you think it is uncanny how often he shows up first on a thread full of potential deadly misinformation with the first real truth, and then calmly dogs those who are wrong till they squeal at him. Sincerley: Billcoe512 Can you still use the 5,12 even if you don't have a prayer of ever getting up one again? I might change the _ at the end of my name. Hey JT, just FYI, the _ at the end of billcoe_ showed up the same way you got the 512.
Sure you can.
CurtV10
|
|
|
|
|
jefffski
Sep 4, 2004, 9:35 PM
Post #137 of 143
(6777 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 286
|
there is a simple solution to all this.
in any climbing situation, each piece of gear should be able to hold the maximum fall factor force.
the daisy does not meet this standard. why incorporate a backup piece into an anchor, no matter how solid, that isn't strong? i just don't get that. why not use toy biners as backups? they hold body weight. i've even seen people chain non-locking biners together. all good if nothing goes wrong.
from my understanding the following do meet the standard:
a cordallete
a metolius pas
the rope
a sling, girth hitched to a harness
a tied sling (water knot wirth long tails)
a webolette
5 mm cord, tied with a double fisherman's
i just take the view that things can go wrong very quickly. i need to be sure that what i've done doesn't add to a bad situation. given that my analytical skills aren't perfect, i don't want to judge each situation. i'll screw up and deduce that such and such a method is safe here. so why carry sometthing that i may misuse because it's convenient--daisies are convenient., but can be misused.
so i use only the rope, a cordelette (spectra-lightweight and small), new or newish sewn slings or waterknotted webbing with long tails or a pas system from metolius. given that these too can be misused but at least i've eliminated one risk factor-the daisy. since accidents are often a result of several factors happening one on top of another, i think eliminating even one risk factor is a good thing.
i try to reduce the chance of shockloading any of these pieces because they are not designed for that. i try to keep my body weight on them to keep them tight, and align my body in the anticipated direction of forces should my climber fall.
good points made about escaping the belay. i need to do more thinking about that.
daisy's are accidents waiting to happen. save 'em for aiding.
i see people using daisies all time and usually,and definitely if i am climbing with them, remind them that the loops do not hold more than body weight. (btw, nor do the adjustable daisies made by yates or metolius).
here's my take: if i die and my mom reads the accident report and finds out that
a-i wasn't wearing a helmet and that contributed to my demise
b-i was using a (insert ) to save weight/for convenience and that contributed to my sudden flight from earth
she'd kill me. so when i'm setting up an anchor, i think of my mom.
be careful out there
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Sep 4, 2004, 11:13 PM
Post #138 of 143
(6777 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: in any climbing situation, each piece of gear should be able to hold the maximum fall factor force.
All right, lets consider pieces of protection.
Cam's and stoppers, do not even come close to meeting this criteria.
Bolts do.
In reply to: from my understanding the following do meet the standard: a cordallete a metolius pas the rope a sling, girth hitched to a harness a tied sling (water knot wirth long tails) a webolette 5 mm cord, tied with a double fisherman's
a cordallete agreed
a metolius pas agreed with the proviso that it is very limited in its application
the rope agreed
a sling, girth hitched to a harness wrong, it is good for maybe 15kn
a tied sling (water knot wirth long tails) only if it is 1" webbing
a webolette not even close, two of the legs are only rated for 14kn
5 mm cord, tied with a double fisherman's assuming that you are speaking of a cordelette, the test data shows 1 leg to be between 10kn and 22kn with the highest being subject to a 40% loss of strength in a flex test
I would agree that using a daisy in an anchor is not the safest way to go.
As far as where a daisy/rope combination three point anchor would land in the range of possible set ups?
In my judgement it would be inferior strength wise to:
a rope only anchor
a 7mm cordelette
In my mind, it would be superior to the other options that you presented.
Then throw in questions of flexibility, weight, bulk, the energy absorbing properties of a rope based anchor, tradeoffs in what you carry, etc., and the relative merits become even more murky.
