Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
rgold
Trad climber
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
|
I've been an assisted-braking user for quite a few years now, having settled on the CT Alpine Up as by far the best solution for the way I handle half ropes. My reasons are somewhat different from those posted by others, but that isn't the primary focus of this discussion so I'll save them for another time. My point at the moment is I am not biased against new technology simply by virtue of having learned and become competent with earlier methods.
So here's the thing I dislike about new belay gadgets. It isn't so much that people simply fail to do their due diligence and so don't know how to use them and then screw up, that is a criticism of climber attitudes rather than anything intrinsic to the devices. (For example, there's a perfectly good way to pump slack to the leader with a gri gri and still maintain a functional brake hand, and the information is available in the device instructions and all over the internet. Anyone still using one of the fully discredited approaches is failing a basic responsibility to their companions. That's bad, but I don't see it as a device flaw.)
No, what bothers me more is that the new technologies come with hidden gotcha's that no one knows about until something bad happens. I'm not necessarily blaming manufacturers and engineers for this, as it is probably an inevitable side-effect of increasing complexity. It is just a fact of life the user has to accept, that they may do everything according to the book and the device may still not perform as it is supposed to. (It is small consolation that the book may be rewritten after an unfortunate experience.) In climbing, where we pride ourselves on our ability and dedication in controlling elements of risk---even as we willingly embrace some, the fact that we have to accept a small probability that a belay device might fail through no predictable fault of our own is a bitter pill to swallow.
In the case of assisted braking devices (so now excluding the grigri), there is a technical issue that isn't particularly well-known, and that is the relative decline in performance for high loads. Tests by Jim Titt have shown that the "force multiplying" effect of a number of assisted braking devices (how much of a load you can hold with a given level of grip strength) tends to level off when higher loads have to be held, even if the required increase in grip strength is available. By contrast, the ATC-XP continues to provide more or less the same multiplicative advantage as the load increases. This means that the same gadget that provides nearly effortless braking for low-impact falls may be much worse than the "non-locking" ATC-XP in holding a big fall. (In this respect, by the way, the juls seem to be the worst of the lot.)
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
...the fact that we have to accept a small probability that a belay device might fail through no predictable fault of our own is a bitter pill to swallow.
generalized to the entire "safety system" (include here anchors, webbing, ropes, carabiners, etc and the training to implement properly) that bitter pill gets pretty large, though the failure probability seems not to grow as quickly.
How much risk is mitigated by acceding to Mei's hypothetical request? and how much more is assumed?
|
|
rgold
Trad climber
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
|
I agree Ed, but when it comes to belay devices, we have a kind of choice that is not available when rigging an anchor with whatever is available. And I also agree that my "complaint," if that's what it is (remember I use these devices), may, as with many human reactions to probabilistic events, be far more emotional than rational.
|
|
JimT
climber
Munich
|
|
Single-pitch I´d belay someone with whatever device they wanted, it´s their life not mine. When they belayed me I´d make my choice as well!
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
I'd like to push back a little bit.
For instance, you rig your belay with carabiners, and the evolution of carabiners has lead to reducing their weight and size.
Do we have any idea what level of engineering goes into designing the modern carabiner, what tests those designs are subjected to and how the actual carabiners are "qualified" for use in the safety systems (including the determination of the necessary training for using them)?
My guess is that we overestimate the degree of rigor used in producing these products. This complacency is worrisome, especially given they are critical components in our safety system.
For the most part, we assume they are provided with a degree of assurance that is equal to their critical importance, legal disclaimers not withstanding, and of course, we all assume we know how to use a carabiner, how complicated could it be?
This ubiquitous item has failed in a number of cases, mostly because the climber used them "incorrectly" in cases where they were subject to forces that lead to failure.
