|
mojomonkey
Apr 8, 2009, 7:57 PM
Post #101 of 129
(15588 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Posts: 869
|
ambler wrote: This fixation on rope distances really does miss the forest for the trees.
I don't care about the specific rope distances. The question is about what actually occurred. The synopsis notes both that
- Stark fell to the ground from some point
- was still held on belay and exerting pressure on Kwok
- but not too much pressure that another person was able to untie Stark
All working out "perfectly" seems incredible, and may indicate an error in the synopsis, regardless of specific rope/fall lengths.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Apr 8, 2009, 8:07 PM
Post #102 of 129
(15578 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
mojomonkey wrote: ambler wrote: This fixation on rope distances really does miss the forest for the trees. I don't care about the specific rope distances. The question is about what actually occurred. The synopsis notes both that - Stark fell to the ground from some point - was still held on belay and exerting pressure on Kwok - but not too much pressure that another person was able to untie Stark All working out "perfectly" seems incredible, and may indicate an error in the synopsis, regardless of specific rope/fall lengths.
He could have rolled after impact and, thus, stretched the rope tighter. I'm obviously speculating, but I don't see this as much of an issue because I don't think we know if he fell straight down and didn't move after the impact.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Apr 8, 2009, 8:20 PM
Post #103 of 129
(15560 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
ambler wrote: This fixation on rope distances really does miss the forest for the trees.
Besides, it did not work out perfectly. Perfect might be if there was zero slack between Kwok and Stark but that rope had no tension. Or perfect would be if the lowest point was when Stark was an inch above the ground. Instead, we are in some middle ground involving rope stretch from a dynamic fall (edit: non-static load) of two people followed by a relaxation to static loads as allowed by the circumstances.
Bill
(This post was edited by billl7 on Apr 8, 2009, 8:22 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
russwalling
Apr 8, 2009, 9:04 PM
Post #104 of 129
(15503 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 12, 2002
Posts: 239
|
vivalargo wrote: I wonder why the leader (WS) didn't secure the lead rope to the anchor and rap off, instead of having the much lighter (125 lb.) belayer try and lower him to the ground directly off his waist - a pretty much unheard of descent tactic (this basically only happens when someone seconding a pitch cannot follow and the leader must lower him to the deck or the belay below). JL
Hardly unheard of. 40% of the stuff I do has that maneuver in it, at Josh.
|
|
|
|
|
k.l.k
Apr 8, 2009, 9:07 PM
Post #105 of 129
(15499 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
jt512 wrote: k.l.k wrote: Wendell was the third climber. He had to rescue Al, who had suffered severe injuries. The clock was ticking. I very much doubt that he was in a position to measure, exactly, all of the distances involved. Just to correct one point. Al's injuries turned out to be minor enough that he could make an appearance at work the next day, though Wendell would have had no way to know that that was the case.
Yes, I should've said, "appeared to be," but the post was already running long. In a fall of that distance, with the end scenario as described, rescuers should prepare for both back/spinal and head trauma.
|
|
|
|
|
jsh
Apr 8, 2009, 9:09 PM
Post #106 of 129
(15488 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 118
|
I was just in Josh last week. I asked two locals for their versions, one of whom was nearby, and my take-home is this: I don't believe what's written on the top post here any more than the two (conflicting) versions I heard. The only version I will believe will be the one from Mr. Kwok. Like any other accident, there's just too much hearsay going on here.
Both versions I heard did have in common the elements of a faulty tie-in (one version, Stark's rope was clipped to a gear lope on Kwok; the other, Stark didn't finish his knot). Both also mentioned lowering from an *intermediate* anchor (as in, not the cliff-top).
I've climbed in Josh a bunch, and will comment that leaders and followers alike tend to be more complacent in general, once they've topped out on a formation; it's common to hear "off belay" when you can see or know that there is no anchor (or tie-in) involved. It's easy to imagine this having come into play.
My take-home sofar is this: double-check tie-ins to the anchor; and fix a rap line, as opposed to lowering, whenever possible. Fixing a rap line leaves one person responsible for his/her own system and safety; this alone reduces possible errors. Plus, less wear on the rope (especially in Josh).
|
|
|
|
|
k.l.k
Apr 8, 2009, 9:38 PM
Post #107 of 129
(15462 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
rudder wrote: k.l.k wrote: I strongly disagree with John Long's comments that the family, friends and first responders acted inappropriately by not immediately releasing a public report-- independent of and prior to any done by the NPS or other institutions. John didn't say inappropriate, he said bizarre. bi-zarre (bi zär') adj. 1. markedly unusual in appearance, style, or general character; strange; odd.
