This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Hi Everyone,
I'm from Singapore originally but started climbing when I started uni in the UK. Only recently, I saw a post on facebook from one of the climbing gyms in Singapore about the ban of ATC in some of the climbing gyms in Singapore.
https://www.facebook.com/ClimbAsia/photos/a.336984574412.152343.18140806941...
I'm outraged beyond words, as I was looking forward to going back to climb with some friends. What do you guys think about this?
I'm from Singapore originally but started climbing when I started uni in the UK. Only recently, I saw a post on facebook from one of the climbing gyms in Singapore about the ban of ATC in some of the climbing gyms in Singapore.
https://www.facebook.com/ClimbAsia/photos/a.336984574412.152343.18140806941...
I'm outraged beyond words, as I was looking forward to going back to climb with some friends. What do you guys think about this?
1
1
In reply to cindylmy:
It's not stopping you, just get a different device.
I'm not sure it's necessary, but outrage seems a bit excessive to me.
It's not stopping you, just get a different device.
I'm not sure it's necessary, but outrage seems a bit excessive to me.
Post edited at 16:01
12
In reply to cindylmy:
"Since ATCs are deemed dangerous, can I get a full refund on the device I bought from your store?"
"Since ATCs are deemed dangerous, can I get a full refund on the device I bought from your store?"
7
In reply to marsbar:
It's just the fact that people now learning to climb in SG will be thinking that 'oh, my grigir will catch the climber's fall' so people will start to become negligent
It's just the fact that people now learning to climb in SG will be thinking that 'oh, my grigir will catch the climber's fall' so people will start to become negligent
1
In reply to cindylmy:
Except when they're 'Outraged beyond words'
> Singaporeans always have a good sense of humour
Except when they're 'Outraged beyond words'
4
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
yes the irony, we have a complain culture. but if climbing gyms in the uk have the usage of ATCs taken away from you guys, how would you feel? (of course, not applicable if you're a ABDs convert)
yes the irony, we have a complain culture. but if climbing gyms in the uk have the usage of ATCs taken away from you guys, how would you feel? (of course, not applicable if you're a ABDs convert)
1
In reply to cindylmy:
IMO it's only a matter of time before all walls insist that an Auto Assisted braking device is used. I believe that some walls in the USA already do so.
Al
IMO it's only a matter of time before all walls insist that an Auto Assisted braking device is used. I believe that some walls in the USA already do so.
Al
1
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
Apart from the ones in the OP, of course
> Except when they're 'Outraged beyond words'
Apart from the ones in the OP, of course
1
In reply to cindylmy:
Installing ABS, seatbelts and airbags in cars resulted in fewer casualties, I think the same thing would happen if everyone used an assisted device for lead belaying. Maybe you would get a few people being more negligent but with well designed assisted devices it would still be safer overall.
I don't see any reason for a ban that stops people using devices they are completely familiar with or experienced people choosing for themselves but I think walls should start using one of the newer assisted devices on induction courses so it becomes the default for new climbers.
> It's just the fact that people now learning to climb in SG will be thinking that 'oh, my grigir will catch the climber's fall' so people will start to become negligent
Installing ABS, seatbelts and airbags in cars resulted in fewer casualties, I think the same thing would happen if everyone used an assisted device for lead belaying. Maybe you would get a few people being more negligent but with well designed assisted devices it would still be safer overall.
I don't see any reason for a ban that stops people using devices they are completely familiar with or experienced people choosing for themselves but I think walls should start using one of the newer assisted devices on induction courses so it becomes the default for new climbers.
2
14
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
But increased casualties amongst vulnerable road users. Law of unintended consequences.
> Installing ABS, seatbelts and airbags in cars resulted in fewer casualties
But increased casualties amongst vulnerable road users. Law of unintended consequences.
9
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
There were lots of casualties prior to that though. And while there are fewer now, there are still lots.
The number of casualties caused by the use of non "assisted" belay devices in UK leading walls in the history of indoor leading so far is approximately (or perhaps precisely) zero. Which is a number rather more difficult to reduce.
So much so that you could probably be forgiven for thinking it's not worth walls pissing off large numbers of their clients by introducing some arbitrary control measure based on the assumption that "assisted" belay devices are necessarily safer, based in turn on precisely no scientific research whatsoever.
> Installing ABS, seatbelts and airbags in cars resulted in fewer casualties,
There were lots of casualties prior to that though. And while there are fewer now, there are still lots.
