This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
I just wanted to give everyone a heads up that the Warwick climbing wall as we know it will be knocked down in about a years time. I think the plans for the new wall are going to be placed on the notice board for those that are interested.
In my opinion the plans for the new wall are incredibly disappointing especially in comparison with the current facility -primarily due to the limited space allocated for the new facility and the glass panels for half of the climbing room walls. I don't believe the new wall will even match what we currently have for roped climbing and given the choice i would chose to stick with the the current facility (and competition wall!). Sad times...
In my opinion the plans for the new wall are incredibly disappointing especially in comparison with the current facility -primarily due to the limited space allocated for the new facility and the glass panels for half of the climbing room walls. I don't believe the new wall will even match what we currently have for roped climbing and given the choice i would chose to stick with the the current facility (and competition wall!). Sad times...
10
In reply to batson:
It's a real shame, the new wall is clearly style over substance and is basically just being used as a prop to make the entrance to the new leisure centre look good.
I've moved away from the area now but when I was still there I was one of many people that raised concerns.
There was supposed to be some kind of consultation that I put my name down for but it never happened as far as I know, so they have ended up with a climbing wall designed by architects.
I guess all climbers around Leam/Warwick/Cov will have to become boulderers and just go to the (frankly excellent) Ballroom instead...
It's a real shame, the new wall is clearly style over substance and is basically just being used as a prop to make the entrance to the new leisure centre look good.
I've moved away from the area now but when I was still there I was one of many people that raised concerns.
There was supposed to be some kind of consultation that I put my name down for but it never happened as far as I know, so they have ended up with a climbing wall designed by architects.
I guess all climbers around Leam/Warwick/Cov will have to become boulderers and just go to the (frankly excellent) Ballroom instead...
6
In reply to batson:
Totally agree with the previous two posters.
So sad that they've ignored the concerns raised and just appear to be going ahead with their original idea.
While the current wall has its faults, it is functional and I think the new wall will be a nice to look at white elephant!
Totally agree with the previous two posters.
So sad that they've ignored the concerns raised and just appear to be going ahead with their original idea.
While the current wall has its faults, it is functional and I think the new wall will be a nice to look at white elephant!
2
In reply to Dandan:
Shame there's no parking at ballroom (...and a lot of traffic to get to the centre of Coventry!).
Shame there's no parking at ballroom (...and a lot of traffic to get to the centre of Coventry!).
2
In reply to Lord_ash2000:
Couple of renderings here:
https://warwick.ac.uk/services/sport/about/facilities/sports-hub
Couple of renderings here:
https://warwick.ac.uk/services/sport/about/facilities/sports-hub
In reply to Dandan:
There was a hint of consultation but basically the views of users have been ignored. A massive opportunity lost.
There was a hint of consultation but basically the views of users have been ignored. A massive opportunity lost.
4
In reply to batson:
Looks like Surrey sports park. That's a shiny facility that doesn't know if it's catering for elite athletes or children's parties and so trends to the latter
http://www.surreysportspark.co.uk/sports/Climbing/
Looks like Surrey sports park. That's a shiny facility that doesn't know if it's catering for elite athletes or children's parties and so trends to the latter
http://www.surreysportspark.co.uk/sports/Climbing/
2
In reply to batson:
Absolutely agree, the plans for the new wall are terrible! I alsi put my name down for the consultation meeting but never heard anything more about it.
They are going to get rid of all the feature walls and go for generic plastic walls like all the other climbing centres...I travel 30mins to Bear Rock and am there a lot, if these plans become a reality I'm not sure it will be worth the fuel!!
Having climbed with glass walls before I can say that they are definitely more for show and not practical to climb at all!
Really hope they will listen to the people who actually use the wall!
Absolutely agree, the plans for the new wall are terrible! I alsi put my name down for the consultation meeting but never heard anything more about it.
They are going to get rid of all the feature walls and go for generic plastic walls like all the other climbing centres...I travel 30mins to Bear Rock and am there a lot, if these plans become a reality I'm not sure it will be worth the fuel!!
Having climbed with glass walls before I can say that they are definitely more for show and not practical to climb at all!
Really hope they will listen to the people who actually use the wall!
6
In reply to batson:
I have just seen the new designs and feel very annoyed that after climbing at the uni for 9 years I will have to look for another venue? I still can’t believe that a climbing facility will have more glass than climbing walls and with the Olympics you would have thought the concentration would have been on creating a world class venue?
Unfortunately I don’t think a climber has been involved in the decisions and the loss of the feature walls to flat boards is the most disappointing
I have just seen the new designs and feel very annoyed that after climbing at the uni for 9 years I will have to look for another venue? I still can’t believe that a climbing facility will have more glass than climbing walls and with the Olympics you would have thought the concentration would have been on creating a world class venue?
Unfortunately I don’t think a climber has been involved in the decisions and the loss of the feature walls to flat boards is the most disappointing
2
In reply to goddamm7:
In the late 70s Warwick University built a state of the art end-of-sports-hall climbing wall. The management were so keen to keep it looking good, they banned most climbing shoes and instead bought a supply of white-soled rock shoes for climbers to use.
Sad to think the same absurdly misplaced priorities may be showing themselves there again, especially when the first lead feature wall there was such a step ahead of almost everywhere else at the time, in the 90s.
In the late 70s Warwick University built a state of the art end-of-sports-hall climbing wall. The management were so keen to keep it looking good, they banned most climbing shoes and instead bought a supply of white-soled rock shoes for climbers to use.
Sad to think the same absurdly misplaced priorities may be showing themselves there again, especially when the first lead feature wall there was such a step ahead of almost everywhere else at the time, in the 90s.
5
In reply to Dandan:
Those renderings were from way back, I don't know what this new plan is everyone has seen, it would be good to have a look at it to see what they settled on.
If it's any consolation I did a fair bit of work on a design for this new centre in 2016 which involved some nice big steep walls and decent bouldering, but by the sounds of it they have opted for something better suited for birthday parties. Seems to be the problem these days, climbing walls are seen by architects as nothing more than fancy cladding.
Those renderings were from way back, I don't know what this new plan is everyone has seen, it would be good to have a look at it to see what they settled on.
If it's any consolation I did a fair bit of work on a design for this new centre in 2016 which involved some nice big steep walls and decent bouldering, but by the sounds of it they have opted for something better suited for birthday parties. Seems to be the problem these days, climbing walls are seen by architects as nothing more than fancy cladding.
4
In reply to batson:
In my gallery , I have put some images.
The amount of glass is staggering! Obviously, it vastly reduces the potential climbable space but may look nice. They did actually employ a climber consultant but he obviously had his own agenda.
They say this is final but can't be any harm expressing one's views to the vice_chancellor.
In my gallery , I have put some images.
The amount of glass is staggering! Obviously, it vastly reduces the potential climbable space but may look nice. They did actually employ a climber consultant but he obviously had his own agenda.
They say this is final but can't be any harm expressing one's views to the vice_chancellor.
1
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
Just had a look now, yes that's a crap design, nearly all vertical.
If only you knew what you could have had.
Just had a look now, yes that's a crap design, nearly all vertical.
If only you knew what you could have had.
1
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
The original plans included a full size speed climbing wall built to official spec, is that still in there? It was tucked in the join between the main wall and the glass wall.
At least it would mean the wall is 15m+ tall which is a decent length...
The bouldering looks like absolute junk, it'll never be a patch on panel 3...
The original plans included a full size speed climbing wall built to official spec, is that still in there? It was tucked in the join between the main wall and the glass wall.
At least it would mean the wall is 15m+ tall which is a decent length...
The bouldering looks like absolute junk, it'll never be a patch on panel 3...
1
1
In reply to batson:
Is this not where the new Maths department building is going?
One man's meat is another persons poison.
Is this not where the new Maths department building is going?
One man's meat is another persons poison.
In reply to Lord_ash2000:
I wonder which other sports have seen similar disregard for the views of the people who will actually be using them?
The swimming pool would look just as good if it was only a foot deep, and it would be much easier to mainitain.
How about replacing that dull 5-a-side wooden floor with nice pretty, shiny tiles?
Table tennis tables clearly have dangerous corners, so let's make them oval shaped instead.
And we could replace badminton nets with advertising banners to keep costs down.
> Seems to be the problem these days, climbing walls are seen by architects as nothing more than fancy cladding.
I wonder which other sports have seen similar disregard for the views of the people who will actually be using them?
The swimming pool would look just as good if it was only a foot deep, and it would be much easier to mainitain.
How about replacing that dull 5-a-side wooden floor with nice pretty, shiny tiles?
Table tennis tables clearly have dangerous corners, so let's make them oval shaped instead.
And we could replace badminton nets with advertising banners to keep costs down.
13
In reply to Dandan:
Last I heard , the speed climbing wall is still planned.
The only good news is that I may well be persuaded to get outdoors more often!
Last I heard , the speed climbing wall is still planned.
