UKC

Just wanting to check what the attachment point on the landward side of the Tirolean traverse currently is.

Has anyone got current information?

The "Attachment Point" is just any number of cracks at ground level you can use that'll take trad gear. I doubt much has changed, unless someone's been along and stuck a bolt in it.

I'd be far more concerned about the other side...

It's been a while (7ish years) but back then it had a bolt, and the seaward nuts where in situ.

I'm planning to head up there this weekend so I can let you know then if that's not too late..

Really? Must have completely missed the bolt. We just used trad gear. The seaward side had a fairly dodgy looking peg that didn't exactly inspire confidence.

Just to clarify, I'm using "seaward" to mean further out to sea, ie on the stack.

Yep that's what I meant as well, maybe someone chopped it? I seem to recall this came up a while back and some people got quite cross. It was on the on the horizontal wave washed platform.

heres a shite photo of where it was (also i just checked at it was 2012 - god i'm old)

It's a bit strange, there's not exactly an absence of gear placements. I could at least understand the argument for putting one on the other side.

Can't remember the anchor details, but we didn't set it high enough and ended up in the sea on the way back. 

There is a static rope rapped around a block on the landward side (just a couple meters), but it needs backing up as its not really pointing in the right direction. A couple of hexes work perfectly which can be placed just beside it (dmm red and yellow?). 
 

The side of the stack is much worse. There are lots of pieces but poorly equalised and the load is on the worse pieces, its a nice surprise. However it does hold. It can also be easily backed up when you get across. This is all as of 22nd july.

I really do think someone should just put a couple of bolts in either side. It would be much cleaner and safer. All in all the stack could do with a good clean up. It even had a half rope hanging down the face which we removed.

It's possible I just missed it. It would never even have occurred to me to look to be honest, unless I'd known about it ahead of time.

here's how it should be done!

Aye well, someone has to get the tyrolean in the other side first. Guess who landed that job...

Top tip - try to not end up having to swim the channel when it's like this:

Good effort, I wussed out and got my mate to do it, it was a bloody freezing day as well.

Yeah , got to get there somehow, but don't forget you all have to get back.

Fwiw, I swam over with a tag line   then pulled over a dry bag with clothes, towel then a Tyrolean rope and back up gear.

Second came over on Tyrolean. Own gear land side, fixed gear backed up on the stack. Before doing route we took off all back up on stack and left rope doubled so it could be pulled from landside.

One short ab then a longer one led directly to the rope mid channel (free hanging abseil so get it right ). First person down pulls to shore , a bit tricky alternately releasing abseil prussik and with a clamp on the tyrolean rope.

Second abseiler can be assisted by tensioning abseil rope to shore.

Retreive all ropes . Works well apart from having at least two wet ropes to wash.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/7538425@N05/7716463394/

Mystery solved! I must admit I was a bit shocked to find it and did think it was an odd place for a bolt, especially an expansion one.

Wasn't there something about it being placed by an American slackliner -or maybe I just made that up......

Edit: just read previous post..... seems I didn't imagine it!

Plenty of places to stick trad gear to set it up and the faffing around is part of the adventure of the route! A fixed tyrolean point on either side would spoil the fun

Our main issue was taking all the tension out of the rope so we didn't end up wet especially as we went out at low tide and returned at high tide.

Eh no there should not. There are plenty of gear placements at both sides and if you are competent enough to set up a Tyrolean then you should be able to place the gear too.

I would happily sea a bolted lower off from the top though. It would be much cleaner and less conspicuous than the mountains of tat that are left behind.  

There should be no bolts at all - entirely inappropriate. Both anchors could be kept perfectly tidy without.

Currently the worst mess is the tyrolean anchor on the stack. Yes its easy to make an anchor on gear, but theres currently a load of pieces that need removing. So either the rusted crappy pieces needed to be regularly replaced or something longer lasting and discreet could be put in. Or there could be no anchor and people could just build their own every time which would be ideal but doubt it would happen. People removing the destroyed tat before adding more would make a huge difference as well.