The number of casualties caused by the use of non "assisted" belay devices in UK leading walls in the history of indoor leading so far is approximately (or perhaps precisely) zero. Which is a number rather more difficult to reduce.
So much so that you could probably be forgiven for thinking it's not worth walls pissing off large numbers of their clients by introducing some arbitrary control measure based on the assumption that "assisted" belay devices are necessarily safer, based in turn on precisely no scientific research whatsoever.
8
In reply to cindylmy:
I really don't understand these sorts of things.
If you're competent using a friction device it's perfectly safe, likewise if you're competent using an assisted locking device it's perfectly safe.
If you're incompetent using a friction device it's dangerous and if you're incompetent using an assisted locking device it's also dangerous (though less so).
The dangerous situation is someone belaying with any device they're not competent with. I can't see how banning one device improves that.
That being said I'm not outraged beyond words.
I really don't understand these sorts of things.
If you're competent using a friction device it's perfectly safe, likewise if you're competent using an assisted locking device it's perfectly safe.
If you're incompetent using a friction device it's dangerous and if you're incompetent using an assisted locking device it's also dangerous (though less so).
The dangerous situation is someone belaying with any device they're not competent with. I can't see how banning one device improves that.
That being said I'm not outraged beyond words.
9
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Dare I ask why?
Who gains from this?
Apart from the manufacturers of costly belay devices
> but I think walls should start using one of the newer assisted devices on induction courses so it becomes the default for new climbers.
Dare I ask why?
Who gains from this?
Apart from the manufacturers of costly belay devices
5
In reply to deepsoup:
There's an awful lot more car journeys per year than indoor lead belays.
Where do you get that statistic? I agree there's probably very few disabling/fatal incidents because the outcome is not going to be a free-fall drop but it seems highly unlikely there are no injuries at all.
Pretty much every manufacturer of belay devices now offers an assisted model and they have presumably spent quite a bit of R&D money developing them. The people who have access to the accident statistics (i.e. insurance companies and walls) in many countries seem to think there are safety benefits.
I don't agree with a ban. But at some point it in the near future it will make sense to make assisted devices the default taught to new climbers in induction courses.
> There were lots of casualties prior to that though. And while there are fewer now, there are still lots.
There's an awful lot more car journeys per year than indoor lead belays.
> The number of casualties caused by the use of non "assisted" belay devices in UK leading walls in the history of indoor leading so far is approximately (or perhaps precisely) zero.
Where do you get that statistic? I agree there's probably very few disabling/fatal incidents because the outcome is not going to be a free-fall drop but it seems highly unlikely there are no injuries at all.
> Which is a number rather more difficult to reduce. So much so that you could probably be forgiven for thinking it's not worth walls pissing off large numbers of their clients by introducing some arbitrary control measure based on the assumption that "assisted" belay devices are necessarily safer, based in turn on precisely no scientific research whatsoever.
Pretty much every manufacturer of belay devices now offers an assisted model and they have presumably spent quite a bit of R&D money developing them. The people who have access to the accident statistics (i.e. insurance companies and walls) in many countries seem to think there are safety benefits.
I don't agree with a ban. But at some point it in the near future it will make sense to make assisted devices the default taught to new climbers in induction courses.
2
2
In reply to timjones:
An Edelrid MegaJul costs £27. There's hardly any price premium for the 'auto lock' on new devices like that and even for GriGris the cost of the belay device taking into account how long it lasts is peanuts compared with the other costs of indoor climbing - wall entrance, fuel/travel, shoes, ropes etc.
When ABS systems for cars got cheap and worked well after a while they became the default in new cars. We're getting to the same point with assistance in belay devices. Which doesn't mean old cars without ABS or old belay devices without assistance should be banned.
> Dare I ask why?Who gains from this?Apart from the manufacturers of costly belay devices
An Edelrid MegaJul costs £27. There's hardly any price premium for the 'auto lock' on new devices like that and even for GriGris the cost of the belay device taking into account how long it lasts is peanuts compared with the other costs of indoor climbing - wall entrance, fuel/travel, shoes, ropes etc.
When ABS systems for cars got cheap and worked well after a while they became the default in new cars. We're getting to the same point with assistance in belay devices. Which doesn't mean old cars without ABS or old belay devices without assistance should be banned.
