|
j_ung
Feb 9, 2012, 9:29 PM
Post #2 of 60
(13124 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Hahaha! Way more entertaining than the last thread.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Feb 9, 2012, 10:25 PM
Post #3 of 60
(13109 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Wow, some of those are hilariously bad.
|
|
|
|
|
ubu
Feb 10, 2012, 12:58 AM
Post #4 of 60
(13067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2008
Posts: 1485
|
Back to a single tied sling with no redundancy. But here another system is added as "back-up" from a tree as anchor. A pulley carries the rope, and does not provide the friction that is relied on for helping the belayer with the load.
ADT + pulley (!!?!?!!?) + single webbing loop = just wow.
|
|
|
|
|
jae8908
Feb 10, 2012, 2:56 AM
Post #5 of 60
(13033 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2011
Posts: 270
|
wow
|
|
|
|
|
Semperviren
Feb 10, 2012, 5:12 AM
Post #6 of 60
(12993 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 10, 2012
Posts: 1
|
I think it would be much more valuable for beginners to see some examples of proper anchors, not blatant examples of what not to do. Instead of 10 pictures of basically just the american triangle, how about some nice SERENE anchors? There are a lot of folks out there who will simply just look at the pictures you provide and not read the commentary.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Feb 10, 2012, 5:17 AM
Post #7 of 60
(12990 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Semperviren wrote: I think it would be much more valuable for beginners to see some examples of proper anchors, not blatant examples of what not to do. Instead of 10 pictures of basically just the american triangle, how about some nice SERENE anchors? There are a lot of folks out there who will simply just look at the pictures you provide and not read the commentary.
You also missed the other the other thread, where he linked a site where he posts photos of all kinds of anchors at this same crag.
(This post was edited by sungam on Feb 10, 2012, 5:18 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
qwert
Feb 10, 2012, 7:43 PM
Post #8 of 60
(12913 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 2394
|
Semperviren wrote: I think it would be much more valuable for beginners to see some examples of proper anchors, not blatant examples of what not to do. Instead of 10 pictures of basically just the american triangle, how about some nice SERENE anchors? There are a lot of folks out there who will simply just look at the pictures you provide and not read the commentary.
Dont open that can of worms!
qwert
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Feb 10, 2012, 8:03 PM
Post #9 of 60
(12903 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
i wonder if the OP asked permission before taking those anchor pics ..
most people who have taken pics of mine are nice enough to ask
hmmmmmm
|
|
|
|
|
TarHeelEMT
Feb 11, 2012, 11:00 PM
Post #10 of 60
(12829 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 20, 2009
Posts: 724
|
This is why I never trust anyone I meet at Pilot Mountain.
|
|
|
|
|
TarHeelEMT
Feb 11, 2012, 11:00 PM
Post #11 of 60
(12825 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 20, 2009
Posts: 724
|
ubu wrote: [image]http://climbpilotnc.us/Scroundrel%20ADT1b%20sm.jpg[/image] Back to a single tied sling with no redundancy. But here another system is added as "back-up" from a tree as anchor. A pulley carries the rope, and does not provide the friction that is relied on for helping the belayer with the load. ADT + pulley (!!?!?!!?) + single webbing loop = just wow.
Not to mention the single non-locker attaching the pulley.
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 12, 2012, 4:50 AM
Post #12 of 60
(12764 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
"This is why I never trust anyone I meet at Pilot Mountain."
Such bigotry. But, robust men with a beard and black glasses, they're always like that. And worse, if they climb.
However, trust is an interesting point imo. One of the ADT's was by a leader for Boy Scouts, and did that at two routes. One of the girth-hitches at the hangers was by a free-lance paid guide who'd been climbing less than a year; the other was by a college activity leader. Others were trusting them for safety, if not for anchor rigging lessons. And none of the rigs did fail, or reasonably would have.
We read here mostly disagreements, even to rejecting equalization for TR. "What's it all about, Alfie?"
