Runout customs ultralight double compatibility with ACE double fly

I recently picked up a runout customs ultralight double without a fly, and I'm wondering if an Anker double fly (pole included) would fit it. Does anyone have any experience with this setup?

Thank you!

Ive got an Anker double fly that I use on my Runout Customs Baffin Ledge, its a tight fit but works.  It should work for your UL Double but might be a little loose but I am sure you can make it work.

Thanks Kevin! I can’t seem to find the dimensions of the Baffin model online; do you know the specs? Just wondering what the size difference is there.

Sean Anderson wrote:

Thanks Kevin! I can’t seem to find the dimensions of the Baffin model online; do you know the specs? Just wondering what the size difference is there.

Sorry, I don't have the specs off the top of my head, its larger than a regular Runout double so I am just assuming it is bigger than the UL but I could be totally wrong.  

Kevin Mokracek wrote:

Sorry, I don't have the specs off the top of my head, its larger than a regular Runout double so I am just assuming it is bigger than the UL but I could be totally wrong.  

Thanks Kevin. To clarify, the Alpine Double is different from the Baffin, right?

Sean Anderson wrote:

Thanks Kevin. To clarify, the Alpine Double is different from the Baffin, right?

I’m pretty sure it is.  The Baffin was the biggest they made and they stopped making it several years ago. 

For posterity if anyone has the same question, I heard back from Luke that the Anker double fly is way too big for UL double. 

I think what you are calling the Anker ledge is just the TNF Cliff Cabana design, which is the same size it was when it was the A5 Cliff Cabana, and the same size as the Black Diamond Cliff Cabana.  So your fly will fit the BD Cliff Cabana, too big for the standard double size made by Luke. (Edit, saw you had fly not ledge).

John Middendorf wrote:

I think what you are calling the Anker ledge is just the TNF Cliff Cabana design, which is the same size it was when it was the A5 Cliff Cabana, and the same size as the Black Diamond Cliff Cabana.  So the BD Cliff Cabana flys should fit.

Mine is a prototype fly, not sure if that is any different size.   The fly bag still has Conrads name number and address on it with a big PROTOTYPE written on the side.    I’m assuming it’s full strength lol, I’m still here.

Kevin Mokracek wrote:

Mine is a prototype fly, not sure if that is any different size.   The fly bag still has Conrads name number and address on it with a big PROTOTYPE written on the side.    I’m assuming it’s full strength lol, I’m still here.

Probably Cabana size. I am finding the 20 year old fly materials are delaminating a lot, just got one of my old A5/TNF flys out of storage, and the coating peeled off while being used in the Tarkine rainforest in very wet conditions.  You can use spray on urethane, but will never be as good as a good new urethane coating, materials are much better now than 20 years ago, too (thanks, China!).

edit: you might want to check that fly—it might be one of the modified Diamond Flys that was used on the Sharks Fin on Meru.  They modified the top fly with a pole system to make more room, but I heard there might have been up issues with snow loading on the flatter top-not sure, though, but I believe they went with a different variant of the design on their successful ascent later.  

John Middendorf wrote:

Probably Cabana size. I am finding the 20 year old fly materials are delaminating a lot, just got one of my old A5/TNF flys out of storage, and the coating peeled off while being used in the Tarkine rainforest in very wet conditions.  You can use spray on urethane, but will never be as good as a good new urethane coating, materials are much better now than 20 years ago, too (thanks, China!).

edit: you might want to check that fly—it might be one of the modified Diamond Flys that was used on the Sharks Fin on Meru.  They modified the top fly with a pole system to make more room, but I heard there might have been up issues with snow loading on the flatter top-not sure, though, but I believe they went with a different variant of the design on their successful ascent later.  

It may be one of the early Meru trip ledges, on the bag is written "put on triple ledge 2011".  I don't know when they went but it could be.  I tried it on the ledge again and its a little sloppy fit for the Baffin so it makes sense that it would be a triple fly.

Yes, the “triple ledge” design you refer to is the A5 Diamond Ledge design, with one person suspended in a hammock below the ledge.  This system really needs a bottom anchor to work well, when anchored top and bottom, rock solid and aerodynamic.  A better system now perhaps for team of 3 is the Delta3p, same weight, packs smaller, and more ergonomic.  Most details about past designs and new designs on Bigwalls.net (Still need to add details of the Aslak ledge, and also the boxes of Ermanno Salvaterra and Bryan Wyvill).

John Middendorf wrote:

Yes, the “triple ledge” design you refer to is the A5 Diamond Ledge design, with one person suspended in a hammock below the ledge.  This system really needs a bottom anchor to work well, when anchored top and bottom, rock solid and aerodynamic.  A better system now perhaps for team of 3 is the Delta3p, same weight, packs smaller, and more ergonomic.  Most details about past designs and new designs on Bigwalls.net (Still need to add details of the Aslak ledge, and also the boxes of Ermanno Salvaterra and Bryan Wyvill).

