LukeM wrote:Ahh, no love for the micro rack? If I can love a micro rack and then also love a simple, surely you can do the same the other way around.
Working on it!
Moderator: Tim White
LukeM wrote:Ahh, no love for the micro rack? If I can love a micro rack and then also love a simple, surely you can do the same the other way around.
Caver John wrote:Has anyone ever tried the Raumer Handy braking Biner?
Caver John wrote:^ this is true.
Has anyone ever tried the Raumer Handy braking Biner?
This thing looks interesting, like it would apply more braking than a standard Biner.
potholer wrote:I suppose if such an anchor failure did happen, and a Stop/Simple was pulled through a braking krab, assuming it survived the experience, the main problem of possible uncontrolled descent would come when the rope below was unweighted, so the correct action would be to slap a jammer on the rope above the descender as soon as one recovered from the initial surprise?
Jeff Bartlett wrote:I can say, without a doubt, that if a rebelay below me ever fails -- and I find another person's weight dramatically thrown onto my descender -- the first thing I will do is attach every rope clamp and attachment point I own to anything and everything within reach.
Well, possibly the second thing, depending on whether or not I piss myself.
Jeff Bartlett wrote:potholer wrote:I suppose if such an anchor failure did happen, and a Stop/Simple was pulled through a braking krab, assuming it survived the experience, the main problem of possible uncontrolled descent would come when the rope below was unweighted, so the correct action would be to slap a jammer on the rope above the descender as soon as one recovered from the initial surprise?
I can say, without a doubt, that if a rebelay below me ever fails -- and I find another person's weight dramatically thrown onto my descender -- the first thing I will do is attach every rope clamp and attachment point I own to anything and everything within reach.
Well, possibly the second thing, depending on whether or not I piss myself.
potholer wrote:I suppose if such an anchor failure did happen, and a Stop/Simple was pulled through a braking krab, assuming it survived the experience, the main problem of possible uncontrolled descent would come when the rope below was unweighted, so the correct action would be to slap a jammer on the rope above the descender as soon as one recovered from the initial surprise?
paul wrote:A project for someond to try and post the results on YouTube?
paul wrote:I would imagine that if the descender wasn't damaged due to being caught in the braking carabiner, the fact that the caver below is now hanging on the rope would have the same effect as a bottom belay: i.e., you would stop where you are on the rope anyway until the caver below unweighted the rope.
Once unweighted, I imagine there is a chance that you still would not be able to continue descending depending on how the descender being jammed un the braking carabiner impedes the passing of the rope through the descender or not.
The main problem highlighted in "Alpine Caving Techniques" is that the descender could possible be damaged and either detach from the rope or become uncontrollable in descent.
potholer wrote:paul wrote:I would imagine that if the descender wasn't damaged due to being caught in the braking carabiner, the fact that the caver below is now hanging on the rope would have the same effect as a bottom belay: i.e., you would stop where you are on the rope anyway until the caver below unweighted the rope.
Once unweighted, I imagine there is a chance that you still would not be able to continue descending depending on how the descender being jammed un the braking carabiner impedes the passing of the rope through the descender or not.
The main problem highlighted in "Alpine Caving Techniques" is that the descender could possible be damaged and either detach from the rope or become uncontrollable in descent.
I thought that (assuming the descender did survive) uncontrolled descent was thought to be a fairly likely thing when the rope below was unloaded, due to the straightening out of the rope path through the descender.
paul wrote:I'm not sure what you mean by "when the rope below was unloaded, due to the straightening out of the rope path through the descender".
potholer wrote:paul wrote:I'm not sure what you mean by "when the rope below was unloaded, due to the straightening out of the rope path through the descender".
I really wasn't being clear in what I wrote.
I understood that a risk was that if the descender top *is* pulled through a standard braking crab by excessive weight from below without meaningfully damaging the descender, then if the weight below was removed, the descender would be likely to end up stuck in the sideways orientation, where it could give much less friction than in the normal upright position, and where the braking crab was also no longer doing anything useful (something that could potentially also happen if someone lowered themselves onto a rope at a pitchead/rebelay with a non-locked-off descender).
That's really what the comment about jammers was about - someone descending could potentially end up very much stuck on the rope after a belay failure below, but be at risk of a rapid descent (at least as far as the knot on the rebelay) as soon as the rope did become unloaded.
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot]