Rappelling without extension
|
Rappelling is the most dangerous thing we regularly do, aside from like driving. |
|
Can we stop calling the brake strand the "break" strand? It's making me nervous. |
|
Andrew Rice wrote: You’ve got just as much chance of teaching people the difference between your and you’re. Basically, it’s not gonna happen |
|
Desert Rock Sports wrote: Is it objectively dangerous or is it subjectively dangerous because people are tired and don't put as much thought into it? I don't really get the fear mongering behind rapping if you just use your brain and realize that getting to the top doesn't mean the end of paying attention during a day out. |
|
I used to use my third hand with a locker, then I switched to a non locker because ' its just a back up ' ...and after it unclipped itself twice within a few months I went back to using a locker. Im kind of surprised you find using an extension so difficult that you decided this method was easier. Can you give me some scenarios where you see your method being superior? |
|
Connor Dobson wrote: Objectively speaking, does it matter? It’s the point at which many people commonly make mistakes and injure themselves. Even experienced people who are aware of how to “just use your brain”. Also it’s objectively hazardous as any failure of the system is likely to cause a ground fall, whereas mistakes during other portions of our hobby might have lesser consequences. |
|
anonymous coward wrote: A mistake of the belay isn’t likely to cause a ground falI? Not finishing your figure 8?
-disclaimer- I rarely extend my rappel and equally rarely back it up. |
|
Desert Rock Sports wrote: Some stats from ANAM for climbing accidents in USA and Canada from 1951--2020. Rappelling: 346. Lowering: 564. Fall on rock: 4,783. Note that these stats go back to 1951, so the rappelling accidents include many years when third-hand backups weren't used, something one might think would inflate the numbers. The lowering stats are also interesting, since lowering on single pitches wasn't a thing for many years. This makes those numbers worse than they might first appear compared to rappelling, because the bulk of those accidents occurred in a much shorter recent time period and yet they still outstrip rappelling accidents. Of course, an accident is not the same as a fatality. Many of those "fall on rock" incidents were not fatal. A majority of the rappelling accidents probably were fatal. I don't know the fatality rate for the climbing accidents, but it would have to be under 7% in order for rappelling to be "more dangerous." Despite what we tell our moms, I don't think there is any way climbing is safer than driving. |
|
Ryan Never climbs wrote: Non-statistically valid test: how many people do you know who have died climbing vs how many people you know who have died in car accidents? According to the stats in https://www.tetongravity.com/story/adventure/your-chances-of-dying-ranked-by-sport-and-activity, the chances of dying "mountain climbing" are 1/1750, whereas the chance of dying driving are 1/6200 (their figure for this is 16.3 per 100,000 licensed drivers). |
|
Well, most climbers drive and climb so it seems like a wash. To be honest, climbers probably drive more than the general population, and often on curvy mountain roads, at night when tired, etc. |
|
Life is hard, and it just may be time to give up the ghost. Thus... I will build a climbing wall inside my car... and double my chances or a proper perishing. Thank you for all the great statistics. I will now take up needle point. : -) |
|
Ryan Never climbs wrote: That 38k from Wikipedia is 12 per 100,000 or 1 per 8,300---even smaller than the number I quoted! The "mountaineering" stat is 57 per 100,000, almost 5 times the driving death toll. Dunno where it comes from though, and if it includes snow and ice it might be double the pure rock-climbing figure, but even so climbing appears more dangerous than driving by these measures. That said, other analyses do suggest the opposite conclusion. Here is a table from https://www.summitpost.org/mountaineering-accident-statistics/658474 that reaches a very different conclusion. Most of the graphs and charts on the page are not visible, but you can still read Steph Abegg's analyses. |
|
Noodle Dude wrote: If there isn't lowering hardware like mussys, or if the lowering hardware is worn out and risks my rope, or if the route is such that lowering will abrade my rope (which is easy considering that lowering puts 1.66 times the force on the anchors compared to rappel - hence extra rope wear at the anchors - and the moving ropes under load also abrade against the rock wherever it touches). I rappel quite a bit in single pitch where others wouldn't, but I think that's because a lot of people aren't comfortable or don't know how to rappel. I started climbing rope solo for 5 years, so I had to become comfortable with such situations where nobody was there to check me. That's where my idiosyncratic rappel process took shape (see below). In single