hafilax

You're just afraid of them because they're magical.

What do you want to use it for?

The most glowing netbook review I've read basically said it didn't suck as much as the others but still sucked. Sign me up for an iPad.

On easy ground I use the autoblock. You can pull rope through hand over hand, especially with skinny ropes.

Dont you just stick your biner in the hole and pull up and lower ? I have mostly only used an old school reverso. Haven't tried releasing an xp-guide or a R^3.

No, that isn't correct and you're misinterpreting. I'm saying IF you are using or counting on autoblocking to compensate for some actual or potential failing of your, or your partner's, belaying then you should address the root problem and not attempt to compensate with some device. How is this different from rope soloing or are you against that too? There you are entirely replacing the belayer with a device and putting your life on the line solely based on faith in the device. At least with an autoblock there is a person at the other end to deal with problems and maybe even give you a little encouragement.

Of course it's a hypothetical scenario, but it's certainly one that is possible. If given A or B, which do you think would be more likely to arrest a fall? Doesn't seem like rocket-science to me... what am I missing? The biggest problem with autoblock mode is that it's not trivial to lower somebody; even if you practice every anchor setup is different. It can take time to rig up and double check your release setup. If anything happens to the climber it will take longer to lower them if they're on an autoblock than if belayed off the harness. This can range from them falling out away from the rock climbing out of a roof, to somehow getting badly injured and needing to be lowered promptly. I've heard of enough autoblock horror stories that I employ it more judiciously now. If there's a reasonable chance that the climber will need to be lowered I'll belay off my harness. I will concede to Joseph that I think it is overused (I never use it craging) but for multipitch is it a great tool. Just understand when to use it and when to definitely not use it.

Being dropped is not a common occurrence in climbing. That's a ridiculous statement. Using an autoblock isn't any more or less safe than any other belay method. It's a tool.

You're toproping! I want my belayer relaxed so they can pay attention to me when I'm leading. I end up climbing in 3s a lot. I have a large group of friends that I climb with so whoever is free that day climbs and we don't send anyone to the boulders. I don't always autoblock off the anchor but if it seems safe to do so I will take advantage and drink water, eat some food and relax a bit while making sure there's no slack. I've found that, in general, autoblocking devices are 'stickier' than regular tube devices for lead belaying and rappelling. They have to be narrower so that the rope can't squeeze past when autoblocking especially if designed for narrower ropes. They are great for doubles though which is really what they are designed for.

You guys must have cracked the proprietary code of the Farmer's Almanac.

Good to know jmace. I didn't have any big plans this past weekend so didn't really look that closely. I was just surprised by the difference between the Friday and Saturday forecasts. Ended up bouldering so NBD.

Friends went to Leavenworth on Monday with the forecast on the Sunday calling for sun. Hiked in to Outer Space and it started to sprinkle a bit. 10 minutes later it was raining and 20 minutes later it was a down pour. Something unexpected must have come through. An unexpected swing in the jet stream? I'll be sure to mark down rain on the calendar for next year and plan a trip to Costa Rica.

It would be nice if there was a confidence level indicator that would go along with the forecast. Last weekend had me completely fooled as to what it would do Sunday and Monday.

I wouldn't do any tests starting from freezing (32F/0C) and going to boiling. Way more energy is required for phase transitions than simple heating and you wouldn't have much control over how much ice is in the slurry. I would do snow melting and water boiling tests separately. There are other ways to improve efficiency: changing the pot and adding oil. A thin layer of oil reduces evaporative effects as does having a smaller top opening. Cooking pot experiments using oil and a pot with a small opening

The specs from MSR: Pocket Rocket will boil 16L of water on one 227g canister whereas the Reactor will do 22L. Need to know the weight of the pot for the Pocket Rocket to really compare. Assuming they are the same weight and you're just counting canisters. <16L Pocket Rocket to 22L Reactor to 32 either to 44 Reactor to 48 either To first approximation, the moment you will need more than one canister for the PR you might as well have the Reactor. The next approximation requires the weight of the pot used with the PR. The lightest pots on the MSR site seem to be about 150g for 1.5L. Let's say that the PR system is about 250g and the Reactor 515g. The difference is about 1 canister so it seems that you might have to go to 3 canisters with the PR maybe? Just a guess. Someone correct my quick analysis if it's wrong.