John used "unreasonable" and "irresponsible" in a post in one of the treads on ST. Or more to the point, he said that the responsible and reasonable action would've been to release a report far more quickly, which implies that Wendell's delay was unreasonable and irresponsible.
I would also disagree with his characterization in this thread. I find nothing bizarre in the fact that someone who had just witnessed the death of one of his best friends, and who had no professional or even amateur training or obligation in forensic work, should take a few weeks before sharing details with the rest of us.
|
|
|
|
|
vivalargo
Apr 8, 2009, 9:39 PM
Post #108 of 129
(15456 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 26, 2002
Posts: 1512
|
KLK wrote:
"Second, lowering off the top of JTree climbs, from a summit belay, is a common local practice. The summits are typically rounded with anchors well back from the edge. There are seldom cold shuts-- this isn't your gym. The "walk-offs" are frequently dicier than the actual climbs."
And yet the person doing said lowering has to get down as well - no? How does he/she manage the descent? Who climbs something they can't safely get off of?
I can see lowering a novice off the top, from the top - if the down climb was dangerous, say - but in over 1,000 days of climbing out at Josh I've never had anyone lower me (from the top) off a summit. But to each their own . . .
"Fifth, I strongly disagree with John Long's comments that the family, friends and first responders acted inappropriately by not immediately releasing a public report-- independent of and prior to any done by the NPS or other institutions."
Not true. And the way you have that phrased above makes it seem as though I was strong arming grieving survivors for details - a curious distortion (and facile, transparent flame) considering I debriefed the belayer myself.
My actual opinion is that an accident report should be presented to the public within a week of the accident, just as it is done in the skydiving community. Moreover, said report should never be the responsibility of "family, friends and first responders," lest emotional issues get mixed up with technical details.
In other words, just to make this perfectly clear, the task of drafting an accident should never have fallen on Wendel. He should have been debriefed, then left alone. Period. I consider it a great failure of our sport that an accident survivor/witness was ever held responsible to draft any document about the event.
Also what "institutions" are you talking about here? The NPS? You should see my correspondence with them over the debacle they made of the last report.
Sadly, there is no "institution" to reliably, and in a timel manner, report climbing accidents. Hence family, friends and first responders inherit the task by default. Not good.
JL
(This post was edited by vivalargo on Apr 8, 2009, 10:16 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Apr 8, 2009, 9:47 PM
Post #109 of 129
(15440 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
jsh, respectfully, I think you need to spend more time reviewing the data and considering its source before posting.
Wendell Smith was on the scene at the time of the accident and is the primary source for info in this thread. Al Kwok has been providing additional details right up to today via others, and none of those details contradict those of Wendell Smith in any significant way.
Neither Smith nor Kwok has mentioned an intermediate anchor; besides, it was a short route. The gear-loop tie-in sounds like a guess or misunderstanding about the haul-loop tie-in which has been fairly consistently reported. The unfinished knot likely was a rumor which was bred out of Wendell reasonbably untieing Stark post-accident to alleviate the pressure on Kwok.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
jsh
Apr 8, 2009, 10:06 PM
Post #110 of 129
(15413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 118
|
Bill, Wendell's version is *still* only hearsay in that he only the chance to inspect things after the fact, or at best, from the ground looking far up. Only Al Kwok can tell us who was tied into what, where, and how.
My point is not to establish who's wrong and who's right; I am only pointing out that, as in so many, many accident and rescue reports, there's a LOT of conflicting stories and theories running around, and we (or at least I) shouldn't accept any of them as bible fact, regardless of the big names attached.
|
|
|
|
|
k.l.k
Apr 8, 2009, 10:10 PM
Post #111 of 129
(15404 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
vivalargo wrote: KLK wrote: "Second, lowering off the top of JTree climbs, from a summit belay, is a common local practice. The summits are typically rounded with anchors well back from the edge. There are seldom cold shuts-- this isn't your gym. The "walk-offs" are frequently dicier than the actual climbs." And yet the person doing said lowering has to get down as well - no? How does he/she manage the descent? Who climbs somethng they can't safely get off of? I can see lowering a novice of the top, from the top -if the down climb was dangerous - but in over 1,000 days of climbing out at Josh I've never had anyone lower me (from the top) off a summit. But to each their own . . . "Fifth, I strongly disagree with John Long's comments that the family, friends and first responders acted inappropriately by not immediately releasing a public report-- independent of and prior to any done by the NPS or other institutions." Not true. And the way you have that phrased above makes it seem as though I was strong arming grieving survivors for details - a curious distortion considering I debriefed the belayer myself. My actual opinion is that an accident report should be presented to the public within a week of the accident, just as it is done in the skydiving community. Moreover, said report should never be the responsibility of "family, friends and first responders," lest emotional issues get mixed up with technical details. Also what "institutions" are you talking about here? The NPS? You should see my correspondence with them over the debacle they made of the last report. Sadly, there is no "institution" to reliably, and in a timel manner, report climbing accidents. Hence family, friends and first responders inherit the task by default. Not good. JL
First, I don't like to be lowered myself. When I was a local, though, I did it all the time with n00bs, folks likely to get sketched on the frequently dicey "walk offs," and, occasionally, if there was a need to return someone rapidly to the base. I'm no longer a local. But I gather from Russ's account, and from what I've seen when I'm back, that some folks do continue the practice.
