Tying into the belay loop?

Danny Herrera wrote:

For the younger kids in comps, they tie off a figure 8 & locker to the belay loop.

& locker? I hate know-nothing parents.

So, let's say that you've tied into your belay anchor directly with the rope, a solid practice if you're swinging leads, and you're tied in to the belay loop. You're leaning out, weighting the anchor and your belay loop, ready to belay up your second. Maybe, to see your partner, or for comfort, you want to stand sideways, leaning out. Now you want to use that belay loop to, well, belay. Sounds like things could get a little weird.

Why, if your harness has re-enforced tie in points (most Do), would you ever even think of tying into the belay loop? What's the upside? 

Matthew Jaggers wrote:

& locker? I hate know-nothing parents.

Every auto belay in every gym uses a locker connected to the belay loop.  

As to the parents, how are they to know any better.   If I were trying to make a system as idiot proof as possible and have a figure 8 pre tied with a locker on it so all the “no nothing parents” just have to clip the locker to the belay loop.  Easy to inspect. 

Kevin Mokracek wrote:

Every auto belay in every gym uses a locker connected to the belay loop.  

As to the parents, how are they to know any better.   If I were trying to make a system as idiot proof as possible and have a figure 8 pre tied with a locker on it so all the “no nothing parents” just have to clip the locker to the belay loop.  Easy to inspect. 

Thats apples and oranges. You don't tie into a rope when youre auto belaying, do you? Parents would be the only idiots demanding an extra protection point beyond a figure 8'd rope tied in on a roped climb. A climbing coach sure wouldn't. Maybe you "no nothing", but who's to say? The post stated they "tie off to a figure 8 & locker", not a figure 8 to a locker. I could be reading that wrong though.

Ignatius Pi wrote:

In paragraph 6 - 'Tying In' - Petzl certainly just says "Tie in to the two tie-in points", and the same in French; no mention of the belay loop - although one could argue that if the correct method has been specified there is no subsequent requirement to list and eliminate all other potential methods.

That's my point. When manufacturers say to use one method, it doesn't mean there aren't other methods available. Case in point: most harness manuals show the tie-in knot as a re-threaded figure-8, but plenty of climbers (myself included) use other knots to tie-in as well. When someone claims "almost every manufacturer stating this is not correct", then they need to show that manufacturers specifically stating this method is incorrect. So far the evidence presented shows one manufacturer (BD) cautions against tying in directly to the belay loop, and it's a caution (exclamation mark) not a warning (skull and cross bones). One manufacturer is a far cry from "almost every manufacturer".

I was friends with the former technical director of hard goods at Mammut and then Edelrid.  I remember him telling me about tying in to the belay loop and it was totally fine and something people did in Germany (he was Swiss but lived near the border.) 

Not sure I’d consider it dangerous, more just different and not practical.  I’ve done it a couple times in weird situations but never for a normal climbing scenario.  I’ve clipped with lockers to my belay loop hundreds of times but again never in a normal climbing scenario.

JJ Burns wrote:

A few months ago I climbed with a guy that was using a Simond harness that didn't have tie-in points. You could only tie in on the belay loop, and there was a tiny image of the figure eight stitched on the belay loop.  

Interesting!  Thanks for passing that along.

Mikey Schaefer wrote:

I was friends with the former technical director of hard goods at Mammut and then Edelrid.  I remember him telling me about tying in to the belay loop and it was totally fine and something people did in Germany (he was Swiss but lived near the border.) 

Yeah, apparently Edelrid thinks it's fine, it's in the technical documentation is being OK. The regional and nationalistic differences in climbing techniques I always find interesting. Physics affects everyone the same way, but some techniques evolve to be quite different.

JJ Burns wrote:

A few months ago I climbed with a guy that was using a Simond harness that didn't have tie-in points. You could only tie in on the belay loop, and there was a tiny image of the figure eight stitched on the belay loop.  

Maybe this harness?

https://www.decathlon.com/products/climbing-harness-easy-3?variant=1517323911181&gclid=CjwKCAjw-sqKBhBjEiwAVaQ9a6fVz-0lhC2gusCvVgknM9y_uJPPclDIBxL-YpWpeS2bObMvFA6g8BoC0HEQAvD_BwE

aikibujin wrote:

That's my point. When manufacturers say to use one method, it doesn't mean there aren't other methods available.