pitch, I'll usually take just a fireman's backup for rappel, unless the route is such that a fireman's will pull me off the wall or off my rappel route. I really love the fireman's and from what I've seen it's an underutilized technique. Considering that the helical friction hitch and a redundant rappel extension both require an overhand to be tied, we can consider them an equal faff. So there's actually time saved in a single pitch rappel with my method vs extending, because extending requires the friction hitch to be tied after the net zero faff of the extension. That's assuming you don't carry a pas, if you do it's already extended. As rgold pointed out, there's economy to extending in a multi pitch setting, since the extension need only be tied once. So I certainly can't claim efficiency in multi pitch with no extension method. The efficiency really comes with my idiosyncratic rappel process: my tether is usually two single length alpine draws with non-lockers, set up redundantly. I do my test rappel to almost the end of the tethers, bounce, check that tethers are slack, unclip one tether. Reset rappel to the top, test again to almost the end of the remaining tether, bounce, check that tether is slack, unclip. Then begin rappelling. I'm not recommending it, but it's the process I've devised to convince myself the system is safe. This process may seem overwrought, but after studying rappel failure modes I concluded that I can't trust visual inspection - due to the 1 or 0 bights clipped failure modes detailed in the required reading resource posted earlier. Santa Claus checks his list twice, so I feel vindicated in this idiosyncrasy. The most important thing that cannot be overstated is never unclip a weighted strand and never unweight a strand - via standing up or pulling - to unclip a weighted strand. Transfers should be smooth, unclip only slack strands when everything is settled and all weight is on. I used to be very much into tethers, extension, pas and whatnot. I do use extension in some cases for some purposes. However, this idiosyncratic process of mine is very familiar at this point and I try to stick to doing things the same way as much as practical so I don't get confused. I'll say this about using the original setup I posted - it's relaxing, it didn't jam, and it was nice to listen to static electricity as I glided down the rope. Additionally, with regard to climbing risk vs driving risk: we can narrow that gap if we just always drive 20mph over the speed limit perhaps. Then you can tell your mom that technically it's safer. But don't do this, it's just a joke. |
|
While I've never needed to transition from rappelling to ascending, extending an ATC guide makes the transition really easy: |
|
In regards to the ANAM stats, they leave out many many accidents. They also have a habit of cherry picking the cause of accidents or allowing self-reporting parties to do so. They are often categorizing data in ways that might misrepresent actual hazards. For example, hikers are often defined as free soloing climbers in locations where none ropes up. And odds change with the objective so if the average mountaineer never travels over snow then the calculated odds of injury might exaggerate the odds for the average person. Lastly, many research studies (and their data) on accidents are not freely available for public to examine. For example, you would be hard pressed to find the last major study of accidents in the Tetons online. Without that, all data is suspect. Here is one such conclusion: "The risk of serious injury or death is almost 50% more likely with swimming when compared to rock climbing." EDIT: If you ever doubt the wind can be a climbing & driving hazard, this happened yesterday in Wyoming: |
|
'Considering that the helical friction hitch and a redundant rappel extension both require an overhand to be tied, we can consider them an equal faff. So there's actually time saved in a single pitch rappel with my method vs extending, because extending requires the friction hitch to be tied after the net zero faff of the extension. That's assuming you don't carry a pas, if you do it's already extended.' I see where you are coming from, but then I want to counter with just basketing a single length through your belay loop, no overhand needed, and using a pre sewn friction hitch, no overhand needed or use a locker draw as one of your anchor draws, and then bum that and use it as your extension when you clean the anchor, or using a second locker on your belay loop, and extending your ATC with that extra locker. There are certainly things that require equal amounts of faff as your method but they involve an extension and extra equipment, which seems to be what you are trying to do away with? I would also wager that setting up an autoblock with a presewn or VT prussic on a tensioned line is much faster than wrapping a single strand and then tying an overhand and then double checking the knot is correct and the hitch isn't too loose so that it might reach the device... My concern would be someone improperly tying the friction hitch and then relying on it and having it either accidentally get defeated because its too long, having it untie, or have not tied it through the correct spot. |
