UKC

The part that broke, called the belay loop, is designed to be the strongest part of the climbing harness, but Hewett, 34, said Skinner's harness was old.

"It was actually very worn," Hewett said. "I'd noted it a few days before, and he was aware it was something to be concerned about." Friends of Skinner said he had ordered several new harnesses but they hadn't yet arrived in the mail.


http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Just posted on the Neil Dyer thread about this... seems that many of us routinely use worn-out gear
(I know I could do with replacing some of mine.)

From the neil dyer thread: "I once witnessed him cruise I'm A Bad Bad Boy on the Ormes with a tatty alpine harness and
rock boots that had been resoled a million times."

this and highlights my point that maybe old-school bashed-up gear is kept in use long after it should have been retired,
possibly because you get attatched to certain pieces of gear (my alpine bod harness, for example)

anyone else feel like re-checking their gear after this?

In reply to oliver aram:

After this tragic accident, I am going to re-evaluate my 33 year old Whillans Harness.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Serious question. Anybody here with a BD Blizzard harness that has a creaky belay loop? Mine is 11 months old and although the stitching is intact it creaks under abseiling load. Is this normal for others? No 'pie man' jokes please.

Davie

In reply to I am the God of Strathyre: Just changed my BD blizzard for one of the new BD quick release type, I dont recall it creaking but it was starting to wear considerably and was fraying around the waist, but I reckon its about 8 year old.

In reply to TWINKLETOES:

Apparantly harnesses should be retired at a max of five years from manufacture; hopefully some expert will be along soon to give us some professional advice. Obviously checked for wear very regularly.

Mick

In reply to TWINKLETOES: my mates got one an says his doesnt, however my petzl corax does, its i think 3 yrs old now? maybe more, maybe 5 thinkin about it, was gona go for the blizard myself!

In reply to TWINKLETOES:

Think mine will be winging it's way back to BD. Not happy with the loop.

Davie

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


Tragically he was using something very ancient, and well past its sell-by date. But the very strange thing is this comment 'it was actually very worn'. The belay loop being worn: what on earth does that mean? Just from tying in and untying over the years? In which case the harness must have been incredibly old, to show major signs of 'wear'. I can't help feeling that there's something else about the history of that harness e.g. once, when he'd run out of krabs, for some desperate reason he had the rope, plus his full weight, running directly through the belay loop ...? Sheer speculation, but something very extraordinary must have weakened that belay loop. As we know, the forces on a belay loop for normal abseiling, with zero fall factor etc - just body weight - are absolutely minute, compared with what it's required to do in a worst case fall or belaying scenario. I'm sure most people could get away with abseiling from one of their gear loops on some harnesses.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Maybe this would be a good time to start a campaign to encourage climbers to replace old gear.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth: Couldn't it be just the result of UV degradation over a period of many many years, battery acid attack etc.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

I don't struggle to imagine how a professional climber, climbing in strong sunlight could wear a harness out. Even a climber who only goes out a couple of times a week will see significant wear on a harness in 5 years.
You must have seen how a tent outer gets knackered by a a few summer weeks in good weather?
Surely you are just trolling here, you have got to be kidding.

Davie

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

What's the life span of a harness ?

Strangely I've just bought a new harness after wearing my old Troll 6 for 18 years.

In reply to I am the God of Strathyre:


I know two differnt people who have abbed into Huntsmans on their gear loops - probably happens more often than you think.


Chris

In reply to I am the God of Strathyre:

Yes, completely agree. Fantastic how fast gear, particularly tents, deteriorate. My original Black's Good Companion just tore apart like paper in a violent storm after about 15 years of intensive use.

I'm just puzzled by this "very worn" belay loop, given that you only ever clip into, or tie into, that. And given also, that most of us change our harnesses at least every 5-7 years.


No, not trolling. Just saying that you could just possibly do that on some harnesses if you were careful enough. I've certainly managed to abseil off some extremely flimsy anchor points on one or two epics when in complete extremis. The idea of your BELAY loop just parting under your body weight seems very strange to me indeed. It just must have been very very severely weakened/damaged already.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth: I understand what IATGOS is saying, though I share some of your puzzlement. Maybe people who do anything for a living tend to be more complacent/blase/reckless/negligent than the amateur?

In reply to I am the God of Strathyre:

... and now Chris Craggs, no less, bears me out. I'm sure actually that I've heard of one or two friends of mine who've done this, unbelievably, 'by mistake'. Quote unquote.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth: Off topic slightly, but I've driven my car oblivious to the fact that the front tyres surfaces were eggshell-thin and could have blown out at any second when Iw as driving down the M-way. Can't say I've ever checked my harness.

In reply to Marc C:

It's just so sad, this. Because he was such a very great rock climber, with at least one of the all-time world climbing achievements to his name (I mean the first free ascent of the Salathe, but particularly his lead, after several attempts, of the incredible headwall. Saw Paul Piana's fantastic lecture about this years ago at Buxton). It's just shocking to me that he got that complacent, and abseiled on an ancient piece of (obviously very badly damaged) junk.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth: Sad, yes. Shocking, maybe. The point I was making was that top climbers often are complacent or reckless, no? I remember reading that Robin Smith used to like the thrill of climbing on old gear. Pretty sure the likes of Menlove Edwards or Tom Patey weren't the most scrupulous when it came to checking their gear.

In reply to Marc C:

But why should you, really, if you've looked after it OK? By that I mean keeping it away from anything that might obviously damage it, for example, not just casually throwing it into some cupboard that has e.g. saws or acidic material in it.

In reply to Marc C: Slightly different but Beal proved that UV had no appreciable effect on rope strength. Bits of rope were left on all aspects and altitudes in the alps for long periods and then tested and there were no important differences. Abrasion however is a different thing, especially with slings. A new sling cut across half its width will still hold huge loads, one that has been abraded across its whole width is scarily weak. This is because abrasion effects all of the strands from which the sling is made. It is this type of effect that is most likely to have weakened a belay loop.

In reply to Marc C:

You are so right, sadly. I talk as a mere, very average, very safety-conscious, 'leisure time' climber. Many of our greats were of course much, much riskier by nature. Mummery, Owen Glynn Jones, Mallory, Alex McIntyre, Al Rouse, Patey (as you say) - the list is endless.

In reply to Kendal47: Good point about abrasion. Just odd that, according to a friend, TS was aware and concerned about the state of his harness yet was prepared to rappel off The Leaning Tower with it...

In reply to Kendal47:

Are you sure? I seem to remember that nylon slings exposed to UV lost their strength considerably and in a relatively short time.

Mick

In reply to Marc C:

It's terrible to speculate, but just what is all this about abrasion? What abrasion - sufficient to make it snap i.e. insufficient to support body weight?? There was obviously something v visibly wrong with it, if he was concerned about it. What a tragedy that he kept using it, even once it looked (for whatever reason) very dodgy.

In reply to Marc C:

Yes, if he was that concerned you would think he would use a sling threaded through his harness and clip into that.

Anyway, don't wish to speculate till more details are shown why it failed, just seems you need to be more aware, and I think a lot of us who do not use prusiks as backup will start doing it now.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


I think he is right - can't remember where or when but I remember results that said some REALLY old bleached tat was tested and was still astoundingly strong.

Chris

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I think that's something to do with the difference between dynamic and absolute strength, isn't it? i.e. to simplify it, as I understand it, a rope basically gets more 'brittle', less dynamically absorbent etc., rather than (or more than) weak with old age.

In reply to I am the God of Strathyre: Im sure I spotted a recall notice to do with BD harnesses in TISO this week.I think it may have been sumthing to do with the buckles, not the loop, but its worth an enquiry.
Scary stuff, the squeaky abs...