<< could argue that if the correct method has been specified there is no subsequent requirement to list and eliminate all other potential methods.>> 

Just to clarify here: when I referred to "other potential methods" I didn't mean other safe/acceptable methods - although they might be; I meant any other way of doing it, safe or otherwise, that the human brain can concoct. My point is that if the manufacturer has specified a correct way of using a piece of gear, then - by definition - all other ways are considered unsafe. If you then decide to use your judgement and experience to overrule the manufacturer's recommendation it may be entirely reasonable - you may well have decades more experience than the manufacturer - but it's then your call, and your responsibility. And should it, God forbid, come to a situation where lawyers are looking closely at the fine detail - I'd imagine that any scenario wherein you've apparently ignored a relevant manufacturer's safe usage instructions would pretty much leave you out in the cold. This may or may not be a problem!

Ignatius Pi wrote:

My point is that if the manufacturer has specified a correct way of using a piece of gear, then - by definition - all other ways are considered unsafe.

Really? Ever read the instructions for using your slings?

Jim Titt wrote:

Really? Ever read the instructions for using your slings?

 Hi Jim. No, I haven't. I probably should have, but like you I'd been climbing for several years [decades?] before such instructions appeared, and thereafter largely ignored them.

I apologise for the informality; we actually corresponded several years ago - very helpfully, from my point of view. Does 'Stifte' ring a bell?

Current situation in Germany: DAV (German Alpine Club) teaches both methods and instructors are supposed to explain that harness manufacturers might recommend one method over the other. Outside of gyms you rarely see people using the belay loop as their tie-in point while most entry-level gym climbers do this.

But yes, I suppose we're weird that way. I exclusively learned the "figure eight through belay loop" method, roughly a decade ago. Then someone pointed out that I might want to look at my harness's manual...

Regarding kids and lockers tied to the rope: AFAIK accepted practice for some specific situations according to DAV, especially for birthday parties and such, with the (safety) benefits outweighing the risks. I mean, there's a reason most of us use a bowline but adult competitions use figure eights, right? 

In the Netherlands (and a lot of our climbing culture is an amalgamation of German, French and British practices) a lot of gyms use a locking biner with safety clip (such as the DMM Belay Master) as their primary tie-in points for top roping, with all routes except for the lead routes having fig-8's prepped. 

The gyms that don't use this method obligate you to tie in through both harness tie-in points and NOT the belay loop for both TR and Lead (although it would be technically totally safe, otherwise the method with the locking biner would be just as unsafe for top roping). 

Lead climbers are ALWAYS taught to use both tie-in points, and not the belay loop. Although I think this has more to do with the excessive length of the knot you would otherwise have in your system, than with the belay loop potentially failing. 

I have never tied in to the belay loop because of the extra length they add to the knot as well to the extra length of the belay apparatus. I think they get in way in general which is why I have cut them off of every harness I have ever owned.

Noel Z wrote:

The German Alpine Club says that both belay loop or hard points are approved, despite almost every manufacturer stating this is not correct.

^ So here's your claim.

Your evidence for that claim:

Many Petzl harnesses have images printed on the loop on how to tie in. Many others have plastic reinforced hard points where you are supposed to tie in. I've experienced many times the results of tying into the belay loop in Germany and its both dangerous (interference) and limiting (banshee belay only).

Section 6 here
https://www.petzl.com/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/06868000001FM4PAAW

Section 6 does show the hard points as the correct way to tie in. But it also shows 3 ways that are explicitly bad, and it does not state that the belay loop is one of them. It does show girth-hitching to the belay loop as the correct way to tie in for Via Ferrata.

Figure 2 here:
https://blackdiamond-web.cdn.prismic.io/blackdiamond-web/f1fca6a1-99b5-460d-935b-caab93b8bd02_M10150_F+Harness+IS-WEB.pdf

Figure 2 shows tying into the belay loop with the "Risk of accident or injury" logo. There's a different logo for "Risk of serious injury or death", which is used for things like tying into the gear loop. So I guess they're saying you might get in an accident or get injured, but the injury probably won't be serious and you probably won't die. That's some strange messaging.

Sections 10 here:

https://www.climbingtechnology.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/IST51-7H171CTS1-S2_rev-2_04-21.pdf

Section 10 shows clipping into the belay loop with two opposite and opposed carabiners, which are also clipped to a figure 8 follow-through, as a valid tie-in. It doesn't explicitly show tying into the belay loop.

