UKC

Kalymnos saw it first accident of the season yesterday when a young lady lowered off the end of the rope and fell 8m to the ground. Luckily she wasn't too seriously hurt but I am amazed there are still climbers out there that don't knot the dead end of the rope.
Bizarrely the length of the route is painted on the rock.

Stay safe,

Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

... but is the length of the rope printed on the rope?

Stupid, I agree, but still easily done.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I have just purchased the Rockfax app and I have to say I was surprised to find that route lengths are not included in the description. IMO they should be.

Al

In reply to GridNorth:

They are marked on the topos though,

Chris

In reply to john arran:


Did you mean 'easily done if you are stupid '?

I can't see any reason for not knotting the end of the rope when you are sport climbing

Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

An easy mistake but an even easier fix.


Thanks for the reminder.

In reply to Chris Craggs:


Agreed. But it is possible to forget. Or to use someone else's rope who hasn't knotted the rope (and forget to check). Or have a partner who helpfully coils and packs your rope for you without putting a knot on the end (anyone else hate other people coiling your rope?). Happily admit to being stupid though.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

It's always good to be reminded of this simple procedure. I first saw someone come off the end of a rope years ago when Brits were arriving in France with 45m ropes to try sports climbing. The other day I climbed with someone with his new rope who, when I asked what length it was, replied 'EITHER 60m or 70m'.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

The moment we label people as stupid for having accidents (even what look like simple ones) is the moment we begin to fail to learn the lessons. Informed, trained, intelligent people who are not suicidal idiots continue to have accidents in all walks of life. It doesn't mean that they're stupid - it just means that they're human beings.

If we want to avoid reduce the chances of making our own "stupid" errors then we're much better off to think about the circumstances that could have led anyone to make the same mistake and what we can do to avoid them ourselves in the future.

In reply to AdrianC:
My use of the word 'stupid' was a (rather poor) play on words re John Arran's "stupid mistake".

If the thread and the inappropriate use of the word makes one person think about it, then that will have been worthwhile,

Chris

In reply to AdrianC:


Agreed. I always knot the rope, even when climbing at my local crag, which isn't even tall enough for this is to happen on a 50m rope. I reason that if I alway tie a knot, I will tie a knot the one time it matters.

Although I do have form on this: https://www.coldmountainkit.com/knowledge/articles/helicopter-rescue-in-the...

In reply to Chris Craggs:


Agreed. And thanks for posting about it.

In reply to Chris Craggs:


So they are. Apologies, I didn't notice that.

Al

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Is it not better just to know the length of the rope and the length of the routes? Otherwise you'll be pointlessly knotting the end of the rope every time when it wasn't even necessary for that crag.

In reply to David Coley:

That was some story.

In reply to Michael Gordon:
I know... the sheer effort of knotting the end of the rope... I feel tired just thinking about it

The point is, as was said above, forming the habit.

In reply to digby:

Ah, but you have to untie it as well!

In reply to digby:

But why bother if it's unnecessary for the venue? It's like doing up all your screwgates in a trad belay.

In reply to Michael Gordon:


My rope lives in the rope-sheet and has a knot in it all the time, removes the need to worry about 'one more thing',


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

The length of the route is in the guide book, I certainly make a habit of checking this before climbing.

If you on sports then the belayer should immediately be concerned if the middle marker of the rope passes them while the climber is leading that there's an issue to sort out.

I'd agree knotting the end of the rope is a good safeguard, but on the other hand I know if I did it all the time I'd end up getting the rope stuck one day when I forget to remove the knot and pull through from the other end.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Great reminder Chris. I remember abseiling off a sea stack and, having misjudged the length of ropes needed, ended up at the knots I had tied at their end. The knotting habit saved me that day, albeit in different circumstances!

In reply to Chris Craggs:
I usually tie a knot in each end of the rope but it can cause it's own problems. I once was unable to recover my rope at the top of the Verdon Gorge, without a great deal of faff, because a knot got well and truly stuck in a tree 30 metres down.

Al

In reply to Michael Gordon:


You got dislikes for your post but I'm inclined to agree. There are crags which I regularly visit at which I know the maximum route length; for those I take a rope that's definitely long enough, and then I don't have to worry. Elsewhere, if there's even the slightest doubt, I'll use a knot.

In reply to Michael Gordon:


I'm with Michael here. It's excessive if you've a 60m rope at a 20m venue.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Is it not more important to watch the rope ?

In reply to David Riley:


People get dropped regularly so watching the rope obviously isn't enough for some - belt and braces,


Chris

In reply to David Riley:

The reason people get dropped on sports routes is that if the lowering climber is stripping the route then the belayer should be watching the climber so as to know when they need to stop them at each quickdraw. In this scenario its very easy to not see the end ofb the rope coming. Hence it should be habit to tie a knot. I agree with Chris and others who would tie one regardless of relative route to rope length. That way a strong habit is formed.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I thought this was the climber not the belayer ?

In reply to David Riley:
Sorry, this was meant as a reply to the OP.

Knotting the ends of rappel ropes is a somewhat different question than knotting the ends of a belay rope and I think it best not to combine them in one discussion.

I think potentially superfluous safety procedures should be evaluated in terms of how much extra time and effort they consume, and the time and effort required to put a knot at the end of a rope is utterly negligible, especially in the context the rope will be used for (we are not speaking of alpine mad dashes or the NIAD). This being the case, David's point about habitually putting a knot in the end of a belay rope that will be used for lowering seems to me to be the most intelligent approach.

In reply to Michael Gordon:
There were accidents involving ropes long enough for the venue when belayers changed their positions e.g, stepping back from the wall.

In reply to PMG:

OK, I can sort of see that happening. You'd think they would have realised after the first lower that there wasn't much rope to play around with!

