UKC

Hi,

I have been climbing indoors for about 1.5 years, mostly bottom roping but have also done a few sports climbs too. I have been attempting to extend my knowledge by reading Libby Peters book so that I can venture outside, practicing outdoors setting up anchors on top of a 45 degree (as opposed to vertical) mountain side.

Now the instructor at the wall I'm at was showing how to direct belay from the anchor at the top using an ATC style device with teeth on one side. The ATC was clipped into the master point at the top via a biner and the lead rope fed through as normal down to the climber below. I was attached to a separate anchor to hold me in place. The position of the belay anchor meant that I had bend down or sit to even remotely entertain breaking if a fall occurred. In addition to this, once the climber got to the top, he then wanted to be lowered back to the ground. This didn't feel safe at all to me, even though the rope was in the brake position, I felt that most of his weight was held in my hands and arms only and would quickly fatigue on a high cliff.

My question is, was this a safe way of belaying from the top? Everywhere I have read typically mentioned not to use a manual braking device when direct of anchor and should be using a guide style device that will auto lock, or use a redirect so the anchor is taking most of the weight.

Thanks

In reply to CCob:

Someone is mixed up here! Anyway if you are bringing up a second then putting the ATC direct into the belay is fine as long as your brake hand is ABOVE the device since this is identical to normal belaying. Go back to the instructor and get him/her to clarify matters before about thirty people post more confusion!

In reply to CCob:

Well....

There is nothing inherently 'wrong' about using a basic 'plate' device on a direct anchor. IF the anchor is bombproof. But you need to be sure that you can pull the brake rope up past the belay device to get maximum braking. And this means that, with a stance behind the device, simply taking in the rope as your partner climbs is a total pain. That's why the italian hitch or a 'guide plate' are preferred in that situation; you can be below the belay device and take in easily.

If you are belaying someone in a direct anchor situation there is no way it should feel that, when lowering, they are hanging off you. They should be hanging off the belay with you simply controlling the rope. But I will admit I'm struggling to envisage the situation you describe on a wall.......

In reply to jimtitt:


Only 29 to go then......

In reply to CCob:

Having an ATC clipped directly to the master point and not in guide mode is fine IMHO, though you should be clipped in, in such a way that the device can't be pulled away from you if it is weighted. Having the device a little below you so it is not too awkward to reach down for rope, but you can still pull the dead end of the rope towards/up to you to lock it off is good. Hopefully that made sense, but really it would just be easier to learn how to use guide mode

In reply to jsmcfarland:


How do you put an ATC into 'guide mode'?

28....

In reply to Andy Say:

As you know, an ATC can be the guide version, doesn't mean everyone will bother to write ATC Guide.

In reply to jezb1:


Or even ATC XP Guide

In reply to CCob:

Use a guide style belay device or redirect. A direct belay at the top isn't the best idea. The direct belay when bottom roping is fine because firstly, the rope passes over a carabiner or similar before reaching the climber. Second, the belayer can move freely. The first adds more friction in the system, the second reduces the impact on the belay device (and thus your hands).

In reply to Andy Say:


Ah, I should have been more specific. The wall I climb at has a shelf at the top also, so it allows you to practice bringing up a second from the top.

In reply to JuneBob:


Yea, this is what I believe I am feeling, less friction in the system. I'm so used to belaying from the bottom with the rope going through a biner at the top then connected to the climber. With this setup I could confidently hold the brake with one hand (not that I do), but with the direct anchor method from the top, whilst I probably could have held it with one hand it wouldn't have been comfortable

In reply to CCob:
Don't get the whole direct belay thing, slow, technically more difficult to arrange, why not just clip the belay device to the belay loop on the harness, job done.

In reply to CCob:

If you're lowering from a direct belay you can redirect the inactive rope through another krab behind the powerpoint, works really well.

In reply to John Kelly:

The instructors argument was that it's better as you are not part of the system so you can escape in an emergency situation to help your climber.

In reply to jezb1:

So is that not the same the redirect method? I guess the difference is the location of the ATC coming of your harness or the powerpoint.

In reply to CCob:

I think that using an ordinary plate direct on the anchor is generally speaking a bad idea. As Jim says, the brake strand has to be above the device in order to brake, so this means the positioning of the device is quite important; it certainly can't be too high. But if it is too low, then it gets hard to take in rope, so there is a fairly limited range of positions that will work.

Then there is the question of hand position. In order to pull rope through the device effectively, the brake strand would normally be gripped thumb-up. But it is quite awkward to lift the strand up and brake in this position. On the other hand, it is even more awkward to take in rope with the brake hand gripping thumb-down.