So you've got one out of three manufacturers saying that tying into the belay loop is incorrect, and they're not saying it's serious or deadly. The other two aren't saying anything exactly about it, but they're showing similar ways of connecting to the harness as being okay.

While there's certainly some ambiguity here, your "almost every manufacturer stating this is not correct" claim seems not to be in the PDFs you've linked.

Kevinmurray wrote:

I have never tied in to the belay loop because of the extra length they add to the knot…

Same here 

as well to the extra length of the belay apparatus.

This makes no sense to me. That’s what, almost 3”? Far easier to use the belay loop than monkeying around with the hard points. Never once thought there was too much extra length. Actually never thought about it.   

 I think they get in way in general which is why I have cut them off of every harness I have ever owned.

You’re doing it wrong.

Marc801 C wrote:

Same here 

This makes no sense to me. That’s what, almost 3”? Far easier to use the belay loop than monkeying around with the hard points. Never once thought there was too much extra length. Actually never thought about it.   

You’re doing it wrong.

No a long enough really sharp razor knife does it the right way. Now a dull deer antler would be the wrong way.

an advantage of tying into the belay loop is that you can very easily replace the belay loop, which is really cheap, compared to replacing the whole harness. perhaps it’s the equivalent of a resole on your shoes?

David K wrote:

So you've got one out of three manufacturers saying that tying into the belay loop is incorrect, and they're not saying it's serious or deadly. The other two aren't saying anything exactly about it, but they're showing similar ways of connecting to the harness as being okay.

Regarding what manufacturers recommend, don't recommend, choose to omit and how this should be interpreted: There is no conspiracy here David K. This is not a lexical problem and you might be missing the (safety) point. Manufacturers are not withholding secret best methods from you. They show you the best way, which is the safest way after all consideration have been juxtaposed.

Please try and find instructions for any standard harness, which state that belay loop is for tying into. Or any climbing association for that matter. The only sources I can find are of German origin (Edelrid, DAV). What does that tendency tell us? 1) It's a German thing, 2) the practice hasn't been universally adopted. Why not? Because the main problem isn't a problem in Germany. There, they teach to belay directly off the anchor as standard. This means the belaying loop is for your attachment to the anchor (PAS or rope), whereas the anchor is for belaying. Both are separate. So what works in Germany, works there because it's part of a system, a tradition, which correctly keeps belaying an attaching separate. In other traditions the same separation achieved by tieing into the hard points and belaying from the belay loop.

Minor issues: Tieing into your belay loop will wear out you loop somewhat faster, is not recommended (outside of Germany), there's a great danger you clip the knot, because of the knots height it guts pulled into the last draw while hang dogging, and the centre point of gravity is slightly less favourable regarding inversion during a fall. Theses things are in most cases minor though.

Major issues: If your leader falls on a mutlipitch route and the belay loop has a double role (attachment & home for your belay device), the loop is pulled firstly in one direction for the catch, and then subsequently in another when the attachment PAS/rope is exhausted. That can be dangerous. I have been on the sharp end of this as a leader and its difficult to back out off. In invite you to test it. Hang on your belay loop at home. Now attach your belay device. Below or above? Belayer's side or wall side of knot? What if climber falls? Will the sides be reversed? What if teh leader falls without clipping anything, wile setting up, or the first piece pulls? Positions still the same? What about stance and anchor position? Anchor is high and right, the only available stance left, but you belay with right hand, still okay? Now bring brings unforseen dynamic into to picture. You scratch you nose, so belay with left for a moment. Where is your tether? Is your belay device an ABD which needs geometry to stay locked (Smart, Jul)? What effect will a traverse have? What if the belayer is pulled into the first draw, a dummy runner? Part of a banshee belay fails and there a shift before a catch? Will a hard point tie-in be the same as a belay-loop-tie-in in these situations? Of course some of these issues exist for a hard-point-tie-in, but there are way less variables. What about a inpromtu rescue while your belay loop is tensioned? Hanging belays? Simul climbing with tie-in and GriGris? Some big wall harnesses have two belay loops and yet sill state to tie into hardpoints.

I would tie into my belay loop in an emergency without hesitation. It's a fully rated attachment after all. I would clip it with two carabiners for quick toprope cragging or mid-line attaching. Maybe it's even the best option for crossing glaciers as Jim Titt stated. Just don't do tie in there for any alpine/multipitch. YMMV so do as you please.