In reply to brianjcooper:

After many years of climbing and rope access work I always tie a loop in my ropes when I'm abbing a couple of meters from the end, I always figure it's nice to have some rope to work with if you end up getting to the knot.

In reply to Fruit:

Good idea. Info logged for future use.

In reply to Fruit:
Except when you abseil off the great ledge at Wintours leap on a 50m half ropes, you only just get to the ground after rope stretch!

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I am not too fond of exact route lengths in guidebooks - this is a misleading feeling of safety if this is not perfect. First, guidebooks may include mistakes, second and more important, if rope length is tight, much depends on where the belayer stands when lowering.

In reply to springfall2008:
One situation where being heavy helps in a climbing situation. You can always untie the knot

In reply to Chris Craggs:
A story to help understand why having a knot in the end of your rope/s, regardless of the difference in rope and route length.

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-sharp-end/id1080036452?mt=2&i=10003...

In my opinion the time it takes to tie (and even untie for the sake of argument) a knot in the end of a rope, even if you did it everything single climb, outweighs the time and pain of recovering from a broken ankle, leg or worse.

There's nothing to say it couldn't be your partners recovery either. I don't think I'd want to climb with someone obliged to not tie a knot for the sake of saving time.

We're climbing for goodness sake, we can't all be that rushed for time in the first place.

In reply to Emilio Bachini:

I always thought it better to tie into your harness rather than a knot in the rope because it doesn't get jammed if the unthinkable does happen.

In reply to GrahamD:

I've taken to tying a knot a couple of meters from the end after an incident as to leave something to work with.

In reply to Emilio Bachini and others:

So to all these people who always tie a knot in the end, even in a 60m rope at a 15m crag: I get it, you would rather make it an absolute rule and then not have to think about it. In general I'm happy to expend a bit more thought, and modify my procedures to suit different scenarios.

I assume you always use your indicators when driving then? Moving back in after overtaking, on a completely empty road, etc.?

In reply to bpmclimb: Yup. Surprises happen

In reply to bpmclimb:


But it no hardship to tie a knot, I don't get it!

It takes about 3 seconds to tie and the same to undo, what's more important that you can't take 3 seconds out of you route to ensure your or someone else's safety, and if it becomes habit then you'll never fall off the end of the rope will you?

In reply to bpmclimb:


I don't really get the tie/untie issue, my sport rope lives in the rope-sheet with a permanent knot in the dead end. The only time it gets untied is when I swap the rope round to even out wear on it,


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:


Ditto. but perhaps they are taking a loose rope to the crag and paying it through every time.

In reply to bpmclimb:

I do tend to always use my indicators - they're also useful to pedestrians planning to cross, cyclists, bikers, etc.
I tend to knot the end of the rope, and my rope has the middle marked as well.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I agree Chris, having witnessed two narrow escapes both on Kalymnos, one trying to do a 35 metre route on a 60 metre rope and the other trying to do a 40 metre route on a 70 metre rope both thought they would be OK with rope stretch!!!!

In reply to Chris Craggs:


All very well if the rope is only used for leading...

In reply to Christheclimber:


Yes but the above examples are just silly! If you're talking about doing 20m routes with a 60m rope, knots in the end will be completely pointless.

Does everyone advocating this practice do the same indoors? After all, some walls are higher than others and you never know which one you'll end up at...

In reply to Michael Gordon:


Yes I guess I am fairly unusual in that respect (Billy No Mates). Having said that, when I second a route - I tend to do that on the live end too,

Chris

In reply to Michael Gordon:

The examples given are far from silly. The tolerances worked to in both rope manufacture and route length approximation are pretty poor.

Last year I met a couple on Kalymnos who had brought with them both a 70 and an 80m rope. The 70 proved to be the longer of the 2.

I have climbed supposed 40m pitches with loads to spare from an 80 and 35m pitches where I have descended on stretch.

A knot is simple and easy.

In reply to 3leggeddog:

OK, I think assuming you'll be fine with a rope 10m too short is silly. You think otherwise; fair enough.

In reply to Chris Craggs:
Proposition: you would have to be stupid to lower off the end off the rope.
Fact: clever people have lowered off the end of the rope.
Conclusion: everyone is stupid (or capable of it).

Mitigation: plan for your unexpected stupidity... get into good habits, like tying knots!

(personally my rope is always tied to the rope bag)

In reply to bpmclimb:


Yes why wouldn't you, they maybe thing you haven't seen and you indicating might just save an accident.

Do you really make a conscious decision not to use your indicators based on what's around you?
"Is there anyone about? No, good, I don't need to signal", seems like more work than just doing what you'd normally do to me.

In reply to AdrianC:


Failing to tie the end of the rope is an action, not a person.

Saying it's stupid means the behaviour is stupid, not the person.

It the difference between saying something was a stupid mistake, and saying something was a mistake, stupid.

People who fail to learn the lesson, now they're stupid.

In reply to krikoman:

Goodness knows why you'd indicate to move back in if there's only one car on the road to overtake. What else would one do - stay on the wrong side and plough into the next oncoming car?

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I agree with the value of forming a good habit. Now I realise this is not quite the scenario you're talking about, but, sometimes you really have to use common sense...

I watched a couple of German climbers yesterday at the Dentelles. They were on the 30m first pitch of a three pitch route. They were climbing on an 80m rope. I know this as earlier I'd seen them do a 40m single pitch and lower down without a problem.

He leads the pitch and belays.
She follows.
Clearly she doesn't want to go any higher and is unsure about abseiling so he lowers her back down to the ground.
She ties ANOTHER 80m rope to the bottom of the one they're climbing on.
He pulls it up, unties the knot, threads it through the maillon on the belay and ties them together with an overhand.
He then pulls up the rest of the second 80m rope, finds the end of the first rope, and ties the two ends together.
He throws the whole bundle of rope down.