.
|
|
|
|
|
csproul
Feb 14, 2012, 3:53 PM
Post #13 of 60
(12637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: "This is why I never trust anyone I meet at Pilot Mountain." Such bigotry. But, robust men with a beard and black glasses, they're always like that. And worse, if they climb. However, trust is an interesting point imo. One of the ADT's was by a leader for Boy Scouts, and did that at two routes. One of the girth-hitches at the hangers was by a free-lance paid guide who'd been climbing less than a year; the other was by a college activity leader. Others were trusting them for safety, if not for anchor rigging lessons. And none of the rigs did fail, or reasonably would have. We read here mostly disagreements, even to rejecting equalization for TR. "What's it all about, Alfie?" .
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 14, 2012, 4:44 PM
Post #14 of 60
(12619 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
csproul wrote: Rmsyll2 wrote: "This is why I never trust anyone I meet at Pilot Mountain." Such bigotry. But, robust men with a beard and black glasses, they're always like that. And worse, if they climb. However, trust is an interesting point imo. One of the ADT's was by a leader for Boy Scouts, and did that at two routes. One of the girth-hitches at the hangers was by a free-lance paid guide who'd been climbing less than a year; the other was by a college activity leader. Others were trusting them for safety, if not for anchor rigging lessons. And none of the rigs did fail, or reasonably would have. We read here mostly disagreements, even to rejecting equalization for TR. "What's it all about, Alfie?" . Lloyd, you can call it bigotry all you want, but here's the plain simple truth: some climbing areas attract inexperienced climbers with a lack of basic climbing and/or rigging skills. These areas are usually predominantly top-rope friendly areas. Pilot just happens to be one such area. Pilot is not unique, there are many such climbing areas around the world. Now, don't get me wrong, there is some very good climbing at Pilot, and there are some fantastic, knowledgeable climbers at Pilot. But because of the pretty high gumby-factor, I am much less likely to trust the average Pilot-Mtn climber to belay me or to trust a random anchor that I cannot inspect. You can usually spot the experienced/inexperienced climbers with just a few minutes of observation, but you will definitely see more of the latter at Pilot as compared with most other climbing areas.
When I was starting out I did a lot of climbing at Quincy Quarries and the Middlesex Fells in the Boston area - two areas that cater to n00bs. I saw a few questionable things on rare occasions, but I never saw one anchor as bad as all that crap.
Sorry, but call it bigotry if you like - but I'm gonna go ahead and say it: it really does seem like the blind leading the blind at Pilot.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 15, 2012, 12:56 AM
Post #15 of 60
(12556 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
'cracklover' said '"it really does seem like the blind leading the blind at Pilot."
Oooh, I haven't seen that yet! When will they be back?
And apparently 'cracklover' did not bother to read the captions for the images, or even the title note. Yeah, they are "bad", that was the point, in order to examine why, to better see how anchors are done for TR. That was the lesson, I thought, of SRENE/ERNEST analysis: to analyze. And the same source has an index of TR rigging galleries showing many other riggings. No one else, including 'cracklover' so far as I know, has ever made a specific study of what people are actually doing. It's taken a while and a lot of effort, and some risk: has anyone wondered what the viewpoints amounted to?
The point imo is not one location, it is one subject: two bolted rim anchors for TR. If those few, of the hundreds observed, are "bad", who else would care to say why, beyond or contrary to the captions for the images, and suitable for the Beginner forum?
.
|
|
|
|
|
Rmsyll2
Feb 15, 2012, 2:12 AM
Post #16 of 60
(12540 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266
|
"you can call it bigotry all you want"
I wanted to make a joke, hey? But moving right along....
"You can usually spot the experienced/inexperienced climbers with just a few minutes of observation"
You think you can, because you are so hugely and widely experienced. But the ones who are inexperienced cannot do so. Repeating: two of the "bad" anchors were made by leaders who were being trusted. Those anchors, and all the others, were not made in that way because of the place where they were made. Slamming the location and slamming "n00bs" are both ridiculous and only self-serving imo.
It was (incredibly) 'beerbreader' who recently said "Just because it isn't set up the way you'd set it up, doesn't mean it's unsafe". Repeating: for all the TR anchors I've seen, none have been imo truly dangerous. Some have been done outside the more careful notions, and some are not as simple as others have decided to do theirs: so what? Some have been easily re-done to offer some other notions: so what?
