SHould this person be climbing?

My friend John is fat. He's gotta weigh close to 300 lbs. But I've seen him fall on gear and its been fine. I fly up in the air when I belay him,(because I am the perfect weight for climbing), but well placed gear could hold a cow. Well... maybe a donkey....

I am a fat fucker. Like HUGE. And I am big boned. And I usually carry way to much gear. And a second rope. And I like to run it out a little, on climbs way out of my grade. And I am actually already dead!

Happy Hallowe'en!

A G G G G GHOST!

Seriously now. I'm not actually dead, I am just from Canada.

For those who are reading down this thread actually looking for answers, here's a link to a calculator - take with a grain of salt, as who knows whether the math behind the scenes is accurate.

myoan.net/climbart/climbfor…

Wouldn't climbing ice be very desirable for said guy since you don't fall anyway?

A while back I taught to a crew of typically large clydesdale class dudes who freguently took falls weather they anticipated it or not. Good gear never blew. Obviously bad gear blew. That's the deal, regardless of weight, we are all subject to the same paradigms. At my lightest I've taken 40+ footers on shit gear, at my biggest (200+), micro kit in shit limestone has saved my rump.

Know your kit, know your skill, swing big, but most importantly have fun today ensuring you'll come back tomorrow for more.

T-bob

Ice is nice for big guys. You make your own handholds n footholds, none of that crystal pinching bullshit.

On "tomorrow's Physics lesson"

GOOD LUCK actually generating a 1.7 factor fall. I'm not saying they never happen but you'd be hard pressed to create a situation where such a fall could occur short of trying the belay to a tree with only a few feet of rope out.

With a full aid rack I wheigh about 230 pounds and I have fallen on some small stuff and they held.

Please cancel "tomorrow's" physics lesson. A fall factor is not something generated. But knowing the fall factor can give an approximation of the forces generated from a given fall factor.

I think your point may have been to point out that a 1.7 is very unlikely. Fair enough. My point was to illustrate the different loads with differing body weights for a given fall factor. I could have used a smaller ff to illusrate the same point. Body weight matters.

1.) The bigger they are, the harder they fall
2.) YER GONNA DIE!!!!!!!

coryred797 wrote:So I was out the other day climbing and noticed a fairly big guy leading. Lets call him climber "a". He was about 5'11 240ish not fat, but definitely big, think NFL linebacker build. Anyways I was kinda scared watching him lead. ....etc., etc,his pro was placed good, he would pop it? Do you really think he should be leading on ice? Not trying to pick on the guy but I was concerned and it got me thinking... I leave it to you guys, GO.

In what way is this of any concern to you?

Cam Robertson wrote:Seriously now. I'm not actually dead, I am just from Canada. For those who are reading down this thread actually looking for answers, here's a link to a calculator - take with a grain of salt, as who knows whether the math behind the scenes is accurate. myoan.net/climbart/climbfor…

I think that calcualtor is messed up.

10 Meters of rope out
2 Meters above last anchor
equals... FF 1.2..... Yeah thats not right.

Should be .4 = Length of Fall 4 meters / 10 Meters of rope out.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=647

JSH wrote: So really - it's up to us as a community to continue the education, when someone says something misinformed about falling and forces. Be nice, and contribute.

Like pointing out for small fall factor falls the max force is nearly proportional to weight?

Ah, good catch Sunder. That first one is not the one I found a few months ago. This one's way more geeky, which I think gives it more cred.

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.e…

Add some distance travelled after impact to account for rope stretch - a catch on a dynamic rope is not fully unlike travelling 'through' an object, like water.

I think that UKC link also gives a great explanation of measuring fall factors, and at the bottom starts to explain how so many factors actually impact (reduce) falling force.

What an arrogant stupid-ass question.

Loophole wrote:What an arrogant stupid-ass question.

That's not fair the guy clearly didn't understand the concepts of dynamic rope stretch and it's affect on lead falls, or the actual holding power of climbing gear in good rock. Maybe he could have come up with a more PC way of asking or maybe he is just a troll.

Larry S wrote:I'm hesitant to reply to this... But yes, it would hold. I don't want to sound like a dick, but you really should know this stuff if you're leading. It's not the weight of the guy that matters, it's the force you generate on the piece when you fall. Anyways, let's round his weight off to 1kn (~225 lbs) most micro/aid gear is rated to 2kn, so that would hold him hanging on it without breaking. Free climbing gear is usually 5kn or better for small stuff with medium-large nuts at 10kn. Camalots are rated to 14kn. Your rope limits the max force on a piece to 7-9kn with a static belay, which doesn't happen in reality, so the force would be less than that, especially if there's a bit of rope out. So he's got nothing to worry about aside from sending his belayer for a wild ride. I hope he was either about equal in size or anchored down. I used to have 30lbs on my partner and could easily lift him a about 5 feet in the air on a big fall. And i'd want some extra friction in the belay device too. Maybe some gloves.

+1

I'm 6'4 245.....and I often wonder how these scrawny little cupcakes can even cary a rack and if they should even be climbing at all.

For Real...! This question is stupid...! Climbing is for every one...!Check your Ego..please!!