Isn't a ladder almost all large pull muscle exercise? I would think that a finger board and campus board would be better for forearm training.

I'd get a set of adjustable height gymnastic rings instead. Jeremy Blumel wrote a great article on using them for training in Squamish Climbing Mag. Levers, push-ups, pull-ups, dips, muscle-ups, shoulder extensions etc. Page 31 http://squamishclimbingmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/scmfall20092.pdf

Found it on youtube [video:youtube]WLveMNQ9U9w

I don't know how to embed viddler but this cat cracks me up. Kitty suckles the air.

Grading the endurance is always tricky. I mentally bump my expectations down when the word 'pumpy' shows up in the description.

It's 10c in the same way the Split Pillar is 5.9.

Briefly glanced at it on the weekend. Looks like a great book.

Trip: Squamish - Milk Road Date: 5/15/2010 Trip Report: Sorry no pictures. Milk Road Topo Description with photos on squamishclimbing. Also has a longer pitch-by-pitch TR by yours-truely. Haven't seen any mention of Jeremy Frimer's new variation to Milk Run which he has dubbed Milk Road so I thought I'd spread the love around and give a brief TR from last weekend. Three of us decided to get on some rock last Saturday and the first suggestion was Milk Run. Seemed doable at 8 pitches of 10d A0 (11d). I knew it would be a bit much for me given that I haven't really climbed even indoors in 3 months or outside since last fall. But I also knew that my much stronger partners could haul my sorry ass up there if necessary. The climbing is really fun if you're capable. It wasn't too tricky gaining the main dihedral with a few aid moves. The leader needs good route-finding skills but it's all there. The main dihedral of Milk Run is incredible. Lieback fingers for 20m with lots of rests for one pitch and then the money pitch with 40m of full on steep liebacks. I got the easy pitches but took a pretty long fall from the topout of the 10b pitch which rattled me for the rest of the day. Managed to onsight the ramp though. ;-) The new climbing goes up the Crescent ramp and then a chimney variation that meets up with the face cracks above the High Octane roof. There is then a thin dyke walk to bring you to the top. One quick note on the topo (if it hasn't been updated). The Crescent Tower pitch is closer to 50m from the bottom of the chain. I think the climbing is of great quality and variety. We felt it was harder overall than the Grand although that might just be the rust. I'd like to put in some endurance training miles and then get back on this one and the Grand wall. Hopefully it will see lots of traffic and stay clean. SO GET ON IT! Gear Notes: Full rack from nuts to #4 C4 with lots of finger sized cams. We brought a triple set including TCUs and C3s. 2 ropes needed to retreat. Approach Notes: See topo. We walked right up to it.

Tugging on a cam to see if a flake expands or to see if it's a good placement is NOT the same as "setting" it. The difference is that "setting" a nut actually makes it more secure, whereas tugging on a well-placed cam doesn't make it more secure, unless there is actually something wrong with the placement, and even then it's only made more secure by fixing the placement, not simply by tugging on it. I didn't say anything about setting cams did I? I'm just saying that doing more than putting a cam in the crack and seeing that the lobes are in an acceptable place is a good idea. YMMV

I can accept that. I haven't caught a lot of hard falls if any. I've backed off of climbs rather than face a fall onto the anchor. It's another piece of evidence that says to me that falls in the real world don't even approach the forces of drop tests. As the commitment factor goes up with remote climbs I'd consider bringing a pair of gloves given the importance of the hands to the safety of the party and the non-issue of the weight.