Second, over at ST, it felt very much like you were pressuring the survivors to get a report out, especially in the thread where a few posters started using words like "conspiracy." I'd have preferred that you use your stature and respect in the community to calm the mob down. That wasn't your choice. I'm not accusing you of being a jerk or even acting irresponsibly. But I feel pretty strongly that in such situations, the most respected posters should do what they can to keep the temps down. The wait of three weeks hardly strikes me as excessive, especially in this case.
Third, you are correct, the precise problem is that we don't have institutions that can or will provide the sort of expert, methodical accident reporting that some of us would like to see. In this case, that means the burden falls directly on the survivors.
We're Americans, we don't believe in social institutions. We don't join clubs or associations the way the Euros do (how many who post here even belong to the AAC?), and we don't subsidize full-time, professional mountain rescue units in most parts of the country. As a result, in an accident like this one, the pressure falls directly on the folks most closely involved.
That means we are at the mercy of chance-- who happens to be the point person at whichever public agency might be responsible, what sort of resources they have available, and a variety of other factors that vary widely from place to place. A nationally standardized reporting practice, carried out by competent professionals or semi-professionals, would be lovely.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Apr 8, 2009, 10:34 PM
Post #112 of 129
(15370 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
jsh wrote: Bill, Wendell's version is *still* only hearsay in that he only the chance to inspect things after the fact, or at best, from the ground looking far up. Only Al Kwok can tell us who was tied into what, where, and how. My point is not to establish who's wrong and who's right; I am only pointing out that, as in so many, many accident and rescue reports, there's a LOT of conflicting stories and theories running around, and we (or at least I) shouldn't accept any of them as bible fact, regardless of the big names attached.
I mean that as a suggestion. I don't mean it as a recommendation as I believe it will result in a lot of noise in this thread - very much like what is going on now about how/when to give a detailed technical report.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
rudder
Apr 8, 2009, 10:36 PM
Post #113 of 129
(15367 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2008
Posts: 3
|
k.l.k wrote: John used "unreasonable" and "irresponsible" in a post in one of the treads on ST.
If he did, that would be stronger than bizarre, but admit that "inappropriate" was your word, and not John's.
I did not disagree with the way any of the climbing team handled themselves, nor with their familes. But, the insults from others, heaped upon those who asked questions, those who dared to discuss in a =discussion forum=; that I disagreed with. And, again, those who broadcasted prolifically about how they had something to keep silent about.
|
|
|
|
|
alkwok
Apr 8, 2009, 10:41 PM
Post #114 of 129
(15358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 61
|
Cross-posted on Supertopo:
I have been silent because I am still processing what happened. Moreover, Wendell told me and Tia that he would write up a report and post it. The following may fill in some details about what happened the fifteen minutes before the accident: it’s a slightly edited version of the “accident report” that I emailed Dan Messaros, Lost Horse Ranger district (NPS), on Mar 24, 9 days after the accident. (I replaced “the green-blue rope” and the “gray-red” ropes in the original report with “rope #1” and “rope #2)
Just to preface the report: I have also been silent because many of you here know Woody far better than I did: I had climbed with Woody for about 12 – 15 times: the first few times were with Woody and Blake (or others) in the ’03 to ’05 seasons, and more recently with Woody and Wendell (and Liz Ying and Tom Martin). I will post my tribute to Woody, something I did not mention at the Memorial Service, on the “Woody appreciation thread..” But this is what I sent Dan Messaros, (I apologize if it’s too terse, I was just trying to give Dan the “essentials”):
The sequence of events as I remembered:
(1) Woody lead Desperado (10a) on rope #l.
(2) I followed, trailing rope #2 for Wendell to climb. I tied a figure-8 on a bight near one end of rope #2 and clipped it with a locking ‘biner to the haul loop at the back of my BD harness (probably a Momentum)
(3) I cleaned Woody’s gear as I followed. However, there was one piece I couldn’t get out. So, I back-clipped rope #2 to it.