So now he has two strands of rope, threaded through the belay and tied together with an overhand, hanging down the 30m pitch. And 100m of rope lying on the ground in a heap. With a knot in the end, just in case.

In reply to Andy Nisbet:

It is true that it could be seen to be unnecessary on some occasions. However, I think the point that was being made was if you always do it then it becomes a habit, so you don't forget to do it when it is necessary. I think it is good to encourage habitual practice when it comes to safety critical behaviour. In a similar vein, I always use a prussik when abseiling, even if it's only 10m, so it's second nature when I'm on more critical abseils.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Some willy waving going on on this thread Chris.

Wally

In reply to Martin Haworth: A minor edit.. It is true it could be perceived as unnecessary on some occasions. But sometimes out perceptions are wrong

In reply to krikoman:

I did an advance driving one day course once (I think it helped with the company's car insurance). The instructor said that you should never be doing anything by rote because you should always be assesing every situation on merit. I guess there is some merit in that - doing stuff by rote works with known unknowns but doesn't always make you alert to the possibility of unknown unknowns.

The rationale, applied to ropes, is I guess to avoid the trap of thinking "I have tied a knot, therefore I'm safe"

In reply to GrahamD:

So are you saying there are reasons not to indicate your intentions while driving, I sort of get the point of what he was saying, but can you give me one possible reason for never using you indicators apart from laziness?

Of course you should always be assessing risks and different situations, but not using you indicators doesn't fall into that category.

An example he might have been talking about, "you should always drive below the speed limit - clearly if you could accelerate out of the way of an impending accident, when slowing down would clearly not help, then fine break the rules.

Safety checks on the other hand, Don't check your rear-view mirror or don't indicate, just don't make sense.

In reply to krikoman:

I did actually ask that question and didn't really get an answer. I think on reflection the point wasn't specific to indicators, it was a general one of always thinking why you are doing at all times rather just doing things by rote.

In reply to krikoman:


I'm absolutely not saying this is a *valid* reason.... but one might be because upon seeing a car indicating to change lanes even several car lengths ahead, the default response of most drivers in England is to urgently accelerate and hang around in the "blind spot". Doesn't seem to happen north of the border for whatever reason.

In reply to JHiley:

So you'd teach them a lesson by not indicating, just in case they MIGHT accelerate up behind you and hid in your blind spot, but how do you know, apart from geographically, who they are going to react?

Whereas in reality , they might be a motorbike, in the drivers blind spot when (with him thinking he's the only car on the road and needn't indicate) they pull out into you path and knocks them off.

It's a pretty tenuous reason for NOT doing something you should be doing 99.9% of the time.

In reply to krikoman:

I think the thing is you think about why you are indicating rather than just indicating and manouvering. Not that you shouldn't indicate most of the time.

In reply to krikoman:


I didn't say its something I would do. FWIW I always indicate on the basis that its a simple and unavoidable fact that everyone makes mistakes and no matter how certain I might be that no one is there and that indicating doesn't matter, there's a possibility I've just forgotten something or not seen something.
However, lets say I looked in my mirror, saw a car was a long way back and indicated. I might then look to the next-next lane over to check that no one is about to change and hit me in the middle. In the mean time the car I saw, has seen my indicator and had an outbreak of strangely English rage (I'm English too btw, the geography thing was just an observation). He/she has accelerated and is now much closer and faster. If I'm just doing things by rote, I might have ticked all my boxes and assume it's still ok to change lanes. (this could all happen very quickly) But I need to remember why I indicated in the first place and check again.

In reply to krikoman:


That would mean putting the coffee cup down between my legs, with the risk of spilling it over my nads. Either that or to flick the indicator stalk up with the cup itself, which wouldn't be a problem but flicking it down again is much harder. And all the while I'd have no hands at all on the wheel since I'd obviously need my other hand to keep holding my phone.

Are you really advocating such dangerous driving just for an unnecessary signal?

In reply to Chris Craggs:


Lowered off or abseiled off?

In reply to Toerag:


Lowered off , the 2nd let the end of the rope escape through the belay device,


Chris

In reply to krikoman:



That's exactly what I do. I reckon I'm much more consistent than most drivers in using my indicators, but yes, there are some situations where I decide not to - those situations when I'm confident that it's not necessary. That doesn't feel like it's taxing my brain at all, and so it doesn't feel like more work. Similarly, there are climbing situations in which I can feel absolutely confident that an end knot isn't required; in those cases I don't tie one.

It's a matter of personal preference. I'm not keen on slavish adherence to rules; in general I prefer to expend a little extra thought and remain flexible in responding to situations and making decisions. 100% observance of rules can seem the best idea, but it can backfire, sometimes.

By the way, are you really 100% with indicator use, as you imply? If so, I reckon that puts you in a very small minority.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Late to the party, but I'm on the side of making a decision based on the circumstances of the time. The other day my partner was fretting about not tying a knot in the end of an ab rope for a 15m ab; they'd have ended up in the sea long before the ended up abbing off the end of the rope. That said, if there's any doubt whatsoever I tie a knot.

With indicators, I only ever don't use them if indicating may cause more confusion than it'll resolve, such as exiting on a multi-lane roundabout where I'm following my lane, and indicating might cause another driver concern that I'm trying to change lane into them. Let's face it, indicating is hardly taxing and it gives everyone a heads up as to your intentions if you've screwed up. It also gives information to pedestrians and other road users you may not immediately consider.

In reply to Chris Craggs:


I suppose the issue of dead end knots isn't confined to sport climbing. Abseiling back down any climb, obviously knots are called for if there's even the slightest doubt about rope length. But I wouldn't knot the ropes as an absolute rule, because if the length isn't in question then other factors may trump that consideration - not getting the ropes tangled, for instance.

In reply to tehmarks:

Agree completely. I was just thinking of making the point about multi-lane roundabouts.