The only good news is that I may well be persuaded to get outdoors more often!
In reply to batson:
This type of design is unfortunately happening everywhere in the Southeast. Token walls designed to give some sort of wow factor at the frount of any new leisure facility but unappealing to most seasoned climbers.
Presumably motivated by architects and kerb appeal of non climbing types.
I can’t think of any recent (last 8 years) council type development which has not followed this trend.
This type of design is unfortunately happening everywhere in the Southeast. Token walls designed to give some sort of wow factor at the frount of any new leisure facility but unappealing to most seasoned climbers.
Presumably motivated by architects and kerb appeal of non climbing types.
I can’t think of any recent (last 8 years) council type development which has not followed this trend.
1
1
In reply to batson:
Soooooo, I took the time to look at the plans following on from this post and can only echo the thoughts and sentiments, I've always embraced change in any way that sees progression but I'm struggling to find this progression within the plans.. The existing facility provides an environment which sees people new and old hands at climbing aspiring to the challenge of the steep overhanging lead wall. I fear that too much space has been given over to design in the new plans and in an environment that is often at capacity the priority I would have thought would have been given to the customer need.....more route lines less bouldering
I will obviously reserve judgement and am ever the optimist but as I say fear the worst more regressive than progressive
Soooooo, I took the time to look at the plans following on from this post and can only echo the thoughts and sentiments, I've always embraced change in any way that sees progression but I'm struggling to find this progression within the plans.. The existing facility provides an environment which sees people new and old hands at climbing aspiring to the challenge of the steep overhanging lead wall. I fear that too much space has been given over to design in the new plans and in an environment that is often at capacity the priority I would have thought would have been given to the customer need.....more route lines less bouldering
I will obviously reserve judgement and am ever the optimist but as I say fear the worst more regressive than progressive
2
In reply to john arran:
I lived in Coventry in the 90's and the Warwick Uni wall was my local one that I visited regularly. It was a big deal for me to lead a climb on that overhanging section and on my own quickdraws! Don't get that anywhere now. Also loved the jamming crack. I got on well with the staff and took pictures at lots of their events and they were used in publicity for the wall.
I lived in Coventry in the 90's and the Warwick Uni wall was my local one that I visited regularly. It was a big deal for me to lead a climb on that overhanging section and on my own quickdraws! Don't get that anywhere now. Also loved the jamming crack. I got on well with the staff and took pictures at lots of their events and they were used in publicity for the wall.
2
In reply to batson:
Thanks for the post. I agree completely, as does just about everyone I know who uses the wall regularly.
It will be the very sad end of an era and not in a misty eyed but progressive way. From what we can see, it's just a significant step back and missed opportunity.
We have annual memebership and will probably cancel and start using other walls in the midlands. There is a choice if prepared to travel a little (and we do already travel to use the Warwick wall). It's sad but I suspect people will vote with their feet.
Thanks for the post. I agree completely, as does just about everyone I know who uses the wall regularly.
It will be the very sad end of an era and not in a misty eyed but progressive way. From what we can see, it's just a significant step back and missed opportunity.
We have annual memebership and will probably cancel and start using other walls in the midlands. There is a choice if prepared to travel a little (and we do already travel to use the Warwick wall). It's sad but I suspect people will vote with their feet.
4
In reply to batson: Having viewed the plans I wholeheartedly agree with you. Significant step backwards in comparison to the existing facilities featured walls. Most definitely a missed opportunity should this proceed in its current form.
Would appear someone from ‘Everest’ sat in on the review meeting! Dependant on the aspect of the building I wonder if climbers will be subject to the suns rays pleasantly warming the wall (chalk sales to increase).
Would appear someone from ‘Everest’ sat in on the review meeting! Dependant on the aspect of the building I wonder if climbers will be subject to the suns rays pleasantly warming the wall (chalk sales to increase).
In reply to batson:
I have attended all of focus group meeting and had a few discussions with management before the group was set up. i think the plans for the new wall look ok....given the space that design was given, but the very large elephant in the room is the room itself.
IMHO this was never a space that was suitable for building a wall, and from day one there was never any room for discussion in this area. This was the space, and there was no choice but to make the best of it...I think the new layout will probably do that.
Like others have said, I think this was a huge opportunity missed, starting from scratch it could have been so much more, it seems that design (eye candy) was given president over what climbers wanted/needed. To a point I can see why they would like to create a wow factor to the entrance to the new sports development but personally I think that this was a error.
I should add on all other areas of design that the university were more than willing to listen and took on board what was said, I think for this part the university should be commended, praise where praise is due.
I really hope that the old comp wall will just not end up in a skip and someone will take it away and use it, it's been so much fun to climb on over the years, I'm going to miss it.
I have attended all of focus group meeting and had a few discussions with management before the group was set up. i think the plans for the new wall look ok....given the space that design was given, but the very large elephant in the room is the room itself.
IMHO this was never a space that was suitable for building a wall, and from day one there was never any room for discussion in this area. This was the space, and there was no choice but to make the best of it...I think the new layout will probably do that.
Like others have said, I think this was a huge opportunity missed, starting from scratch it could have been so much more, it seems that design (eye candy) was given president over what climbers wanted/needed. To a point I can see why they would like to create a wow factor to the entrance to the new sports development but personally I think that this was a error.
I should add on all other areas of design that the university were more than willing to listen and took on board what was said, I think for this part the university should be commended, praise where praise is due.
I really hope that the old comp wall will just not end up in a skip and someone will take it away and use it, it's been so much fun to climb on over the years, I'm going to miss it.
2
In reply to batson:
No featured walls seems a bad move in my opinion. Next you'll be telling me they haven't included at least one crack system in the new design. If this is a money saving exercise why not just dismantle the current wall and rebuild it in the new facility.
No featured walls seems a bad move in my opinion. Next you'll be telling me they haven't included at least one crack system in the new design. If this is a money saving exercise why not just dismantle the current wall and rebuild it in the new facility.
4
In reply to Andy Fielding:
There are featured walls...admittedly it would have been nice to have more, and yes, that was a budget issue, as was relocating the existing wall, which was also discussed.
There are featured walls...admittedly it would have been nice to have more, and yes, that was a budget issue, as was relocating the existing wall, which was also discussed.
In reply to batson:
It is suggested that the current proposed design is sanctioned because the new sports complex is already over budget and the climbing area itself is over budget. It is estimated that it would cost around a further £153K for detailed walls, as used in the old climbing area, so there is no chance this can happen. What is not stated however, is the glass costs around this figure! What climbers want glass?
A very experienced, retired construction executive said during one of the meetings:-
You will be forgiven fairly quickly for being over budget and for being late, but poor quality is there for ever!
It is so sad that a top UK University, as rich as Warwick puts style over substance, worries about £153K (but could save more that this by simplifying the design) and cares not to listen to its potential users.
It is suggested that the current proposed design is sanctioned because the new sports complex is already over budget and the climbing area itself is over budget. It is estimated that it would cost around a further £153K for detailed walls, as used in the old climbing area, so there is no chance this can happen. What is not stated however, is the glass costs around this figure! What climbers want glass?
A very experienced, retired construction executive said during one of the meetings:-
You will be forgiven fairly quickly for being over budget and for being late, but poor quality is there for ever!
It is so sad that a top UK University, as rich as Warwick puts style over substance, worries about £153K (but could save more that this by simplifying the design) and cares not to listen to its potential users.
4
In reply to Boxman:
I was under the impression that the present wall has an annual revenue of well over £100,000 so the new one would effectively pay for itself incredibly fast.
I was under the impression that the present wall has an annual revenue of well over £100,000 so the new one would effectively pay for itself incredibly fast.
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
Not if everyone stops going there because it's shit.
> I was under the impression that the present wall has an annual revenue of well over £100,000 so the new one would effectively pay for itself incredibly fast.
Not if everyone stops going there because it's shit.
8
In reply to krikoman:
Well you can say goodbye to the crack as I didn't see one in the plans -perhaps i missed it as i was blinded by the sunlight coming through from the insane amount of glass panels!!
Seriously though-no crack in the new plans-you'll have to go red point Birmingham for some good cracks!
Well you can say goodbye to the crack as I didn't see one in the plans -perhaps i missed it as i was blinded by the sunlight coming through from the insane amount of glass panels!!
Seriously though-no crack in the new plans-you'll have to go red point Birmingham for some good cracks!
In reply to batson:
Can anyone tell me the timescale for the demolition - new build please?
Can anyone tell me the timescale for the demolition - new build please?
1
In reply to batson:
Thanks - my granddaughter has just got into climbing and is going there on Saturday morning. Just wondered how soon she would need to find somewhere to climb until the new one is built. There is nowhere else in Cov other than the ballroom and that is bouldering only.
Thanks - my granddaughter has just got into climbing and is going there on Saturday morning. Just wondered how soon she would need to find somewhere to climb until the new one is built. There is nowhere else in Cov other than the ballroom and that is bouldering only.