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: The Beal tests were on rope and were in response to their frustration about the exageration of UV's effects. I don't know whether this extended to slings. The sling tests were [I think] conducted by Lyon equipment and were quite dramatic. I didn't see results about UV, but there may have been. The main upshot was that if your slings are furry, bin them.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
Ive read through this thread - replied to the original thread reporting Todds death. This is an incredibly sad and reflective time for the climbing world.
The title of this thread is somewhat serious for us all. Now its important to note in these situations the truth takes some time to out - but if the belay loop theory is correct then the whole structure of a harness is compromised. I don't care how old his harness was - surely the loopis still relatively bombproof and the last part of the harness to go. Either we all have to believe the rhetoric of the gear companies or the harness failure cannot be the real cause of death.

In reply to robw007: But surely its natural that the loop would fail as this is the part under the most direct strain?

So you'd expect the loop to be the site of failure.

In reply to I am the God of Strathyre:

Yes, me, I've abbed off using it loads of times and it does creak a bit sometimes. Never really thought anything of it...

In reply to IainRUK:
But it is also the strongest part of the harness - so i am not sure if we have any real info on loop failure over time, uv, stress, falls taken etc etc - is this an area we need to explore??
I have never heard of another loop failure - maybe there are others out there?

In reply to robw007: Curious numpty question: which is strongest (in terms of withstanding more force)? The belay loop of a harness or the main waist belt with the belt doubled back through the belt buckle?

In reply to Marc C:

Nowt wrong with my whillans harness, except it is old.

In reply to Marc C:
Well - good question - I am sure it has been designed to take load an spread it through the system effectively. However different parts of the harness have to work for different jobs. My harness for example if you ab or belay with it you do that from the loop in question - so that loop has to be pretty strong - the waistbelt would not feature if the loop failed.

In reply to I am the God of Strathyre: i have a new safe tech harness that you could abb of the gear loops
there rated to 10kn u can even belay a partner off them if necessary
but both of these should only be done in an emergency but as i said it can be done

In reply to Marc C:

My brother's just emailed from America making the interesting point that it was almost certainly the stitching that was badly worn, and that failed, on Todd's gear loop.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth: May also be time to reappraise the super super lightweight approach, or rather qualify its suitability somewhat.

If you engineer a piece of gear down to a very low level, necessarily you reduce its possible longevity on the basis that that piece of gear, whether a webbing harness or a karabiner, once it becomes worn, will fail earlier under a heavy load than stouter gear that has more in reserve.

Time to maybe adopt more of a throw away mentality and be prepared to bin gear that gets heavy use.

I expect that as with many tragedies, Todd Skinners tragic death will teach us all a valuable lesson. Its a shame we only learn through such events

+++++++

I saw the photos on his website of his achievements and have immense respect for him. He goes up to the hall of heroes amongst some esteemed company

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Someone died whilst absieling in a quarry in March earlier this year out here in Perth (Australia). It turned out that he had inadvertantly clipped into a gear loop, and when his feet slipped the additional force that was applied lead to the loop failing.

If the manufacturer rates the gear loops as suitable for absieling off then fine, but otherwise I'd avoid it (I wouldn't trust mine).

Detail's (and subsequent vitriol) at www.climberswa.asn.au/Community/Messageboard/default.asp?view=message&id=557

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Sad news that should make us all think.

As a matter of course I never just clip in to the belay loop on my harness, instead prefer to pass my HMS krab through the intersection of belay loop and leg loops.

Whilst one part of the webbing harness might conceivably fail in extreme situations, the catastrophic failure of both elements is unlikely.

In reply to Kendal47:

Ropes and slings are constructed differently. Ropes have a sheath. This is exposed to sunlight and therefore could be degraded by UV. The core (where the ropes strength lies) isnt exposed (unless the sheath is damaged) and therefore wont be affected. Slings dont have this protective sheath and therefore would react differently.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
How much strain does the belayers, belay loop take. I`m thinking of the scenario were a fat rubbish climber like me with a brand new harness, goes out with some really experienced ace climber with an old harness. Not going to go down right well saying "excuse me old chap can I inspect your harness".
Cheers Beds

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Sad news indeed which should make us all think.

I've always been of the opinion that it's always sensible to back things up, particularly when it's simple to do so.

Going back to the days when harnesses were a lot less sophisticated than nowadays, (I'm talking pre-whillans) I developed the habit of always clipping my main screwgate Krab through both the belay and leg loops where they intersect -- just in case one of the tape loops failed.

I've been told off at indoor walls for doing this whilst belaying, but I've always found that it keeps my centre of gravity lower, and can hold falls better -- as well as being 'fail safe' in terms of loading on the tape loops.

As an engineer I cant see why not.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

imagine doing something like the harding slot on asttroman.....a few times a year over 15 years in the same harness....it's not dificult to imagine it would get pretty trashed.

In reply to Morgan Woods:

I can't imagine using a trashed harness.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I, for one, have been more than a little complacent on this issue and regularly use one ten year old harness (summer rock) and one 6 year old harness (Scottish winter). Then again, I still use two 6 year old ropes!

Not any longer.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
It's just shocking to me that he got that complacent, and abseiled on an ancient piece of (obviously very badly damaged) junk.

If indeed, it was complacency - which, admittedly, is one of climbings' biggest killers.

In reply to Alan Stark: By threading the Krab through the leg loops and waist belt you stand to 3 way load it or load the gate fairly easily. With a properly maintained harness the belay loop is far stronger than this setup.

In reply to Kendal47:

HMNS should be fine/

It dose bring into question though that it is called the belay loop for a reason.

I alway TIE IN to both leg loops and waist. In fact the belay loop is virtually never used on my harness.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

The difference between a sling and rope that is UV bleached it that the core will have been protected from the UV rays by the sheaf, so the core which has the majority of the strength will be reasonably un effect in cord/rope. In a sling it will all be weakened.

In reply to mark reeves:

so if I coat everything with Factor 30 it will be cool.

runs off to boots .......

In reply to Norrie Muir: Oh my God!

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

It was recognised by Troll that the belay loop was the weakest link in the harness and will be subjected to a lot of stresses, wear and tear. They actually sold spare belay loops. I have one for my old Black Master, which has "shrunk" due to my fondess for a certain brown liquid.

You also have to take into account that Todd Skinner was a prolific climber with a lot of big and long hard routes under his belt. I can imagine how the sheer volume and intensity of climbing Todd did, coupled with the more complex rigging techniques required to tackle some of his routes will place additional stresses on his harness.

A sad loss to us all.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Very sad news but people should be careful about speculating too much before knowing the actual facts. As I've said several times before tragic accidents leading to death or serious injury are often initially misrepresented on Rocktalk posts (and where I've know the climbers involved or their family this can be very upsetting at an already difficult time).

Too many climbers are irresponsible with harnessess. Most sling material is constructed such that all strands meet the outside and can suffer wear and UV damage(unlike rope). Abseil loops and tie back points on harnesses are among the most vulnerable spots. I've climbed only for 17 years and I've retired 4 harnesses in that time and need a 6th soon. I do like chimneys and thrutches and have climbed mainly on rough rock (grit, sandstone, granite) but I'm a recreational climber holding down a full time job.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Will now definately change my 9 year old ATC.

In reply to Kendal47:

I thought the 3 way load situation might be quoted at me, but as the HMS Krab actually catches both belay loop and the leg loops at the point where they cross there is no possibility of 3 way loading --- try it and see.

I wouldn't recommend it with an oval or D shaped Screwgate, but the pear shaped HMS virtually ensures the load is concentrated where its supposed to be.

In reply to Alan Stark: I have tried it and I don't like it. I spend a very large amount of time in my harnesses every year and anything that increases the chances of a three way loading, and probably more scarily loading the gate, is best avoided. Belay loops [or abseil loops as is probably a more relevant name if you belay from your rope loop] don't break if you maintain your kit even slightly. You can load them in any direction. HMS krabs are weaker than oval ones to although given the overall strength this is a little pedantic. Abseiling from the loop on your harness is the safest practice, hence why this is what manufacturers recommend. Do what ever makes you feel safest though I guess.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

It's not hard at all to consider how, over a period of years the stitching on a belay loop could get damaged considering the kind of climbing Todd Skinner was known for.