In reply to bpmclimb:
Years ago we were almost hit by a car traveling with lights off at night. We were changing lanes. My wife (who was driving) used an indicator and crossed the dividing line. We heard a horn right behind us. Puzzled, she instinctively pulled back into our lane. We were driving pretty fast. The other car was even faster.

Situations like that are very rare but they do happen. Years of needlesly using indicators on empty roads paid off that night.

In reply to PMG:



Glad to hear you got out of that safely However, that's just one particular situation - it's not hard to imagine scenarios where an unthinking, default use of an indicator could be misinterpreted, and actually increase the danger.

As an aside, I must say that I'm surprised how many people on this thread report that they use indicators all the time. Like I said earlier, I'm confident that I use indicators far more consistently than most other drivers around me - just not 100%. I don't know what roads you all drive on - almost every driver I see uses indicators less than I do.

In reply to bpmclimb:

An unthinking, default use....!!!!! What does that mean? I use my indicator where they are supposed to be used and when they are supposed to be used. I fail to see how they could ever be misinterpreted, ever.

As an aside, I must say that I'm surprised how many people on this thread report that they use indicators all the time. Like I said earlier, I'm confident that I use indicators far more consistently than most other drivers around me - just not 100%. I don't know what roads you all drive on - almost every driver I see uses indicators less than I do.

That doesn't make it acceptable really though does it? Almost every murderer I know is a bit more murdery than me, I don't think I need to catch up in any way.

People use there indicator all the time because it give others, who you might not be aware of, an INDICATION of what you might be about to do.

My personal us of indicators might stem from riding a motorbike for 15 years, where the number of times people would do daft shit, nearly kill you, and they say "sorry mate id didn't see you" as some sort of excuse. When if they used their indicators I'd have had a bit of warning.

In reply to GridNorth:

This is a deliberate policy to help reduce accidents.

If we publish the route length in the book for a sport route then people tend to drop their guard and may take the route length as 100% accurate believing that their rope is the correct length (an then not tie a knot).

But, there are a number of reasons why this route length figure can never be 100% accurate.

1) People don't always stand in the same place when belaying.
2) People cut bits off their rope and forget.
3) Some people use more rope in their knots.
3) Most importantly, routes get re-bolted and lower-offs get moved (this happened in El Chorro which is why we dropped individual route lengths in all our publications since 2008).

It is not up to guidebooks to tell you how many quickdraws are required, nor precise route lengths. These figures are too easy to get slightly wrong with potentially serious consequences. Climbers should learn to make this judgement for themselves and, or course, always get in the habit of tying a knot in the rope. In fact store the rope in its bag with a knot in it even when you are climbing at a tiny 8m crag.

Something else worth considering is, do you actually know how long your rope is?
We measured some ropes and found that ropes claiming to be 60m long varied between 60m and 66m in length.
Imagine that someone with a 60m rope that was actually 66m is climbing a route before you. They lower off a route stated at 32m in the guidebook and get to the ground with a bit of spare. Based on asking them the length of their rope, you set off with your 60m rope that is actually 60m and end up plummeting the last 4m to the ground when you lower off. Admittedly this scenario has less to do with guidebooks but it does highlight the fact that you should always be responsible for your own decisions. In my opinion rope manufacturers should sell you the length of rope they claim and not a bit more than that and I have made this point to some of them at trade shows.

Alan

In reply to krikoman:

>Almost every murderer I know is a bit more murdery than me, I don't think I need to catch up in any way.

Almost?!

>People use there indicator all the time because it give others, who you might not be aware of, an INDICATION of what you might be about to do.My personal us of indicators might stem from riding a motorbike for 15 years, where the number of times people would do daft shit, nearly kill you, and they say "sorry mate id didn't see you" as some sort of excuse. When if they used their indicators I'd have had a bit of warning.

This is the crux of it for me. I can think of situations when indicating might increase the danger e.g. signal being misinterpreted or someone acting reactively to block you (which is depressingly common). BUT the reduction in risk due to giving people a warning of what you MIGHT do massively outweighs this. Also, someone claiming that they are ever 100% sure of their surroundings is just being naïve. Someone who says they wont make mistakes if they concentrate hard enough is in denial.

To avoid going off topic I think the parallels to knots/ climbing are quite nice. Tying the knot in the end of the rope increases the risk of some things e.g. partner pulling the rope through and getting it stuck or getting complacent about route lengths. However the risk of lowering off the end due to not tying a knot is more important and you can't be sure that you won't make a mistake one day.

In reply to JHiley:


If you tie the knot into the (red) loop in the rope bag then this becomes less likely to happen since you tend to notice when the rope bag starts lifting off the ground.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


Yesterday was so windy at our local crag that we packed up early and went home. As we were leaving something caught my eye and I turned round to see a rope bag with the end of the rope attached disappearing up the crag. It lodged in a tree some twenty metres off the ground and about the same distance rightwards in an area with no routes. Not sure how it worked out but when we left there was a lot of swearing going on.

In reply to JHiley:


Nice point about the partner pulling the rope through, if it's always there, then they'll learn to undo it first, hopefully it won't happen then.

However the risk of lowering off the end due to not tying a knot is more important and you can't be sure that you won't make a mistake one day.

I've seen it happen twice once a bloke fell of the end, and another time his belayer ran out of rope and she dropped her boyfriend.

In reply to krikoman:


It's obvious what it means, I can't put it any more clearly. And the situations in which indicators can mislead are pretty obvious, in my opinion; I'm very surprised you find it impossible to imagine any of them.

In reply to JHiley:



Yes, usually. Not always, though. There are situations where deciding not to signal is the better choice - in my opinion. I regularly see drivers using indicators so badly that it's obvious that they're just doing it by rote, and not actively considering how the signal might be interpreted. In some cases the signal is so ambiguous that it's effectively useless.