1
4
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
You're still not explaining why it makes sense in your opinio
> There's an awful lot more car journeys per year than indoor lead belays. Where do you get that statistic? I agree there's probably very few disabling/fatal incidents because the outcome is not going to be a free-fall drop but it seems highly unlikely there are no injuries at all.Pretty much every manufacturer of belay devices now offers an assisted model and they have presumably spent quite a bit of R&D money developing them. The people who have access to the accident statistics (i.e. insurance companies and walls) in many countries seem to think there are safety benefits. I don't agree with a ban. But at some point it in the near future it will make sense to make assisted devices the default taught to new climbers in induction courses.
You're still not explaining why it makes sense in your opinio
3
In reply to timjones:
If you look at an Edelrid |MegaJul or one of its competitors then you have an assisted device which costs hardly any more than an ATC and has an obvious safety advantage. It's like ABS in cars, once the cost gets low enough the safer option takes over.
My guess is that over the next few years manufacturers will push for their new assisted devices to get more prominence in shops relative to ATCs and they will be what new climbers buy. Once the trend is established new climbers should be trained on the new devices.
> You're still not explaining why it makes sense in your opinio
If you look at an Edelrid |MegaJul or one of its competitors then you have an assisted device which costs hardly any more than an ATC and has an obvious safety advantage. It's like ABS in cars, once the cost gets low enough the safer option takes over.
My guess is that over the next few years manufacturers will push for their new assisted devices to get more prominence in shops relative to ATCs and they will be what new climbers buy. Once the trend is established new climbers should be trained on the new devices.
Post edited at 22:28
In reply to cindylmy:
After 35 years the Sticht plate I found whilst hitching back from Trem is still going strong. I have replaced the string once and the marker tape twice.
After 35 years the Sticht plate I found whilst hitching back from Trem is still going strong. I have replaced the string once and the marker tape twice.
10
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Nothing I can copy/paste on here, just conversations with the managers of a couple of my local walls at odd times over the years. Prompted, I think, by reading threads on here not unlike this one. If you were serious about eliminating injuries from indoor walls, you do better by *miles* to leave the belayers alone and ban bouldering.
You're the one proposing (or perhaps I should say defending) a draconian ban on a perfectly usable bit of kit, the assertion is all yours really, I rather think the onus to back it up with statistics is on you.
I can't really see why the insurance companies would care that much btw. They are generally only bothered by the bottom line and even if accidents with dodgy belaying were commonplace, claims would still be rare.
Unless they are novices under instruction, a piece of equipment supplied by the wall is defective or something like that there is no liability for the wall arising out of one climber dropping another and no claim for the insurance company to pay out.
> Where do you get that statistic? I agree there's probably very few disabling/fatal incidents because the outcome is not going to be a free-fall drop but it seems highly unlikely there are no injuries at all.
Nothing I can copy/paste on here, just conversations with the managers of a couple of my local walls at odd times over the years. Prompted, I think, by reading threads on here not unlike this one. If you were serious about eliminating injuries from indoor walls, you do better by *miles* to leave the belayers alone and ban bouldering.
You're the one proposing (or perhaps I should say defending) a draconian ban on a perfectly usable bit of kit, the assertion is all yours really, I rather think the onus to back it up with statistics is on you.
I can't really see why the insurance companies would care that much btw. They are generally only bothered by the bottom line and even if accidents with dodgy belaying were commonplace, claims would still be rare.
Unless they are novices under instruction, a piece of equipment supplied by the wall is defective or something like that there is no liability for the wall arising out of one climber dropping another and no claim for the insurance company to pay out.
4
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Regardless of whether the ban has stemmed from insurance or whether it's just management trying to reduce risk in their wall. It's probably safe to say that the stats show more accidents occur when the parties involved are using a 'non-assisted belay device' (N-ABD).
It's likely that there are a larger number of people that use N-ABDs at climbing walls. The greater number of people using these devises obviously going to mean a greater number accidents. Equally, the people who are willing to spend their money on ABDs (assisted) are generally people who are committed to climbing, have taken the time to learn good safety techniques and usually have more experience under their belt. Again, this demographic of people are obviously, less likely to have accidents.
With the ban, all the will end up with it more people who are less experienced and knowledgable using devises that still may or may not help stop a fall. ABDs are debatably more complex than N-ABDs.
Another (I presume) unforeseen problem the managers are now going to face is the training of all their staff to recognise and use every different type of 'assisted' belay devise on the market. At least the majority of N-ABDs use the ordinary up to move rope/down to lock off technique so it's easy to spot if someone is belaying unsafely.