I don't have any answers for any of the questions raised, of course... I too succumb to the "Challenger mentality" which posits that your probability of failure goes down with each successful voyage, what is it about human perception of risk that makes this a tenable thought?
oh, and perhaps this should be at least linked:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHdqjjyeTtg
We are, in fact, part of the product testing for all climbing gear. It would not be possible to anticipate all the situations for which we use this gear. A bit of knowledge regarding the gear would seem to be important when deciding how to use it in real life.
|
|
ionlyski
Trad climber
Polebridge, Montana
|
|
So here's the thing I dislike about new belay gadgets. It isn't so much that people simply fail to do their due diligence and so don't know how to use them and then screw up, that is a criticism of climber attitudes rather than anything intrinsic to the devices. (For example, there's a perfectly good way to pump slack to the leader with a gri gri and still maintain a functional brake hand, and the information is available in the device instructions and all over the internet. Anyone still using one of the fully discredited approaches is failing a basic responsibility to their companions. That's bad, but I don't see it as a device flaw.)
No, what bothers me more is that the new technologies come with hidden gotcha's that no one knows about until something bad happens.
Yeah but in the case of the GriGri that information didn't come out until after about 10 years after "no brake hand accidents" started accumulating. Then they searched out new techniques for belaying the leader with that device that would both pay out slack AND keep a hand on the brake. Kind of like reverse engineering.
Many years ago (can't remember how long the GriGri has been around) seems like 20 years ago I was belaying a cutting edge climber at Smith Rocks. He asked me if I knew how to lead belay with the device and I said yes because I had been experimenting with pushing the rope backwards through the device at a rate that didn't cause the device to lock up, thereby paying out slack. I thought it was working pretty well but when he went to yank up slack for a clip at the crux it locked and boy was he pissed. Then he came back down and said again, "don't you know how to use that thing"? He then had me squeeze it open with my brake hand (abandoning the brake end) and pay out slack with the other hand, then during a fall, just let go. That never sat well with me because I have ripped through 12 feet of rope before the unit locks up and seen it happen many times, rope diameter dependent.
Now I have seen revised information from Petzl on lead belay technique but I'm no longer interested. Just me.
Arne
|
|
rgold
Trad climber
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
|
I sympathize, Ionlyski. I think that any device that requires you to disconnect braking in order to pump slack has an intrinsic flaw, which may or may not be so important depending on the technique of the belayer. (That said, even the ATC might be said to require a "disconnect of braking" in the sense of reorienting the strands to parallel in order to pump slack.)
There other gotchas. Petzl warns about weighting the load strand with the non-braking hand, Cinches have had various problems historically, Mammut Smart has rope-jamming issues, and the other assisted-braking devices suffer from the performance inconsistencies I mentioned above. Anything with a moving cam might be adversely affected by a bit of grit in the mechanism (this might explain otherwise "inexplicable" gri gri failures).
It is worth adding that whenever a gadget fails to perform as it "should," there is always a chorus of voices citing operator error, not because all the facts are known (they usually are not), but rather because of (I would say blind) faith that the device cannot possibly malfunction unless the user makes a critical error.
Where's the test data on what an ATC holds when the rope has a new dry treatment? It sure AF goes through the rappel device faster. Forgetting about slippery treatments, I don't even believe the manufacturer's engraved ranges.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
ATC Pilot...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0IN08M4pkU
revealingly, perhaps, this is the only "How To" video on the Black Diamond site for belay devices... apparently people are more concerned with what the proper number of button pokes are required to turn on the various BD headlamps... maybe they need a phone app interface.
If you should not remove your brake hand from a gri-gri then what of the "auto lock feature" which Mei felt was important in the OP?
Petzl seems to have walked back from this feature.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Sigh. By way of clarification, it's not that I 'hate' grigris, gyms, sport climbing, inclusivity, commercialization, or a demographic that has exploded over the last thirty-five years.
No, what I have a problem with (particularly in the context of any discussion of belaying and belay devices), is that climbers and climbing have dramatically failed to grasp and acknowledge the extensive impacts these changes have wrought on climber perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. Hell, even what climbing 'is' for the vast majority of climbers has seriously morphed over that time frame.
But sticking to the immediate context of belaying, the cumulative effect of all those factors has produced a 'modern' demographic where a good belay is not a given, everyone is suspect (for good reasons), and folks think yet more reliance on a mechanical device is the best way to counter that situation. And it would be if not for the fact the device they're looking to for the "extra assurance of safety" is, in large part, the reason a good belay is no longer a given.