I'm not arguing against the use of indicators; in the overwhelming majority of cases of course they should be used. I'm just saying don't switch your brain off and let your spinal cord do it, because the brain is needed: in order to signal your intentions effectively you may need to make subtle choices about exactly when to signal, how long to signal for (maybe cancel the signal manually, rather than always let the steering do it), and even - albeit rarely - decide not to signal at all.

What I'm getting at is the difference between applying rules slavishly or intelligently.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

`The Checklist Manifesto`
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/books/review/Jauhar-t.html?_r=0

Some of the smartest and most professional people in the world (surgeons, airline pilots, architectural engineers) perform best if they do invariant tasks by rote - eliminating errors or oversights. They can then concentrate their judgement on variables.

I'm sure tying your rope or car indicators fall in the former category.

In reply to bpmclimb:

Ok I think there's a bit of a subtle distinction between not indicating because it will mislead someone when you arguably aren't expected to do it anyway and not indicating when you're definitely supposed to but don't think it's necessary or because you think someone will try to block you in (I raised that example earlier because I think it's insane that people do that, let alone that its the typical/ default reaction).

I'd say 'I always indicate', but I don't indicate left when I'm in the right of a pair of lanes coming off the motorway and there's no ambiguity about where I'm going, because I'd say you're not really expected to in that situation and it confuses the drivers to the left. Similarly I'd say 'I always indicate', but not when I'm driving in a straight line and have no intention of turning (to take that logic to it's silly conclusion).

I agree with not switching the brain off. I've caught myself indicating *as I move* which is obviously bad. I've also sometimes forgotten to indicate. I'd even admit it probably happens quite often. But when it does I think; "Oh, I F'd up." and not; "I was fully aware of my surroundings, so indicating was unnecessary."

Similarly, I'd say tying a knot in the end of the rope when sport climbing (or better, tying to the bag) is a good habit even though it sometimes happens to be unnecessary. I've often not done this and will hopefully be more consistent due in part to this thread.

In reply to JHiley:

Similarly, I'd say tying a knot in the end of the rope when sport climbing (or better, tying to the bag) is a good habit even though it sometimes happens to be unnecessary. I've often not done this and will hopefully be more consistent due in part to this thread.

Yes, me too, probably

In reply to Chris Craggs:

My attitude would be that many accidents don't arise when you're fully functioning and not being overtly stupid, they instead arise when you're knackered, dehydrated, driven nuts by midges or otherwise distracted. Not only is the misjudgement of rope length more likely at this time, so is forgetting to knot the ends of your rope. Get a process, engrain it, and only in specific circumstances deviate from that process, rather than only using the process when you deem it necessary. I'd suggest that knotting your rope is more akin to checking your mirrors than using your indicators.

In reply to bpmclimb:


Are you saying the Highway code is wrong?

Or are you saying that if you follow the highway code, people will indicate at the wrong times, or dangerously.

Or are you saying that some people don't use their indicators correctly and that might be dangerous.

The two things are very different.

In reply to krikoman:

The trouble with a default practice which doesn't require thought is there can be a tendency to slip into bad habits. I'm not for a minute suggesting the following may apply to the road-savvy folk on this thread, but some road-users may indicate to pull back in without checking their left mirror. In my mind checking the mirror is more important and since I'm doing it first anyway, if I don't feel indicating is necessary after, then I won't.

In reply to krikoman:

How did we get onto Highway code? It's a bad idea to indicate if it's misleading, like indicating too soon so people think you are taking a different turning or indicating left to move from the middle lane to the left lane right next to a slip lane as people will think you are leaving the motorway!

Perhaps putting a knot at the end of a 50m rope when you climbing indoors on a 12m wall is a waste of time and somewhat annoying if someone plans to pull the rope through to untangle it!

In reply to jon:


Cut from the same cloth as Charlie's tent?

In reply to Ian Parsons:

Ah, I don't remember Charlie's tent. But I should clarify the above scenario. The two climbers had finished their route and the second had lowered. He untied and the belayer took the Grigri off leaving the rope hanging with both ends just touching the ground, one of which was tied into the rope mat. It was then that the mat took off and landed in the inaccessible tree. They couldn't pull the rope down with the end they still had hold of as the mat was attached to the other end. There was no spare rope to climb to the belay. The attachment of the mat/rope to the tree was of an unknown quality, so they couldn't prussik up it. There was no route leading to, or anywhere near the tree. So what would you do if there was no one else there with a rope? As I said, there was a lot of swearing and some really sketchy soloing going on, so we legged it... (there was someone else there or we'd have helped).

In reply to JHiley:

Bring back hand signals!

In reply to krikoman:


No

Or are you saying that if you follow the highway code, people will indicate at the wrong times, or dangerously.

No. People will do that, but you imply a causal relationship: that's not what I meant at all.

Or are you saying that some people don't use their indicators correctly and that might be dangerous.The two things are very different.

Yes, that's more like it, but I don't see it as correct and incorrect, black and white - or that's not quite how I'd put it, anyway. I believe there are many subtleties involved in optimum use of indicators which the Highway Code doesn't cover in detail - they'd need a whole extra book. Avoiding ambiguity frequently involves fine-tuning exactly when you signal, and cancel a signal, and sometimes even means not signalling at all.

In reply to springfall2008:


But that's bad driving, not an excuse for not signalling, it's also "some" people. Well "some" people NEVER signal and "some" people are just shit drivers. It doesn't mean you excuse them or not do something you know is right.

It's like saying we shouldn't have indicators because "some" people indicate at the wrong time.

Of course putting them on too early at a roundabout is very dangerous, but why does that support the fact we shouldn't use indicators. We should use them when they SHOULD be used, it really very simple.

In reply to bpmclimb:

That might be true in a very few instances, I'd still indicate if I was changing lanes on a motorway, either stay in the lane you are in, until after the junction, or indicate. Indicate for a sort length of time if you feel that helps, but the bloke on a motorbike, that you haven't seen, might be very grateful for some warning.