But, it's their walls, they can do what they like.
Regardless of whether the ban has stemmed from insurance or whether it's just management trying to reduce risk in their wall. It's probably safe to say that the stats show more accidents occur when the parties involved are using a 'non-assisted belay device' (N-ABD).
It's likely that there are a larger number of people that use N-ABDs at climbing walls. The greater number of people using these devises obviously going to mean a greater number accidents. Equally, the people who are willing to spend their money on ABDs (assisted) are generally people who are committed to climbing, have taken the time to learn good safety techniques and usually have more experience under their belt. Again, this demographic of people are obviously, less likely to have accidents.
With the ban, all the will end up with it more people who are less experienced and knowledgable using devises that still may or may not help stop a fall. ABDs are debatably more complex than N-ABDs.
Another (I presume) unforeseen problem the managers are now going to face is the training of all their staff to recognise and use every different type of 'assisted' belay devise on the market. At least the majority of N-ABDs use the ordinary up to move rope/down to lock off technique so it's easy to spot if someone is belaying unsafely.
But, it's their walls, they can do what they like.
2
In reply to cindylmy:
Could somebody explain all these acronyms to me please? The last time I climbed on an artificial wall we used a figure 8 attached to the harness of the "second", who took in the rope as the "leader" climbed to the top of the wall then lowered him back to the floor in a controlled way. It seemed to work OK.
Any why is the OP so outraged at the ban on one of these bits of equipment? (Or is it just a ban on acronyms?)
Could somebody explain all these acronyms to me please? The last time I climbed on an artificial wall we used a figure 8 attached to the harness of the "second", who took in the rope as the "leader" climbed to the top of the wall then lowered him back to the floor in a controlled way. It seemed to work OK.
Any why is the OP so outraged at the ban on one of these bits of equipment? (Or is it just a ban on acronyms?)
1
In reply to Rigid Raider:
I'm just using the acronyms they used:
N-ABD - non-assisted belay device. ie ATC, bug, stitchplate, reverso
ABD - assisted belay device. ie Gri-gri, click-up, Revo
The only other one I can see in this thread is:
ATC - Air traffic controller.
You've obviously been doing this climbing malarky wrong for a long time mate!
I'm just using the acronyms they used:
N-ABD - non-assisted belay device. ie ATC, bug, stitchplate, reverso
ABD - assisted belay device. ie Gri-gri, click-up, Revo
The only other one I can see in this thread is:
ATC - Air traffic controller.
> "second", who took in the rope as the "leader" climbed to the top
You've obviously been doing this climbing malarky wrong for a long time mate!
1
In reply to Fruit:
You might want to be careful with that.... I had a similarly old sticht plate acquired in a similar way and one day dropped it while sorting my kit and it broke in half! Luckily I was at home and not at the bottom of a sea cliff.
You might want to be careful with that.... I had a similarly old sticht plate acquired in a similar way and one day dropped it while sorting my kit and it broke in half! Luckily I was at home and not at the bottom of a sea cliff.
1
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
It's at least double the price. That isn't hardly more than, it's significantly more than.
> If you look at an Edelrid |MegaJul or one of its competitors then you have an assisted device which costs hardly any more than an ATC
It's at least double the price. That isn't hardly more than, it's significantly more than.
In reply to Matt Vigg:
Well said. Same goes for some of the old delapidated harnesses I see some old timers wearing, who should know better. Old ropes just tend to get a bit stiffer with any serious risk (other than chemical attack) usually obvious from visible damage but old well used harnesses contain seriously weakened webbing, which can snap.
Well said. Same goes for some of the old delapidated harnesses I see some old timers wearing, who should know better. Old ropes just tend to get a bit stiffer with any serious risk (other than chemical attack) usually obvious from visible damage but old well used harnesses contain seriously weakened webbing, which can snap.
1
1
In reply to deepsoup:
I think I said about 5 times in the posts above that I am not in favour of banning ATCs.
My point was that now assisted devices are not significantly more expensive they will most likely gradually replace ATCs as the default choice for new climbers, just like ABS has become standard on new cars, and that at some point when this trend is established walls should start using them in induction courses.
> You're the one proposing (or perhaps I should say defending) a draconian ban on a perfectly usable bit of kit, the assertion is all yours really, I rather think the onus to back it up with statistics is on you.
I think I said about 5 times in the posts above that I am not in favour of banning ATCs.