Climbing does include making decisions. IMO more information allows more informed decisions.
.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Feb 15, 2012, 2:18 AM
Post #17 of 60
(12537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: 'cracklover' said '"it really does seem like the blind leading the blind at Pilot." Oooh, I haven't seen that yet! When will they be back? And apparently 'cracklover' did not bother to read the captions for the images, or even the title note. Yeah, they are "bad", that was the point, in order to examine why, to better see how anchors are done for TR. That was the lesson, I thought, of SRENE/ERNEST analysis: to analyze. And the same source has an index of TR rigging galleries showing many other riggings. No one else, including 'cracklover' so far as I know, has ever made a specific study of what people are actually doing. It's taken a while and a lot of effort, and some risk: has anyone wondered what the viewpoints amounted to? The point imo is not one location, it is one subject: two bolted rim anchors for TR. If those few, of the hundreds observed, are "bad", who else would care to say why, beyond or contrary to the captions for the images, and suitable for the Beginner forum? .
Sorry, I couldn't understand what you were getting at here.
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Feb 15, 2012, 7:35 AM
Post #18 of 60
(12479 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
The point is that while none of the anchors shown would probably fail in a top-roping situation they would be dangerous in many others.
That beginners in particular are either learning or practicing ways of setting up belays which are contrary to generations of experience and the advice given in literally hundreds of textbooks is worrying. The needless over-complication of some of the systems and the blatant ignoring of basic principles in others shows a fundamental lack of understanding of safe practice, mostly in an attempt to achieve something which few of us understand.
I too would be reluctant to climb with anyone who displayed this level of competence, who knows what else they would do?
This problem is not confined to your particular area but certainly it seems a honeypot for the incompetent, not helped by the use of rim anchors which are an undesirable concept for the environment, for safety and the moral ethic of climbing but which if essential can be far better arranged for convenience and safety.
Top-anchor rigging has been studied by generations of climbers, instructors, schools and so on and the combined knowledge of what works and what doesn´t is readily available and needs no more complication or `improvement´ as the accident statistics show.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Feb 15, 2012, 8:36 AM
Post #19 of 60
(12468 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
JIm,
I agree with just about everything you wrote above, accept the section where you say anchors don't need to be improved.
If a new and improved method for building safe anchors, top-rope or otherwise, I would be happy to explore and maybe except it as a new or alternative method.
In general, I am very impressed with your post on anchors.
What I don't understand is why the person who is spending time walking around the crag instead of climbing, photographing, and then creating a website not putting on a clinic or workshop for these guys instead of criticizing them on the internet. Both would require the same amount of time, one would make people safer and less defensive.
The world is already full of negativity, why bring more of it to the climbing scene.
I know some of the people there wouldn't attend and would even avoid clinics because they "know better" or are "already safe," but the few who would attend could be taught what a safe climbing anchor looks like. The local community would benefit from it, some climbers would appreciate it,other would continue with the status quot.
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Feb 15, 2012, 8:40 AM
Post #20 of 60
(12467 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
cause you cant show off yr top rope "expertise" that way ...
i dont usually worry about doing TR anchor critiques unless its obviously dangerous ...
but i really dont understand why people dont just stick with the basics ... aka what the guides use and teach ...
if a person at the crag starts arguing over TR anchors ... they are not experienced IMO ... except as a top rope tough guy
(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Feb 15, 2012, 8:40 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Feb 15, 2012, 11:22 AM
Post #21 of 60
(12439 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
guangzhou wrote: JIm, I agree with just about everything you wrote above, accept the section where you say anchors don't need to be improved. If a new and improved method for building safe anchors, top-rope or otherwise, I would be happy to explore and maybe except it as a new or alternative method.
I was trying to seperate the issue of anchors and rigging them but failed somewhere, it was early in the morning though!
The anchors shown (two rim bolts) can be considerably improved in functionality and usability which would also remove the need or desire or even temptation to over-complicate things with the set-up.
