UKC

Hi

So, I was out today practicing some steep ground ropework with some friends. The methods I have learned are from reccommended textbooks and my hazy memories of training.

I set up direct and indirect systems. No problems setting up, anchors were bombproof etc.

But then I started thinking of worst scenarios and why you'd even use a rope anyway. It all seems very inefficient to me for the following reasons:

VERY slow
A group of 8 (max ratio) would get demoralised, cold and tired pretty quickly.
The reason for rope usage is given as emergency if you go wrong or have a casualty; visibility is probably going to be crap and it's probably wet and perhaps dark
Indirect quite uncomfortable around belayer ribcage
Client slipping on ascent/descent creates a first aid situation
Getting all 8 up/down would take ages
Keeping them all in a safe spot whilst on belay would be difficult
Getting people to trust the rope without a harness would be quite hard

Guides tie all clients onto a rope while going over rough ground. I've worked alongside them using this method, yet the ML award does not mention this as part of confidence roping.

The whole thing strikes me as a bit ridiculous. Anyone know something that I've obviously missed completely?

Guessing that the real answer is 'don't make a big route choice error in the first place'. But that's not the point...

cheers in advance

In reply to Hans:
I imagine that it's practical application is quite nuanced, providing confidence and safety to clients in very specific situations. Can't say for sure as I haven't done the Summer ML, but I'm aware that it won't allow you to begin taking large numbers of folk up pitched terrain as your scenario implies may be the case?

In reply to Hans:

And surely part of gaining the award is to know when the rope would be of good use anyway?

In reply to Hans:

The ML expects you to be able to safely get people down problems where roping a whole group together would be dangerous or pointless, say broadstrand in the lakes.

The ml requires more than just confidence roping.

In reply to kwoods:

Yes, the situation would be extremely specific. No, not pitched at all, that would be MIA territory. I'm talking a slightly rocky bit of steep ground with a handily, glacially deposited boulder anchor to use. Probably 10-15 metres of ascent/descent.

In reply to Dave Perry:

The ML requires a heck of a lot more than confidence roping. But your point I find confusing: if roping a whole group down is pointless/dangerous, why bother roping anyone? If everyone has to get off the mountain (which they obviously do) then using a rope would have to include everyone, surely?

I'm really confused by all this.

In reply to Hans:
>


Yes it is - if you read the remit of the ML award, you should not knowingly put you or your group into a situation where you require a rope for progression or retreat. However, you should have the necessary basic skills to allow you to do so should (god forbid) you make a shocking error in judgement or navigation that leads you and your group onto ground which requires these skills to be tested.

Just suck it up, jump through the hoops of assessment and don't go out with the intention of using your rope with a group - you know how shit it is even in practice!

In reply to Hans:

The rope is an absolute last resort, and many days you won't even carry it. I often carry a sling that I can use to confidence rope someone if it comes to it, but you can only do this for one client! I would never say never, but I very much doubt I will ever use a rope as an ML to get someone up a section, there is always an option to back off. Down I can just about imagine in a particularly dire circumstance, but still massively unlikely! Confidence roping though you might use, people freak out at the oddest of things! (I had a client who freaked out when the clag came down!). The steep ground is a lot about spotting too, and route choice, don't get too hung up on the rope work!!

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

Yes, you have a totally valid point. I'm aware that a leader should never ever plan a route where the rope would become a vital tool, or a neccessary one. It should be treated exactly like a first aid kit.

But it is such a god damn faff; even sucking it up I still have to demo the efficiency of it all and justify actions. How can I convincingly do that if I'm constantly thinking 'this is really rubbish'? Even now, I'm thinking of new scenarios and I hope to God I never have to use those 'skills' in anger. Might as well just quit leading groups!

In reply to Hans:

I think most assessors would also agree its a faff and would also hope you will never use them!

In reply to Hans:

The reason you do it in training and assessment is so that it demonstrates to you that you never want to have to use them so will do your very best to never put yourself in the position of doing so by becoming an expert navigator and route planner - the ML award is a navigation and leadership award after all.

In reply to girlymonkey:

Confidence roping is a skill I have used a great deal, especially in the Alps. But descending and ascending with a group using just a rope, urgh.