The combination of all these awkward things and the need to have the device in a rather limited range of positions means that, compared to the several other available options for belaying which are just as easy to implement, using a plate in non-guide mode directly on the anchor is an inferior solution.

In reply to CCob:

nothing wrong in principle, but it's more a question of if people new to outdoor climbing can make a judgement call on the quality of anchor & stance set up required and also make sure they are safe themselves whilst belaying. Sometimes being integral to the system is a good way of keeping novices safe!

In reply to Andy Say:

Just 21 to go....

In reply to jezb1:


I guess I noticed the words 'should be using a guide style device that will auto lock' which indicated to me that the ATC was NOT an ATC Guide

In reply to jimtitt:

Are you sure there isn't an ATC XP Guide Pro 4, Jim?

In reply to CCob:
Escape the system

I've been climbing quite a while and I don't know of anyone who has had to do that in anger

In reply to CCob:


Over-complicated bollocks. It is all so easy to loose sight of what actually works in the real world by trying to come up with an answer to problems that never occur.

As has been said above; if you are at the top of a pitch then attach the belay device to yourself rather than attach directly to the anchor(s).

In reply to rgold:

the post I wish I had written. End the thread here, case closed : )

In reply to CCob:

If you have the standard ATC, which it sounds like, I would say you should never ever belay with it direct from the anchors. I don't normally bother with threads like this, but if I understand you correctly, what you are suggesting sounds like it could quite possibly kill someone.

This is from an old blog post:
"Rather alarmingly, we saw a young Czech visitor fall about 35 mtrs down the cliff, utterly miraculously coming to a halt literally a metre above the ground. He was bashed and bruised but otherwise OK. He had been climbing on a top rope that his partners had supposedly attached via a munter/Italian friction hitch [directly from the anchor] at the top of the cliff. Clearly it wasn't a munter hitch because when he fell he didn't stop until something happened to snag. This, I'm pretty certain, saved his life and - as we had only just arrived at the cliff - stopped our weekend coming to a rather abrupt and unpleasant early end.

Even if you are 'just' top roping, take care out there kids. He was very lucky - if you f**k up just once you may well die. Check, check, then check again. " http://lightfromthenorth.blogspot.co.uk/2007/09/autumn-climbing.html What you are suggesting could quite possibly end in exactly the same events. Please don't do it. It's nearly 10 years ago, but I can still see that guy bouncing down the cliff. Never want to see something like that again.

In reply to Andy Say:


I´ ve got an ATC XP Guide Evo 1 and 2. I like cutting bits off and welding bits on to see if they work better.

In reply to CCob:
If you have the standard ATC, which it sounds like, I would say you should never ever belay with it direct from the anchors. I don't normally bother with threads like this, but if I understand you correctly, what you are suggesting sounds like it could quite possibly kill someone.


I have just returned from climbing having done precisely this . Its fine provided its positioned so it can be locked off . The OP sounds like it was poorly positioned.

In reply to CCob:
What is the difference between belaying from the top off your harness and belaying off a fixed anchor point next to your anchor point? Nothing (except that it is easier to escape the system in the latter case, and the load will not go onto you).

The advantage of belaying off your harness is that you will always have the belay plate in a position where you can safely belay with it. This is not true for all anchor points, but that doesn't invalidate direct belaying off a suitable anchor point. Similar (but possibly less critical) concerns apply to the placement of a guide mode plate...

Guide mode is great for bringing climbers up, but it is NOT a great solution for lowering. If I found myself next to a suitable fixed anchor point and knew I was likely to have to lower but also wanted to be able to easily escape the system then belaying in non-guide mode directly from the anchor is probably the better solution. As already described, redirecting the brake rope through a krab on the anchor makes lowering easier.

This is _not_ a normal situation. Normally in trad a) you aren't expecting to lower, and guide mode is usually the better solution (or a standard belay off the harness for simplicity). This is IMO why you rarely see this. I do often belay direct off a quick belay when moving together but I just use an Italian hitch since I am not expecting the rope to be loaded.

To respond to something in the OP, it doesn't matter if you sit down/bend/stand up to belay if you are not part of the system (i.e. are belaying directly off an anchor) as long as you can safely operate the belay plate and you will not shock load the anchors if you slip - ideally with no slack in your cowstail and do not climb above the anchor. For anything other than a bottom belay, the correct choice of position (sitting, standing etc) depends on the position of the anchors and the expected load. Sitting down is common at the top of a route, standing on a stance with high gear.