Big wall climbing means you live in your harness, you sleep in your harness, you drag it up off width cracks, you use it to haul hundreds of kilos thousands of meters, you sit in it for hours aiding and belaying then you rap off with huge sacks of kit hanging below you.

Wearing a gear loop out on stanage or at your lokal wall seems unlikely. Getting more than a couple of serious seasons out of a harness on a big wall seems even less likely.

I'll be checking mine before I next use it, its 6 or 7 years old and a bit frayed/dog chewed in places.

Why do so many of the truely great climbers die such simple, preventable deaths?

jk

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Just wanted to say a few general things about harnesses. Any questions please free to email me.
I have seen & heard many strange things from climbers regarding harnesses.
Harness prices have fallen in real terms and I don't believe there is a choice to be made between £40 and a life.
I do work in the climbing manufacturing industry and it really scares me when I see people climbing in Whillans harnesses and other redundant gear. Some UK climbers seem to think it's macho or clever to use old equipment, though I hope this is becoming less common.

Harness life is a max of 5 years.
Fluffy is bad, bin it.
Damage to any load bearing part is bad, bin it.
Even if pristine but 5 years old, bin it.

Be safe.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Sadly, strange at it seems, it does not appear to be the case that fall arrest equipment (such as harnesses / slings) needs to be very very severely weakened / damaged in order for it to fail.

On a recent Health and Safety Executive course, I was told that the most minor seeming cuts or abrasion to a harness or other gear can dramatically reduce its performance.


See extracts below from HSE website:

From HSE Document INDG367 - Inspecting fall arrest equipment made from webbing or rope
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg367.pdf

Examples of defects and damage

The following defects and damage have the potential to result in thedegradation and/or weakening of the lanyard:

cuts of 1 mm or more at the edges of webbing lanyards (eg where the lanyard may have been choke-hitched around steelwork)

surface abrasion across the face of the webbing and at the webbingloops, particularly if localised;abrasion at the edges, particularly if localised;damage to stitching (eg cuts or abrasion)

In reply to jkarran:

You let your dog CHEW your climbing gear?

*blink*

Wow!

In reply to C2BK:


I didn't 'let' him chew it, he's a dog, it's what they do. I told him off, checked it over then repaired it with cord. Mostly he ate a gear loop.

jk

In reply to Ian E B:

"Even if pristine but 5 years old, bin it." you were going so well then you go an spoil it. Why the hell would anyone want to bin a 5 year old but pristine harness (if its UV damaged it won't look pristine).I've got no objection companies covering their H&S responsibilities by saying you should do this but that doesnt stop it being plain rubbish advice.

In reply to Offwidth:

It's your choice, I've said all I am going to say.

In reply to Ian E B:
Is the 5 years from the date of manufacture or the purchase date.

Why is there no warning on a harness? Who is culpable for not having a warning, the manufacturer or the retailer?

In reply to Norrie Muir:
The advice is that you should replace after a maximum of five years since first use, or 10 years since it was manufactured, whichever comes first (e.g. the shop can safely keep it 5 years before selling it)

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Do all shop assistants know the exact date of manufacture? I will be asking them as I might be re-newing my 33 years old harness. What should I do if they don't know the date?

In reply to Norrie Muir:
I just got a new DMM harness and on the box or on the instructions i am sure it said something to the effect of a limited life span and ISTR it said if used everyday it might only last 1 year. Not sure if the warning is on the harness as well, i`ll look when I get home.
Cheers Beds

In reply to Ian E B:

I know its my choice. I know enough about materials science to judge back covering from real safety issues. Frankly a well used harness that is a few months old is a load more risky than a pristine 5 year old harness.

In reply to various: It's perhaps not completely relevant but I have some direct experience with the inspection and lifing of military aircraft seat harness.

Aircraft seat harness are desinged to protect pilots in very severe crash senarios (standard crash test is 6G deceleration and normally much more) and the forces are therefore similar to those for climbing harnesses. They are also pretty much indentical in method of construction - i.e. nylon webbing with bar-tacked stitching.

It is only reading this that I realised that I've seen people with climbing harnesses that if there was similar damage to a pilot's harness, I'd refuse to let the aircraft fly. What's more I'd haul over the coals any pilot or technician who hadn't reported that the harness needed replacement.

We have VERY strict inspection criteria. ANY damage to bar-tack stiching leads to harnesses being replaced. ANY cuts, nick or fraying of wedding leads to replacement.

Aircraft harness assemblies have a year storage life varying from 5 to 10 year from manufacture. I personally have granted up to extension to permitted life of harnesses on the basis of my inspection from 5 years to 5 1/2 years. More recently two engineering authorities are currently increasing lifes across the board up to 10 years. That seems to be the standard maximum that all the subject matter experts and industry seem to be content with and our testing requirement are usually significantly more stringent than those associated with normal PPE.

It's rather interesting how something I would class as unacceptable at work I might not comment upon when climbing.

As others have said the bottom line is that if there is any damage to load bearing stitching you should bin the harness immediately. Abrasion of webbing should also be taken very serious and if the whole width of webbing is effected, again the harness should be replaced.

HTH

In reply to Ian E B:
.


Bollox !

See above. I've just replaced my harness after 18 years.
I know a lot of climbers who are using old gear, ropes,boots,slings, etc and are quite happy to trust their lives to their old equipment.

Climbing equipment doesn't deteriorate like a machine full of moving parts in constant use.

I remember using an ancient rope tied to a van to haul down an umpteen ton girder off a light engineering workshop.

The stress it put up with before it gave was incredible.
The rope was probably about 25 years old and could have held an elephant !

In reply to Jonno:

I would ask if we could loot your stuff after some of it fails but it sounds like it might not be worth having

In reply to Jason Kirk:

I suppose you do what the manufacturers tell you and replace your gear every two years ?

I don't suppose my stuff would be worth having to a gear freak ?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg367.pdf

This articel is designed for industrial use but has some good photos of what constitutes wear which is applicable to climbing webbing.

Roger Caldecott who used to work for Lyon Equipment organised some informal testing of climbing equipment. One such test was how little abrasion across the width of a piece of webbing can seriously weaken the webbing. I've a report on the tests but it is rather technical. I've been meaning to re-draft it in an easier to understand format. maybe I should get my finger out and do it soon...


CONJECTURE: If Todd had been juggin' up and down ropes I guess it is possible that the harness loop could have rubbed and become even more worn till it reached a point where it failed.

Very tragic but if through his death climbers take more notice of the wear and tear on their kit and retire/change it sooner perhaps other such tragic accidents might be avoided. Little consolation I guess this is to his family and friends...

George Mc

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
Mick, I just dont believe this, it sounds like complete bollox, how could ANYBODY let alone someone as experienced as Todd even get near to wearing out a harness to that extent, its just completely insane and impossible, are we looking at misadventure or murder here? I know this sounds extreme, but it is JUST NOT POSSIBLE, nobody, even an absolute begginer, would not be able to see if their harness was up to spec.
This cannot be the reason, something else must have happened.

In reply to Al Evans:

Reading this thread and from your own experience you will know that is entirely possible that some climbers will use their harnesses way beyond their recommended life and that they do not check them for wear.

Second since this has happened I've been told of at least two episodes were there has been leg loop failure.

See above for the weakest link in a harness...the belay loop.

This from an expert "belay loops are vulnerable as they tend to
stick out and catch on the rock, and also belay krabs if 'nicked' can quickly
abrade the inside of belay loops - any cuts on webbing is not good. "

The message is clear, check your harness everytime you use it.

It's not insane Al, or bollox and it is entirely possible whether you are a beginner or an 'expert'.

Read the link above too.