I'm really dreading being judged and criticised on it, even though I have worked as an SPA for a few years and also as an access tech. I'm going to be picked to pieces on something completely ridiculous. Oh well, pints have been pre-ordered in the pub for afterwards so at least there's something to look forward to!!

cheers for advice.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

Fingers crossed I can argue that point successfully. That supports my total conviction in nav and route planning!

In reply to Hans:

In 30 odd years of going out on the hills, I used a confidence rope for the first time at easter to assist someone down a slightly dodgy path. all other members of the group managed fine.

That is a more normal scenario IMO, but I still had to know how to do it!

Steve

In reply to Hans:

If you have done your SPA, my advice would be, don't over engineer it. The requirement for ML is quite specific and fairly simple setups are all that is required.

Steve

In reply to SteveD:

Great stuff, yep, you had the skill to use, so good. I imagine 99percent of leaders will only ever use a rope to that extent.

I wonder if anyone has ever done a full on indirect belay with 8 clients down a slimy, rocky slab in crap vis in the rain? lol.

In reply to Hans:

DOn't over think it, just do what is expected and no more - I nearly failed my SPA for doing the opposite of this.

It's like when doing your driving test - who do you know that still threads the steering wheel through their hands to turn a corner? yet this is how you have to do it on the test in order to pass.
It seems pointless and for the most part is, but you have to do it to pass. This is what they want and you give it to them. Afterwards you can cross your hands over, steer one handed or take your hands off the wheel completely (not recommended).

In reply to Hans:



If you are well practiced I don't think ML ropework is too slow, even when trying to get the whole group down.



Eight is not the max for ML-Client ratio. Why do you carry a bothy bag and food?



Why would you be going up with the rope in an ML situation?
I can't see why that would be necessary. If you're using the rope in descent you should be able to see that you can then walk off from there. If not you shouldn't be lowering your clients to it.


As you said though, it's almost always going to be better walking off.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

Very wise advice. Yep, just give them simple, textbook stuff. Understood

In reply to Hans:
The rope work component of the ML is of very limited use in practical applications. Should one ever find themselves in a situation requiring the rope on a mountain, the training and assessment of rope work in the ML award in insubstantial anyway. Ever tried to escape a waist belay before with just a rope?

I think the rope work section leaves candidates woefully unprepared to actually deal with a real situation involving a rope on the hills. Perhaps it shouldn't be taught at all?

I also think the SPA isn't thorough enough (there were chaps on my assessment I wouldn't trust to hold my ropes any day who passed) but that's another issue.

In reply to gdnknf:

I agree it's of very limited use. I don't agree that the techniques are insubstantial.

Escaping the system is possible with a few extras that aren't taught.

It leaves candidates with a few tools with which to do a very complex task in possibly very bad weather. I agree that it shouldn't be taught, apart from the close confidence roping. I think learning how to make a stretcher would be a much more effective use of time, and more likely skill to use if anyone seriously injured themselves or you came across an injured hiker etc.

Quite a lot of SPA's work indoors anyway so it's good enough, but maybe they should make SPA and ML training and assessment 5 days. It would make more sense. But that's way off my original whinge...

H.

In reply to Hans:

Keep the rope work simple when you go on you're assessment, climbing people can easily overcomplicate things.

You won't be picked apart if you keep it Safe, Simple and Adaptable.

In reply to Hans:

Stretchers are (pretty much) a waste of time. If you come across someone that needs carrying you should be summoning help not trying to effect a rescue yourself.

In reply to Hans:


It's already been cut down massively. Some of the stuff you used to have to do with the rope looks totally out of place now.

In reply to Hans:

Perhaps I'm well out of date, but my understanding of the rope work requirement of the ML is two fold.

a) Can you demonstrate adequate ability at confidence roping in situations where participants need it only for confidence purposes. (little objective danger)

and

b) Can you demonstrate safe belay techniques using one rope only to get a participant safely over an obstacle where the use of confidence rope technique alone would be unsafe ( some objective danger)

In reply to jezb1:

Aye, will do. I'm planning on only using overhand knots on the bight or rethreaded.