(4) I got to the top. I did not see how Woody was anchored in. Woody was dehydrated and wanted me to lower him ASAP. I cannot remember when I untied myself from rope #1; I might have done so as soon as I got to the top since the area of the top was pretty large and it was pretty flat. But I am sure that I untied myself from it at some point.
(5) Woody had placed two camalots in a horizontal crack at the top. (But I don’t remember anything clipped off of these two cams.) He told me to add a third piece using the gear I had cleaned. I did so, and it took me 2 -3 minutes to finalize on a placement I was completely happy with. I knew Woody wasn’t too pleased with how long it took me. Regardless, I equalized the three camalots with a green cordelette and with either a figure-eight or an overhand knot. I then clipped myself off to the equalized anchor with a sling that was girth-hitched to my harness via a locking ‘biner: this is a habit (clipping off via a sling) I developed from my sport-climbing days.
(6) Woody was busy doing something when I was fixing the anchor but I wasn’t paying attention to what he was doing. Shortly after I clipped myself into the anchor above, Woody handed me a bight (Fig-8 or overhand) or a clove-hitch that was tied/hitched on rope #2 and said something. I do not remember if he said, “Tie in” or “Clip in” or “Clip this in.” All I remember was that the following went through my head, “Woody is the quintessential trad climber and all ‘old-fashioned’ trad-climbers like to clip into the anchor via the rope because it can absorb more shock than a sling,” i.e. I interpreted that bight/hitch Woody gave me as something he wanted me to tie into the anchor with. So, I clipped this bight/hitch into the locking ‘biner I used towards the end of step (5) and removed the sling (girth-hitched to my harness) from that locking ‘biner.
(7) At this point, I thought Woody was ready to be lowered (since he has already tied himself into rope #1). So, I started to put rope #1 through my belay device (a Petzl Reverso) that I was going to lower Woody with. However, Woody wanted me to hand back all the gear I cleaned. I did so. I then proceeded to lower Woody. I remember saying, “Woody I am going to lower you very slowly as if you were down-climbing,” and Woody answered, chuckling, “Not that slow.”
(8) Regardless, I lowered Woody slowly because I want to make sure I was in control. I HATE lowering people because I only weigh 125 pounds. Anyway, the first 5 to 8 feet (when Woody was still on relatively flat ground) went OK. Then I remember being tugged very hard by Woody as I lowered him further: I pressed down with one foot (to prevent myself from being pulled further) and held very hard with my right (brake) hand to stop him from moving.
(9) Next, I remember being airborne and screaming. I remember seeing another body in the air with me and my glasses flying off me.
What happened (/what Wendell Smith and I figured out:)
(i) I was not really clipped off to the anchor. When Woody was “busy doing something” in step (6) above, he was puling all the slack (70 ft or so) on rope #2 (the trail rope) and asked Wendell to tie in.
(ii) Wendell had climbed more with Woody and knows that Woody didn’t use clove-hitches. So, when Woody handed me that bight, he might have just given it to me to clip to myself somewhere so that the trailing rope wouldn’t be flying/dangling around …
* * * *
My postlude to the report:
In point (8) above, it was probably the first 10 – 20 ft (when it was still relatively flat) that the lowering went OK.
As Wendell mentioned in his report: I have forgotten most of the details about what happened immediately after I stopped falling. However, I have very bad eyesight (-8.0 Diopter, both eyes) I remember that the rope(#2)/harness was sort of pulling me away from the rock, and I was trying desperately to move (with difficulty) towards the rock. Once I finally got to the rock, I remember trying desperately to move further to the right to sink a hand jam into a crack: I remember I was freaking out because I don’t know if it was just some horn that caught the rope I was falling on …
Matt, THANK YOU for getting me down.
|
|
|
|
|
k.l.k
Apr 8, 2009, 10:49 PM
Post #115 of 129
(15352 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
Thanks for posting, Al.
|
|
|
|
|
yokese
Apr 8, 2009, 11:22 PM
Post #116 of 129
(15282 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 18, 2006
Posts: 672
|
Al, thanks for posting. I can't even fathom the distress that you feel right now. Hence, I sincerely appreciate you taking the time and effort to post your report. This is very important for the climbing community, several valuable lessons can be learn from this accident.
Mods, perhaps a good time to do a little cleaning in this thread so Al's post is more visible.
|
|
|
|
|
ambler
Apr 8, 2009, 11:58 PM
Post #117 of 129
(15243 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2002
Posts: 1690
|
Thank you, Al, that was a clear and very helpful account.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Apr 9, 2009, 12:13 AM
Post #118 of 129
(15212 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
Thank you, Al. That explains a number of issues that have been in question.