1
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
They have started building the new one now and the old one wont close until the new one is opened!
They have started building the new one now and the old one wont close until the new one is opened!
In reply to batson:
Thanks.
Thanks.
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
Very true. The wall is the only part of the complex that actually makes money when running costs Vs income are analysed although the Uni would never admit to this. It has been heard that Warick sports as a whole loses ~ £2m/year (and yet admin staff increase and they take decsions that will increase this loss?)
Add to this that climbing/bouldering is one of few sports actually growing in participant numbers yet a Uni potentially downgrades a facility. Forward thinking?
Very true. The wall is the only part of the complex that actually makes money when running costs Vs income are analysed although the Uni would never admit to this. It has been heard that Warick sports as a whole loses ~ £2m/year (and yet admin staff increase and they take decsions that will increase this loss?)
Add to this that climbing/bouldering is one of few sports actually growing in participant numbers yet a Uni potentially downgrades a facility. Forward thinking?
In reply to Andy Fielding:
I always liked Warwick, I thought it had one of the best variations of routes of many of the walls I've been to.
I always liked Warwick, I thought it had one of the best variations of routes of many of the walls I've been to.
RIP indoor climbing in Warwick. The new build is a really poor design, if you're a regular climber...
A great 'business opportunity' now presents itself for anyone thinking of opening a new midlands wall.
A great 'business opportunity' now presents itself for anyone thinking of opening a new midlands wall.
1
In reply to batson:
Just stumbled across this and it makes a sad read. I learned to climb here around 2000 and have great memories of the place.
It’s a shame also that given the ever increasing status of climbing as a sport, and its Olympic inclusion, a top university such as Warwick is passing up the opportunity to make what could have been a significant investment in both its facilities and the sport as a whole.
Just stumbled across this and it makes a sad read. I learned to climb here around 2000 and have great memories of the place.
It’s a shame also that given the ever increasing status of climbing as a sport, and its Olympic inclusion, a top university such as Warwick is passing up the opportunity to make what could have been a significant investment in both its facilities and the sport as a whole.
1
4
In reply to batson:
I'm a student at the University and went along to the consultation. Here are the final plans they sent to me and other attendees on the 28th Nov: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_3tdLmN1CexcyruLmTimnLZN3yML5G81
I'm a student at the University and went along to the consultation. Here are the final plans they sent to me and other attendees on the 28th Nov: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_3tdLmN1CexcyruLmTimnLZN3yML5G81
1
In reply to Sid Sherborne:
Thank you for sharing. Much worse than I had remembered. Style over substance is very much the operative phrase! Such a large area to go at but only ~30% more lines than current and all that glass? Makes no sense.
Thank you for sharing. Much worse than I had remembered. Style over substance is very much the operative phrase! Such a large area to go at but only ~30% more lines than current and all that glass? Makes no sense.
1
In reply to Boxman:
I'm not sure there are more lines as i couldn't see in the plans how many climbing lines there are? Lets not forget two of those lines are exclusively for speed climbing. With the finger like profile of the walls to gain more climbing area its going to be dangerously tight in some of those corners I don't see how they think that wall will accommodate the huge groups they have in for parties/the bear cubs/scouts in addition to the students and private climbers at the levels we have now let alone in a few years time (as climbing becomes more popular with the Olympics/ increasing student numbers and general population). For a start where would the groups even sit safely whilst waiting their turn to climb?
Someone said at one of the consultations that those in charge of the new sports centre should be ashamed of themselves for what they are doing to climbing at Warwick-and having seen these final plans I'd have to agree.
I'm not sure there are more lines as i couldn't see in the plans how many climbing lines there are? Lets not forget two of those lines are exclusively for speed climbing. With the finger like profile of the walls to gain more climbing area its going to be dangerously tight in some of those corners I don't see how they think that wall will accommodate the huge groups they have in for parties/the bear cubs/scouts in addition to the students and private climbers at the levels we have now let alone in a few years time (as climbing becomes more popular with the Olympics/ increasing student numbers and general population). For a start where would the groups even sit safely whilst waiting their turn to climb?
Someone said at one of the consultations that those in charge of the new sports centre should be ashamed of themselves for what they are doing to climbing at Warwick-and having seen these final plans I'd have to agree.
Post edited at 11:12
6
In reply to batson:
Remember too that although some of the lines may reach 15 metres, the new roof slopes down so many routes will actually be much shorter than the present ones.
Remember too that although some of the lines may reach 15 metres, the new roof slopes down so many routes will actually be much shorter than the present ones.
In reply to batson: ive been thinking about this a lot and concerns are greater now than before on two points really but around the same issue, I’ve spoken to a number of climbers old and new, elite and beginner and the idea of segregated areas cause two problems, climbing is a community sport active encouragement between different skill levels has not only helped with mine and others climbing development but has helped regulate safety with experienced and generally more skilled climbers able to give advice about a whole range of issues.
Along the same thought lines with these areas beginners will quickly exhaust the offer in the beginners area and move to the intermediate section, this will become overly congested and the knock in will be some climbers taking increased risks moving into the advanced area to avoid the crowds whilst not having the skill set to do this safely, I may be wrong but feel it is a significant area of concern the wall staff will need to address
Along the same thought lines with these areas beginners will quickly exhaust the offer in the beginners area and move to the intermediate section, this will become overly congested and the knock in will be some climbers taking increased risks moving into the advanced area to avoid the crowds whilst not having the skill set to do this safely, I may be wrong but feel it is a significant area of concern the wall staff will need to address
2
In reply to Alan Jephcott:
Certainly a different approach and extremely valid.
Further thoughts.
Transfer of current walls to new build. Objections are:-
Closure time. Estimate no more than 16 man weeks. i.e. 4 guys 4 weeks to strip current wall and re-install in new build. The frames would be in place in the new build ready. (Certainly no where near the 6 months as quoted!) 4 weeks without a climbing wall would be worth it!?
Concerns about the panels theirselves not able to be put back due to distortion etc is unlikely. The panels are grp. Extremely stiff, resiliant and strong. A quick jet wash and they would be as good as new. (Apart from the rope wear!)
Saving money as well!
Certainly a different approach and extremely valid.
Further thoughts.
Transfer of current walls to new build. Objections are:-
Closure time. Estimate no more than 16 man weeks. i.e. 4 guys 4 weeks to strip current wall and re-install in new build. The frames would be in place in the new build ready. (Certainly no where near the 6 months as quoted!) 4 weeks without a climbing wall would be worth it!?
Concerns about the panels theirselves not able to be put back due to distortion etc is unlikely. The panels are grp. Extremely stiff, resiliant and strong. A quick jet wash and they would be as good as new. (Apart from the rope wear!)
Saving money as well!
In reply to Boxman:
I did suggest this moving of the current wall to the new building at a consultation but they said the panels wouldn't cope with it and surprisingly they also said it wouldn't save on cost?
I did suggest this moving of the current wall to the new building at a consultation but they said the panels wouldn't cope with it and surprisingly they also said it wouldn't save on cost?
In reply to Boxman:
Having been part of the team that installed the curved resin wall I would be very surprised if you could take the wall down and re-build it without using one of these https://www.bes.co.uk/gorilla-14in-wrecking-bar?ref=gs&gclid=EAIaIQobCh... and lots of these http://www.mytoolshed.co.uk/p1001831/Roughneck_Sledge_Hammer_3lb_Fibreglass...
I seem to remember the pieces of the puzzle didn't fit very well when we built it
Having been part of the team that installed the curved resin wall I would be very surprised if you could take the wall down and re-build it without using one of these https://www.bes.co.uk/gorilla-14in-wrecking-bar?ref=gs&gclid=EAIaIQobCh... and lots of these http://www.mytoolshed.co.uk/p1001831/Roughneck_Sledge_Hammer_3lb_Fibreglass...
I seem to remember the pieces of the puzzle didn't fit very well when we built it
3
In reply to Boxman:
No way 4 guys could dismantle the existing wall in that time - or dismantle it at all without destroying it. As Has been mentioned the original “comp wall” didn’t fit together that well. The newer stuff was resined together in situ. The panels arrived with out any resin on the borders so they could be bolted on to the frame. They then applied about an inch of resin al over the gaps and sculpted it on site. You’d have to smash all that off, angle grind the bolts and then crow bar the panels off which would probably break the edges of them in the process. You’d just be left with a big broken mess. You could salvage the frame but the panels are made over the frame so you would have to lay all that out over the floor and make the panels over it. The reality is that this is an antiquated way of making climbing walls. There’s a reason all the new walls are plywood. It’s much better. It gives the route setters way more freedom and it’s also impossible to comply with most walls route setting policies on a resin wall as you never have a flat surface to put a hold on and you can’t pin anything. With a flat plywood surface and the right selection of volumes I can build you a crack, or an Arete, or a corner. I can turn a vertical wall into a slab and vice versa, then on the next reset we can change it and give you something new. We can also use every hold available on the market. With a resin wall you are restricted to a tiny percentage of what is available.