Mick

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: I do not like trusting a belay loop alone and currently on my third harness in 15 years. Till recently I did as balti boy and put my HMS through main belt and lower loop, till worries of 3 way loading changed me. One friend uses a piece of 6mm cord tied into a loop alongside his belay loop which he replaces now and again, as a backup. I might be doing the same from now on. Todd's untimely death could of possibly been avoided doing the same. A sad loss and one which we should all learn from.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Of course a simple manufacturing safety solution would be to use a core on the key front and abseil loops. Some harnesses do this. Peoples attitudes are interesting in this: I talked this over with two friends last night. One was worried without any real cause and the other was not fussed with a furry loop I'd say should have caused retirement a good while back.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


I disagree and so do those who make harnesses...

"At the British Mountaineering Club, Student Club Safety Conference (what a name!) last October this bloke, who is the technical development manager for err Wild Country? Troll? said:

"This keeps on coming up! The belay loop is by far the strongest part of the bloody harness. The rest of the system would fail well before the bloody belay loop ever would. Belay from the bloody belay loop. The clue's in the bloody name."

http://www.tradgirl.com/climbing_faq/safety_3.htm#belayloop

Most wear I have on my harness is not the loop but the areas where the rope runs over the leg and waist connections.
Generally and from all the manufacturers/retailers i have talked to the belay loop is normally the strongest part of the harness.

In reply to nz Cragrat: Exactly, there is more to this than initially meets the eye. AND I think it requires serious investigation.
BTW Mick, can you reply to me about the OMOH T shirt please.

In reply to nz Cragrat:

Normally being the word. Belay loops stick out so they get more wear. A nicked belay crab can seriously weaken the loop. Its quite easy to see a scenario where the loop can fail first but hard to see the climber wouldn't notice the harness needed retiring under the manufacturers instructions on the grounds of visible damage to a safety critical component.

In reply to Al Evans:

Not commenting on this incident but you are completely wrong on your main point. Next time you are out with your mates or out on a crag check some abseil loops. Its not unusual to find abseil loops constructed from stitched two layer webbing where the stitching on the loop joint cannot be seen to be sound as the loop is so furry.

In reply to nz Cragrat:


I see. But is the belay loop the part of the harness that is most prone to wear?

As someone as said it sticks out from the harness so is prone to abrasion against the rock and if you use a biner that has 'nicks' this will cut the webbing.

M

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Keep an eye open on this supertopo forum on harness safety

http://tinyurl.com/sz4ug

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


Leg loops get a lot of hammer if you slide down descents on your arse, and the tapes that run from them can easily become abraded to the point of failure. But leg loops are not load bearing...nobody ever died from a failed leg loop, did they?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Of course it does taken from that same thread which shows how stupid climbers can misread safety information:

"So if the belay loop is so strong, why don't I tie into it? Because you would wear it out very fast. The established tie in points on harnesses are usually covered with a durable cloth or webbing to take the brunt of the abrasion from the rope being tied in. Falls, hanging and hangdogging tend to move the rope slightly, under load, against the harness, and this results in a lot of abrasive wear. If you subjected the belay loop to this wear, it's unprotected webbing would wear out pretty quickly."

Obviously any manufacturer will tell you worn webbing should be retired.

In reply to nz Cragrat:

Cheers,

"Trying to break a belay loop can certainly be done, but not with equipment typical to our industry... The loop is too strong for the testing equipment.

On the other hand, the other components of the harness can be pulled to failure.

I just hate to see us get emotionaly side tracked from the technical aspects of the harness because the instance (I am just knots inside over the Todd Skinner tragedy) appears to be the loop... It appears through comments on this thread it would be reasonable to say it was worn out.

Worn out how. We cannot say. could a brand new loop exposed to acid fail today yes.

Could a 6 month old loop fail today from abrasion, yes.

Could a good loop fail during rapel. Maybe. I am certain somebody can route the rope in some strange way that it could cut the loop from heat and friction of the rope.

These things are made of webbing, fabric, foam and buckles. They are not magic. They are just a solution for the need of a climbing harness. Their condition to do their job is up to us (I know there is an ANSI test for harnesses... This is a good thing and manufacturers do use it).

Now if we saw a complete seperation of webbing or stitching of a harness in optimum repair, I think some of these concerns would be more valid. I also think the harness would not meet the ANSI test, and I would expect a BAD BATCH scenario, that would be scary!

Todays harnesses are good. Their condition is your responsibility. "

Todays harnesses are good. Their condition is your responsibility.

In reply to nz Cragrat:

I expect all harness makers will be looking at how their stitching is done now, to try and reduce this sort of accident. Bar tacking through all thicknesses of webbing, when worn, would make it operate like a screamer, failing at a certain load. doing it in layers may stop this risk.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Yeah mick i am not too fussed about the whole incident either since I was one of the many who have spent time with him in the past.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I think there is a degree of hysteria developing here - this is the 1st harness failure (if indeed that is what it is) that I have heard on in 40 years of climbing - and suddenly everyone is running round like headless chickens!


Chris

In reply to nz Cragrat:

Its very sad that this discussion comes on the back of the death of someone like Todd, as I said earlier I dont believe it, but if true it needs looking into.
I cannot see how that is unquestionable, sorry Cragrat but that is sad and true. Not too fussed? How anybody dies, whether its Todd or any other mate you have climbed with we should try to seek out warnings and ways of preventing it happening again, if only as a tribute to our friends.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I agree about the "hysteria". It seems not uncommon amongst some people here to exhibit an unusual amount of paranoia in areas like this. The odds are quite infintisimal compared to the number of times the things get used

In reply to nz Cragrat: Fair point, but I still think an investigation is worthwhile.

In reply to Al Evans:

I think that my comment has been misunderstood a little. My initial response was that Mick said

"See above for the weakest link in a harness...the belay loop. "

then it is contradicted in later statements.

"Not fussed" means I am actually upset at the lost of someone I knew briefly (in Kiwi) and i am interested in the reasons also because I have been involved in Alpine and Cliff Rescue professionally for a long period. It sounds like it was worn beyond reason.

In reply to Al Evans:

I have no qualms about that... did I say I was opposed?

In reply to nz Cragrat:

From Black Diamond:

http://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/scene/beta/qc_kp.php

In reply to nz Cragrat: No, and even if you were (which I dont think) an initial response to the death of a friend is a traumatic and not neccesarily thought out response. I'm groveling here aren't I, I didn't mean to be critical, I just mean I dont believe Todd would let a harness fail, and I think it should be properly checked out.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I think it is more concern for everyone's safety (hysteria is filed inder "Chat Rook' at UKC). When an accident like this happens it is most certainly a wake up call. Some people do treat their harnesses as if they are indestructable and that they last forever. They quite clearly don't and the manufacturers will back this up.

Hopefully out of this we will become more educated as regards the use and abuse of our equipment that we place so much trust in.

M

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

When an accident like this happens it is most certainly a wake up call. Some people do treat their harnesses as if they are indestructable and that they last forever.

I look forward to your Gear Reviewers report on Harnesses as it looks like I will need to replace my 33 years old harness.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

What I find more worrying is the rope that broke due to a 10' fall on the other link! Holy smoke, as if climbing isn't stressful enough already!


Chris

Some interesting points are made here http://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/scene/beta/qc_kp.php

In reply to Ean T:

The tests are interesting (and reassuring) but doubt it's as simple as a cut or abraded belay loop ... more likely a combination of things (eg abrasion, plus exposure over a period of years to UV/ acid/ excessive heat etc). But not much point in speculating until the tests have been done.

This past year or so, I have personally seen/ heard of 2 incidents when the sling on an in-situ quickdraw failed due (presumably) to UV damage. On both occasions the krab just "cut" through the sling. (Fortunately the quickdraws in question were on steep bolted routes so the climbers concerned were unhurt).

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I used to work for Lyon Equipment testing gear for an HSE research contract. I still work in Rope Access and have been teaching gear inspection for 6 years or so now...

Some good info here but still some points worth adding. Lyon's current course is a full week so I'll try to stick to just nylon webbing/ belay loops!!:

Firstly, strength.
Yes, belay loops are massively strong, typically in excess of 30 KN (3 tons) - probably stronger than any other piece of gear you own or the anchor.