I have only the best wishes to you in this post-accident time.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
jsh
Apr 9, 2009, 2:00 AM
Post #119 of 129
(15102 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 118
|
Al, I'm so sorry for what you've been through. I hope you'll find some peace eventually.
And thanks, a million times over, for posting your report.
I have one remaining question - from your report, it sounds like you did not redirect rope #1 through the anchor to lower Woody; is this correct, that you were lowering him directly off your harness?
|
|
|
|
|
socalclimber
Apr 9, 2009, 2:27 AM
Post #120 of 129
(15089 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437
|
Thanks for the post Al.
Something that may be of use to us all. My partners and I generally don't lower off routes, we usually do the decents or rap. Largo is absolutely correct, the decents out here can be far more scary than the routes themselves.
With this said, whenever I do lower someone from the top, I like to redirect the rope through the anchor so I am not lowering directly off the harness. There are lot of reason for this like belay escapes etc.
There is a nother very good leason here, always know what your partner is up too. This goes further than double checking your systems. Al stated clearly he didn't know what his partner was up too.
Years ago I had a very near death experience on a multipitch route when my partner and I were doing the change over for the next lead (mine). Neither was paying any attention to what the other was doing. The ledge was tiny, and when I went to lean back on the anchor, my partner noticed I was completely untied from the anchor. He managed to grab my harness just in time. I would have gone 130 feet to the deck.
Game over.
Neither one of us ever figured out how I became untied. Frankly it doesn't matter.
I was lucky, pure and simple.
Thanks again Al for the post.
|
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
Apr 9, 2009, 4:04 AM
Post #121 of 129
(15017 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
socalclimber wrote: Thanks for the post Al. Something that may be of use to us all. My partners and I generally don't lower off routes, we usually do the decents or rap. Largo is absolutely correct, the decents out here can be far more scary than the routes themselves. With this said, whenever I do lower someone from the top, I like to redirect the rope through the anchor so I am not lowering directly off the harness. There are lot of reason for this like belay escapes etc. There is a nother very good leason here, always know what your partner is up too. This goes further than double checking your systems. Al stated clearly he didn't know what his partner was up too. Years ago I had a very near death experience on a multipitch route when my partner and I were doing the change over for the next lead (mine). Neither was paying any attention to what the other was doing. The ledge was tiny, and when I went to lean back on the anchor, my partner noticed I was completely untied from the anchor. He managed to grab my harness just in time. I would have gone 130 feet to the deck. Game over. Neither one of us ever figured out how I became untied. Frankly it doesn't matter. I was lucky, pure and simple. Thanks again Al for the post.
I, too, have been lucky in a similar fashion twice in the past. First time, while taking a relative beginner up his first multipitch. Second pitch: he tells me "on belay" and I head off. It's only when I'm about four metres out and placing my first piece of gear that he realises he's "belaying" me from the wrong end of the rope. I clip in hard to the nut I just placed, he gets himself properly sorted, and we continue.
The other occasion is one I posted up here a while back. Sport climbing with my wife, who hasn't climbed all that much and has good, but far from perfect english. I reach the top, clip a couple of quickdraws through the rings and hook the rope through, and call down "have you got me" ready to be lowered. She answers "yes". Just before leaning back (but thankfully still holding on to the quickdraws), I glance down to see her removing the rope from her belay device.
Both my fault. Both could have easily left me dead, but I was lucky and learned from them. Communicate and double-check. Always. Simple and stupid events will kill you just as dead as complex and unpredictable ones.
|
|
|
|
|
alkwok
Apr 9, 2009, 8:27 AM
Post #122 of 129
(14953 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 61
|
Jsh wrote, "it sounds like you did not redirect rope #1 through the anchor to lower Woody; is this correct, that you were lowering him directly off your harness? "
You are correct Julie. Unfortunately, I lowered Woody directly off my harness.
(This post was edited by alkwok on Apr 9, 2009, 8:33 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Apr 9, 2009, 8:53 PM
Post #123 of 129
(14731 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Thanks so much, Al, for getting your story out. Definitely lessons there for all of us.
I wish you plenty of healing.
One last thing - I hope you're not castigating yourself. Personally, I'd climb with you any day of the week.
Take care,
GO
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Apr 10, 2009, 12:32 AM
Post #125 of 129
(14719 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
The moderators may want to review the effect of locking things down until more facts became available. That seemed to work well in this case at least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