My point was that now assisted devices are not significantly more expensive they will most likely gradually replace ATCs as the default choice for new climbers, just like ABS has become standard on new cars, and that at some point when this trend is established walls should start using them in induction courses.
In reply to Dell:
https://www.bananafingers.co.uk/belays-c-37.html?page=2&sort=5a
About 22 quid for various varieties of Jul vs 14 quid for ATCs. Given that it costs a tenner to get into a climbing wall and they last for years that doesn't seem too significant. It's a price difference that can easily be overcome in the mind of a new climber looking for their first belay device by training the sales people to say the more expensive one is safer.
> It's at least double the price. That isn't hardly more than, it's significantly more than.
https://www.bananafingers.co.uk/belays-c-37.html?page=2&sort=5a
About 22 quid for various varieties of Jul vs 14 quid for ATCs. Given that it costs a tenner to get into a climbing wall and they last for years that doesn't seem too significant. It's a price difference that can easily be overcome in the mind of a new climber looking for their first belay device by training the sales people to say the more expensive one is safer.
In reply to Rigid Raider:
More than 20 years ago?
Indoor walls nowadays generally have a fairly large area (say about 50% of the wall space, maybe a bit more in a big place) given over to indoor leading in which the climber clips runners as they go, like outdoor sport climbing.
Describing a climbing partnership indoors as 'leader' and 'second' is very outdated. You're not a 'leader' unless you're leading a route these days, and nobody is a 'second'. A partnership consists of a climber and belayer, or perhaps leader and belayer if the climber is actually leading.
I tried belaying with a fig-8 briefly, while it was briefly trendy back in the early to mid '90s. (In the style of the time, which was to use it as a kind of over-sized sticht plate.) Now there was a belay device that really was dangerous - *way* too slick even with fat furry 11mm ropes, and with the potential to break open the gate of a screwgate krab under certain (mercifully fairly unlikely) circumstances. Even then accidents were extremely rare, but it's probably a good thing the fad didn't last.
I think I bought my original ATC around that time. It is/was a Black Diamond belay device, the ATC stands for "Air Traffic Controller" - just a brand name, nothing meaningful. The OP isn't outraged that the one specific device has been banned, the ban extends to all forms of traditional belay plates. (In spite of their decades long record of impeccable safety.)
> The last time I climbed on an artificial wall ...
More than 20 years ago?
Indoor walls nowadays generally have a fairly large area (say about 50% of the wall space, maybe a bit more in a big place) given over to indoor leading in which the climber clips runners as they go, like outdoor sport climbing.
Describing a climbing partnership indoors as 'leader' and 'second' is very outdated. You're not a 'leader' unless you're leading a route these days, and nobody is a 'second'. A partnership consists of a climber and belayer, or perhaps leader and belayer if the climber is actually leading.
I tried belaying with a fig-8 briefly, while it was briefly trendy back in the early to mid '90s. (In the style of the time, which was to use it as a kind of over-sized sticht plate.) Now there was a belay device that really was dangerous - *way* too slick even with fat furry 11mm ropes, and with the potential to break open the gate of a screwgate krab under certain (mercifully fairly unlikely) circumstances. Even then accidents were extremely rare, but it's probably a good thing the fad didn't last.
I think I bought my original ATC around that time. It is/was a Black Diamond belay device, the ATC stands for "Air Traffic Controller" - just a brand name, nothing meaningful. The OP isn't outraged that the one specific device has been banned, the ban extends to all forms of traditional belay plates. (In spite of their decades long record of impeccable safety.)
1
In reply to The Green Giant:
The terminology as Rigid Raider used it is outdated but it wasn't always considered incorrect so there's no need to be a dick about it.
> You've obviously been doing this climbing malarky wrong for a long time mate!
The terminology as Rigid Raider used it is outdated but it wasn't always considered incorrect so there's no need to be a dick about it.
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
The posts in which you are confidently stating that Gri-gris and the like would obviously improve belaying safety if adopted from the start by novice climbers. I don't believe it is so. It's a logical fallacy to make an assertion like that and suggest that those who are doubtful need to provide evidence to show you're wrong. The onus of proof is on you.
No doubt you're right about the money, but I think a new climber looking for their first belay device is more likely to want something similar to the device they learned with. If they learned from a more experienced mate that will probably be a passive device, if they've undergone some more formal training (including that provided by, or in association with, their local wall) it almost certainly will be.