I certainly wouldn't NOT us my indicators because I think I have the road to myself.

Of course as in most of life, you're free to do what you like. I'm sure Chris didn't put up his post to be antagonistic, but more to point out how daft some serious accidents can happen.

I first climbed with people who tied a knot, which meant I always look for a knot before pulling through, which means I teach people who climb with me to tie knots and check before pulling through, which is the main reason I can see for not tying a knot.

In reply to AdrianC:
Have your 100th thumb up (Good point by the way)

In reply to krikoman:



I think that's a good example of being slave to a rule. There might be pressing reasons for not delaying the lane change, and yet the situation renders a signal ambiguous and potentially dangerous. In such cases applying a rule in an absolute way traps you into a course of action which is not optimum.

There are a few "rules" in life which I have (to date) followed 100%, because no scenario has ever cropped up in which they're not a good idea (for example, It's difficult to imagine any situation where I'd work with mains electricity without the supply switched off). Always tying knots in the ends of ropes doesn't qualify, nor does always using indicators, because I can imagine scenarios (and experienced many of them) in which applying the "rule" wouldn't be the best idea.

At this point I should probably reassure any possible climbing partners that I'm very aware of the dangers of insufficient rope length, and if in any doubt at all use stopper knots. On the other hand, I might not feel fully confident in a climbing partner who got unduly anxious about the lack of knots in situations where they clearly aren't needed. I might start to think that they were too bound up with absolute rules, and lacked the flexibility to judge specific situations on their own merits.

In reply to bpmclimb:

But you're making excuses for what someone else "might" think, if you're changing lanes you should indicate, if there are two or more possible reasons why you are doing this, the person behind you has a responsibility, to take evasive action and act accordingly.

What you think, someone else might think, are really ever the same thing.

As for waiting to pass a slip road at 60 mph the 110m average length of the slip road is passed within 4 seconds, while there might be a reason not to wait (like if you were about to crash) I don't see this a valid reason not to indicate.

I don't think anyone mentioned being unduly anxious either, it was a small piece of advice that might save someone an injury.

Anyhow , you carry on with your not indicating and mind reading, but please don't do it in front of me, I prefer to have some clue as to what the person in front is about to do.

In reply to krikoman:


If you take an advanced driving course you will find out that you should only indicate when it's useful. For example you don't indicate to pull back into the left hand lane of a motorway after overtaking someone if the motorway is otherwise quiet!

In reply to springfall2008:

I'd do it to let the car I was overtaking know I was pulling back in front of them, so they don't randomly accelerate when they wake up, surprised that someone has had the audacity to overtake them.
Some folk react as if you had leaned in through their window and tweaked their knob.

In reply to bpmclimb:


Well do tell us what they are then as, any situation that misleads is as one where they are being misused.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

Here's another one, the highway code says you should indicate right at a roundabout if the exit you are taking is beyond 180 degrees, but if it's esentially straight on but say at 200 degrees one might choose not to indicate right.

In reply to springfall2008:


I take my lead from the most experienced drivers. I rarely see taxi drivers indicate, changing lanes or in tiurning, and they spend more time on the road than almost anyone.

In reply to springfall2008:

So do the correct thing but do it even if you think the road is quiet.

In reply to Chris Craggs:
Anyway, knots aside, someone fell 8m onto sharp, craggy limestone that was unlikely to be flat and didn't get seriously hurt? Wow. That is one lucky lady indeed.

What route was it?

In reply to springfall2008:


When questioned the bus driver that knocked me of my motorbike, changing lanes without warning, explained that 'he couldn't have been there'.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:


I don't even bother to use my mirrors before manoeuvring on the same basis.

In reply to snoop6060:


Aurora at Kalydna, apparently it is a 40m pitch and the length is painted on the rock!

Chris

In reply to Removed UserBwox:


Well, I only drive with my eyes open, when I feel it totally necessary, otherwise they get a well earned rest.

In reply to krikoman:



A signal on returning to your original lane after overtaking is not specifically required by the Highway Code; the law (very sensibly) allows some leeway with this, presumably so that drivers can make their own judgements about what is appropriate.

It appears that, despite your holier than thou attitude and pontificating about the Highway Code, you are not actually so familiar with its contents after all.

In reply to springfall2008:


The rule is when it's useful to other road users!!

Since in your example you have another road user behind you, it might be useful for them to know your intentions.

Once again you make the assumption that you are fully aware of ALL the road users around you, you fail to take into account the bloke on the motorbike, you didn't see in the blind spot around your vehicle.

"Sorry mate I didn't see you", does put his skin back on, heal broken bones or pay for the damage. All for because you don't NEED to indicate, so you chose not to.

the times when you are so alone on the road that you don't NEED to a so far in between, why not just do it anyway?

In reply to bpmclimb:

you might want to look up Rule 103.

I'm not being holier than thou, I can read that all. I'm also try to get across why people end up hurting other people, as a ex-motorbike rider I know first-hand what people think is OK, isn't.

In reply to Chris Craggs:
Argh, ok. You cannot see the length easily on that as it is really faded and its painted as 5+35+15 as I seem to recall. (least was last year) The main 7b bit is literally just doable on a 70m from that bolted belay on top of the slab, I only just made it down on stretch to it. If she fell from there she is surely lucky to be alive, that landing has boulders and all sorts down on the ground and you are tumbling down a very steep slab.

In reply to krikoman:


Rule 103 allows for leeway. It does not state "whatever else you do, make sure you signal; this consideration trumps all others; if you can't signal for some reason, then you mustn't manoeuvre". There is an element of interpretation. Having been a motorbike rider doesn't make you the font of all wisdom - I'm a long term road user and have plenty of (equally valid, it's reasonable to assume) first-hand experience. It doesn't add anything constructive to a discussion if you start insinuating that you're only one who knows (or cares) about safety of others on the road.