|
Just wanted to reiterate Bob's early statement that then most common problem with rappelling is going off the end of the rope. This is a long discussion on the best method to rap, but many methods are fine. I've always kept an eye on the rope below me, to look for tangles, etc. If I have to look up or around, I'll stop rappelling, then look down at the rope before continuing to rap, or I'll make sure that I know I have 20 feet of rope below me and not rappel any more than that until I check again. That along with knots in the ends of the ropes most of the time (unless I'm worried they'd get stuck in a crack or something) is probably more important than if you have an extension or even a third hand at all. |
|
Not sure if has been said yet, but maybe more importantly, having a rappel extension also allow you to easily transition to ascending should you miss a rappel station. Just clip the upper fin of the device into your belay loop and it is set up as a ratchet to ascend the rope (hope that makes sense...). For ice, a locker draw has been a simple little extension for me. This system avoids having to untie tight knots in dyneema. I'm not a fan of the autoblock on the leg loop in any configuration. I think it is very possible to lift your leg high enough to have the autoblock hit the rappel device to defeat it. |
|
Noodle, Miscalibration of the friction hitch would be evident during the rappel testing. According to the required reading article, all rigs should be tested each time before use. I would teach this technique to my girlfriend, who is not by any means a knot-head like me. I've taught her extension before and she hated it because it's hard to take up slack. Miscalibration can also occur with extension, I've seen it in the field and corrected it. Pretty hilarious to see a big long extension with a big long prusik as well. Those pre-sewn prusiks are ridiculous to me and convey a false sense of security. You can always make a shorter connection with a tied prusik than a sewn one if you use the right knots. I detest PMI accessory cord for prusiks, after years it's still stiff as a board. Sterling cord is pretty supple though. I suppose aesthetics shouldn't be a concern, but I have to admit something about the extended rig triggers an OCD-like revulsion in me hahaha. That doesn't matter, just full disclosure of my motivation here. A more important consideration perhaps is redundancy. I notice that most rigs aim for some redundancy, but this is absent in the basket hitch configuration. I know questions of redundancy always raise conflict here, so I'll just concede that entire argument right now: slings never break, slings are invincible, yada yada - okay I get it, but even true believers still seem tie their master points with multiple strands when they can. Another thing I'd like to discuss: is it appropriate for the single pitch manual to teach the leg loop backup? As someone who is almost completely self-taught, I would like the book to at least mention that someone has died that way. If I remember correctly, John Long or some other high profile climber wrote at some point about how he didn't even back up his rappel depending on the circumstances. (Does anybody remember this paper or am I fabricating this?) I think that's interesting, and they're all valid approaches to risk, I'm just somewhat neurotic myself and I like to do things by the book. Bret, I do carry a locking draw these days, thanks to this board. I found out that my camp orbit lockers were actually lighter than my bd positron non-lockers, so that was a no-brainer to swap (plus the older positrons have weak springs and have frozen open on me). However, I don't want to rap on a biner with such a steep angle and a smaller surface than a belay biner. Maybe I'm overlooking some option here. How do you use the locking draw? One unsung advantage of the extension, to give credit to that system, is that with the prusik above waist level perhaps it is less tempting to slide the prusik without keeping a hand below on the brake strand. I really like how that required reading mentions the importance of how the prusik is moved. It's a great read. |
|
Eric Moss wrote: As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the SPI manual is getting dated and certainly contains errata. What was perhaps considered reasonable practice at the time may have changed in the years since (it certainly has in my opinion). Plus, that project had 4 authors, so there was definitely debate about what to include or not, what is "officially" accepted, etc. As for rappelling deaths, the leg loop back-up is basically an operator error friction hitch failure. If you'd like to read some accounts of those (a few of them rife with macabre humor), check out the works cited in the required reading rappelling paper. |