On the face of it I don’t think the new design looks that bad, (though it doesn’t look that great and it is being built by EP I think so will have their usual annoying features like rounded panel edges and square t-nut pattern). I imagine they will get all their holds from them as well which is another mistake.
I felt like I worked hard there to bring the wall forward, change the hold selection, organise the route setting program etc and as soon as I left a lot of that work was thrown out the window. In fact despite living a mile away I haven’t been back in there at all in the last 7 years. Seems a shame but I guess some of the problems that I was always up against will never change - first and foremost it is a university and the sports facilities are a loss leader to attract students and staff.
No way 4 guys could dismantle the existing wall in that time - or dismantle it at all without destroying it. As Has been mentioned the original “comp wall” didn’t fit together that well. The newer stuff was resined together in situ. The panels arrived with out any resin on the borders so they could be bolted on to the frame. They then applied about an inch of resin al over the gaps and sculpted it on site. You’d have to smash all that off, angle grind the bolts and then crow bar the panels off which would probably break the edges of them in the process. You’d just be left with a big broken mess. You could salvage the frame but the panels are made over the frame so you would have to lay all that out over the floor and make the panels over it. The reality is that this is an antiquated way of making climbing walls. There’s a reason all the new walls are plywood. It’s much better. It gives the route setters way more freedom and it’s also impossible to comply with most walls route setting policies on a resin wall as you never have a flat surface to put a hold on and you can’t pin anything. With a flat plywood surface and the right selection of volumes I can build you a crack, or an Arete, or a corner. I can turn a vertical wall into a slab and vice versa, then on the next reset we can change it and give you something new. We can also use every hold available on the market. With a resin wall you are restricted to a tiny percentage of what is available.
On the face of it I don’t think the new design looks that bad, (though it doesn’t look that great and it is being built by EP I think so will have their usual annoying features like rounded panel edges and square t-nut pattern). I imagine they will get all their holds from them as well which is another mistake.
I felt like I worked hard there to bring the wall forward, change the hold selection, organise the route setting program etc and as soon as I left a lot of that work was thrown out the window. In fact despite living a mile away I haven’t been back in there at all in the last 7 years. Seems a shame but I guess some of the problems that I was always up against will never change - first and foremost it is a university and the sports facilities are a loss leader to attract students and staff.
Post edited at 22:36
5
1
In reply to lx:
You may be right but having worked with grp for 30 years it is more rugged, versatile, repareable than most people realise. (or want to recognise?) As you already mentioned bonding panels in situ with grp glass matt or pre-preg and resin. Gaps can be closed, corners re-bonded. Nothing has to be smashed, just cut (jig saw/angle grind) and re-bond. Emotive terms smash, crow bar off?
Of course a new featured wall would be preferable but such a waste to just dump the current featured wall. When Rockface closed, Creation managed to take the featured walls and make something of them. 4 guys could strip the current panels off in a week by cutting. Lots of health/saftey issues could be brought into play but nothing that the grp industry does not already understand and cater for. Cut and bond, just a very manual process that is a bit dusty and then smelly when using matt and resin to re-bond/reinforce.
You may be right but having worked with grp for 30 years it is more rugged, versatile, repareable than most people realise. (or want to recognise?) As you already mentioned bonding panels in situ with grp glass matt or pre-preg and resin. Gaps can be closed, corners re-bonded. Nothing has to be smashed, just cut (jig saw/angle grind) and re-bond. Emotive terms smash, crow bar off?
Of course a new featured wall would be preferable but such a waste to just dump the current featured wall. When Rockface closed, Creation managed to take the featured walls and make something of them. 4 guys could strip the current panels off in a week by cutting. Lots of health/saftey issues could be brought into play but nothing that the grp industry does not already understand and cater for. Cut and bond, just a very manual process that is a bit dusty and then smelly when using matt and resin to re-bond/reinforce.
1
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
See answer to lx (who I think must be Alex.)
In the end though I think his last sentance ( first and foremost it is a university and the sports facilities are a loss leader to attract students and staff) is the case and this is more an adverstisement (i.e. style) rather than a state of the art (substance) facility. Hence all the glass (windows) to show it off.
See answer to lx (who I think must be Alex.)
In the end though I think his last sentance ( first and foremost it is a university and the sports facilities are a loss leader to attract students and staff) is the case and this is more an adverstisement (i.e. style) rather than a state of the art (substance) facility. Hence all the glass (windows) to show it off.
In reply to Boxman:
Personally, building anything out of resin/spray concrete etc is never preferable to plywood in a modern indoor climbing centre. Not unless you never want to do any route setting.
Personally, building anything out of resin/spray concrete etc is never preferable to plywood in a modern indoor climbing centre. Not unless you never want to do any route setting.
1
In reply to batson:
Thread Juxto here
The Warwick Bear Rock climbing wall is being demolished
Bear Grylls - why the hatred?
Perhaps they could slightly alter the name of the name of the new wall to "Bear Grylls Rock Climbing Wall"
Because it'll be crap and not deliver what it claims to.
Thread Juxto here
The Warwick Bear Rock climbing wall is being demolished
Bear Grylls - why the hatred?
Perhaps they could slightly alter the name of the name of the new wall to "Bear Grylls Rock Climbing Wall"
Because it'll be crap and not deliver what it claims to.
1
In reply to lx:
For route setting you may have a point. However:-
For quality of climbs (do not read difficulty)in my limited experience of routes indoors, Bear Rock is difficult (read almost impossible) to compete with. Harrogate, Stockport, Redpoint so limited in comparison. Creation used to be good but the venue is not the most comfortable.
One would also debate, it is not about the setters, it should be about the users experience/quality of routes?
For route setting you may have a point. However:-
For quality of climbs (do not read difficulty)in my limited experience of routes indoors, Bear Rock is difficult (read almost impossible) to compete with. Harrogate, Stockport, Redpoint so limited in comparison. Creation used to be good but the venue is not the most comfortable.
One would also debate, it is not about the setters, it should be about the users experience/quality of routes?
1
In reply to Boxman:
GRP/curved resin or whatever you want to call it has the major problem of limiting the holds that you can use. The flat spots can only be so big otherwise what is the point of using such an expensive material, and this severely limits the size of the holds you can use.
GRP/curved resin or whatever you want to call it has the major problem of limiting the holds that you can use. The flat spots can only be so big otherwise what is the point of using such an expensive material, and this severely limits the size of the holds you can use.
1
In reply to Boxman:
Heavily featured spray concrete/featured resin etc does give an experience that is more like climbing on certain rock types. But it can't be changed. Once its built you are stuck with it forever, never to be updated or modified or even cleaned properly. Its not about the setters, in so far as its not about me doing what I want, but it is about giving me all the tools I need to be able to create what the walls customers want. One of the big frustrations that free lance route setters have is we are often unable to deliver exactly what the customer is asking for with the resources they have. The two main culprits for this are poor hold selection and poor wall design. Bear in mind that most climbing wall customers group together with similar minded climbers and consequently tend to assume that because they and their friends want something, that is what everyone else wants. It may well be that the majority of the Bear Rock users want another heavily featured wall given that this is what they have had for so long, but in my experience this would certainly make them unique amongst climbing wall users. What most people want is change, with fresh new challenges every few weeks. Look at what is happening in the industry. There are new walls opening every month - all of them plywood. Go to the Ballroom in coventry, or the new depot in Birmingham and check out all the amazing large feature feature holds and volumes, and all the tiny screw on footholds that really teach you how to use your feet - you can't use any of those on a resin wall. You also can't pin any holds to stop them spinning. You can't route set in a style that helps all the kids on the squads who are going to comps. You can't set anything harder than the grade of the wall on features only, (which on a few of the lines at Bear Rock is about 6a+). And you get all of these limitations for a significantly higher price.
Heavily featured spray concrete/featured resin etc does give an experience that is more like climbing on certain rock types. But it can't be changed. Once its built you are stuck with it forever, never to be updated or modified or even cleaned properly. Its not about the setters, in so far as its not about me doing what I want, but it is about giving me all the tools I need to be able to create what the walls customers want. One of the big frustrations that free lance route setters have is we are often unable to deliver exactly what the customer is asking for with the resources they have. The two main culprits for this are poor hold selection and poor wall design. Bear in mind that most climbing wall customers group together with similar minded climbers and consequently tend to assume that because they and their friends want something, that is what everyone else wants. It may well be that the majority of the Bear Rock users want another heavily featured wall given that this is what they have had for so long, but in my experience this would certainly make them unique amongst climbing wall users. What most people want is change, with fresh new challenges every few weeks. Look at what is happening in the industry. There are new walls opening every month - all of them plywood. Go to the Ballroom in coventry, or the new depot in Birmingham and check out all the amazing large feature feature holds and volumes, and all the tiny screw on footholds that really teach you how to use your feet - you can't use any of those on a resin wall. You also can't pin any holds to stop them spinning. You can't route set in a style that helps all the kids on the squads who are going to comps. You can't set anything harder than the grade of the wall on features only, (which on a few of the lines at Bear Rock is about 6a+). And you get all of these limitations for a significantly higher price.