Let the debate continue...

In reply to CCob:

Honestly I'm a bit surprised as all this seems to be a bit complex for someone new to climbing and not the way it's normally done.

In most single or short multi-pitch scenarios the leader climbs, sets up a belay, attaches to the belay and then belays from their belay loop or the rope loop which is attached to their harness.

Now I know there are good reason to use a direct belay, but for a beginner this sounds like it's making life difficult?

Thanks everyone for you comments. I'm certainly going to go with what I feel comfortable, and personally I didn't like belaying that way. Or as others have said, positioning of the anchors were incorrect, which gave me that feeling of something not being correct.

In reply to TobyA:

Toby,

I think it is all becoming a bit confused. The scenario with the bouncing Czech (sorry) you describe sounds like a 'bottom rope system' with belayer at the base of the route, an Italian/Munter used at the top to provide braking force? And of course such a hitch used that way (belayer below the hitch) gives very poor braking. But for the victim to fall until something snags sounds less like a system error than someone just letting go of the rope. Of course the first can leads to the second

And, of course, if the belay device is clipped to the rope loop of the tie-in rather than into the harness loop it is easy to actually be in a 'direct belaying situation' - any load generated can actually by-pass the belayer and go straight to the anchors. Isn't it?

The teaching given to the OP sounds a bit like a case of 'instructoritis' with someone passing on what they have been told is a good way to rig a top-rope (i.e. belayer at the top) for novices rather than imparting common climbing practice.

In reply to CCob:


Listen to that feeling! If it doesn't feel right then there is probably something wrong. Never belay someone until you are happy with the setup as ultimately if you are belaying then you are responsible for the person on the end of the rope.

I've setup direct belays before as an exercise but in almost 20 years of cragging I've never felt the need to set one up in anger. So although it depends a bit on exactly what you're doing chances are you don't need to do this so you're right to stick with what you're comfortable with.

In reply to Andy Say:


I wonder if the instructor at a local indoor wall who told me that I should not connect my child to a top rope via a screwgate as it's unsafe (despite this being their normal practice for their organised birthday parties), has the same 'instructoritis'??

In reply to TobyA:



Quite a lot less lethal than a non-friction friction hitch. And, in fact, if done appropriately not lethal at all. Think it through, Toby. If the non-guide device is positioned in the same place as normal, with the ropes configured as normal, but is attached directly to the anchors instead of 'to' the belayer there is no real safety issue.

In reply to Andy Say:


You would almost have to be above (or behind if you are on a flat topout) whatever the belay point is so that you can hold the dead rope behind the ATC to hold a fall, as you would if it were on your harness as normal. I most often use my belay device guide style when topping out and there being a solid easy to use belay point - most often a tree. You then tie yourself in so that you can see down the route and pull the ropes in as the second comes up - see for example youtube.com/watch?v=m6UnXD_ZHXo& Being in that position with a classic ATC would be madness, so instead you would have to be behind the belay point - presumably attached to a second higher belay point? What on earth would be the point? Why not just belay off your harness?

In reply to TobyA:


Nope. You need to be above/behind the belay plate. That does not need to be clipped directly into to the anchor points (sling or rope extension?) which can be behind you.

'(I) most often use my belay device guide style when topping out and there being a solid easy to use belay point - most often a tree. You then tie yourself in so that you can see down the route and pull the ropes in as the second comes up:

I know how a guide plate works, ta.

'Why not just belay off your harness?'

Is what I said about 1000 posts ago. I am merely pointing out that death will not inevitably occur if you use a standard ATC directly off the anchor. It's not necessarily lethal.

In reply to Andy Say:

Right, fairynuff - but the OP talked about clipping the ATC into the power point of the belay. Yes, I take your point you could use a long sling to make that power point below you/in front of you, but again why on earth would you? (or not you - anyone..?) and I don't think that is what the OP was asking about in the first place anyway.

So, don't want to get into an argument with you or anyone else, but if I understood correctly what the OP said, it still sounds to me like a terrible idea to me. The experience of watching that kid fall so far due to a messed up direct belay from an anchor was really rather upsetting!

In reply to Andy Say:

True as far as it goes, but inevitability is not the point. Because of all the issues raised earlier in the thread, using a standard ATC directly off the anchor is more likely to be lethal than other methods that are no harder to implement, and it is that greater likelihood of bad outcomes that disqualifies it.

It can be used for lowering if the brake strand is redirected through a higher carabiner, but there's no good reason to use it on the anchor for belaying.