Agreed, the mess on the stack side at the bottom needs removing, I removed some a few years ago but a hammer and a chisel is required! I also removed the insitu Tyrolean. Not been back since. There is no need for any fixed gear at the base of the stack. Plenty of natural protection is available.

What are your thoughts on a bolted anchor at the top?

I would be in favour as something has to be left there in order to retreat. I would rather a bolted anchor as I believe it would be far more discreet than the mounds of tat that get left behind.

Either that or a Inn Pin style chain but that would be quite big and unsightly. If a bolted lower off was put in would it get removed?

Unlikely to happen anyway as not many people will be arsed to cart a drill to the top!

Totally against. Appalling idea.

The tat could be kept tidy.

Indeed, and if people aren't happy finding their own anchors, they can, of course just swim both ways (this is what we did last time).

Simultaneous ab off each side. Would add to the adventure. 

Why do you think it is appalling in comparison to tat left at the top?

I think it would be far more discreet.

Do you think the chain on the Inn Pin is also Appalling?

Genuinely interested in your reasons, not looking for an argument. Cheers

The principle of not having permanent fixed drilled anchors removing any responsibility from climbers.

Yes, but I think the argument against outweighs that. 

I don't like it. It would be a good place for people and guides to educate the less experienced in replacing and maintaining discreet tat.

Cheers,

Not sure I agree but see your point.

Looks calmer than the day that we decided we weren’t that desperate to climb.

I don't think anyone has mentioned the obvious that the Tyrolean anchor on the stack is obviously not retrieved by those who set up the Tyrolean, so will always be in situ for the next party. Should it be fair swag for a swimming party?

Not necessarily so, the anchor can be retrieved and the last man can get back whilst staying dry at all states of the tide.

Why stop there. Maybe build a bridge with a handrail and lights. 

It was a great adventure when we did it and should remain so.

Really? How?

Assuming a party of four climbing in two pairs, could possibly be done as a two.

First person swims across, sets up Tyrolean anchor on the stack, others tension it on the landward side and then cross.

Climb the stack and abseil back to the base, 60m ropes needed. Do not pull the abseil ropes

Three people go back across the Tyrolean and release the tension from it, the person left on the stack (lets call him Fred) releases that end of the Tyrolean rope, removes any gear and then fastens the end of both abseil ropes to the stack end of the Tyrolean rope. Fred then uses his belay device or a prussik to take up any slack in the abseil ropes so his feet are just touching the ground.

The people on the landward side then pull the Tyrolean rope, ideally through a pulley or similar attached to one of the anchors they used to set up the Tyrolean. Fred is pulled across until he is over the landward side at which point he lowers himself to the ground.

Do not let go of the abseil ropes at this point!! It is then possible to pull the ropes, unfortunately one of them will get wet but it beats a repeat swim at the end of the day.

Worked a treat when we did it.

Brilliant! Of course only works because if the stack. In that case there is no excuse for any messy tat, let alone a bolt.....

As of Friday when I was there, the only in situ gear was a rotten cluster of tat/pegs on the seaward side.

We swam over to the left hand side (after the P1 traverse) and set up a rope to ferry the gear across which worked really well. I loved the fact there was nothing in situ for us to use for the traverse, hope it stays that way!

Thanks for all the advice. Climbed this and Am Buachaille over the last week.

It's really good that this is now bolt free. I was massively disappointed when I turned up in 2011 and found a bolt and in situ Tyrolean. It totally reduced the experience. This time there was swimming which added a lot.

How did you find Am Buchaille compared to Stoer?

Hard to say really. Its quite a bit more committing as the approach is significantly more involved. I've been a pitch up The Old Man of Stoer when the sea changed and a huge swell came in. With the tyrolean in place escape was scary but possible with the sea washing over the tyrolean. I'd hate to have the same thing happen on Am Buachaille!

The climbing on Am Buachaille was dirtier and the rock was a little less solid but not by much. It is a bit bold on the lower section with a badly protected section to gain the first belay. If it was dry it would probably be academic. In the post morning rainstorm damp it felt quite full on.

I think on a good day it would feel easier.