Mind you, for a climber with aspirations to get outdoors and do some 'proper' climbing there is also the expense at some point of buying another new belay device more suitable for trad. For use with double ropes particularly.
> I think I said about 5 times in the posts above that I am not in favour of banning ATCs.
The posts in which you are confidently stating that Gri-gris and the like would obviously improve belaying safety if adopted from the start by novice climbers. I don't believe it is so. It's a logical fallacy to make an assertion like that and suggest that those who are doubtful need to provide evidence to show you're wrong. The onus of proof is on you.
> It's a price difference that can easily be overcome in the mind of a new climber looking for their first belay device by training the sales people to say the more expensive one is safer.
No doubt you're right about the money, but I think a new climber looking for their first belay device is more likely to want something similar to the device they learned with. If they learned from a more experienced mate that will probably be a passive device, if they've undergone some more formal training (including that provided by, or in association with, their local wall) it almost certainly will be.
Mind you, for a climber with aspirations to get outdoors and do some 'proper' climbing there is also the expense at some point of buying another new belay device more suitable for trad. For use with double ropes particularly.
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
You can get a tuber for well under £10.
And sales people in shops may not be best qualified to issue safety advice.
It's not as if you can't have an accident with a grigri, it is not 'safer'.
You can get a tuber for well under £10.
And sales people in shops may not be best qualified to issue safety advice.
It's not as if you can't have an accident with a grigri, it is not 'safer'.
1
In reply to cindylmy:
Off the OP, but I always spend a fair amount of time in the bouldering wall there at Climb Asia up on the first floor whenever I'm in Singapore. Great place to work up an appetite before heading off for dinner at a Hawker Centre! Good little climbing shop too.
Off the OP, but I always spend a fair amount of time in the bouldering wall there at Climb Asia up on the first floor whenever I'm in Singapore. Great place to work up an appetite before heading off for dinner at a Hawker Centre! Good little climbing shop too.
In reply to deepsoup:
I think they would improve lead belaying safety because people make mistakes and a locking device provides a backup when mistakes happen. The new generation of devices like the Jul family are a lot more like an ATC with a fancy shape than a GriGri .
I think new climbers should be taught the devices they are most likely to be using during their climbing career going forward.
You can argue the onus of proof is on me because I am challenging the status quo but it looks to me that pretty much all the belay device manufacturers are introducing autoblock devices. They are the ones with the R&D budgets and test labs and I figure they have done the math.
You are right but my view is training providers should catch up with the market rather than act as a drag on progress - which, admittedly, is what usually happens.
> The posts in which you are confidently stating that Gri-gris and the like would obviously improve belaying safety if adopted from the start by novice climbers. I don't believe it is so. It's a logical fallacy to make an assertion like that and suggest that those who are doubtful need to provide evidence to show you're wrong. The onus of proof is on you.
I think they would improve lead belaying safety because people make mistakes and a locking device provides a backup when mistakes happen. The new generation of devices like the Jul family are a lot more like an ATC with a fancy shape than a GriGri .
I think new climbers should be taught the devices they are most likely to be using during their climbing career going forward.
You can argue the onus of proof is on me because I am challenging the status quo but it looks to me that pretty much all the belay device manufacturers are introducing autoblock devices. They are the ones with the R&D budgets and test labs and I figure they have done the math.
> No doubt you're right about the money, but I think a new climber looking for their first belay device is more likely to want something similar to the device they learned with.
You are right but my view is training providers should catch up with the market rather than act as a drag on progress - which, admittedly, is what usually happens.
1
In reply to Offwidth:
I suppose you're right. I have to admit that the hemp of my waist tie has become a little mouldy in the damp of this damned weather and I am told that some of the newer nylon equipment may be almost as good.
Do they insist on gloves on these 'walls' when one is using a shoulder belay?
> Well said. Same goes for some of the old delapidated harnesses I see some old timers wearing, who should know better.
I suppose you're right. I have to admit that the hemp of my waist tie has become a little mouldy in the damp of this damned weather and I am told that some of the newer nylon equipment may be almost as good.
Do they insist on gloves on these 'walls' when one is using a shoulder belay?
4
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Or the market research. Climbing gear manufacturers generally have quite a fairly laudable attitude to safety and such but make no mistake, their raison d'etre is to sell stuff.
Sorry, but this is just bollocks.
The overwhelming majority of training providers are anything *but* a 'drag on progress'. Individuals are committed to constantly progressing and updating their personal skills, and collectively they are not slow to adopt new practices that can genuinely be shown to improve safety.
The AMI also conducts research, collects and collates the vast experience of their membership. Internationally the UIAA do too. Theirs is not market research, nor should it be. They are not in the business of selling stuff.
Instructors teaching groups of novices do not use passive belay devices merely because they're a couple of quid cheaper.
> pretty much all the belay device manufacturers are introducing autoblock devices. They are the ones with the R&D budgets and test labs and I figure they have done the math.
Or the market research. Climbing gear manufacturers generally have quite a fairly laudable attitude to safety and such but make no mistake, their raison d'etre is to sell stuff.
> You are right but my view is training providers should catch up with the market rather than act as a drag on progress - which, admittedly, is what usually happens.
Sorry, but this is just bollocks.
The overwhelming majority of training providers are anything *but* a 'drag on progress'. Individuals are committed to constantly progressing and updating their personal skills, and collectively they are not slow to adopt new practices that can genuinely be shown to improve safety.
The AMI also conducts research, collects and collates the vast experience of their membership. Internationally the UIAA do too. Theirs is not market research, nor should it be. They are not in the business of selling stuff.
Instructors teaching groups of novices do not use passive belay devices merely because they're a couple of quid cheaper.
2
In reply to Sealwife:
Yes. Can't remember the guys name, although he was quite famous, but it was a belay loop snapping during an abseil I believe.
Al
Yes. Can't remember the guys name, although he was quite famous, but it was a belay loop snapping during an abseil I believe.
Al
In reply to Sealwife:
Todd Skinner would be an obvious example of a fatality. I am sure there are others, although it is rare.
> Has there ever been an accident caused by a harness snapping?
Todd Skinner would be an obvious example of a fatality. I am sure there are others, although it is rare.
In reply to deepsoup:
I was joking about the way s/he said the belayer took the rope IN as the leader climbed up, not about the terminology s/he used.
I was joking about the way s/he said the belayer took the rope IN as the leader climbed up, not about the terminology s/he used.
In reply to Sealwife:
I know of an infamous fatality.
http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/1933713/Todd-Skinners-failed-harnes...
And this testing...
http://www.rockandice.com/lates-news/busted
BUSTED! If you think your harness is safe, check out the test results....
...As testers we saw some particularly scary incidences of harness degradation, basically, accidents waiting to happen. By and large, most harnesses proved safe, but based on what we received and tested, harnesses are in use that are suspect, and their faults are not always visible. Users need to educate themselves as to acceptable lifespans, condition, care and use of the climbing harnesses. Inspect your harness on a regular basis. Considering the cost of a new harness maxes out at $150 and pricing goes as low as $40, it is amazing that climbers are willing to roll the dice by using worn-out harnesses.
I know of an infamous fatality.
http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/1933713/Todd-Skinners-failed-harnes...
And this testing...
http://www.rockandice.com/lates-news/busted
BUSTED! If you think your harness is safe, check out the test results....
...As testers we saw some particularly scary incidences of harness degradation, basically, accidents waiting to happen. By and large, most harnesses proved safe, but based on what we received and tested, harnesses are in use that are suspect, and their faults are not always visible. Users need to educate themselves as to acceptable lifespans, condition, care and use of the climbing harnesses. Inspect your harness on a regular basis. Considering the cost of a new harness maxes out at $150 and pricing goes as low as $40, it is amazing that climbers are willing to roll the dice by using worn-out harnesses.
Post edited at 16:40
2
1
In reply to cindylmy:
I'm outraged beyond words, as I was looking forward to going back to climb with some friends. What do you guys think about this?
1st world problem?
I'm outraged beyond words, as I was looking forward to going back to climb with some friends. What do you guys think about this?
1st world problem?
1
In reply to cindylmy:
Just checking... but is it the case that each top-rope has a gri-gri in situ?
You are meant to use this rather than your own belay device (and dual tie-in, rope+ screwgate, again in situ) as is the case in Aussie gyms.
Cheers
LD
Just checking... but is it the case that each top-rope has a gri-gri in situ?
You are meant to use this rather than your own belay device (and dual tie-in, rope+ screwgate, again in situ) as is the case in Aussie gyms.
