Factor Two Fall and Anchor Failure - Darran Mountains, New Zealand

Gunkiemike wrote:

I'll be the first to say that your physics is way wrong.

good god yes

smurray47 wrote:

good god yes

Yeah I'm more than a little bit rusty. However, my point stands that there are better ways to prevent a factor 2. And intuition tells me that, while my math may be wrong, lifting a belayer one foot is still gonna have a relatively small effect on a high factor fall.

I have not experienced nor witnessed a F2, but if I see the leader start to fall, the rope is above me when I initiate breaking. What I wonder is if as the lead end of the rope orients from above, to even to below me, would my hand/arm re-orient to maintain the breaking or not?

Paul Deger wrote:

I have not experienced nor witnessed a F2, but if I see the leader start to fall, the rope is above me when I initiate breaking. What I wonder is if as the lead end of the rope orients from above, to even to below me, would my hand/arm re-orient to maintain the breaking or not?

Unless you've trained yourself to react and bring the brake end up to your chest, fat chance. If you're gonna take the risk of a factor 2 don't use an atc. Use one of the cam style assisted braking devices or use a munter hitch which will naturally be the best braking orientation. 

eli poss wrote:

Yeah I'm more than a little bit rusty. However, my point stands that there are better ways to prevent a factor 2. And intuition tells me that, while my math may be wrong, lifting a belayer one foot is still gonna have a relatively small effect on a high factor fall.

It's not really your math, but conflating work(energy) with force, and over simplifying the problem. you didn't take into account that now the leader falls a shorter distance, lower fall factor, etc

eli poss wrote:

Unless you've trained yourself to react and bring the brake end up to your chest, fat chance. If you're gonna take the risk of a factor 2 don't use an atc. Use one of the cam style assisted braking devices or use a munter hitch which will naturally be the best braking orientation. 

If that first piece pops, even a Munter will require a quick change of brake strand direction.

smurray47 wrote:

It's not really your math, but conflating work(energy) with force, and over simplifying the problem. you didn't take into account that now the leader falls a shorter distance, lower fall factor, etc

sure the leader may fall a shorter distance but there is also now less rope to absorb the fall because the belayers tie-in is now out of the system. And this whole discussion is a moot point because you should be avoiding the situation entirely by either placing a jesus piece from the belay and placing more gear shortly after OR have the leader of the previous pitch place the jesus piece beforehand. 

...So this whole discussion is somewhat moot, as it would not have saved the team - clipping the anchor or using a Grigri definitely does NOT reduce the total force applied on the gear.  While Jesus-piece clipping is definitely a worthwhile topic (and probably more applicable to most of us unless you really love seeking out obscure alpine routes), it's off topic to this thread IMO.

My guess is the biggest culprit was rock quality, or there simply wasn't any good placements for the gear they had and they were out of rope.  One possible factor that I've always wondered about, however, is direction of pull and traverses.  Most people build anchors to resist downward pull (sufficient for belaying your second), but things can get complicated if you have a next pitch that traverses right off of the belay, especially if you then FF2 on that.  Could horizontal loading and the pendulum swing that would result have played a role?  Would a sideways-oppositional piece have helped?  I'll admit I'm always a bit uncertain when it comes to drastic changes in pull like this.

Apropos of nothing, did anyone else think it was weird that the author of that article used the phrase "climber's mecca" four times in the article?

Ted Pinson wrote:

My guess is the biggest culprit was rock quality, or there simply wasn't any good placements for the gear they had and they were out of rope.  One possible factor that I've always wondered about, however, is direction of pull and traverses.  Most people build anchors to resist downward pull (sufficient for belaying your second), but things can get complicated if you have a next pitch that traverses right off of the belay, especially if you then FF2 on that.  Could horizontal loading and the pendulum swing that would result have played a role?  Would a sideways-oppositional piece have helped?  I'll admit I'm always a bit uncertain when it comes to drastic changes in pull like this.

my impression is yes, depending on the situation.  a leader traversed out who falls and initiates a pendulum type swing will put a horizontal portion of the load onto the anchor..  This component of force is relatively low when compared to the downward component, but could be enough to cause a cam to walk/rotate or a passive piece to shift...

eli poss wrote:

 Let's do some math

I think the math was already done. 

http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/731822/Should-the-leader-clip-the-belay-anchor

Ted Pinson wrote:

... but things can get complicated if you have a next pitch that traverses right off of the belay, especially if you then FF2 on that...

I think that you're using FF2 as shorthand for falling directly on the belay. In any case, as GregD pointed out, you can't have an actual FF2 traversing horizontally from the belay.

There are simple and effective ways to remove the chance of a factor 2 fall on your belay assuming you have good gear.  All you need to do is have your belayer hang lower off the anchor.

If the protection is poor however you don't have much choice.  Given the location and the experience of those involved this might have been the case. We'll likely never have a good answer to this accident.

Perhaps:
A couple of guys, making good time on a longer route.  Cruising through a moderate section, climber A gets to a belay, B follows, they swap gear.  B takes off on moderate ground, either can't get gear in or it is "cruiser", gets a good jag beyond the belay and a hold comes off....F2 on to belay.

I've been complacent about this, often with the excuse of "it's easy, I won't fall".  I'm certainly more cognizant of this situation as I've gotten older, but I got away with it many many times when I was younger. I would guess most people who have spent time in the mountains have made the same gamble.

Sad deal, condolences to family and friends.

It would not be the first time this is all we will ever know: 

While details of the fatal fall were not yet known, NZAT said in a statement that "the leader fell before being able to place gear after the belay".

And even the above has some speculation. Too bad they did not simply report the details regarding rope and gear.

Best wishes to those close to Conor and Sarwan.