Autoblock backup through haul loop for rappel?

FrankPS wrote:
This is not the main purpose of extending a rappel. First, it is how you pre-rig an inexperienced partner.

patto wrote: I'm not sure why you would be pre-rigging a partner like that. If you partner requires pre-rigging then your partner is under your duty of care and YOU need to have control of their rappel/lowering. I haven't found this. But each to their own...

By extending your partner's rappel, you can pre-rig your partner's rappel and check that it is rigged properly, then rappel down first and when you rappel your partner is not pulled in to harness-slack distance of the rope. They can stay more comfortably away from the rope as you weight the rope. Then, since you have rappelled first, you can also provide a fireman's belay when they rap, to complete your duty of care.

IF you are using a backup hitch due to "safety", then rgold's premise is sound.

If you aren't, then do what you like. I personally find it more comfortable to rappel off an extension, than to go off the belay loop, when using an autoblock.

Out of curiosity, does anyone know a reason why you wouldn't want to basket hitch the tie in points with the extension sling, instead of girth hitch? (when NOT also using it as a tether).

mountainhick wrote: I am also not impressed with the mountaineers video. There are numerous ways to achieve the extension plus a redundant clip in system.

Might I suggest this fine invention?

mountainproject.com/v/how-d…

[tongue firmly planted in cheek]

What other ways could you create extension and have redundancy to the anchor? What I have found is that rap stations are typically located on low risk terrain, a big ledge or something, where a fall is not likely. And so being direct into one bolt is not a huge issue. Other than utilizing another sling, draw, etc to go into the other anchor (if the anchor has no master point), what is a good solution? I'm thinking of a hanging, two bolt anchor with rings, where the consequences of a bolt pulling mean death.

Perhaps using a basket hitched long runner (240cm dyneema?) with a knot, that then creates two legs? Just curious

Em Cos wrote:I think there is a disconnect in the assumption you have started with: This makes sense. However, that is not the only reason to use a third-hand style back-up. I use one nearly every time I rappel, primarily so that it is already in place and it is easy, quick, and reliable to go hands free when I would like to, primarily to deal with straightening out the rope on the way down if I am the first one to rap.I think it's best to be competent with multiple techniques and use good judgment in deciding which to use when. But deciding that a course of action (third hand on leg loop) makes no sense based on the original motivation for said action, (prevent catastrophic rap failure in case of unconsciousness) when you are really just making an assumption on that motivation in the first place.. well it seems a bit unlike you, rgold.

You have a point---I was assuming that the reason for the backup is to prevent loss of control, not convenience in stopping. Since hands-free stopping convenience is almost exclusively a concern of the first person down, the people coming after that who are using autoblock backups must be thinking primarily about the loss of control issue, so consider my remarks addressed to them.

But now I have to admit to (yet another) prejudice, which is that leg wraps are a safer and barely more involved way to go hands-free on purpose. The only rappelling fatality I've heard attributed to an autoblock failure (don't know if it has been reported publicly) occurred when the autoblock was used to go hands-free and then catastophically released when the rappeller stepped up with the leg that had the autoblock leg loop. Actually, the rappeller didn't exactly step up; as I understand it, he turned sideways to look down, shifting the leg and hip with the autoblock leg loop up. This naturally rotates the rap lines into the plane of the body rather than a perpendicular plane, and the combination of changes leads to a smaller clearance gap than might have been expected. Turning away from the brake hand is a little unusual---normally you'd turn towards the brake hand, but whatever he was looking for was apparently over the non-brake hand shoulder.

I have to add, as a Certified Old Fart, that I have other concerns about the use of autoblocks as a hands-free convenience. I worry that the idea might change the mentality of some rappellers from "let go with the brake hand and you're dead" to "you really shouldn't let go with the brake hand, but not to worry, if you do, the autoblock will save you."

Probably will...

All fair concerns. For me, leg wraps have never felt completely secure, I find it an unnatural position to keep my thigh up at the near 90 degrees that it seems to require so that the leg wraps don't start slipping, and it takes longer to wrap the leg and unwrap than to ensure the pre-tied autoblock is engaging and then disengage it again when it's time to move - particularly if I have to stop and start many times during a rappel, as in cleaning gear or tossing rope off multiple ledges, etc.