In reply to bpmclimb:


I feel you are misinterpreting (deliberately?) what has been said about this. If you've never been a motor cyclist how can you say your experience is as valid?
Just refreshed my memory on rule 103 too. Doesn't seem to give much leeway.

In reply to bpmclimb:

Let me try and put it more simply, even assuming your interpretation of the highway code is anything near true.

Let pretend you're a good driver and you signal when and where you are supposed to, but have the option of not signalling when there are no other road users around.

What do you gain from not signalling?

Are you 100% sure there isn't another road user you've not seen and might benefit from your signalling?

Who will it hurt if you do signal, even though you think it's not necessary?


As for riding a motorbike, you right it makes no difference, which is why there are specific road safety advertisements about "Thinking Bike" and of course it doesn't have to be a motor bike cyclist, walkers and runners, mum's with prams can all benefit from having and idea of what you are about to do.

and just to clarify rule 103.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-techniques-and-a..."use them to advise other road users before changing course or direction, stopping or moving off Being the relative point for you motorway scenario.

bye the way I don't think I'm the font of ALL knowledge, but why do you insists on denying the rules and guidance, to try and prove what is in effect just being lazy is OK?

In reply to GridNorth:


Even if they are, it's still unwise to trust them - I've certainly seen one crag in Spain where the Rockfax route lengths are dangerously short. It's probably a good idea just to get into the habit of always knotting the rope. This is advice I should take myself

In reply to krikoman:

I think this signalling/not signalling debate is a red herring. The real point is that every situation is asssesed on its merits and if your decision is to indicate 'just in case', no problem. The problem is where the act of signalling automatically is mistaken for an assesment of the situations.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

This is a beautiful thread.

Knotting the end of ropes beforehand abseiling is a good idea. Oh no it isn't, what if you're on a short crag, is there such a thing as routine, what is good practice, what does the Highway Code say. Can we reinterpret the Highway Code.

In reply to GrahamD:

I think the problem is that someone used it as an example of why you would tie a knot all the time:

"why should I always tie a knot, it's not as if I would always indicate..."

Actually in both cases it is safe and proper not to do so under the right circumstances but in both cases it is best practice to do so.

In reply to climbwhenready:


Wait a day or so and it's bound to drift into sexism and racism...

In reply to jon:


And the Nazi's, Hilter or Brexit, I'm surprised none of those have not been thrown into the frame.

After all, with the advent of Brexit, we're free to make our own decisions.

Sorry the thread got hi-jacked but I just don't understand some peoples thinking or attitude.

In reply to GrahamD:


But that's just bad driving, isn't it? It's not to do with signalling when are where you are supposed to, or that signalling where you MIGHT not have to, makes things less safe.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:


Hmm. Whereas I can see 'best practice' in most cases for indicating because there are only limited cirumstances where its worse than not indicating, But I'm far happier, say at the climbing wall, NOT having a knot which could inadvertently get stuck at the top. I know the height of the wall and I know the length of the rope. I consider what I do 'best practice'. If I'm outside and there is any doubt over rope length, I see 'best practice' as tying into the rope because it can't jam in the belay device that way and can't accidentally be left in the rope.

In reply to krikoman:


Yes. My point being we should concentrate on the act of thinking, not the probable subsequent action. Same in all climbing situations. Think about it every time because every situation is different. That's why I'm unhappy when people talk about setting up abseils or belays by rote.

In reply to GrahamD:

But, at the risk of returning the whole thread back to the start, it is the fact that intelligent thinking beings keep dropping their mates at sports crags, that caused it to be suggested that habitually tying a knot might prevent this.
Because thinking/assessing doesn't seem to be enough.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:


Not only that but you're relying on other people's information, a printing error in the guide, someone paints the wrong route length on the rock, you go off route and end up climbing to a different lower off. all of this can have serious consequences.

to be honest I'm nearly always tied in to my harness when outside anyway, either that of it's tied to the bag. If I'm abseiling there's always a knot in the end, I've yet to come across a situation where I'm wishing I hadn't tied one. Maybe when I do I might reassess things.

Doing things by wrote , seems to work OK for pilots flying us around the world on their pre-flight checks.

Just because you always do something doesn't mean you don't think about it.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:


But clearly intelligent, thinking beings don't always think. You could argue this reinforces your point but I would argue that by lulling people into a sense of false security and routine is what stops people from thinking. People should think every climbing situation is potentially dangerous, not to think if I do a few things by rote I'm safe.

In reply to GrahamD:


But if these people had routinely tied a knot in the end of their ropes..........

I understand what you are getting at, but I don't get the reason for not knotting, it's an addition that if you are aware it's there (i.e. everytime ) causes little hassle and no danger.

In reply to GrahamD:


But if you know you have tied a knot in the end of the rope, even when indoors, then how could it possibly get stuck at the top of the wall?

I use my judgement to decide when I need to unknot the knot I have tied in the end of the rope before pulling the rope through. How could your knot, which you knew you tied, get 'inadvertently get stuck at the top'? Surely having thought about it and used your judgement you couldn't possibly make a mistake?

Of course, getting a knot stuck in the anchors indoors is awkward and embarrassing and there obviously a fair comparison to the dangers of being lowered off a rope or abseiling off the end.

In reply to andrewmc:


Because someone else can pulls the rope through ? whatever reason there is a finite chance of this happening whereas there is no chance of being dropped off the end of the rope.

In reply to GrahamD:

On a multi-pitch abseil, however, there is a very real chance of forgetting to untie a knot once and ending up with significant problems.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:



I didn't say that I'd never been a motorcyclist (that's you misinterpreting my posts). I've been a road user for a long time, on a variety of vehicles, and I don't see why my experiences are any less valid than any other road user.