7
2
1
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
Ha ha yeah sorry - turned into a bit of an essay. Bear rock always a bit of an emotive subject for me I guess. Start of my career in the industry and sort of my “first love” but always spoilt after the court case and new management.
Ha ha yeah sorry - turned into a bit of an essay. Bear rock always a bit of an emotive subject for me I guess. Start of my career in the industry and sort of my “first love” but always spoilt after the court case and new management.
In reply to Hat Dude:
Some other good juxto potential at the moment:
Which trad routes have you fallen off in 2017?
We didn't fall off a cliff edge
Today at the test
Stumped by my 4 yr old
Some other good juxto potential at the moment:
Which trad routes have you fallen off in 2017?
We didn't fall off a cliff edge
Today at the test
Stumped by my 4 yr old
In reply to batson:
Irrespective of the merits of plywood panels and moulded resin, the new facility will not offer the number of lines or lengths of route which were originally promised. That alone is a big disappointment.
Irrespective of the merits of plywood panels and moulded resin, the new facility will not offer the number of lines or lengths of route which were originally promised. That alone is a big disappointment.
3
In reply to batson:
surely there is an opportunity for some enterprising individuals to open their own climbing wall in the vicinity, now that the main competition is probably going to be a waste of space
surely there is an opportunity for some enterprising individuals to open their own climbing wall in the vicinity, now that the main competition is probably going to be a waste of space
2
In reply to All the Gear, No Idea:
Surely it would be better if instead of wasting money on something that is inferior to the existing facilities, the people in charge of the funds could actually listen to people and build something better or of equal quality.
Pissing away college funds on what might well become a white elephant because it looks stylish, is not a great idea.
> surely there is an opportunity for some enterprising individuals to open their own climbing wall in the vicinity, now that the main competition is probably going to be a waste of space
Surely it would be better if instead of wasting money on something that is inferior to the existing facilities, the people in charge of the funds could actually listen to people and build something better or of equal quality.
Pissing away college funds on what might well become a white elephant because it looks stylish, is not a great idea.
2
1
In reply to lx:
Have you climbed a Warwick?
The beauty of Warwick from my point of view is it has certain, features which remain constant, but with the addition of movable holds allowed a variety of different routes to be added.
The constants include areas of vertical wall, overhang, bulges, and cracks.
All of the things you've said you can't do are things which can specifically BE done and were at Warwick.
Having some constant features doesn't have to mean the wall is boring. The wall opposite the door a Warwick is a great example, a ramp, a bulge and then a vertical, meant you could attempt something hard, scrape over the bulge, have an awkward rest and then carry on. Very much like climbing outside.
Features for feet, features for hands, left/ right hand holds only, the opportunities are limited by your imagination.
If you like straight up and down, there's that option too.
Have you climbed a Warwick?
The beauty of Warwick from my point of view is it has certain, features which remain constant, but with the addition of movable holds allowed a variety of different routes to be added.
The constants include areas of vertical wall, overhang, bulges, and cracks.
All of the things you've said you can't do are things which can specifically BE done and were at Warwick.
Having some constant features doesn't have to mean the wall is boring. The wall opposite the door a Warwick is a great example, a ramp, a bulge and then a vertical, meant you could attempt something hard, scrape over the bulge, have an awkward rest and then carry on. Very much like climbing outside.
Features for feet, features for hands, left/ right hand holds only, the opportunities are limited by your imagination.
If you like straight up and down, there's that option too.
2
1
In reply to krikoman: lx: Have you climbed a Warwick? - lol... read his first post, will answer your question.
As others have said, real shame the wall is going. The reality is that the comp wall was underused, I'm pretty sure 80% of people never touched it, and the capping roofs made it hard to set really flowing routes, but it was a LOT of fun.. especially on the right hand side, and it was pretty inspiring. I remember being scared and inspired by it on joining the uni in 2005! The new space looks awkward but hopefully the setters make the most of it. Climbing at least was one of the biggest and most active clubs at the uni it would be a shame for that to disappear.
As others have said, real shame the wall is going. The reality is that the comp wall was underused, I'm pretty sure 80% of people never touched it, and the capping roofs made it hard to set really flowing routes, but it was a LOT of fun.. especially on the right hand side, and it was pretty inspiring. I remember being scared and inspired by it on joining the uni in 2005! The new space looks awkward but hopefully the setters make the most of it. Climbing at least was one of the biggest and most active clubs at the uni it would be a shame for that to disappear.
1
In reply to Jon_Warner:
Not sure about the %eges that climbed comp wall. Intimidating even to look at but what a training facility!
Thus the current wall has (soon to be had) something for a wide range of climbers.
Although the setting could be tricky, setters seem to love the challenge and take pride in placing holds that attempt to emulate outside climbing using the embedded features.
What a waste.
Cheapskating, style over substance, whatever the reason, acceptance of the new wall design is a retrograde step for a powerful, rich uni that should look to be forward thinking and progressive!
Not sure about the %eges that climbed comp wall. Intimidating even to look at but what a training facility!
Thus the current wall has (soon to be had) something for a wide range of climbers.
Although the setting could be tricky, setters seem to love the challenge and take pride in placing holds that attempt to emulate outside climbing using the embedded features.
What a waste.
Cheapskating, style over substance, whatever the reason, acceptance of the new wall design is a retrograde step for a powerful, rich uni that should look to be forward thinking and progressive!
Post edited at 15:00
In reply to Jon_Warner:
Ha Ha, fair enough. But I'm surprised they think it's difficult to set routes on a featured wall, to me the featured wall was one of the more diverse parts of Warwick. The fact they haven't been back in 7 years might say sometime.
Again the more features there are the more you can make out of it, imagination is possibly the key, blank panels tend to limit you to the holds bolted to the wall, and therefore the skill of the route setter only.
> lx: Have you climbed a Warwick? - lol... read his first post, will answer your question.
Ha Ha, fair enough. But I'm surprised they think it's difficult to set routes on a featured wall, to me the featured wall was one of the more diverse parts of Warwick. The fact they haven't been back in 7 years might say sometime.
Again the more features there are the more you can make out of it, imagination is possibly the key, blank panels tend to limit you to the holds bolted to the wall, and therefore the skill of the route setter only.
1
3
In reply to krikoman:
It's not difficult to set routes, it's difficult to keep them varied, as there are so few locations to put bolt-on holds and you can't place screw-on holds at all.
A ply panel will have something like 36 bolt holes per square metre, the feature walls have probably less than 10, it must make it very difficult to set the route you want and not end up with the route you just took down.
The point is you can do everything with ply that you can do on a feature wall, from tiny footholds all the way up to huge features like arétes or shelves/roofs, but a feature wall can only do the thing it was originally built to do.
I'm not saying the Warwick featured walls are rubbish, I climbed on them for 6 years and the setters there did a fantastic job of keeping the routes fresh and interesting, but the future has to be ply (and not glass!).
> Ha Ha, fair enough. But I'm surprised they think it's difficult to set routes on a featured wall,
It's not difficult to set routes, it's difficult to keep them varied, as there are so few locations to put bolt-on holds and you can't place screw-on holds at all.
A ply panel will have something like 36 bolt holes per square metre, the feature walls have probably less than 10, it must make it very difficult to set the route you want and not end up with the route you just took down.
The point is you can do everything with ply that you can do on a feature wall, from tiny footholds all the way up to huge features like arétes or shelves/roofs, but a feature wall can only do the thing it was originally built to do.
I'm not saying the Warwick featured walls are rubbish, I climbed on them for 6 years and the setters there did a fantastic job of keeping the routes fresh and interesting, but the future has to be ply (and not glass!).
1
In reply to Dandan:
Questionable view? It could be suggested that featured walls are only limited by the skill of the setter first of all then the wish/skill set of the climber. Easy to make a route harder for yourself on featured walls by using "features for feet only" climbing.
I have never met anyone that prefers plywood walls to what we have at Bear Rock. However I do accept it is a gym. However, why downgrade a gym for the sake of glass and an extra £163K (Which it is estimated would be the extra cost of featured wall Vs plywood.)
There is a need for honesty here. If WS was doing it because plywood is superior they would have argued from that standpoint immediately. They have not. It is and has always been about budget and style, not about quality and substance.
Questionable view? It could be suggested that featured walls are only limited by the skill of the setter first of all then the wish/skill set of the climber. Easy to make a route harder for yourself on featured walls by using "features for feet only" climbing.
I have never met anyone that prefers plywood walls to what we have at Bear Rock. However I do accept it is a gym. However, why downgrade a gym for the sake of glass and an extra £163K (Which it is estimated would be the extra cost of featured wall Vs plywood.)