That bolt-ins shouldn´t be placed vertically in an outdoors environment is anyway clear to experienced bolters, that the cliff top edge is the most fragile and scientifically interesting area for plant life is also well known (and for this reason is generally discouraged or prohibited in largew parts of Europe).
In an area with quality bolting rim anchors would be equipped with extension chains anyway to resolve the rigging problems we are seeing and to reduce the need to access the cliff top to de-rig with its attendant risk to users below and damage to a fragile environment.
We have a similar problem with climbers with less experience at my home crag in the UK where the area most used for top-roping is equipped with single metal stakes (it is sea cliff so access is from the top by nescessity), the knitting that goes on to arrange the holy grail of "two points equalised" is a wonder to see. However it is a good,safe environment for people to play with the enormous quantities of shiny new gear they have so why not? So long as they get something right they will be o.k.
The habit of leaving brand new (with the price tags) slings and double screwgates on the stakes for the local climbers to collect on a Monday is only a bonus!
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Feb 15, 2012, 2:07 PM
Post #22 of 60
(12406 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: 'cracklover' said '"it really does seem like the blind leading the blind at Pilot."
In the upper right hand corner of each post are two buttons. One says 'reply' and the other says 'quote'. If you want to respond to them and quote them, you hit the quote button. It will automatically say 'cracklover said'....blah blah blah. You don't need to type in "crackover said'...yata yata yata."
Sorry...that was bugging me. Carry on with your analyses of silly 2 bolt anchors.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Feb 15, 2012, 4:08 PM
Post #23 of 60
(12374 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: Rmsyll2 wrote: 'cracklover' said '"it really does seem like the blind leading the blind at Pilot." In the upper right hand corner of each post are two buttons. One says 'reply' and the other says 'quote'. If you want to respond to them and quote them, you hit the quote button. It will automatically say 'cracklover said'....blah blah blah. You don't need to type in "crackover said'...yata yata yata." Sorry...that was bugging me. Carry on with your analyses of silly 2 bolt anchors. Josh
I would refer to those as links, not buttons.
Sorry, that was bugging me.
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Feb 15, 2012, 4:22 PM
Post #24 of 60
(12368 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
shockabuku wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: Rmsyll2 wrote: 'cracklover' said '"it really does seem like the blind leading the blind at Pilot." In the upper right hand corner of each post are two buttons. One says 'reply' and the other says 'quote'. If you want to respond to them and quote them, you hit the quote button. It will automatically say 'cracklover said'....blah blah blah. You don't need to type in "crackover said'...yata yata yata." Sorry...that was bugging me. Carry on with your analyses of silly 2 bolt anchors. Josh I would refer to those as links, not buttons. Sorry, that was bugging me.
Sorry, I forget that not everyone has a 3-D touch screen. 
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 15, 2012, 4:48 PM
Post #25 of 60
(12363 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Rmsyll2 wrote: 'cracklover' said '"it really does seem like the blind leading the blind at Pilot." Oooh, I haven't seen that yet! When will they be back?
Ha! But seriously - how better would you describe the "leaders" setting up those fucked up anchors for their charges?
In reply to: And apparently 'cracklover' did not bother to read the captions for the images, or even the title note. Yeah, they are "bad", that was the point, in order to examine why, to better see how anchors are done for TR. That was the lesson, I thought, of SRENE/ERNEST analysis: to analyze.
Wrong. I read and understood them. You, however, seem to have missed my point: there are n00bs all over the country building toprope rigging. Compared to the ones I knew when I was starting out, some of yours seem particularly ignorant of the simplest concepts.
In reply to: And the same source has an index of TR rigging galleries showing many other riggings. No one else, including 'cracklover' so far as I know, has ever made a specific study of what people are actually doing. It's taken a while and a lot of effort, and some risk: has anyone wondered what the viewpoints amounted to?
I have not made a study, and perhaps if I had spent as much time as you seem to have, I would eventually have seen some anchor rigging that bad. But believe me - I've seen a lot of TR anchors all over the Northeast. Anyway, what it seems to amount to is just what I said above - an unusually ignorant group of "leaders".
GO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