By Adaptable, do you mean for escaping the system, adjusting to different sizes of client and different types of anchor? Or am I missing something?

cheers!

In reply to DaveHK:

I guess it totally depends on a lot of things, but it might help someone for a bit if it takes a while for mountain rescue to appear. Again, it's one of those hope-it-never-happens-to-me scenarios! But yeah, I get your point...

In reply to Dave Perry:

No I think you're very much in date. I'm fine with 'B' option for one client. Adding more people to the scenario is where things may get rather complicated!

In reply to Hans:

When do you need to "escape the system" in ML ropework?

In reply to Hans:

I did a first aid course recently with a chap who was an MRT first responder. His view was that in the UK you will almost always be better off calling them out and sitting tight with the casualty. He'd also spoken to orthopedic surgeons who said that well meaning attempts at self rescue often exacerbated injuries.

In reply to Jim Walton:

If the client on the other end of the rope requires first aid, or if another party member is in a similar need. It is, of course, ridiculously unlikely, but the scenario could feasibly occur. Am I over-complicating all this horrifically??

Gut feeling is yes. I'm an idiot! lol

In reply to DaveHK:

Fair one. In the extremely unlikely event of being asked to demo it, I'm going to learn it though. Sod's Law and all that jazz

In reply to Cameron94:

Eight is not the max ratio?? What is it then, 10? 12?

I don't know why I'd be going up with a rope. Only if I realised bad nav had led me to a dead end and going up was a way to much better ground. A shaky justification though. Good question mate.

In reply to Hans:


Aye, you still need to know it. We spent an afternoon on improvised carries on assessment. Edit - and what it taught me was that I never wanted to do it for real!

In reply to Hans:


You are overcomplicating this massively!

Confidence roping with rope or sling or even just holding a rucksack strap is used on a client to make them feel a little more secure because they are nervous etc. There will be no great objective danger, likely to be a scree slope or wet grassy slope maybe.

Protecting a client up a short rocky step. Where it is not appropriate to spot. Some objective danger, likely to be a greasy or wet section, if they slip you need to be able to hold a fall. *IF* they hurt themselves somehow you'd just belay them down if they couldn't go up. Belays are going to be single point and solid beyond debate. You will either belay directly around the anchor or use yourself ie. body belay. Don't forget to keep yourself safe to and think about where and how you clients are attached to the rope. Simple things like getting them on the rope well away from an edge and putting a loop over themselves rather than making them potentially off balance stepping into a loop are considerations.

Protecting a client down a short rocky step, as above really.

Getting yourself down if you can't safely scramble down, SA or Classic abseil.

As you know, an ML shouldn't be planning to use the rope, if you are using it you've probably either wildly misjudged your clients or made a nav / route finding error.

I've got typing diarrhoea up there and I'm tired so sorry if it's come out incoherent!

ML refresher days can pay dividends, did I mention I run them!

In reply to DaveHK:

I did my training in 1979 and my assessment in 2012. We did a load more stuff on my training, rigging handrails and alpine style moving together amongst others. I went to do a refresher prior to assessment (it had been a while after all) and was a little surprised by how little there was to do.

Steve

In reply to jezb1:

Many thanks for that; good to get clarification. It's not nearly as complicated as I thought.

Yes, I've seen your website, but unfortunately my assessment is before your next course but thanks anyhow!

I might actually enjoy it...

H.

In reply to SteveD:

That is quite a gap there between training and assessment! Rigging handrails and moving together sounds fun, pity they took it out. But I can understand why if the protocol now is for the rope as an emergency thing only. Not like you have to build your own high adventure course or something to find a safe route off!!

In reply to Hans:

Check these are still relevant, they rope work element of the ML course changed fairly recently, I don't think the Thompson knot is assessed anymore as it encourages people to lower down too steep to long cliffs. Instead just rope round waist and the casualty down climbs. Check with Mountain Training though


Belays are still the same










All reasons to give to avoid getting the rope out and walking round.


Please tell me this wasn't in the UK? Or it was in a gorge or something like that? Don't do this on your ML. This is something a proper mountain guide uses to cross glaciers and go up certain terrain. There should be a lot more going on than may appear to the untrained eye.