There is a need for honesty here. If WS was doing it because plywood is superior they would have argued from that standpoint immediately. They have not. It is and has always been about budget and style, not about quality and substance.
In reply to krikoman:
I find featured wall are great when you first climb them but after a while, the routes can become same-y as you know where the massive features for feet are, what tricks with the features make a certain passage of climbing easier.
I really enjoyed climbing at Bear Rock when lx ran the place and he turned the squash court bouldering wall into a fantastic facility despite it's obvious limitations. I would also add that you should try some of his "flat plywood" problems/routes, I find he sets some of the most mentally challenging problems around.
I find featured wall are great when you first climb them but after a while, the routes can become same-y as you know where the massive features for feet are, what tricks with the features make a certain passage of climbing easier.
I really enjoyed climbing at Bear Rock when lx ran the place and he turned the squash court bouldering wall into a fantastic facility despite it's obvious limitations. I would also add that you should try some of his "flat plywood" problems/routes, I find he sets some of the most mentally challenging problems around.
1
In reply to Boxman:
I've never really climbed at Warwick except for a comp many years ago but I've climbed on similar style walls and personally, I'd take ply over a featured surface any day. The problem with featured walls is that the features are fixed so it's difficult (not impossible) to set interesting or varied routes as you often can't set the moves you'd like because the climber can always just stand on that feature rather than have to do the cool drop knee you intended to have. Add to that the limited hold sites to chose from and inability to use screw-on's etc and you can easily see how limited your options are going to be when setting on a featured wall.
Ply gives the setter complete control over the moves he wants to create because he's got total control over all possible hand and foot locations. If they want to add a variety of feature like smears in one section they can do with a few screw on's, if however, they want another sequence which forces you to do a certain move off certain holds then they can do. If they want to go even further they can play about with angles by adding a volume or two and putting an undercut on the underside for example, you can't do that on featured walls.
The advantage is variety, a route on a ply wall can have everything a route on a featured wall can have but a route on a featured wall is always going to be limited because your features are fixed and your hold sites are significantly restricted.
I've never really climbed at Warwick except for a comp many years ago but I've climbed on similar style walls and personally, I'd take ply over a featured surface any day. The problem with featured walls is that the features are fixed so it's difficult (not impossible) to set interesting or varied routes as you often can't set the moves you'd like because the climber can always just stand on that feature rather than have to do the cool drop knee you intended to have. Add to that the limited hold sites to chose from and inability to use screw-on's etc and you can easily see how limited your options are going to be when setting on a featured wall.
Ply gives the setter complete control over the moves he wants to create because he's got total control over all possible hand and foot locations. If they want to add a variety of feature like smears in one section they can do with a few screw on's, if however, they want another sequence which forces you to do a certain move off certain holds then they can do. If they want to go even further they can play about with angles by adding a volume or two and putting an undercut on the underside for example, you can't do that on featured walls.
The advantage is variety, a route on a ply wall can have everything a route on a featured wall can have but a route on a featured wall is always going to be limited because your features are fixed and your hold sites are significantly restricted.
2
In reply to Lord_ash2000:
Unfortunately, you seem to be looking at the problem from the route setters point of view, rather than the climbers.
I prefer to make my own way up the wall not how someone tries to dictate how I should do it. It's a bit more outsidesy than a vertical wall, granted you can screw on features, but eventually the wall either ends up with fixed features anyway or a load of screw holes in the wall.
If the wall already has features, you have the choice to use them or not, indeed some of the routes at Warwick, would specifically include / exclude features, there by giving people the choice and if you like two options per route.
So as a beginner you could climb the route with features and then as you get better / more confident you can progress to climbing without, after that you can make things harder by only using features for feet / hands etc, something you can't do on a blank piece of wall.
At the end of the day it's horses for courses, I happen to think we're losing a very good wall for the area.
I'd also agree, any wall is better than glass.
> The advantage is variety, a route on a ply wall can have everything a route on a featured wall can have but a route on a featured wall is always going to be limited because your features are fixed and your hold sites are significantly restricted.
Unfortunately, you seem to be looking at the problem from the route setters point of view, rather than the climbers.
I prefer to make my own way up the wall not how someone tries to dictate how I should do it. It's a bit more outsidesy than a vertical wall, granted you can screw on features, but eventually the wall either ends up with fixed features anyway or a load of screw holes in the wall.
If the wall already has features, you have the choice to use them or not, indeed some of the routes at Warwick, would specifically include / exclude features, there by giving people the choice and if you like two options per route.
So as a beginner you could climb the route with features and then as you get better / more confident you can progress to climbing without, after that you can make things harder by only using features for feet / hands etc, something you can't do on a blank piece of wall.
At the end of the day it's horses for courses, I happen to think we're losing a very good wall for the area.
I'd also agree, any wall is better than glass.
2
2
In reply to Boxman:
I guess this is a case of surrounding yourself ('you' in this case meaning everyone, not specifically you) with like minded people that reinforce your views, because I don't know anyone who prefers featured walls over ply...
> I have never met anyone that prefers plywood walls to what we have at Bear Rock.
I guess this is a case of surrounding yourself ('you' in this case meaning everyone, not specifically you) with like minded people that reinforce your views, because I don't know anyone who prefers featured walls over ply...
3
In reply to krikoman:
This is the really key issue.
>
> I'd also agree, any wall is better than glass.
This is the really key issue.
Post edited at 19:56
2
In reply to Dandan:
Seems a very narrow clique of people, I don't think I agree with any of my mates on anything to the extent you're suggesting. we might like the same beer now and again, other than that.
> I guess this is a case of surrounding yourself ('you' in this case meaning everyone, not specifically you) with like minded people that reinforce your views, because I don't know anyone who prefers featured walls over ply...
Seems a very narrow clique of people, I don't think I agree with any of my mates on anything to the extent you're suggesting. we might like the same beer now and again, other than that.
In reply to krikoman:
The comment
"I guess this is a case of surrounding yourself ('you' in this case meaning everyone, not specifically you) with like minded people that reinforce your views, because I don't know anyone who prefers featured walls over ply..."
is difficult to substantiate. Only started discussing wall types since the design of new wall seen and most users that have discussed the new design, apart from some responders on this forum, seem to believe ply is choosen because it's cheap to make and install, not because it is superior to a featured wall. Hence comments on the forum.
Not to be deflected however:
The main points are?:-
WS are spending substantial amounts of money on a new climbing centre. (You would think many thanks would be the order of the day!) However, climbers (not new students) are looking at the design and suggesting WS appear not to be spending money wisely?
The design seems to be in place as an attractive venue for new students?
There is a much bigger area and not many more lines when compared with current area and number of lines?
There is lots of expensive glass?
Most contentious - The quality of the lines compared to the current lines is also in question? Feature Vs ply, current competition wall Vs new build wall?
Thus come back to style over substance?
The comment
"I guess this is a case of surrounding yourself ('you' in this case meaning everyone, not specifically you) with like minded people that reinforce your views, because I don't know anyone who prefers featured walls over ply..."
is difficult to substantiate. Only started discussing wall types since the design of new wall seen and most users that have discussed the new design, apart from some responders on this forum, seem to believe ply is choosen because it's cheap to make and install, not because it is superior to a featured wall. Hence comments on the forum.
Not to be deflected however:
The main points are?:-
WS are spending substantial amounts of money on a new climbing centre. (You would think many thanks would be the order of the day!) However, climbers (not new students) are looking at the design and suggesting WS appear not to be spending money wisely?
The design seems to be in place as an attractive venue for new students?
There is a much bigger area and not many more lines when compared with current area and number of lines?
There is lots of expensive glass?
Most contentious - The quality of the lines compared to the current lines is also in question? Feature Vs ply, current competition wall Vs new build wall?
Thus come back to style over substance?
Post edited at 16:46
2
In reply to Lord_ash2000:
Personally i think plywood versus featured walls are the least of our worries in comparison with the overall downgrade of the facility (size, number of lines, segregated beginner, and novice advanced areas, space and GLASS PANELS).
I think generally among users of the wall theres a misplaced trust in Warwick University (these are well founded its as a rich internationally renowned top UK University) that they will build a new wall that is fit for purpose (and for the future) and is a considerable improvement on what we already have. I initially assumed this would be the case too. Since realising the true disappointment of the new climbing wall plans I have contacted numerous people at the University and I am yet to find a single person or department who will take the responsibility for the space designated to the new wall or for the glass panels. At this stage that is worrying and is perhaps telling in itself?
The consultations did not allow discussions of the key issues which are the primary reasons for the shortfall of the new wall (space and height of the room and the implementation of glass panels).
Most users still haven't even seen the plans and are blissfully unaware of the downgrade that is looming.
Personally i think plywood versus featured walls are the least of our worries in comparison with the overall downgrade of the facility (size, number of lines, segregated beginner, and novice advanced areas, space and GLASS PANELS).