In reply to springfall2008:


It is, I think, generally accepted that tying in is safer than clipping in with a screwgate. There have been reports arguing that single screwgates should not be used, as screwgates do unscrew themselves and accidents have occurred due to this. Personally I would use either back-to-back screwgates (I have seen this done/been required to do it when helping once), a triple-action twist lock (personal choice - super quick!) or a Belaymaster style krab that cannot unscrew once the clip is closed.

But walls with 30 kids to get through quickly, all on the same route, make their own safety judgements. It makes sense to require individual climbers to (normally) tie in.

In reply to Andy Say:


Well actually if it's an Italian hitch you want to be belaying below the knot (although it doesn't actually matter than much) so it is quite possible to have an Italian at the anchor and belay from the bottom. Personally I think it's barking mad as if the hitch jams or whatever you can't get to it, but if the hitch is tied correctly it will work fine. I have seen it done in caving for 'life-lining' (i.e. belaying) on ladder climbs where apparently it works quite well with fat stiff caving rope as it doesn't tend to jam. First person down a ladder gets a direct belay off the Italian at the anchor; they then belay the rest of the people down, and there is no need to change the knot/anchor (just pull rope through). Reverse for going back up.

But then cavers do all sorts of mad things sometimes like belaying/climbing wearing only belts instead of harnesses. Some put pulleys at the top of bottom-ropes instead of just a crab. I've seen people belay from the top of a ladder off their belt without anchoring to anything (since they don't have anything other than a belt and an HMS, although this is actually OK if the anchor is still above them). Plus everything gets done with Italian hitches, since you try putting a grubby fluffy 11mm rope into a normal belay plate :P

[WARNING HYPOTHETICAL UNTRIED SETUP WHICH WILL DEFINITELY PROBABLY KILL YOU AND EVERYONE YOU KNOW] Try it with a normal belay plate and obviously it won't work at all unless the dead rope is redirected through a higher carabiner, at which point you have to ask what on earth are you doing. They only advantage I can see is that you only need one harness between a pair of climbers...

In reply to andrewmcleod:


You are, of course, completely right. I don't know what I was thinking. Friction hitch: below. Belay plate: behind.

But, equally of course, no matter what hitch you use leaving an Italian in charge at the anchor spells danger.

In reply to rgold:


I'll take that as a positive

I was just trying to counterbalance the idea that 'you should never ever belay with it direct from the anchors......if I understand you correctly, what you are suggesting sounds like it could quite possibly kill someone'. It's difficult to be so black and white.

But look at my earlier posts to see that I do, at bottom, agree with you that its not ideal in a normal climbing situation.

In reply to andrewmcleod:

I guess the point is the risk is even higher with a birthday party full of kids and a 1-6 instructor ratio than a 1-1 ratio that I had with my daughter. In theory a screwgate could fail, but then in theory the rope or the anchor could fail also, it's just rather unlikely.

Personally quite happy to follow climbing centre rules, but they need to lead by example!

In reply to springfall2008:



Don't forget that some instructors know how to do up screwgates much better than amateurs do.

In reply to Andy Say:


This is half the point. The other half is that it is much, much more of a PITA to tie a load of kids on when they are all doing the same route than it is for climbers who are moving around the centre to tie in. It is also more appropriate for top-roping novices (where a bit of rope tension keeps the screwgate properly aligned) than experienced climbers top-roping with a bit of slack, or leading.

There are no absolutes in safety, and sometimes 'it's a PITA' is a valid reason to make a _small_ compromise.

In reply to CCob:

The method you have described only works with specific belay devices, such as the BD ATC Guide. Here's a tutorial link of how to setup and use it youtube.com/watch?v=KM5c9wlTReo&

In reply to AndyCook:

a) you need to read the thread
b) he is not describing guide mode and this method can be done on any standard device; for whether it is a good idea or not, read the thread!

In reply to andrewmcleod:

So answer me this, in using a standard non-ATC Guide style plate what is to stop the seconder hitting the ground if say the belayer at the top of the pitch was hit by a rock, therefore unable to hold the rope in its locked position and the seconder fell off the wall?

IMO you should only use the method of that particular instructor if you are absolutely sure the belayer is not in any risk of not being able to safely perform his/her role, i.e. in a climbing centre

In reply to AndyCook:
9/10 for effort, I nearly responded to this :P

(although I do look forwards to the days when autolocking belay devices are both better than the manual devices in every way and used universally)

Edit: 8/10, this isn't your first post on the thread so technically still counts as returning to the scene of the crime :P