Also for me, I cannot get the autoblock to come close to touching the rap device by lifting my leg, I would indeed have to invert. This may be a combination of the longer rise in a woman's body/harness (greater distance between leg loops and waist belt), the fact that my leg loops are fitted at the top of my leg (as in, the leg loop is close to the hip, so that even with a 180 degree movement in my leg the distance traveled by the leg loop is not far at all; I have seen many climbers with the leg loops fitted very loosely and hanging out around mid-thigh), and the fact that I use a very short autoblock - measured specifically for this purpose and just long enough for the required number of wraps, rather than just grabbing a random length cord for the purpose.

I feel confident the "never let go of the brake strand" is firmly rooted in my head, my muscle memory, and my instincts both for belaying and rappelling. Obviously that is not the case with everyone, and techniques that breed complacency need to be carefully evaluated. But wouldn't this same problem arise from someone following your advice of belaying with an extension and attaching an autoblock to the belay loop?

I think knowing various techniques and engaging your brain each time you rap in deciding which to use, is a good defense against complacency also. That means not dogmatically always adhering to (or always rejecting) any single (safe) method.

rgold wrote: But now I have to admit to (yet another) prejudice, which is that leg wraps are a safer and barely more involved way to go hands-free on purpose.

Hmm.. interesting. You advocate the extended rappel with belay loop autoblock over the leg loop autoblock, because if you are going to do it, might as well do the safer one - but you are also advocating the leg wrap over the leg loop autoblock? If you are choosing between leg wraps and leg loop autoblock, surely the latter has an extra margin of safety as it MAY stop you from unexpectedly losing control of the rope (if something happens to cause you to let go but not invert), while leg wraps could not?

Not to mention: the leg wrap is MUCH more susceptible to changes in body position...

Em Cos wrote:Also for me, I cannot get the autoblock to come close to touching the rap device by lifting my leg, I would indeed have to invert. This may be a combination of the longer rise in a woman's body/harness (greater distance between leg loops and waist belt), the fact that my leg loops are fitted at the top of my leg (as in, the leg loop is close to the hip, so that even with a 180 degree movement in my leg the distance traveled by the leg loop is not far at all; I have seen many climbers with the leg loops fitted very loosely and hanging out around mid-thigh), and the fact that I use a very short autoblock - measured specifically for this purpose and just long enough for the required number of wraps, rather than just grabbing a random length cord for the purpose.

Yes, I think it is possible, at least in some cases, to get the belay-loop / leg-loop / harness fit set-up dialed so that the autoblock can't collide with the device. You might check the body position I described, in which the rappeller turns sideways away from the brake hand (so the brake side shoulder is uppermost), just to be sure everything works in that (admittedly unusual) orientation.

Em Cos wrote:I feel confident the "never let go of the brake strand" is firmly rooted in my head, my muscle memory, and my instincts both for belaying and rappelling. Obviously that is not the case with everyone, and techniques that breed complacency need to be carefully evaluated. But wouldn't this same problem arise from someone following your advice of belaying with an extension and attaching an autoblock to the belay loop?

Absolutely.

Em Cos wrote:I think knowing various techniques and engaging your brain each time you rap in deciding which to use, is a good defense against complacency also. That means not dogmatically always adhering to (or always rejecting) any single (safe) method.

Well, I'm certainly not advocating dogma of any kind, and knowing multiple ways to do things is an essential ingredient in being genuinely, rather than theoretically, safe. But the alternate methods are supposed to have distinct advantages for certain situations, and it is on the basis of those advantages that they are chosen. What then, besides the having a possibly less-scratched device, are the distinct advantages of the belay loop/leg loop setup that would make it the method of choice over the extension?

Em Cos wrote: Hmm.. interesting. You advocate the extended rappel with belay loop autoblock over the leg loop autoblock, because if you are going to do it, might as well do the safer one - but you are also advocating the leg wrap over the leg loop autoblock? If you are choosing between leg wraps and leg loop autoblock, surely the latter has an extra margin of safety as it MAY stop you from unexpectedly losing control of the rope (if something happens to cause you to let go but not invert), while leg wraps could not?