Cheers
LD
In reply to cindylmy:
I've been to Planet Granite in San Francisco (I was only bouldering) and they seemed to insist on a GriGri. Though they had them pre attached to all the lines so I think you even had to use theirs
They also had signs saying you were not allowed to second on the lead lines - which seems very odd to me
I've been to Planet Granite in San Francisco (I was only bouldering) and they seemed to insist on a GriGri. Though they had them pre attached to all the lines so I think you even had to use theirs
They also had signs saying you were not allowed to second on the lead lines - which seems very odd to me
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
To car drivers maybe, but drivers nowadays feel far too safe, and hence concentrate less. Thus the number of pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists killed and injured has increased.
> Installing ABS, seatbelts and airbags in cars resulted in fewer casualties,
To car drivers maybe, but drivers nowadays feel far too safe, and hence concentrate less. Thus the number of pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists killed and injured has increased.
1
1
In reply to fred99:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4...
Pedestrian casualties in the UK decreased from 20,447 in 1979 to 5,396 in 2013. Cyclists and Motorcyclist casualties are also down substantially.
The number bounces about a bit if you zoom right down to a few years but the long term trend is completely obvious: they are falling but not by nearly as much as car occupant casualties because the car occupants are benefiting from the new safety systems.
> To car drivers maybe, but drivers nowadays feel far too safe, and hence concentrate less. Thus the number of pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists killed and injured has increased.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4...
Pedestrian casualties in the UK decreased from 20,447 in 1979 to 5,396 in 2013. Cyclists and Motorcyclist casualties are also down substantially.
The number bounces about a bit if you zoom right down to a few years but the long term trend is completely obvious: they are falling but not by nearly as much as car occupant casualties because the car occupants are benefiting from the new safety systems.
1
In reply to GridNorth:
The USA and Australia (the latter even more so) tend to be far more H&S-oriented generally than the UK. It wouldn't surprise me to see walls doing this in the UK but not for 5-10 years.
> IMO it's only a matter of time before all walls insist that an Auto Assisted braking device is used. I believe that some walls in the USA already do so.Al
The USA and Australia (the latter even more so) tend to be far more H&S-oriented generally than the UK. It wouldn't surprise me to see walls doing this in the UK but not for 5-10 years.
In reply to cindylmy:
Personally I prefer to be belayed with an auto assisted braking device indoors. I've been dropped twice due to inattentive belaying with a standard plate. I probably would not have decked with a assisted braking one. And yes I know it was the belayer and not the device but even so at least you get a second chance.
Al
Personally I prefer to be belayed with an auto assisted braking device indoors. I've been dropped twice due to inattentive belaying with a standard plate. I probably would not have decked with a assisted braking one. And yes I know it was the belayer and not the device but even so at least you get a second chance.
Al
4
In reply to Neil Williams:
I remember climbing at a wall in Vegas many years ago where they insisted that we used a grigri.
The fact I'd never used a grigri before didn't seem to bother them...
> The USA and Australia (the latter even more so) tend to be far more H&S-oriented generally than the UK. It wouldn't surprise me to see walls doing this in the UK but not for 5-10 years.
I remember climbing at a wall in Vegas many years ago where they insisted that we used a grigri.
The fact I'd never used a grigri before didn't seem to bother them...
1
In reply to GridNorth:
I prefer to be belayed with a device the belayer is familiar with. I don't understand how making someone use an unfamiliar device can be safer than the one they're experienced with using.
I prefer to be belayed with a device the belayer is familiar with. I don't understand how making someone use an unfamiliar device can be safer than the one they're experienced with using.
3
In reply to cindylmy:
I'm seeing posts on the Mega Jul. I had a mate using one of these and the lower off was a series of judders. I banned him from belaying me with it. I'm pro choice, take mine away and I'd chose not to climb there.
I'm seeing posts on the Mega Jul. I had a mate using one of these and the lower off was a series of judders. I banned him from belaying me with it. I'm pro choice, take mine away and I'd chose not to climb there.
In reply to GridNorth:
Was it the same belayer who dropped you twice?
There's one member of our club that I won't let belay me, he doesn't pay enough attention to the climbing for my liking. Others are happy to climb with him but I fear he'll drop someone sooner or later.
> Personally I prefer to be belayed with an auto assisted braking device indoors. I've been dropped twice due to inattentive belaying with a standard plate. I probably would not have decked with a assisted braking one. And yes I know it was the belayer and not the device but even so at least you get a second chance.Al
Was it the same belayer who dropped you twice?
There's one member of our club that I won't let belay me, he doesn't pay enough attention to the climbing for my liking. Others are happy to climb with him but I fear he'll drop someone sooner or later.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...