Note. in a marginal anchor set up or an anchor that is facing the threat of a ff2 fall I would either not use the daisy or I would back it up with the rope.
|
|
|
|
|
f_thomas
Sep 5, 2004, 12:26 AM
Post #139 of 143
(6777 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2003
Posts: 139
|
In reply to: Yes, a daisy can be safely incorporated into an anchor set up. I have been doings so for as long as I have been climbing, and I have never even popped a pocket, let alone breaking one. There are also a lot of other good reasons to incorporate a daisy into your systems that I am not going to go into.
An article in the recent Rock and Ice may help change your mind regarding the use of a daisy incorporated into the system as a link to the anchor. Tests were run on slings, quickdraws and daisies and even a short fall onto a daisy will snap stitching. Additionally, the dynamics of a Force 2 fall onto any of these materials can have devastating effect on the climber's body that has to absorb the shock verses a dynamic system that incorporates the rope.
A daisy is too weak a link to be tied into the anchor with.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Sep 7, 2004, 12:36 AM
Post #140 of 143
(6777 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: An article in the recent Rock and Ice may help change your mind regarding the use of a daisy incorporated into the system as a link to the anchor. Tests were run on slings, quickdraws and daisies and even a short fall onto a daisy will snap stitching. Additionally, the dynamics of a Force 2 fall onto any of these materials can have devastating effect on the climber's body that has to absorb the shock verses a dynamic system that incorporates the rope.
The bulk of your argument as you have presented it make a good case for not using sling only anchors. It also has ramifications on the use of high tech material cordelettes, dynnema cordelettes, The PAS, etc.
All of these materials are significantly more "static" then a climbing rope or 7mm perlon. In my mind the stitching in a daisy helps to mitigate the "human funkness device" danger.
Daisies are rated to 22kn end to end and 19kn after all the stitches have ripped. Under certain circumstances they may break at a lower number. What would that lower number be? I would think that at worst it would be comparable to the single arm strength of a webolette(14kn). A webolette has two arms at that strength, a daisy/rope combo has only one. People seem to be comfortable with a webolette, yet they judge a daisy. That doesn't make sense to me.
ps. I am not so fond of a webbolete, anymore then I am of a cordelette.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Sep 7, 2004, 9:20 AM
Post #141 of 143
(6777 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
I use a daisy on my harness, but never as the anchor connection for belaying. I'm with Bill here that one should never belay off a daisy. Secure yourself to anchors with the daisy as you get to the anchors and while you setup some other anchoring mechanism (I usually use the rope), but don't belay on it.
|
|
|
|
|
glowering
Sep 7, 2004, 1:55 PM
Post #142 of 143
(6777 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2002
Posts: 386
|
In reply to: In reply to: I see them using their single slings at the rap anchors all of the time, as you are no longer tied into the rope when you rappel. This is one of the most common mistakes that I see at the crags. They tend to do the same when cleaning anchors on single pitch climbs with a rap descent. It is a really bad habit as far as I am concerned.
Why is this a problem? Are you supposed to use 2 slings? If you are hanging under the anchor it seems like the max fall factor you could generate is a .5
Thanks Dingus for taking the photos and explaining the daisy chain danger.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 7, 2004, 2:44 PM
Post #143 of 143
(6777 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Brutus has been pestering me to try the Yates Adjustables, which will negate this issue for me. entirely. Didn't Pitons Pete bust his leg when one of those ripped on him? Not exactly. His was a well-worn Metolius adjustable daisey which is only rated at 300lbs brand-spankin-new.
He took a static daisy fall. Probably wouldn't have mattered the brand anyway. It broke outright. A not so nice example of climbing fall forces, about 6 to 8 feet in his case. That's right, an 8 foot fall broke his daisy, as it would a lot of our climbing gear. That FF2 stuff is serious!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