Crikey, if ever there was an ironic gerbil wheel of self-reinforcing behavior this is it - proliferate a device which actively promotes bad belay behaviors and then demand everyone use that very same device to counter the resulting debacle of incompetence on a demographic scale.
|
|
rgold
Trad climber
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
|
Mei, a two minor comments on your last post.
the video [about Jul use] clearly demonstrates its usage with double ropes
I just looked at the video and it doesn't address half rope technique at all. In fact, the only place double ropes---which are almost certainly twins---appears is in the bit about upper belays in guide mode.
I've tried the MicroJul and the Mammut Smart Alpine with half ropes and personally dislike the handling issues they impose. They just aren't a good solution for belaying with such ropes. Add to this the fact I mentioned earlier about their performance inconsistencies---especially the MicroJul's---and they are the wrong choice for me as they turned out to be for you.
This is where Click-Up would shine....no moving parts...
The Click-Up does have a moving part, a spring-loaded tab that keeps the rope from popping the device into locking position under low rope tension (as when slack is being pumped to the leader). This little tab is the main reason the Alpine Up's half-rope handling so much better than the Juls and the Smart, and it is the reason the Click Up has the best handling characteristics of any of the assisted braking devices including the Gri Gri.
A good thing about the Click and Alpine Up moving part is that braking would be unaffected by a tab failure, it is just that handling would be worse. So a broken tab would never be the cause of a loss of control, unlike a gri gri, in which a cam malfunction would render the device pretty ineffective, as the braking effect of the rope path by itself is minimal.
|
|
ionlyski
Trad climber
Polebridge, Montana
|
|
Interesting comment Rgold about weighting the load side of the device thereby interfering with the locking process of a camming type of device. I never thought of that.
But for sure in the gym with short 40 foot ropes and the GriGri being threaded at the end of that rope leaving only 10 feet or so of rope on the brake side can have an effect on the locking of the device because there is no weight on the end of the rope so brake hand becomes very necessary.
Arne
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Grigri can provide the best belay experience a leader can ask for. That said, there are a few things I don’t like about it...
4) Designed for right handed people.
So what happens when you're in a tight spot and you need to belay with your left hand? Or your right hand got banged up by a rock earlier in the climb?
|
|
D'Wolf
climber
|
|
We need a few more MIT grads from JPL to chime in and carry this over-analyzation to the next level. REALLY?
"Seat belts save lives."
There are approximately 5,000,000 commuters on the road EACH DAY in Los Angeles. Your odds of a fatal accident in California: roughly 1/13,000. And yet, there are people that can give you personal stories of how a seat belt saved their life and will champion the cause forever more. Roughly half the people that die in auto accidents typically aren't wearing seat belts. Uh, yeah, but the other half that died, were. How many lives do seat belts actually save? Honestly? Somewhat hard to definitively know.
And so it goes with climbing...
I've met climbers that won't use oval 'biners because "D" 'biners are 40% stronger, stating that, "ovals are too weak". Seriously. Idiots.
I can't even begin to calculate the tens of thousands of climbers around the world that have climbed without an auto-locking belay device throughout the history of our sport - and lived.
Statistically speaking, believe it or not, our sport is actually a pretty safe sport. Your paranoia over ATC's belies your inexperience. You're over-thinking this thing. Really.
Don't get on a plane; it might crash.
Thom
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
I’m kinda with you Thom. Most rock climbing gear is over engineered for it’s intended use. To say one style of carabiner is better because It’s stronger is simply ludicrous. Almost all accidents are pilot error and that includes using gear incorrectly
You are correct in saying that rock climbing is a relatively safe sport but that does not extend to alpine climbing. The increased danger in alpine, however, is because of objective hazards like weather, avalanches and rock fall. In a sense you could consider pilot error an objective hazard in rock climbing.
I have been fine despite the fact that I don’t use an autobloc belay system, hardly ever put in three piece equalized anchors and never carry extra gear because I am afraid I might lose something.
A large part of that has to do with my experience. Having said that, I still believe that this discussion is valid and could prove helpful for many people. Whatever system you use for belaying be sure that you are comfortable with it and thoroughly knowledgeable in it’s use.