I'm not deliberately misinterpreting anything; my interpretation differs from yours, that's all: I see some leeway in the way many rules are phrased, and I think that's sensible, because it is not possible to anticipate every scenario - I don't think you can ever completely remove the need for judgement calls in some situations.

In reply to bpmclimb:


Well let's get this out in the open, have you been a motorcyclist or not?

In reply to krikoman:


You might as well drop the bullying tone. You'll never know either way. I don't suppose that will stop you leaping to your own conclusions, though.

when you open a 135 post long thread on UKC to see its gone from a casual reminder about knotting the dead end of a rope to an argument about motorcycles...

https://media0.giphy.com/media/aZ3LDBs1ExsE8/giphy.gif




*its a slow Wednesday

In reply to bpmclimb:

I can assure you there was no bullying tone, (Didn't you just accuse someone of misinterpreting your posts), but you seem determined to assume that, so if it pleases you , carry on.

I think we all now know you haven't been a motorcyclist, there's no shame in it. Since it's the most dangerous form of travel, in deaths per miles travelled, it's quite an eye opener to witness other people driving skills. You notice them more because of your own vulnerability, and the usual excuse is, "sorry mate I didn't see you".

As for the rest of it, you've obviously made your mind up that, anyone suggesting something might be useful, is like asking you to put your prick in a blender with a drunken monkey in charge of the on/off switch. Help yourself, either ignore the advice or don't.

Please try not to fall on me though.

And please don't pull in front of me without signalling.

You could always change your mind at a later date, but don't forget rule 103, before changing direction.

In reply to GarethSL:


its a slow Wednesday

In reply to bpmclimb:


If the road is completely empty, there's nothing to overtake....

In reply to krikoman:


Somebody assumed I hadn't been a motorcyclist, I then pointed out that they had misinterpreted my post. I would have thought the conclusion was obvious (i.e. that I had experience of riding motorcycles on the roads). It passed you by, obviously, since you go on to state ....

I think we all now know you haven't been a motorcyclist, there's no shame in it.

You know nothing of the sort - and it won't help you look any less stupid by implying that everybody else knows it too. You have no basis for either statement.

You notice them more because of your own vulnerability, and the usual excuse is, "sorry mate I didn't see you".

I'm well aware of it, as is every other road user who has a modicum of intelligence, and exercises care when driving or riding. You have no knowledge of me or how I use the roads, I don't need that lesson from you, you patronising git. All I ever said was that I don't follow rules absolutely 100% - even rules which I follow very, very close to that (like signalling) - because there are always exceptional cases.

As for the rest of it, you've obviously made your mind up that, anyone suggesting something might be useful, is like asking you to put your prick in a blender with a drunken monkey in charge of the on/off switch.

By all means suggest something useful, something I don't know already; just try not to leap to unwarranted conclusions about someone you don't know at all, adopt a patronising tone, adopt a bullying tone, assume you're the only one that is aware of road safety. In short, spare me your mush-for-brains bullshit.

And please don't pull in front of me without signalling.

I don't do that, so it won't happen. You have no basis for assuming that I do, so this is yet more hot air.

In reply to Chris Harris:


True, got me on a technicality! The situation I (and quite a few others) was envisaging was an otherwise completely empty road. You know - when you overtake and then stay in that lane for a while before pulling back in, so that the vehicle you've overtaken is quite distant; you have good visibility and you can see that there is absolutely nothing else around. That's one of those rare situations in which I may manoeuvre without signal.

In reply to bpmclimb:


Or you are overtaking something slow like a lorry, so you pass it so much faster it's irrellevent

In reply to bpmclimb:


the irony is strong with this one

In reply to springfall2008:


But what do you gain from NOT signalling, it might be irrelevant, but how is it a bad thing, and what do you actually save? And like I said, you might, just might, have missed someone. Someone who in seeing your signal might be able to prevent an accident. So really is it so much hardship to signal all the time, as if there are other road users around?

In reply to krikoman:

What you gain is applying thought to the situation rather than going onto auto-pilot. One day some thought might actually save your life!

In reply to springfall2008:


But why do you assume it's not thinking about it, it's exactly the opposite, it's thinking, "there might be someone I can't see here, and my indicating might help them". Rather than blindly assuming you know there is definitely no one about because you haven't seen them.

If you would normally signal when the road is busy, why is it different when you THINK there's no one around?

I really don't understand why you would purposefully NOT signal, it doesn't make anyone any safer, whereas signal just might.

It's not about doing it on auto-pilot, it's about doing it because it's right to.

In reply to krikoman:

If that's your conscious thought and it's part of your plan then I'd totally agree with you.

Many people just go through life automatically applying a rule they have learnt a long time ago and never apply any thought to if it's still appropriate. Often the rule is also applied badly, e.g. they think they must indicate, but they change lane and indicate at the same time. Clearly if you are changing lane then indicating is pointless as it's obvious what you are doing, the indication is to inform people ahead of time that you intend to change lane and give them time to react before you change lane.

Interesting when the traffic is busy during rush hour it's sometimes a good idea not to indicate if you have a feeling the car in the other lane will deliberately close the gap to stop you from moving into "his" lane!

Clearly totally off topic!

In reply to krikoman:

Generally if there's nothing to be gained from doing something, the only reason you do it is because you're acting on auto-pilot.

In reply to springfall2008:


But all of what you've written is about BAD driving, it's not an excuse for not signalling. It's about thinking that someone MIGHT do something bad if you do the right thing. so we've now moved on from not signalling when there's no one else around, to not signalling when it's really busy, because someone MIGHT be a bad driver!

This isn't about that, it's about YOU deciding not to indicate, so unless YOU change lanes and indicate at the same time, then that's no reason to do it.

Yes off topic, but that's nothing new for UKC?