Secondly, obsolescence.
Stored correctly, Nylon doesn't lose strength over 10 years or so. UV light will weaken it, as will any use which inevitably cause wear and tear which will weaken it.
Hence manufacturers usually recommend a lifespan of between three and ten years for all-fabric products. This is lifetime 'in-use' and is in addition to correct storage by shops, distributors etc.
However this is ALWAYS with the proviso that lifetime can be as short as a single use.

Thirdly, wear.
Webbing is very susceptible to damage by abrasion. On courses we do a simple demo with 3 quickdraws:
One gets a crampon point stabbed through it, one gets cut a quarter of the way through and the third gets a five second rub over a half-inch long section from the striking sandpaper on the side of a box of matches.
When broken, the first loses little strength, the second is weakened by pretty much the same amount as you have cut through (ie a quarter in this case), the last has usually lost at least half of its strength, despite looking much less serious than the others originally.
This is due to the fact that all the fibres making up webbing are exposed to the surface at some point over only an inch or so - the same reason that webbing is far more susceptible to UV damage than rope which keeps 70% or so of the strength hidden in the core.
NB.'Fluffing' due to age is not the same as abrasion damage and there is some evidence to suggest it helps protect webbing. If you look (very!) closely fluffing due to age consists of pulled loops whereas abrasion wear cuts the individual fibres and you see the fibre ends.


So why was he still using it?
It can be very difficult to decide when a harness is knackered.
Wear is usually a very gradual process, building up slowly over years, and is especially difficult to notice on your own gear as you never see a significant change. Hence why in rope access gear has to have a 6 monthly inspection, usually done by an independent person.
Smaller sections of localised wear are fairly easy to assess, but it is extremely difficult to say at what point general wear becomes a threat - hence why manufacturers suggest lifetimes. Having said that, I think it is the localised wear that we need to worry about, not general 'age'.

Finally, how did such serious wear occur on a belay loop?
From a UK perspective I agree it can be hard to see how a belay loop could get such damage. However in Yosemite routes are longer and wide cracks are very common. I could easily see how thrutching up just one off-width could cause more damage than five seconds with a matchbox.
US climbers also commonly larks-foot a sling or daisy chain into their belay loop for quick clipping into belays. Over a lot of use this could also cause some serious local abrasion - made worse by the fact the damage would be hidden by the larks-foot itself.
Another danger is using worn karabiners. Steel bolt hangers will easily damage aly biners. This isn't significant for the strength of the biner but it can create tiny sharp edges that can damage slings and ropes. Hence why quickdraws should always be used with dedicated 'ends'. I could see how routinely swapping a belay device from harness to anchor bolt, as you often do with magic plate type devices, could cause a similar problem.

Some of these last factors might sound scary, but as long as you are aware of them its very easy to eliminate them. You never liked off widths anyway did you? It is worth, though, doing a regular careful inspection paying special attention to abrasion.
As mentioned higher up the thread, this is a very rare occurrence (I can't recall any others) which is reassuring. This is partly due to the huge safety factors built into new gear, but also that generally folk are pretty conscientious when their life is on the line.

In reply to Adam L:
do you know how much of a problem mildew is. The black diamond report seems to suggest it does damage climbing gear. Although I've read from one manufacturer (beal ?) that it doesn't. Could storing damp gear for a week or two damage it?

Stevo

In reply to CurlyStevo:
here's the link
www.spelean.com.au/BW/TM/BWtechdyn.html#ropecare

In reply to CurlyStevo:
i found another like also saying it doesn't damage polamide or nylon and that storing damp gear doesn't damage it much at all but I can't paste it in properly just put https:// in fron of the following

lccsecure.lancashire.gov.uk/education/data/edintact/documents/appendices/Appendix%2009%20-%20Guidance%20Notes%20for%20Outdoor%20Activity%20Equipment.doc

In reply to CurlyStevo:

lets make it easy for people to get to the link eh

http://www.spelean.com.au/BW/TM/BWtechdyn.html#ropecare

In reply to Chris Craggs:
>this is the 1st harness failure (if indeed that is what it is) that I have heard on in 40 years of climbing

Author:
steelmnkey

" I mentioned this in another version of this thread, but might be worth mentioning here. I saw on the BD site where they say something about never seeing a belay loop fail, but it happened at a climbing gym here in Phx a few years ago. Guy who had a pretty worn harness, leads a route, belayer sucks up the slack at the top to lower him, belay loop let go, he goes 25 feet to the floor (shredded rubber surfacing). Luckily for him, he walked away. I would guess (I didn't see it) that the belay loop was pretty visibly worn at the time."

http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=272774&f=0&b...

In reply to nz Cragrat:
hmmm I tried that and it didn't work and now it does.

I'm not sure why?

Anyway thanks.

In reply to Adam L: I am more inclined to believe Adam than anybody else!

In reply to Adam L:
Couldnt agree more especially with the point about using worn biners, how many times have you seen someone attach a belay plate with a battered old crab, ive seen it lots.Many people i know dont have a dedicated crab for their belay device so they are constantly swapping them round. All those little scratches and nicks rubbing away on your belay loop.

However, as im sure has been mentioned lots already the answers simple, check your gear if your unsure in any way about the condition of anything replace it at the end of the day whats worth more, you or your harness.

In reply to Crofty: Yeah i use the same trick backing up the belay loop with a loop of 6mm cord.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: there is an article on the bd site (link on andy k's) about the wear on nyonal slings and UV. nylon ism uch more ressiliant than spectra to uv.

also with regards to the worn belay loop, did any one see in the andy k harness review, slightly tounge in cheek piece about parnells harness failling.

In reply to Tom Ripley Mountain Guide:

I can't find any link to Black Diamond on Andy Kirkpatrick's site, but if the article you're referring to is the "QC with KP" one referenced higher up this thread then my reading of it is that it does not say definitively that dyneema degrades worse than nylon under UV. In fact one of the entries on the blog-style web page http://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/scene/beta/qc_kp.php suggests the complete opposite. In the entry for 21 April 2006, KP records a test in which samples of three different types of "dogbone" sling were left exposed to UV continuously for more than four weeks, after which the nylon slings actually showed a greater % loss of strength than either of the dyneema types.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: I think one problem with gear is the dificulty of believing that is could have been safe to use the last time but is unsafe today. Hence it just keeps getting used "one more time". I imagine with pro climbers using gear every day and hence wearing it out very quickly then it can be difficult realising just how short the lifespan of gear is compared to caual use.

In reply to Tom Ripley Mountain Guide:

Re UV damage to Dyneema/Spectra vs nylon.

The tests that Kolin at BD did were on a minimal number of samples over a short period of time and pretty un-scientific. He went to the last UIAA meeting with this data and was shot down in flames because WC + Beal have been studying this seperately for ages and have huge amounts of data.

Their conclusions are that Spectra is slightly more resilient to long term UV damage than nylon, but this is a very simplified precis.

Regards

Simon

DMM

In reply to Simon Marsh: thanks simon

when are DMM going to be producing HB alloy offsets?

Just had a good look at all my gear after reading the comments on this thread. On a slightly different topic, is anyone concerned about wear to their abseiling karabiner?
I've noticed a slight indentation caused by rope wear on this biner (I often abseil into routes, climbing on sea cliffs). It is slight indenations at present, but it crossed my mind... When should I become concerned about this wear?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Maybe what we all need is a kind of voluntary MOT. I myself don't feel skilled enough to evaluate the state of my gear. I also hear different things. One person I met would retire a rope that had been stood on. Another would retire karabiners from weight bearing duties that had been dropped from over waist height. But another collected them from the bottom of cliffs and used them.
So why don't we (e.g. BMC) set up a way that every year we can take our gear for an independant and authorised inspection?

In reply to Tom Ripley Mountain Guide:
a good question worth knowing the answer to!