John, I went to a slideshow Brian Wyvill gave after his trip with Campbell-Kelly to try what has just become Brothers in Arms. The “superbox” was an evolution of the Whillans box with an aluminium alloy roof to give protection from falling ice and rocks. The bunk-bed configuration gave a smaller target and reduced the size and weight of the roof. Wyvill had contacts in the aerospace industry and was able to source a ~1” x 2’ x 6’ thick slab of high spec. alloy for the roof that was literally bullet-proof. This was more than 40 years ago and the fine details may be wrong, so I’d be really interested in hearing your thoughts on this.  

duncan... wrote:

John, I went to a slideshow Brian Wyvill gave after his trip with Campbell-Kelly to try what has just become Brothers in Arms. The “superbox” was an evolution of the Whillans box with an aluminium alloy roof to give protection from falling ice and rocks. The bunk-bed configuration gave a smaller target and reduced the size and weight of the roof. Wyvill had contacts in the aerospace industry and was able to source a ~1” x 2’ x 6’ thick slab of high spec. alloy for the roof that was literally bullet-proof. This was more than 40 years ago and the fine details may be wrong, so I’d be really interested in hearing your thoughts on this.  

Yes, I have recently been in touch with Brian, his shelter was recently in the news as it still is at the site of the recent Cerro Torre rescue and tragic accident.  I posted a pic he sent me on my twitter #johnmiddendorf4

it Is interesting that climbing boxes were called Whillians Boxes, as I believe the actual Whillians boxes were made and designed to be bomber basecamp tents, not big wall shelters per se.  Really they should be called Campbell-Kelly-Wyvill boxes, as theirs was the first single point hanging box, I believe.  

That would be some interesting history to hunt down. I always thought they had been designed by none other than Don Whillans himself.

Aside: Don Whillans giving slideshow, and a streaker ran by. Don looked up in amazement and said, 

"Well, I'll be buggered...
... and so will 'e if I can catch 'im...."  

Great pictures John!

The Whillans Box tent was designed and built by Whillans on the 1962 Central Tower of Paine expedition as an advanced basecamp tent because the team's A-frame tents were being destroyed by the wind. The original was built from local wood and canvas, like a small hut. Link. Bonnington was on this trip and he and Whillans asked Karrimor to produce portable aluminium frame versions for his Annapurna and Everest expeditions in the 1970s and were used as far as Camp 4 on the Everest SW face. They sat on platforms, were very stable, but extremely heavy.  By the 80s they had been superseded by dome tents and large-scale siege expeditions with the infrastructure to carry the boxes were out of fashion in the UK.

The Wyvill and Campbell-Kelly "superbox" is not a Whillans box.  It was a suspended tent design as John says. I guess it was called the superbox because it was box-shaped and perhaps because it superseded but shared some heritage with the Whillans box in that both were designed to survive the high winds of Patagonia. 

If I recall correctly, the superbox was not a single point suspension design but required anchors on the corners to stop it being blown around in the high winds. My memory is pretty hazy here but I think Wyvill and Campbell-Kelly carried a bolt kit incase natural anchors were not available. This was a controversial choice for British climbers after the Compressor Route affair. 

As the superbox was still functional in the early 90s and still hanging there in 2022 you could say it has more than achieved its design goals!

duncan... wrote: If I recall correctly, the superbox was not a single point suspension design but required anchors on the corners to stop it being blown around in the high winds. My memory is pretty hazy here but I think Wyvill and Campbell-Kelly carried a bolt kit incase natural anchors were not available. 

The box makes several appearances in Della Bordella's short film about an attempt on the route in 2019, starting at 2:23; there certainly seem to be multiple suspension points, mostly located in rock that looks quite blank.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYluu8L5xDo

Brian Wyvill just told me it did in fact hang from a single point, but they added additional anchors for stabilization.  All this will be on Bigwalls.net eventually.

John Middendorf wrote:

Brian Wyvill just told me it did in fact hang from a single point, but they added additional anchors for stabilization.

Of course, yes; with the top being even more rigid than a portaledge [at 3;18 in his film Della Bordella and Pasquetto  appear to be sitting side-by-side on the roof] I guess that's always going to be possible.

Ignatius Pi wrote:

The box makes several appearances in Della Bordella's short film about an attempt on the route in 2019, starting at 2:23; there certainly seem to be multiple suspension points, mostly located in rock that looks quite blank.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYluu8L5xDo

Thanks for the link.  The route looks amazing. The chimney-offwidth climbed in 1980 by Tom Proctor ('The Hydraulic Man') looks like a stout lead.

Good to see the box is still hanging in there; mind you, someone needs to tell those guys you're supposed to sleep underneath the aluminium roof, not on top of it!