I think the MT thought it was quite ridiculous which is why they change the syllabus.


In 'real life' this is the key. I have never had to use a rope in anger with a group other than confidence roping once. It is also referred to as emergency rope work I think, i.e. to be used in an emergency only.

In reply to Hans: I would say that if, as an ML, your choices and decisions have taken you and your clients into terrain where you are having to administer first aid half way up a short and relatively easy rock step then you are way way out of your depth and skill set. So far out of your depth that the sensible choice for an ML would be to realise that they are out of their depth and to sit tight and call for help.

ML rope work is very simplistic, you only need to know one knot, and it is designed that way. You don't need to be a climber, you don't need to have any knowledge of equalising anchors or any knowledge of what a "system" is. You need to be able to find an anchor, simply assess it's strength (how big is it? Does it move? Is it somewhere near the line of pull?) and then use it to aid you in bringing your mates up one at a time. How you use the anchor and the rope has a little bit of technical skill, but not much. ITS ALL ABOUT THE ANCHOR. If you choose a poor anchor on assessment then you are in trouble.

A good instructor can teach you how to select a good anchor in a matter of minutes. Each time you go out just keep testing yourself to find them. You'll get to learn how the rock lies and the best places to look for them.

The skills required to assess the ground and the people and the techniques to short or long rope are way beyond the ML syllabus. It is one of the most deferred days on MIA Assessment!

In reply to Hans:


Could be a record apparently, just didn't need the assessment in the meantime, I worked for OB for a while but that was an internal assessment and was out with mates otherwise. Only recently started working with Silver and Gold DofE and decided to get rid of the restrictions placed on me by the local board.

I quite enjoyed the assessment so am toying with the idea of doing MIA training and see how that goes.

In reply to Mark Reeves:

As for up to date, I checked with a well known centre a couple of days ago, and as I follow MTA developments relatively closely, I knew the Thompson knot is now no longer assessed, and that overhand knots are greatly encouraged.

No, I have not roped together students in the UK. I was just thinking of other situations in which I have used a rope, non-climbing. I'm analysing and 'revising' very very specifically for the MLS assessment, hence my post.

Thanks for your thoughts

In reply to Jim Walton:

True, sounds like a nightmare.

Yep, anchor selection has to be beyond doubt. As for rigging, I know I know, keep it simple!

Thanks for your advice

In reply to SteveD:

I presume you mean Outward Bound? I'd like that sort of work, but I still have not gotten round to my driving test. Probably never will either. Pity really! Good luck with MIA training, bet you'll enjoy it with so much experience under your belt.

In reply to Hans:

New to the site and I expect all the important stuff has been discussed.

Just an historical note on the end, that may be of interest - back in the day, ML 'security on steep ground' often involved rock climbing, posibly up to Diff. and maybe even training on Curved Ridge with a classic abseil off Crowberry Tower.

In reply to Hans:



Agreed

Agreed. But they might be a bit like that anyway as you have led them to the brink of a crag in crap weather....

Not sure about the 'casualty' bit. And not necessarily 'if you go wrong'. Might be better to think 'if someone needs it'.

'Indirect'? You are right. A waist belay can be uncomfortable for the belayer (if they are using an inappropriate rope and don't have sufficient 'padding' clothing. Luckily no-one has died from waist belaying over a period of 150+ years as far as I'm aware. So maybe it works ifr done properly.

Not if they have an appropriately controlled rope it doesn't. Maybe that's why you need to get the rope out?

Quite right. So practice speed and efficiency and evaluation of where it is appropriate to work 1:8

True.
No. If the rope is kept firmly taut the 'know' they are on a safety line. That's why 'confidence roping' is so called - it gives confidence when properly done.

And that is because the ML is not training you to be a guide. If you think that tying the whole party together to move simultaneously over 'rough ground' is appropriate to the ML you are seriously misconstruing what 'confidence roping' is.
Yep. The answer lies in the guidance for ML candidates. You are assisting people over ground where they are unsure. You are not 'lowering'; you are not 'belaying up' you are 'assisting'.

In reply to Hans:




>

Where has this come from? Mountain Training don't set ratios.