In reply to MikeTS:

I think with krabs the only way to test them is to the point of destruction.

In reply to MikeTS:
I retire metal gear when it shows signs of abuse/age. I don't think droping it a set distance will necessarilly damage it (think of the forces generate when people tug on gear or fall and the biner smashes in to the rock etc). It depends what it hits etc and my understanding with alloy biners is it will be very unlikely to be damaged if there is no visible sign of damage.

Stevo

In reply to Alan Stark:
Another paranoid. I never ab off the belay loop but pass a crab through the route the belay loop takes. I started doing this as I had long hair and kept losing chunks of it in the belay plate but also feel it is safer to trust much nylon rather than one piece!

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

From memory I believe it was kernmantle rope slings and definitely not tape slings as the inner core is protected by the sheath from abrasion and uv...

Cheers Ron

In reply to Dr Fran:
I suggest you never do this when using a figure of eight it is dangerous as if the figure of eight twists it can break the sleeve on the biner. google for more info.

In reply to Dr Fran:

That may be but what you describe is potentially very bad for the karabiner and has caused at least one death in the UK when done in conjunction with a Fig8. It is generally considered bad practice nowadays, although it was common once.
Iain

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Are harnesses made from nylon? I assume that manufacturers have considered other materials and found them unsuitable if they are. From my experience in yachting and camping nylon compared to other man mades i. Is prone to failure due to UV degradation ii. Can fail without showing signs of its weakness...it's staggering how weak it can become

I consciously keep all my climbing gear stored away from direct sunlight at all times possible. Outdoors I keep any unused gear in a bag.

On a boat I don't use nylon ropes (nobody does unless they are on a very tight budget) as there are alternatives and if I have the choice I would buy a tent with a flysheet made of polyamide if it was to be used for long periods in the sun...less of a problem in Wales/Lake District/Scotland!

NM

In reply to Nigel Modern:

Nylon - Polyamide... isn't one just an example of another?

In reply to Ron Walker:


Q. "Why should individual items be marked as long as they are batch coded when they leave the factory?" (This is the Industrial rope access perspective it can be applied to mountaineering adventure equipment aswell)

A. Batch codes are just that. A batch of items, maybe hundreds, all have the SAME number. These are used to help the factory control quality. I think maybe you are confusing batch codes with Petzl's unique numbering of each item.

There is nothing wrong with using Petzl's unique mark as your own for your records as long as it is unique. ie you may have to check, as some of their gear does have batch codes as well as unique codes.

Under LOLER 1998 (made under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974) - each item of PPE must have a unique mark traceable to its purchase and inspection records and also to the statement of conformity.
This is STATUTE LAW not guidance or best practice. ie You must do it. It is a Criminal offence if you do not do it whether an accident happens/has happened or not. You would have to prove that it was unreasonable or unpracticable for you with comply with the above. Could you do that?

However, you will not find unique marks on Krabs, Maillons and many other items (unless you have requested them) so you must mark them yourself.

"Its about time the people who make/enforce the regulations got to grips with the facts; these companies don't let sub standard products out of the factory."

Companies only make items to a good standard because the have to in order to satisfy stringent Euro Norms or UIAA standards of old. (This is also good business but that is another argument).
If these controls were not here you would all be falling out of the sky with remarkable ease and frequency as your home made descender fell to bits, or your homemade seatbelt harness gave up the ghost.

Remember, the UIAA standards (precursors for a lot of current rope access EN's) only came about because of the horrendous number of fatalities due to failing ropes and krabs that occured in the 10 years or so after the war because there was NO QUALITY CONTROL in manafacturing.

Controls give you good gear and keep you alive. When control breaks down, you die.... and that is forever . . .

Free documents to download



<< Click to Download Adobe acrobat PDF reader for free



The links below are to HSE PDF documents

Inspection of webbing/ Tape and rope fall equipment
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg367.pdf

Karabiner testing and inspection in Aborculture (tree felling) http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/hsl_pdf/2003/hsl03-18.pdf



KNOTS http://www.realknots.com/

In reply to brt: Yes but from experience it lasts longer in UV - French tent manufacturers I'm told use it in preference and my own experience is that my nylon Force 10 flysheets quickly fell apart when used in France but polyamide as used by French manufacturers seems to last much better...maybe they just formulate/protect it it differently, I dunno. Whatever it shows that gear can be made more UV resistant and perhaps manufacturers do already. Nylon is a very dodgy material in UV conditions because it loses strength without showing it is 'worn'.

In reply to Nigel Modern:

But nylon is a polyamide isn't it? In which case that doesn't make much sense.

As I know, nylon isn't much used on boats(for running rigging at least) because of its stretchiness rather than anything to do with UV degredation. On the other hand, nylon mooring lines are quite common for the same reason.

Mark

In reply to Anonymous: My experience of nylon ropes is that they can fail unexpectedly. I'm no expert on materials but I think the stretchiness of a rope is more dependent on how it's constructed. Are mooring ropes nylon? I thought most were terylene. I sometimes see what I think are nylon mooring ropes (the braided white ones) but I'm not sure I'd use them. Virtually all running rigging is terylene/other but not nylon and from my experience I'd say the reason is UV. A ropes expert might set us straight on this. Where stretchiness is an issue wire rope or kevlar is used isn't it and the kevlar has a Terylene(?) sheath?

I suppose the point I'm trying to raise (to any gear manufacturer who is eavesdropping) is that I for one would pay more for more UV resistant/UV protected gear. Also I asked the question '...are harnesses made from nylon?...'

In reply to Nigel Modern:

Not all, but a good proportion are. Nylon does tend to be stretchier than most other materials no mater what the construction (one of the reasons that it's used for climbing ropes). Another big advantage of nylon over other materials such as polypropylene is that it sinks, which makes it about the only choice for anchor rope.

Mark

In reply to Nigel Modern:


I don't know much about the actual process, but I do know that all nylon climbing gear has been UV stabalised for a good many years.

Mark

In reply to Anonymous: '...such as polypropylene is that it sinks, which makes it about the only choice for anchor rope...'

I think my anchor rope is terylene and it sinks because it has an anchor and chain attached to it. Terylene ropes seem to me to fair better in UV. Is Terylene a polyamide? I don't know.

Still the question here is UV resistance in climbing gear and I guess manufacturers have considered it but I'm surprised because the harnesses I see and use look very like the material I have seen disintegrate after prolonged UV exposure while other materials appear unaffected eg nylon ropes I have owned and nylon loops on my sailboard harness...in fact probably the harness itself....but the worst I would get here is a dunking.

Certain types of polyamides appear more resistant than others, yet to my untrained, non-expert eye they are the ones used in climbing gear...hence I protect them from sunlight. Am I right in being concerned? How seriously has UV degradation been taken? From experience I wouldn't assume it has.

In reply to Nigel Modern:


Terelene is a polyester, and it does sink on its own, so is fine for anchor rope (though I'd go for somthing a bit springier). You're right to some extent about the line sinking because of the anchor and chain, but anchors don't work because of their weight; they work because of the angle of pull. Using floating anchor rope is self defeating because you need much more chain for the anchor to hold, and furthermore increasing the scope will not make the anchor hold that much better (which can be dangerous).



As I said, all nylon used for climbing gear is UV stabalised; so is clearly taken pretty seriously.

Mark

In reply to Anonymous: That's interesting so the issue is recognised but I just wonder why other materials aren't suitable. An idle thought really as I guess they know what they are doing but manufacturers can't always be left to themselves on issues like this...that's why we have UIAA etc The problem is that safer isn't always sexy and we (the customers) may not be prepared to pay the extra pennies it needs...

Anyway it's only those within the industry who will know whether this is an issue, thanks for your comments,

Nigel

In reply to Anonymous: '...Using floating anchor rope is self defeating...'