I think generally among users of the wall theres a misplaced trust in Warwick University (these are well founded its as a rich internationally renowned top UK University) that they will build a new wall that is fit for purpose (and for the future) and is a considerable improvement on what we already have. I initially assumed this would be the case too. Since realising the true disappointment of the new climbing wall plans I have contacted numerous people at the University and I am yet to find a single person or department who will take the responsibility for the space designated to the new wall or for the glass panels. At this stage that is worrying and is perhaps telling in itself?
The consultations did not allow discussions of the key issues which are the primary reasons for the shortfall of the new wall (space and height of the room and the implementation of glass panels).
Most users still haven't even seen the plans and are blissfully unaware of the downgrade that is looming.
1
In reply to batson:
Given the questionable design as far as experienced climbers are concerned, someone or some senior mgt team must have signed off the design and authorised the build? (However doubtful if a team could sign off the build? A person must have signed off for the sports complex?)
It also could be that within the complex, as there are a number of facilities, each facility needs approval from an experienced individual? Can it be asked who are these/this person so questions can be put with a view to perhaps changing the decision on the design build?
It needs to be emphasised, the facility will be in place for the next 30/40 years. Need to get it right and thus discussion is still a valid objective with a view to improving the facility?
Given the questionable design as far as experienced climbers are concerned, someone or some senior mgt team must have signed off the design and authorised the build? (However doubtful if a team could sign off the build? A person must have signed off for the sports complex?)
It also could be that within the complex, as there are a number of facilities, each facility needs approval from an experienced individual? Can it be asked who are these/this person so questions can be put with a view to perhaps changing the decision on the design build?
It needs to be emphasised, the facility will be in place for the next 30/40 years. Need to get it right and thus discussion is still a valid objective with a view to improving the facility?
In reply to batson:
I think plywood versus featured walls is a good indicator of part of the problem. Personally, I think considering making anymore than 5% of the wall featured is incredibly short sighted and if they have been taking advice from people who are pushing that then this highlights that they have not done a good job of getting the right consultants in who properly understand the market trends and demographics within the industry, as well as the practical implications of running a modern facility that has to compete with other modern facilities.
I imagine Colin will have had a big impact on the design as he will have been consulted with a lot over the new space but obviously I don't know that for sure. I know they had consultation sessions where users of the wall could turn up. These are useful for doing a bit of a biased survey but not a good way to plan a wall build. My experience of working there was that as soon as you go past line manager level it is very much an old boys club, where if you were under the age of 50 you were still a kid learning the ropes. I was treated well and respected for the way I ran the wall by my management at the time but still considered young and naive with regards to the "bigger picture". Maybe I was in some ways but having just done accounting modules as part of an engineering and business degree I got to sit in meetings where I was shown incredibly basic profit and loss figures with loads of information missing and had to sit there biting my tongue because I'd quickly learned that pointing this out just made people angry and didn't change anything because it was much better for them if they could pretend the wall was making money. Ultimately I think they have just listened to the wrong people, but its very hard to convince them who the right people are.
Have they got a stated agenda anywhere for what they are actually trying to achieve with the new build? Also as an aside - has Colin actually left now? I've heard this on the grape vine from several people. But travelling around lot of different walls I hear rumours all the time, most of which are not true!
I think plywood versus featured walls is a good indicator of part of the problem. Personally, I think considering making anymore than 5% of the wall featured is incredibly short sighted and if they have been taking advice from people who are pushing that then this highlights that they have not done a good job of getting the right consultants in who properly understand the market trends and demographics within the industry, as well as the practical implications of running a modern facility that has to compete with other modern facilities.
I imagine Colin will have had a big impact on the design as he will have been consulted with a lot over the new space but obviously I don't know that for sure. I know they had consultation sessions where users of the wall could turn up. These are useful for doing a bit of a biased survey but not a good way to plan a wall build. My experience of working there was that as soon as you go past line manager level it is very much an old boys club, where if you were under the age of 50 you were still a kid learning the ropes. I was treated well and respected for the way I ran the wall by my management at the time but still considered young and naive with regards to the "bigger picture". Maybe I was in some ways but having just done accounting modules as part of an engineering and business degree I got to sit in meetings where I was shown incredibly basic profit and loss figures with loads of information missing and had to sit there biting my tongue because I'd quickly learned that pointing this out just made people angry and didn't change anything because it was much better for them if they could pretend the wall was making money. Ultimately I think they have just listened to the wrong people, but its very hard to convince them who the right people are.
Have they got a stated agenda anywhere for what they are actually trying to achieve with the new build? Also as an aside - has Colin actually left now? I've heard this on the grape vine from several people. But travelling around lot of different walls I hear rumours all the time, most of which are not true!
1
1
In reply to Boxman:
If the design has been signed off its pretty unlikely that it will be changed now. Wall building companies pre fab the walls then ship it over and assemble. Depending on when it was signed off it may be half built already.
If the design has been signed off its pretty unlikely that it will be changed now. Wall building companies pre fab the walls then ship it over and assemble. Depending on when it was signed off it may be half built already.
In reply to lx:
My understanding is that Colin was largely marginalised and his views were ignored by those 'above' him. I presume he found this thoroughly frustrating.
My understanding is that Colin was largely marginalised and his views were ignored by those 'above' him. I presume he found this thoroughly frustrating.
6
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
Saw him in there a couple of weeks back, on a busy night, taking a picture of the number of people on the floor.... and saying something like 'they need to see just how crowded it can get...'. Make of that what you will.
Saw him in there a couple of weeks back, on a busy night, taking a picture of the number of people on the floor.... and saying something like 'they need to see just how crowded it can get...'. Make of that what you will.
4
In reply to ripper:
Also gets heaving with the kids' clubs on eg. Sunday mornings. Obviously, no bad thing but just shows the demand.
Also gets heaving with the kids' clubs on eg. Sunday mornings. Obviously, no bad thing but just shows the demand.
1
In reply to Boxman:
What I do know is, the building design with all the glass windows etc was in place long before any real climbing wall was designed. We were just given the building plans and told to design a wall for that space, there wasn't and hardly ever is any say in the building design by the climbing wall manufactures.
It's normally the architects who know nothing about climbing walls and what a climbing wall space needs who design the building purely to look good on the concept renders without any consideration for how the wall will work in real life, as I've said before for them it's basically just some fancy cladding to put in a focal point area for aesthetic reasons, hence the love of glass to show it off.
By the time a real climbing wall is designed for the space, we just have to make do with what room we have to work with and that's that, not that I consider this design to have made the best of the space, but it may have been for budget reasons I don't know.
I really do think architects need to consult with climbing professionals much earlier in the processes when they are designing a new building with a climbing wall in it. I've had times when I've simply had to say, "sorry a climbing wall won't fit in here" because the space they have allocated is basically just a high corridor with no fall zones accounted for.
What I do know is, the building design with all the glass windows etc was in place long before any real climbing wall was designed. We were just given the building plans and told to design a wall for that space, there wasn't and hardly ever is any say in the building design by the climbing wall manufactures.
It's normally the architects who know nothing about climbing walls and what a climbing wall space needs who design the building purely to look good on the concept renders without any consideration for how the wall will work in real life, as I've said before for them it's basically just some fancy cladding to put in a focal point area for aesthetic reasons, hence the love of glass to show it off.
By the time a real climbing wall is designed for the space, we just have to make do with what room we have to work with and that's that, not that I consider this design to have made the best of the space, but it may have been for budget reasons I don't know.
I really do think architects need to consult with climbing professionals much earlier in the processes when they are designing a new building with a climbing wall in it. I've had times when I've simply had to say, "sorry a climbing wall won't fit in here" because the space they have allocated is basically just a high corridor with no fall zones accounted for.
1
In reply to Lord_ash2000:
Now we are getting to heart of the issue. This needs to be aired and given the 30/40/50 years this design will be in place discussed until someone looks to review?
So, as suggested, put aside feature Vs ply.
Other issues!
3 sections Vs 1?Beginners, intermediate, experienced?
Height of walls change in these areas.
Bouldering area Vs lead climbing area
No of lines given the area of the room
and most controversial of all, amount of glass.
The uni is 3rd richest in the top 3 as an educational establishment.
It is a charitable trust = pay little tax
Effectively using public money (just happens to be justified as earned income on basis it's a uni)
An institution that is not listening to it's wider community despite the pretence that it consulted.
Need to do better up to us to inform them of this. Make them listen?
Now we are getting to heart of the issue. This needs to be aired and given the 30/40/50 years this design will be in place discussed until someone looks to review?
So, as suggested, put aside feature Vs ply.
Other issues!
3 sections Vs 1?Beginners, intermediate, experienced?
Height of walls change in these areas.
Bouldering area Vs lead climbing area
No of lines given the area of the room
and most controversial of all, amount of glass.