Not exactly. The leg loop autoblock might stop you from a loss of control, but it also might get you killed and has already done so once as far as I know. I'm not sure how that works out to an "extra margin of safety."

By the way, I know a number of experienced people who back up their autoblock with leg wraps when they go hands-free. I think this is because the autoblock goes from being a "just in case" backup system for brake strand control to the primary last-resort system for hands-free maneuvers, and these folks don't think it is so reliable that it can be left as the only thing between them and catastrophe.

As for the leg wraps being sensitive to body position, that's only possibly if you don't know how to do them properly, so I suppose I should have said "properly executed leg wraps," which have no susceptibility to body position.

Ok, I guess someone will ask what "properly executed" means. In my experience, leg wraps are pretty stable in all the body positions you get into when going hands-free, but there can be a problem with the wraps creeping down the leg under the weight of the hanging rope. This is easily neutralized by either clipping the hanging rope to (or just through) a carabiner on the harness or dropping a loop of the hanging rope over your head and shoulder. The point is to either eliminate the weight of the hanging rope or else to get that weight to exert an upward force on the leg wraps rather than a downward one.

rgold wrote: Not exactly. The leg loop autoblock might stop you from a loss of control, but it also might get you killed and has already done so once as far as I know.

The extra margin of safety I was referring to is this: If your plan for stopping as needed is a leg loop autoblock, and then something happens to cause you to let go of the rope, the leg loop autoblock may catch and save your life (as long as the thing that caused you to let go didn't also cause you to invert). If your plan for stopping as needed is to deploy leg wraps, then you have no protection against an unexpected event.

Obviously every method has pros and cons, and can mitigate some risks while introducing others. Which is why I advocate knowing many methods, knowing what the pros and cons are, and choosing which to use in each situation with a full understanding of the benefits and risks.

Thanks for the tip about leg wraps, I think when I and another poster referred to them being susceptible to body position we were thinking of the wraps slipping down the leg, your method would help that.

rgold wrote: Well, I'm certainly not advocating dogma of any kind, and knowing multiple ways to do things is an essential ingredient in being genuinely, rather than theoretically, safe. But the alternate methods are supposed to have distinct advantages for certain situations, and it is on the basis of those advantages that they are chosen. What then, besides the having a possibly less-scratched device, are the distinct advantages of the belay loop/leg loop setup that would make it the method of choice over the extension?

Good question. I don't think anyone but you mentioned a "scratched up ATC" as a reason to avoid extending the rappel. The potential problem is not a scratched ATC, but rather a stuck ATC going over a lip. If you end up below a lip and hanging in space, with your rope weighted over the edge of the lip and your ATC device still above it (if that description makes sense), they you can get stuck. Admittedly, the circumstances required to get into this position are rare and probably also require an inexperienced belayer who wasn't prepared for this circumstance and being careful going over the lip, but I often see advocating extending the rap for beginners so they can be pre-rigged. Such a beginner may not have the skills or knowledge to easily extricate themselves from this stuck position. Again, rare - probably no more rare than inverting on rappel though. Anyone who has expressed concerns about going over lips with an extended rappel I would guess is worried about this possibility, not a scratched device.

Interestingly, I find the opposite situation from Helen - extending the rappel device would put it uncomfortably close to my face and hair, making getting things stuck more likely. Unless I extended it a lot more, but I wouldn't be comfortable in a situation where it was difficult for me to reach above the ATC and say, attach a prussik, should I need to. I find it is also more comfortable getting over an awkward edge to start a rappel with my set-up close to me. Some of this may come down to I learned to belay and rappel with the device on my belay loop and am more comfortable and experienced with that set-up. There's also the possible concern that with every additional piece of gear you add to the system you are introducing an additional possibility for failure, either of gear or of human error in setting it up. That's not a factor for me personally, though.

