Roped w/ no Pro In?

[Zenolith]

Some discussion on the Leuthold thread got me wondering what, if any, is a good time to be roped with no pro in. Glacier travel of course, and winding the rope around features such as is done on the summit pinnacle of Mt. Jeff and the like. I seem to hear too many stories of a falling climber dragging off his/her partner causing two deaths instead of one. The couple that died on Cooper last year, the two guys from U of O in '97 on N. Sister, come to mind. I follow a general rule that there be at least one solid peice in if we're roped. Otherwise the follower should untie and clip back in if the leader puts in a peice. I'm talking about steep alpine routes like Sandy, Cooper and such but I think the same is more true on rock routes. What do others do?

[Dru]

Hey zeno don't forget the famous snow arete scenario where the partner jumps off the other side to stop your fall! In general if you are roped but have no pro in, it should be either because 1) the rope itself is your pro or 2) because you are moving fast over easy terrain but will need to be placing pro again quite soon and it's not worth it to untie,coil, and solo scramble before that point.

[goatboy]

There have been lots of incidents on Denali in which rope teams venture onto steep icy terrain without placing intermediate pro, and a fall results in the entire team being unable to arrest, and going down.

Another (better) scenario is that in which one has a rope team on low angle snow slopes with no pro, but has faith in the rope team's ability to self-arrest (e.g. climbing with less experienced folks for whom soloing would be a bad idea). I've seen this lots of time at outdoor schools, or guided climbs on Rainier or what have you. Of course, this is just the sort of scenario which can start off benign and end up on the Denali-like terrain mentioned above, with similar results.

On rock routes it's impossible to self-arrest per se, so if you're tied together and there's no pro, you're simply multiplying your chances of having one person's fall pluck the entire team off the route. These are the routes that have sections which seem best to solo.

I totally agree with Dru's point -- the question of safety versus ineffeciency of unroping, coiling, etc -- and where people draw that line is obviously in different places for different people. Speed is safety, in one sense -- yet trying to be "speedy" can result is higher risk and carelessness. Seems like a judgment call, as so many mountaineering choices seem to be.

I hope this interesting thread doesn't degenerate into a spray fest!

Steve

[goatboy]

There have been lots of incidents on Denali in which rope teams venture onto steep icy terrain without placing intermediate pro, and a fall results in the entire team being unable to arrest, and going down.

Another (better) scenario is that in which one has a rope team on low angle snow slopes with no pro, but has faith in the rope team's ability to self-arrest (e.g. climbing with less experienced folks for whom soloing would be a bad idea). I've seen this lots of time at outdoor schools, or guided climbs on Rainier or what have you. Of course, this is just the sort of scenario which can start off benign and end up on the Denali-like terrain mentioned above, with similar results.

On rock routes it's impossible to self-arrest per se, so if you're tied together and there's no pro, you're simply multiplying your chances of having one person's fall pluck the entire team off the route. These are the routes that have sections which seem best to solo.

I totally agree with Dru's point -- the question of safety versus ineffeciency of unroping, coiling, etc -- and where people draw that line is obviously in different places for different people. Speed is safety, in one sense -- yet trying to be "speedy" can result is higher risk and carelessness. Seems like a judgment call, as so many mountaineering choices seem to be.

I hope this interesting thread doesn't degenerate into a spray fest!

Steve

[none_dup1]

I agree with the above, but might be more inclined to use a rope with no intermediate pro than some others.

By way of example, Bob Davis, Jim Nelson, and I tied in to a single 50m 9mm rope for two days on Johannesberg N.E. Buttress. We used it going up when bushwhacking and tree climbing, then climbing steep exposed heather. On that lower, vegetated portion, we slung some trees and used a piton and a few chocks. Then we rapped into the narrow snow gully that leads up to the snow arete, and Jim placed some rock pro in the gully walls as we went up. Once on the arete, we stayed roped up, but as can be seen in the write up of this climb in the new Nelson/Potterfield book, we weren't concerned at that point about slack in the rope. We were tired and plodding up easy ground, wondering how and when we were going to get off that massive, crumbly mountain. What was supposed to be a day trip became a two-day trip.

On the way down during the early evening of the first day and most of the second day, we were roped as we downclimbed loose 3rd and 4th class terrain. We also did some rappels before reaching the CJ Col. At that point, we opted to downclimb the CJ Couloir, which was certainly the most dangerous part of the trip. We stayed roped up and kept the rope fairly taught between us. I went last as I had the biggest boots. We had no snow or ice pro, and wouldn't have used it anyway. There was no need or opportunity to place rock pro. The snow was quite hard, though not yet icy, and our progression was very slow and tedious. We faced in for almost all of the 3,400' to the bottom of the couloir, and rocks zoomed by all afternoon. In a word, it sucked.

It made sense to us at the time to be roped, and I'd do it that way again. But some people have expressed surprise that we stayed roped without pro, especially in the couloir. Obviously, it's a judgment call to be made by the team, and I don't think there is a right answer. For us, it seemed like the way to go.

John Sharp

[Paul_Warner]

Climbing roped together, instead of setting up traditional belays, is a great way to save time, but the bottom line is this:

If a fall of any climber is likely, and would pull the rest of the party off their feet, use a running belay!! It doesn't take that much more time, and is infinitely safer.

If you insist on climbing together without being "tied into the mountain", untie and solo climb. That way, only the person falling is gonna get whacked! (unless they hit someone else) A perusal of "Accidents in N. American Mountaineering" will provide MANY accounts of just such a situation. Don't become a statistic.

[Lambone]

This is my opinion.

If you are not putting in gear, don't fall. Regardless if you are still roped or not.

If you don't trust yourself or your partner, put in gear.

If you are simo climbing and you don't trust your partner, make him go first. And make him put in gear. Again, don't fall.

If you are trying to move fast, and you are not puting in gear, put the rope in your pack and get it out of the way. You will go faster, and you wont be tempted to rely on it.

Of course, there will always be different situations, and different circumstances, but unless you know how to use it properly a rope will only prolong your suffering. Anyone disagree?

[This message has been edited by lambone (edited 04-19-2001).]

[dan_e]

In August of 1996, my friend an I witnessed what can happen when two are roped together without pro. This was a big epic, but I will leave out the details, refer to the accidents book for specifics. A party of two were decending the Emmons ahead of us, the guy closest to my partner who was ahead of me fell over while cleaning his crampons. The snow was garbage so self arrest was impossible. He fell past his partner, dragging him as he past. The both landed on the edge of a crevasse on steep ground. One of them died, the other was injured. The guy who fell was not very experienced. The guy who died was a guide and very experienced. We self-belayed the entire way down, a tedious way to descend, but it was the only safe way. I would never do this with more than a team of two, mainly due to the added weight and more people=more chances for error.

[none_dup1]

I'm pretty much in lambone's camp, though I don't typically make less experienced partners go first unless we're going downhill.

There are certainly many, many cases of people being roped, one or more of them falling uncontrollably, and everyone being taken down. However, aside from Pete Schoening's famous K2 belay, there are also plenty of instances of people being saved by others while roped up, despite a lack of pro. On my first climb in 1985, I was involved in one such minor mishap after a friend tripped on steep snow. More recently, a friend of mine literally saved a husband and wife from what could have been a death fall while descending steep snow in the Monte Cristo area. They were very lucky, but it was Bob's quick thinking and a solid snow arrest that determined the outcome.

In the final analysis, we must all decide how best to protect ourselves and those in our party. Sometimes it's with a rope, sometimes without, and sometimes by picking an easier route or even staying home.

[Dru]

Consider this situation - you're moving together easily along a rock ridge and suddenly the climber in front comes to a section that he/she feels requires a piece and belay. That would be a good time to be roped up but if you had put the rope away and been 3rd classing at that point the time it takes to dig it out, tie in and get the other end to the suddenly-needs-to-be-belayed climber, something bad could happen....

I agree with lambone on the less-experienced climber going first while simuling, that wway the more experienced climber can watch and fire in a belay if the top climber starts sketching. whereas the less experienced climber, coming last, may find a move you found easy, hard, suddenly slip, and give you a big tug you weren't expecting or prepared for

[none_dup1]

I very rarely simul-solo on rock with anyone less experienced than me, nor do I simul-climb on rock with a rope but w/out pro with less experienced partners. I agree that this is asking for trouble. If I have to explain to someone from behind how to do a simple rock move, then I believe they should be on a rope and belayed from above in the first place, especially if the move is exposed as in your example. I frequently simul-solo and simul-climb using running belays with people of equal or greater skill. N. Ridge of Stuart, N. Ridge of Forbidden, etc. are examples of where this seemed appropriate.

[Cpt.Caveman]

Just put on the Pink Spandex it will save you from everything according to the Candians.

On a serious note:

If I have to explain to someone from behind how to do a simple rock move, then I believe they should be on a rope and belayed from above in the first place, especially if the move is exposed as in your example. This part is the key.

Well said Jberg

 

[erik]

simuli climibing is a valuable tool. i try to practice simuli climbing with my standard partners on most routes 5.8 and below. and sometimes harder than that. i agree that the less experienced climber should always lead as a fall would result in some serious consequences. though a little tip that might save you is to use tiblocs on pieces that protect crux moves. it allows for a micro belay and you can still keep moving. soloing i can climb in givlers in about 10 minutes while simuli i can do it in about 15, depending if you want to fiddle with gear. i have seen parties take forever on this nice little climb. simuli climbing saves some serious time is my point. arches in yose can be climbed in just over an hour with competent teams . dragontail is another one that we climbed simul and flew up the poor thing. (plus i had to be at work a couple hours later in tacoma)

but climbiing with running belays should only be undertaken by experienced and confiedent climbers as the chance for mistakes is too great. i never simul unless it is wihthin the brohood.

climb safe and never take unknown risks.

$.03

have fun this weekend cause i am going too!

 

[Lambone]

Erik,

What to you mean when you speak of unknown risks. If you mean, don't take the risk of your partner falling off and pulling you with him because you didn't know if he(or she) could pull the moves, than I would agree.

But don't you confront unknown risks every time you go climbing? You can never be sure of everything. All kinds of bad shit can, and does happen.

My question, that deviates from the original, is:

Is it worth it to try and climb Gilivers crack in 10 minutes, or The Shield in less than ten hours? Arn't you taking unknown risks? And more importantly, why are you taking them? I can see the alpinists point, speed=saftey. But what the hell is the point of climbing some standard route faster than everyone else?

If you say because you like to, than I guess I can't argue. To each his own.

[Dru]

hey lambone, training for speed on routes you know lets you get faster, faster, than training for speed on routes you don't know, eh?