The uni is 3rd richest in the top 3 as an educational establishment.
It is a charitable trust = pay little tax
Effectively using public money (just happens to be justified as earned income on basis it's a uni)
An institution that is not listening to it's wider community despite the pretence that it consulted.
Need to do better up to us to inform them of this. Make them listen?
2
1
1
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
I tried that and I was just fobbed off. Probably just seen as a trouble maker- might be worth others contacting the VCs office to show i am not just a lone voice...
I tried that and I was just fobbed off. Probably just seen as a trouble maker- might be worth others contacting the VCs office to show i am not just a lone voice...
Post edited at 18:06
1
In reply to batson:
Is it time to get actual students/student union involved in this discussion? Past and current Warwick Uni climbing club chairpeople? Or the SU coordinators? e.g.
studentactivities@warwicksu.com
Tom Daly (Sports Coordinator)? Tom is one of our two Sports Coordinators. Tom is responsible for the following areas; event planning, coaches, kit, circling, pre-season, accident reporting and non-BUCS finance. He is also the lead contact for the Sports Exec Training, Sports Council and Club Conference events. tom.daly@warwicksu.com
Lydia Smith (Sports Coordinator)? Lydia is one of two Sports Coordinators. Lydia is responsible for coordinating the BUCS programme at Warwick. She is the lead contact for the Sports Fair, Sports Day and Sports Ball events and also manages the Sports Website, HEAR Reports and Sports Club’s Annual Risk Assessments. Lydia.Smith@warwicksu.com
Gerard Henry (Student Activities Manager) Gerard leads the team and provides advice on planning and preparing for all events, trips, tours, performances and balls, health and safety and issues involving a degree of risk. gerard.henry@warwicksu.com
Brian Wilson (Student Activities Transformation Manager) Student Activities Transformation Manager
brian.wilson@warwicksu.com
Not sure who is the current president of climbing club. last year was Natasha.
Is it time to get actual students/student union involved in this discussion? Past and current Warwick Uni climbing club chairpeople? Or the SU coordinators? e.g.
studentactivities@warwicksu.com
Tom Daly (Sports Coordinator)? Tom is one of our two Sports Coordinators. Tom is responsible for the following areas; event planning, coaches, kit, circling, pre-season, accident reporting and non-BUCS finance. He is also the lead contact for the Sports Exec Training, Sports Council and Club Conference events. tom.daly@warwicksu.com
Lydia Smith (Sports Coordinator)? Lydia is one of two Sports Coordinators. Lydia is responsible for coordinating the BUCS programme at Warwick. She is the lead contact for the Sports Fair, Sports Day and Sports Ball events and also manages the Sports Website, HEAR Reports and Sports Club’s Annual Risk Assessments. Lydia.Smith@warwicksu.com
Gerard Henry (Student Activities Manager) Gerard leads the team and provides advice on planning and preparing for all events, trips, tours, performances and balls, health and safety and issues involving a degree of risk. gerard.henry@warwicksu.com
Brian Wilson (Student Activities Transformation Manager) Student Activities Transformation Manager
brian.wilson@warwicksu.com
Not sure who is the current president of climbing club. last year was Natasha.
1
1
In reply to Boxman:
Natasha has shared this thread on the WUCC Facebook page this afternoon so most current student climbers should have seen it including the current presidents
Natasha has shared this thread on the WUCC Facebook page this afternoon so most current student climbers should have seen it including the current presidents
2
In reply to Adam Patterson:
This seems a shame! Over 1400 members, each of which would have used the current climbing wall?
This seems a shame! Over 1400 members, each of which would have used the current climbing wall?
In reply to batson:
I'm not sure if anyone here is aware that the climbing manager (Colin) was sacked (and not his choice) just before xmas. Warwick sport found him too much to deal with, since he raised his voice and concern about the new wall, the person who is in charge is not a climber and has no knowledge about climbing, nor has any interest in what climbers want and whats best for the club. one thing is certain here, they are left with no barriers and now pushing their plans without Colin questioning their every steps.
to make matters worse, there is no one in charge for now and a disaster is only round the corner. Warwick Sport cares about one thing and that is making the new climbing wall more like a museum than a climbing wall to attract more wealthy students to make more money.
It's a sad time and a big shame, maybe more people need to stand up to raise their concern as still a lot of people are unaware of these changes..
5
2
In reply to bravodelta:
i know the people there pretty well and i think they couldn't fool Colin and they just wanna run it like a gym than a proper climbing centre. like everywhere else, they looking to put a "yes man" in charge and they don't give a S**T about safety or quality of climbing.
7
2
In reply to batson:
Unfortunately, I think we might be too late to do anything about the new centre, although as someone mentioned above nothing ventured nothing gained. It also surprises me how few people know about the demolition of the centre and haven't seen the plans for the new one. Few people seem to know about Colin being sacked as well which, on a more personal level, is a shame as I got to know him quite well and found that although he can come across as quite a scary and gruff character he really does care a lot and wants the best for the centre and everyone who climbs there- he just has his own way of showing it! I've never posted on here before but I just want to say that I feel very strongly about this- it happened only a few days before Christmas as well. Although it might be too late to do anything about the centre (though I hope not), I would like to think that if enough people here voice their opinions on the matter then he might stand a chance at coming back as I have head he is going to appeal.
6
1
In reply to Leopard02:
I have spoken to some of the students down the wall. They simply shrug their shoulders and say we've heard the plans are rubbish but 'they' don't want to listen and its too late. It seems that as the students will be moving on at the end of their degrees they aren't concerned enough to try and do anything about it.
4
In reply to batson:
As an ex-student at Warwick I can vouch for Warwick Sport being an absolutely shocking organisation.
They don't want to hear any concerns. This is not the first time they have ousted good people with strong views opposing proposed changes. Diabolical management.
7
1
In reply to Leopard02:
Completely agree with Leopard02 about Colin. Was really shocked when I heard a couple of week ago that he had been sacked. He 'encouraged' me to take up climbing when my kids joined the climbing club and if you know Colin you will know that I wouldn't have had much choice in the matter! But I really needed that shove to give it a try and I love it Personally I think the climbing wall is a safer, friendlier place when he's around, so I hope he wins the appeal and actually comes back.
7
2
In reply to CovClimber:
i do agree with you covclimber, I was at the wall on Sunday, the wall was super busy while Bear cubs sessions were running, I couldn't help but notice that there was a big difference in running the sessions, kids were sitting around on their phones in groups, staffs were somehow busy chatting and there was no structure or ducipline compare to only a month ago when Colin was around. I feel much safer for my kids to climb there when Colin is around, also shame to Warwick sport to keep it so quiet, I think more people would be concerned if they knew Colin is gone. I hope he appeals and I hope to see him back soon.
3
1
In reply to batson:
So moving this back in the direction I think it was intended, use of space design etc being key, I guess the point has been made, lots of varying views around featured walls and use of monster volumnes to make shapes on flat panels, overall though that it will have less lines but more bouldering and may have innovative new route setting ?! I guess it’s time to be hopeful and you never know it might be a total crushingly good joyful place to climb
4
In reply to Alan Jephcott:
> I guess it’s time to be hopeful and you never know it might be a total crushingly good joyful place to climb
You're not a Brexiteer, by any chance, are you?
2
In reply to john arran & Alan Jephcott
I usually like half full view rather than half empty but find it hard to accept when there is no need to be here!? For very little money, probably much less than the current design (as all is needed is a high walled box-shaped sports hall with stucture to take climbing panels) WS could have done the climbing community and it's new students a great service. Instead we have a glass palace. So sad!
3
In reply to Boxman:
Agree. The plans are what they are and we have to be realistic about the practical implications. There is nothing hope and positive thinking can do to remedy the downgrade of the lead and top rope climbing in those plans.
2
I also cannot believe this proposal! For years, every week end, I have travelled 65 miles each way from Worcester to climb on something interesting, with well set routes rather than the horrible plywood walls which are all around and which are simply shite!
The layout of the wall with the proposed segregation is a poor approach to climbing wall design and in my opinion the result looks is totally banal. I understand that designers were probably just handed a space (a small space) to fill but someone must have advised the project planner and the project board that the space allocated was not sufficient. There are bigger, better walls not to many miles away which are already in direct competition with this wall already, at least Bear Wall has something different to offer.
I cannot believe that at a moment when Climbing is becoming an olympic sport, Warwick University, WARWICK UNIVERSITY for crying out loud, believes that it is ok to provide something such paltry facility, undoubtedly a downgrade from the existing one for students and local climbers alike. It seems a shortsighted decision.
I shan't be doing all that travelling, and none of my friends either shall either I can imagine, just to climb on a fairly small, ordinary wall but I do not suppose that the either the university or the operators actually care for the loss in revenue that shall undoubtedly result from the change.
It is possibly too late but to sharpen the complaints pens to the very to top of the chain, I think, starting with Colin's sacking.
4
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...