Lowering vs rappelling

Ed Wright wrote:Just lower and be done with it. I HATE waiting while some idiot takes 25 minutes to set up a rappel when they could be lowered in 1 minute.

Wow 25 minutes, well some people are going to be slower then others.

Phil Lauffen wrote: There have been plenty of instances where the climber thought the bolt was in good condition, and it wasn't...

That's what I meant, I just can't figure out the quote feature. A lot of new climbers are all about the bolt, but who knows the history of each (I won't cite time bomb bolts I've come across). If you have your system down, you can be off those chains in NO time!
Steve

slim wrote: i don't really agree that rapping is more dangerous. with lowering, you have twice as many people who can fuck up. judging by the numbers of related accidents that i have read about in the last 10 years, i'm pretty sure that lowering accidents are happening a lot more often than rapping accidents these days.

I'm with slim on this. I've never heard of a rapping accident on single-pitch sport-climbing terrain (doesn't mean it hasn't happened), but I've heard of plenty of lowering accidents (means it has and does happen).

Having said that, I prefer getting lowered, probably >90% of the time. My partners are excellent. I trust them. And I don't detach myself from the anchor until they're holding my weight, we've made eye contact, and I've screamed "pay attention mother-fucker!"

Richard Radcliffe wrote:I've never heard of a rapping accident on single-pitch sport-climbing terrain...

Here's one.

Perin Blanchard wrote: Here's one.

Ah yes. I remember that. The old memory's just not what it used to be. Or ever was really.

Interesting, though, that one of the arguments being made for rapping is that fewer people involved = less chance of a screw-up. Clearly this incident does not support that argument.

the accident which you linked seems like it was inconclusive whether she was rapelling or being lowered.

slim wrote:the accident which you linked seems like it was inconclusive whether she was rapelling or being lowered.

If, by inconclusive, you mean that a gaggle of we Internet poseurs couldn't agree on the interpretation of a grainy photograph then yes, you are correct.

If, however, one accepts the testimony of two eyewitnesses then: no.

Jason N. wrote: But from the climber's perspective, isn't it safer to assume you'll be rapping? And from the belayer's perspective assume they'll be lowering...

For single-pitch sport, it is easy to envision a scenario in which the climber would HAVE to lower, such as a severely overhanging or traversing route, so you will definitely occasionally not be rapping. Lowering off of every route to avoid silly belayers going off-belay when the climber goes direct has become the norm. (And honestly, most non-stupid belayers will seek additional confirmation that the climber will rap even if the climber says "Off belay".)

A pretty fair statement by Jason.

Usually don't assume anything, except as a belayer, always assume the climber is to be kept On; until it's clear that your climber is the one asking for Off. If the command doesn't make sense to the pre-plan discussion or the overall situation, I'd like to get a confirm before I physically take someone Off.

When just considering the partner exchange, one method isn't any more or less safe than the other. Hundreds of climbers probably perform either method in any given week without concern for an accident.

Perin Blanchard wrote: If, by inconclusive, you mean that a gaggle of we Internet poseurs couldn't agree on the interpretation of a grainy photograph then yes, you are correct. If, however, one accepts the testimony of two eyewitnesses then: no.

did the woman actully ever state whether she was rappeling or being lowered? perhaps the man you assume was her partner thought she was rapelling, and she thought she was being lowered? none of the eyewitnesses sound positive about what they saw.

i still find the root cause to be inconclusive (?).