Remember that the system is an inanimate object and you are animate and want to stay that way. Constant vigilance is paramount in the vertical world...gravity never takes a vacation.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
PLENTY of problems with those bitd with all the same errors and results afaik.
Well, I don't know when bitd was for you, but that wasn't the case in the areas I climbed at in the '70s; no one ever got dropped in tens of thousands of goes with no devices at all.
|
|
rgold
Trad climber
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
|
I'm 74 years old and have been climbing for 60 of those years. My onsight trad climbing level has dropped two full grades in spite of being at it more or less continually. My mile time has more than doubled. I can't come anywhere near jumping and grabbing the rim of the basket any more. The number of two-arm pullups I can do is only slightly more than the number of one-arm pullups I used to be able to do. If I close my eyes, I'm lucky if I can balance on one foot for five seconds.
One of the things that have kept me in the game have been the advances in technology. A few stoppers and hexes got me up 5.11 BITD, but if I had to climb 5.9 with the same rack, I'd probably have hung up my spurs. So although I'm neither addicted to nor obsessed with climbing technology, I'm definitely a fan.
In this regard, I don't get the seat belt analogy. If buckling up significantly increases my chances of walking away from an accident, why would I choose not to do it? And if seat belts improve, why wouldn't I opt for better versions?
I think that climbers, with their use of ropes and cams and nuts, devote more attention to risk attenuation than anyone in any other endeavor. It is, in some sense, continually on their minds (and if not, to their peril). This inclination to attend to risk is precisely what enables us to survive. But then why is it surprising that in some of our down time we discuss the features and benefits of the various devices we use?
By virtue of experience, training, and attitude, I guess I'm as good or better a belayer than many younger climbers. But does it really make sense that I use the same belay system, with its demands for good grip strength and fast reflexes, that I used, say, thirty years ago, when my physical capabilities were so much more substantial? Isn't the rational thing, ego notwithstanding, to adopt something that will provide a bit of an edge? And how exactly does anything about generations climbers managing without recent advances in technology have any relevance for my decision about being as reliable a companion as I can possibly be?
I'm in awe, as I think most of us are, of Jim's abilities and choices, but he himself makes it clear that they aren't for everyone. But even in Jim's case, I'm guessing he isn't ice-climbing with a Stubai straight pick ice axe in one hand and a Salewa ice dagger in the other, nor is he even likely to be sporting a double rack of rigid-stem cams. We all embrace various aspects of technology and its improvements. One person's line will be drawn in a different place than another's. I see the belay device "debate" as part of a continual struggle to evaluate how technology can contribute to our sport without somehow draining its soul, and so am not at all bothered by the discussion.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2017 - 02:21am PT
|
I suspect Jim likes shiny things as much as the rest of us but that, at the end of the day, Jim mainly relies on Jim to give Jim an extra assurance of safety and not one of the shiny things.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2017 - 06:14am PT
|
Rgold....I too have found my physical abilities much diminished. I once, with perfect conditions, could dunk. I now can barely grab the net. I am far from a Luddite when it comes to gear. I have, up to date, modern ice tools and ultralight BD cams. All of my biners are 1oz. and I use 9mm single ropes. I certainly depend on new technology to keep my climbing level anywhere near what it was.
My choices in belay devices follow the same trend towards minimum weight and versatility. I reiterate that, given the importance of a good belay, people should choose the system they feel the most comfortable and secure with. Conversely, I want a partner who I feel has his/her belaying down pat whatever system they choose to use.
Extraordinarily warm and dry in Ouray. I'm up early to head out to Escalante Canyon for some splitter cracks!
|
|
Don Paul
Mountain climber
Denver CO
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2017 - 06:17am PT
|
I still like ATCs better, can give and take slack instantly.
|
|
rgold
Trad climber
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2017 - 08:10am PT
|
Extraordinarily warm and dry in Ouray. I'm up early to head out to Escalante Canyon for some splitter cracks!
Now right there is one of the innumerable differences between Jim and I. It's 11 am on Sunday morning and I'm still sipping a cappuccino, staring at the 3 inches of snow I have to shovel off my driveway.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!