Damn, between rgold and Em Cos, you two sound like adults discussing the differences. I thought it was supposed to degrade into a name-calling, "you noob" flamefest on MP. See if you can knock it off and get with the program. :)

FrankPS wrote:Damn, between rgold and Em Cos, you two sound like adults discussing the differences. I thought it was supposed to degrade into a name-calling, "you noob" flamefest on MP. See if you can knock it off and get with the program. :)

Sorry Frank, I couldn't credibly call rgold a noob. Next time someone wants to blame yoga pants for climbing accidents though, I'll be all over it. ;)

rgold wrote: Given that the choice to back up is entirely motivated by the potential for rare failures, and given that both methods are equally easy to implement, why in the world would you purposely choose a method for protecting against rare failures that introduces its own rare failures, when the alternative does not introduce comparable new potential problems?

Except it does.

Since we are talking entirely about rare failure modes, and that's what we are trying to protect against, using the extended rap introduces rare failure modes that are less likely to occur in the traditional option. Quite possibly the single greatest cause of fatalities in single pitch sport climbing involves some form of mistake made at the anchor when the climber is getting ready to rap or lower off. In most cases the problem could have been avoided by fully weighting the rope to test the system in use before disconnecting one's tether.

With the extended rappel, it's harder to fully weight, and therefore test, the system before you venture off. Can it still be done? Yes, but it's more likely a climber wont weight and test the system before disconnecting his tether if it's harder to do compared to the traditional method.

What about if a climber passes the belay and has to ascend back up the rock 10'? This is not uncommon actually. I've seen it several times. It's easy as pie to do when the device is at your belay loop, not so when the device is at your face.

That is just two of a few disadvantages that the extended option offers, so yes using the extended rap option introduces its own problems. Each option has advantages and disadvantages. Also, I am not following you when you speak to autoblock failure as a result of being inverted. I've been inverted and the autoblock held.

Upside down as in under a roof, or flipped upside down? If the latter, how the hell did that happen?

20kn,

What is your most preferred alternative to extending the rappel when it is disadvantageous for the reasons you described?

Alex Krueger wrote:20kn, What is your most preferred alternative to extending the rappel when it is disadvantageous for the reasons you described?

Connecting the ATC straight to the belay loop.

There is a really good discussion on pros and cons of various rap backup techniques here: ropelab.com.au/prusik-self-…

Big takeaway - don't use a backup from your leg loop clipped ABOVE your belay device! It is not necessarily intuitive, but this can very easily result in you being unceremoniously tipped out of your harness by your "backup" (see pics in article referenced)

Alex, I'm very glad you've come to the conclusion that your suggestion has no merit. Lots of good advice on this thread (and the link above has some good info) - its interesting to think and challenge the orthodoxy, always keeping in mind that often doing something unorthodox can bring a whole set up issues that aren't immediately obvious.

Em Cos wrote: Good question. I don't think anyone but you mentioned a "scratched up ATC" as a reason to avoid extending the rappel. The potential problem is not a scratched ATC, but rather a stuck ATC going over a lip. If you end up below a lip and hanging in space, with your rope weighted over the edge of the lip and your ATC device still above it (if that description makes sense), they you can get stuck.

This is one difference I have seen between US and UK practice. In the US the recommendation seems to be to extend about 60cm, but I have seen a lot longer. UK books seem to go for 30cm or less.

Ted Pinson wrote:How often do you guys get inverted on a rappel?

Rarely. But the rare times it occurs are more likely to occur when you also lose control of the belay rope. Many people site rockfall as one scenario....

Auto block failure without inversion can also occur.
youtube.com/watch?v=3T4FT2S…

20 kN wrote:Quite possibly the single greatest cause of fatalities in single pitch sport climbing involves some form of mistake made at the anchor when the climber is getting ready to rap or lower off. In most cases the problem could have been avoided by fully weighting the rope to test the system in use before disconnecting one's tether. With the extended rappel, it's harder to fully weight, and therefore test, the system before you venture off.

A decent point, and I definitely agree the best safety is weighting the system first. But if anybody is paranoid enough about setting up an autoblock then there is no reason why they shouldn't be capable and motivated of weighting the system.

RE leg wraps... They are solid and they have clear tactile feedback on their operation. Regardless of backup if I'm hanging for any time about in a position without my hands on the brake then I tie a backup knot for extra paranoid comfort. Most of my complex rappels have been while canyoneering.

Thanks for the response, 20kn

What's your preferred method for attaching an autoblock when you want to connect the ATC directly to the belay loop?