The rope I'm referring to floats and has plenty of give in it. I think the give comes from the fact that it's a twisted rope. It looks and feels like terylene, bought before I was aware of a problem with nylon...Oh no I might have to replace it if it's nylon! Honestly from experience I mistrust nylon in critical places eg anchor rope

Never seen floating anchor ropes as an issue until you get to much bigger ropes and bigger boats when in my experience you're probably using a winch and chain

In reply to Nigel Modern:

I should stress that my knowledge of such things is purely as a user. However, nylon is very strong (stronger than polyester for example), and very strtchy. That makes it a great material for absorbing high shock loads, and thus is inherently good material for climbing gear. If it is possible to negate the effects of UV (and it seems that this is the case) then the question should really be: why use anything else?

Mark

In reply to Anonymous: That may be the bottom line but if you know me from previous postings I'm a bit of a sceptic when it comes to leaving commerce unsupported to make decisions on safety issues. Thank God for eg UIAA and other bodies including I guess the BMC who will look at issues raised by this and other gear failures without commercial pressure on them.

This gear failure is high profile, perhaps a one off and perhaps explicable by the age of the harness but it just rang bells from my own experience - he knew it was old, the issue was raised, he looked at the harness and was prepared to carry on climbing with it but it failed, probably under a relatively small load at one of its strongest points. I'd love to know if it was stitching or the actual loop. Is this question answered anywhere up the string?

In reply to Anonymous:

Nylon has a certain degree of stretch but the dynamic ability of climbing ropes comes from baking the fibres in an oven. The fibres contract slightly and coil up (rather like hair does if you burn it) making them far springier. Heat treatment is done by the rope manufacturers which is the main reason for differing peak impact forces between them, though the weave also has some effect.

In reply to Adam L:



I didn't know that. Very interesting; thanks.

Mark

In reply to Anonymous:

Spider dragline silk (Biosteel) harnesses coming soon!

http://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/NewsDetails.asp?News_id=8699

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I'm sure this has probably been said, I don't have time to read the 146 comments, but why didn't he back his abseil up with a prussik loop?

That way, at least his leg loop would have been attached to the rope.

Sounds like sloppy practice to me. It makes me really angry to see the death of someone so talented for nothing.

There are too many examples. People not wearing helmets is one - am I right in thinking Cuthbertson didn't wear one on his ascent of Rhapsody - how about the new E11?

Why do all the best climbers die abseiling?

In reply to rginns:
I'm not sure a prussic around a leg loop would have saved him. Quite likely with no belay loop to join the leg loops to the harness he would have been flipped upside and the legs would have just pulled off.

Backup abseils isn't a simple consideration either cavers generally consider backing up abseils more dangerous than just doing them, as further complications can occur (like the prussic jamming or stretching out in to the belay plate).

I for one think checking everything on an abseil b4 doing it is very important as you are fully trusting the system unlike in climbing and I beleive it is easier to get complacent with abseiling as it feels much safer than climbing.

In reply to rginns:


Sloppy Posting. You are wrong about Rhapsody on a couple of counts.

Dave

In reply to rginns:
Cubby did Requiem, Dave MacLeod did Rhapsody, so your thinking is wrong.

In reply to CurlyStevo:


That's interesting. I've often thought that backing up an abseil has limited benefit and some downsides but no one else has ever raised it as an issue.

In reply to Dave Pritchard:

Ok, I accept I am wrong, hence me asking the question. However, ther are other examples, mcloed on divided years E8, Birkett on Fear of failure E8, etc etc

I expect this is controversial, given free choice regarding safety, but the point was that these guys are going to end up in trouble one day, through not taking simple precautions.

backing up the ab would have saved Skinners life, but he evidently chose not to.

In reply to CurlyStevo: point taken about the possible flip, however it may have given him that opportunity to stop his fall.

I agree with a thorough checking of everything. I for one hate abseiling.

In reply to rginns:
Many people back up the ab with a prussic tied to their belay loop.

In reply to estivator:
if you backed it up using a larksfooted sling through your tie in loops then your really would be safeguarding your abseil.

Stevo

In reply to estivator:


...which evidently wouldn't have helped at all. However that would seem too close to the belay device.

I didn't think this was standard practice?

Whenever using a prussik I've only ever used it in the leg loop.

In reply to rginns: 'Not wearing helmets' is 'sloppy practice'? IMO it's an individual choice based on risk-assessment. In which case it's a rational informed decision, and, therefore, not comparable to unknowingly abbing off while clipped into a frayed or weakened belay loop. Though it would seem in this case Todd Skinner *was* aware his harness needed replacing, which makes his decision to abseil regardless seem an irrational one.

In reply to rginns:

I do that as I usually extend my belay plate on a sling. I guess you could tread the sling through your harness in the same way you'd tie in but then again if expected your belay loop might fail you'd chuck the harness away.

In reply to rginns:

It really hacks me off on this kind of forum when someone takes it upon themself to criticise the dead. I wager Skinner (whom I met a few times and climbed with once) knew a damn sight more about climbing and the risks therein that you do or indeed ever will. He was a human (and a fine one), he made his choices and he is dead. Leave him in peace and get on with your own tiny life.

And no, you don't have "the right" to air your views on here. the man is dead FFS.

Another post completely full of heresay and bereft of facts..

My belay loop is pretty old (and not particularly worn)
and I backed it up, just because it's a critical central point in the (sport climbing + abseiling) system and I'm a coward when it comes to hanging belays. However a German friend told me that everyone in Germany ties into the belay loop alone as it's the strongest part of the harness and you get less wear on it from rope rub, or at least it's spread along the whole length. I have half heard of the belay loop doing something scary on a really old harness to someone but what I've seen is that it's the rise (the bit betwen the leg loops) that takes all the wear whenever the ropes are flipped from pointing down to pointing up, even when they're not loaded. I've got a half worn through example, and I've heard of an old rise failing on a prominent alpinist (in an Andy K article). This is presumably what the German's are trying to avoid, and we're certainly more vulnerable to rise failure than them, tying in through both leg loop and harness loop as we do in the UK. Of course, unlike the belay loop, the rise isn't a critical central point (as long as you remember to tie in to the waist loop which I've forgot to do twice before).

In reply to MNT:
Well said. There's a place for such debates, but this thread definitely isn't it.

In reply to Paz:

As discussed on here before, it would seem to be a good habit to always take the rope down through your waist belt then through your leg loops. If you miss your leg loops it is not good, but if you bring the rope up and miss your waist belt it is serious. A suprising number of climbers admit to having done that ( I admit to having once belayed off a gear loop !)

In reply to Simon Caldwell:

Thank you.

And they should never ever be personalised! It's legit to ask why don't climbers wear helmets (though of course it is tantamount to saying why do climbers risk their lives at all) but never to ask, aspecially of the dead, why did he make this choice or that? Especially in such a patronising manner.

In reply to MNT:

my post was not meant to criticise the dead.
However I apologise if that was how it sounded, which after re-reading it is maybe how it could have come across.

His highly unfortunate accident just frustrates me. It's this type of situation which makes me angry that people can get into it, and makles me realise the fragility of life, and how easy it is to have a fatal accident. I suppose it is the risk we all take.

I do not profess to know half as much as most on this forum about climbing, however I am completely entitled to air my views.

I never met Todd Skinner, so I guess I should have read my posting before submitting, and thought twice , but I'm sure there are others that find this sort of accident difficult to deal with. No disrespect was meant.

In reply to rginns:
"however I am completely entitled to air my views."
yes just as much so as others are to comment on them.

In reply to Mike Conlon:

A good habit to get into is to do it right and check it. The weird thing is when you use leg loops alone it doesn't feel any different - the load still goes mostly through your leg loops even if you also tie into your waist loop

In reply to rginns:

OK, fair enough and accepted. But if you want to raise an issue do it in your own thread and not one about a dead person - especially one whom some people on the site are bound to know.

My point about how much Skinner knew about climbing was that he undoubtedly assessed his position and what he was doing - so it was the same calculated risk we all take whenever we go out. Each and every one of us can, and some of us will, get this wrong.

As to frustration at the accident - imagine if you knew him? That's why I'm so hacked off!

Rant over, and if it's at all necessary I apologise too.

there, all sweetness and light.

In reply to Paz:

I fully agree with you about checking each time but I think the habit thing adds a bit of margin for when you are tired, peed off, cold and just wanting to get off. Regards and take care.

In reply to Paz:

Agreed. I once got to the top of an E3 before realising that I had just threaded the rope through leg loops and waist belt, but had not tied a knot. Lynn Hill famously did the same and fell the length of Buoux, and a friend of mine had his rope fall off half way up leading a pitch.

Dave

In reply to Removed User:


The relevant artricle appears to have disappeared, unfortunately. (ISTR that it used to be retrievable by Googling "questionable rappel safety".) IIRC the gist of it was that putting a prusik above the abseil device was worse than useless because if someone lost control of their ab device the instinctive reaction is to grab the rope above the ab device, which usually meant grabbing the prusik, thus releasing it. Putting the prusik below the ab device avoids this problem: if you grab the rope above the ab device then the prusik holds and locks off the ab device, and if you grab the rope below the ab device then it locks off anyway. Either way you stop. The potential downside with attaching the prusik to the leg loop to do this is that if you rotate backwards in your harness or bend at the hips then the prusik can come in to contact with the ab device and release. Hence the current recommended "best practice" for backing up abseils is to extend the ab device 15cm-30cm from the ab loop with the backup prusik attached directly to the ab loop. This gives you the better configuration of the prusik below the ab device without the risk of the two physically interfering with each other on the rope. The only downsides I am aware of with this approach are that it takes a bit longer to set up (though no longer than any other prusik backup) and requires an additional bit of gear ie the sling you use to extend the ab device.

In reply to Martin W:

and you can rap off the end of your rope.

Which you can't with a Hitch above the device.

In reply to Martin W:

...and if the belay loopfails in all of these situations you're stuffed

In reply to nz Cragrat:


Which is maybe marginally less likely with a hitch above the device. I suspect that, even if the prusik did grab the rope enough to stop you, if you've felt the rope end going through your hand then you're likely to grab the rope above the ab device, thus releasing the prusik. A better way to avoid abbing off the end of your rope IMHO is to tie a knot in each rope end.

If you are really worried about your ab loop failing (although I thought it had been pretty well established by now that, unless it has become damaged, the belay loop is the strongest part of the harness) then you can extend the ab device on a sling lark's footed between the waist and leg loops. If you tie an overhand close to the harness then you can attach the prusik to that, with a second overhand higher up for the ab device. This would be not unlike Andy Kirkpatrick's rap sling: http://www.psychovertical.com/?rapsling

In reply to nz Cragrat:

Er, don't people tie a knot in the end of the ab rope any longer if it doesn't reach the ground??

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

I don't bother cos I normally forget to take it out and then it gets jammed. Best just to keep an eye on where I'm going and I normally came up that way anyway so I know what I'm going for. If I know I'm going to get close to the ends or it's seriously spacey then yeah it's a good idea but usually you'll hit a ledge way before the ends of the rope.

I'm more likely to hank/coil any surplus rope and tie that to the end using a bowline, so it doen't get wet in a rock pool or wet and jammed in boulders when the tide comes in, but you might have gathered I'm more likely to abseil into a sea cliff than off a mountain or big wall.

In reply to Ian E B: Does anybody know if was using a prussik back-up, and if not does anybody think a prussik back-up through a leg loop would've prevented this accident?
Rob

In reply to Rob McNeill:

intresting.

the leg loop does hold your weight afterall.

In reply to Rob McNeill:
Read the thread!

In reply to balti boy:
no not interesting, already been covered! And a leg loop prusic is not a back up for the belay loop failing it's supposed to be a back up for if you accidentally let go of the rope.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

no really.

shows fake astonishment.

In reply to balti boy:
I replied to your last post but you deleted it. But your right I am a bit bored. Waiting to finish work to go and drink beer...

In reply to CurlyStevo:

I know that feeling I have a bottle of wine chilling at the mo

In reply to balti boy: If a belay loop is present you can extend the device using a sling and an extra carribeana i do this and put a prussick below the device with a krab directly through my harness. A prussick can hold about 1/2 a tonne when tight, if its on a leg loop it can cause problems, your leg riding up for instance, alot of climbers wont use them for this reason.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/obituaries/story/0,,1936124,00.html

In reply to dachiefofdaleaf@hotmail.com:

What is this Carribeana of which you speak? Sounds exotic...

In reply to sutty:

http://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/scene/beta/qc_kp.php

In reply to Adam L:

Good response Adam. I know of two first hand anecdotal instances of belay loop failure.

(1) A belay loop clipped with a karabiner that had been used on a climbing wall hanger and the sharp edges cut through the loop. I think the person fell c. 13 m.

(2) A belay loop failed (whether through abrasion/contamination or the same as (1) above I don't know), but the harness was 12 years old.

Perhaps an incident in the industrial world reported by the HSE could shed some light....

http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2002/e02055.htm

The document can be downloaded from here
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/sir59.pdf but it is 1.5 MB

In reply to daveyjavey: Interesting...

"...A one millimetre deep nick or cut in the edge of a webbing lanyard can result in between five to 39 per cent loss of strength. Ingress of dirt and UV can also cause damage to the fibres of the webbing, resulting in a similar loss of strength...

Further up the thread I raised the UV issue. We still don't seem to know if it was stitching or webbing failure.

The problem with UV damage is it may not show on inspection (even the ones recommended by the HSE) so is there a role for a UV sensitive strip on gear which will reveal when it has had a standard UV 'dose' considered safe?? HSE would have to develop this I guess as it sounds highly technical and expensive to develop (what is the 'safe' dose?) and I can't see a manufacturer/manufacturers taking it on

In reply to Nigel Modern:

Some more research the HSE commissioned and was undertaken by the Health & Safety Laboratories, if anyone is interested?

They are big files and you may just wish to look at the executive summaries.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/hsl/hsl02-16.htm
(section 8 of the first document)

http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/hsl/hsl02-17.htm

In reply to daveyjavey:


The factor that had the most severe effect on the webbing performance was exposure to artificial UV radiation. One of the webbings lost 80.2% of its strength after the longest exposure time of 1538.5 hours in the exposure chamber...Five of the webbings tested failed to meet the 22kN criterion of BS EN 354 after exposure to UV for 384.6 hours.

Pretty scary stauff, that UV light, right? 384.6 hours is only sixteen days. Or then again, maybe not:

Exposure to natural sunlight had a less marked effect, maximum strength loss being 10.5%...One of the webbings tested failed to meet the 22kN criterion of BS EN 354 after six month's exposure to natural sunlight only.

So sunlight isn't nearly as nasty as artificial UV. Conclusion: don't wear your harness while you're on the sunbed.

So what else did they test?

The ingress of dirt had the second most marked effect, reducing the strength of the webbings by up to 56.6% over 5,000 cycles.

This test involved running the webbing back and forth (which counted as one "cycle") repeatedly through a bath of builders sharp sand. So as well as embedded dirt there will have been direct abrasion. The greatest strength reduction was caused in the first 500 cycles, after which three of the webbings failed at under 22kN. Conclusion: ingrained dirt and continuous abrasion are probably bad for your harness.

Inflicting 4mm damage to the edge of the webbing resulted in strength reduction of up to 45.2%

Don't use a harness with visible nicks in the webbing.

Three of the webbings tested failed to meet the 22kN criterion of BS EN 354 after all weather exposure of six months.

Be suspicious of in-situ ab tat.

Quantification of damage to webbings by colour change is not currently viable.

Even if it still looks pretty new.

Examination of three harnesses withdrawn from service...showed that damage sustained in-service is visually comparable to damage caused by ingress of dirt and exposure to all weather.

Stuff wears out when you use it (and gets less strong as it does so).

Now, can anyone honestly say that any of the above is really suprising news?