More Danger: Lowering or Rappeling?

!

This won't be controversial.

I haven't died yet doing either, so I'm not sure.

I only report results when I don't die from either methods.

Both are safe when performed correctly, both can be fatal when mistakes are made. There are fairly straightforward safeguards that can be implemented to prevent most of the common causes of accidents in both cases. The rest is just situational, or individual preference.

For me, since one of those common causes of accidents is miscommunication, rappelling has an edge because it does not require any communication - I can rappel safely whether or not my partner is on the same page (or even present at all). Learn how to do both safely, and give this life-critical procedure the attention it deserves every time. 

Josh: are you specifically asking about rapping off a "half rope-length" climb vs lowering of the same length climb? or lowering off (which usually is only done on such " 1/2 pitch" climbs vs ALL rappelling?

BUT..I 100% agree with Jaren, "communication failure" is usually the problem. 

Em Cos wrote: Both are safe when performed correctly, both can be fatal when mistakes are made. There are fairly straightforward safeguards that can be implemented to prevent most of the common causes of accidents in both cases. The rest is just situational, or individual preference.

For me, since one of those common causes of accidents is miscommunication, rappelling has an edge because it does not require any communication - I can rappel safely whether or not my partner is on the same page (or even present at all). Learn how to do both safely, and give this life-critical procedure the attention it deserves every time. 

It all depends but I normally prefer rappelling because lowering requires 2 people to not make a mistake and rappelling only requires 1 person not to make a mistake.

There is no debate.

Rapping instead of lowering is on the list of top ten Perma-Gumby behaviors.

https://www.climbing.com/people/crusty-corner-the-top-10-perma-gumby-behaviors-and-how-to-cure-them/

Mae Rae wrote: There is no debate.

Rapping instead of lowering is on the list of top ten Perma-Gumby behaviors.

https://www.climbing.com/people/crusty-corner-the-top-10-perma-gumby-behaviors-and-how-to-cure-them/

I am assuming this post is sarcasm because the link you gave is a joke.

This one did make me laugh though

6. Belaying with your rock shoes on and/or taking them halfway off and standing on the heel
If your shoes are so comfortable you can keep them on for the entirety of your gym or climbing session, then they’re way too big or they’re just crappy. Even if they’re tight and you need relief between pitches, you shouldn’t take them halfway off and stand on the heels—this deforms the heel cup and, over time, turns a nice pair of rock shoes into floppy, sloppy choss.
Solution
Wear clown shoes, everywhere, always. And maybe a dunce cap. And while you’re at it, go sit in the corner and visualize yourself doing double dynos.

Clear sign the entire post was not serious though.

Josh, were you and your buddy weighting for what anchor gear is at the top? "Yeah, there's bolt hangers here, no chains or rap rings but we can lower..."

ViperScale . wrote:

I am assuming this post is sarcasm because the link you gave is a joke.

This one did make me laugh though

Clear sign the entire post was not serious though.

A joke?

Now you've gone and invoked the wrath of Matt Samet fanboys.

Josh Cameron wrote: Canyoneering with a buddy of mine today and got into a discussion over whether lowering or rappelling causes more accidents.  We both agreed it was lowering. In "Accidents in North American Climbing" it seems there is a disproportionate number of climbing accidents from people getting lowered off the end of their ropes. But maybe that is just what is reported and put in print. Thought I'd ask the MountainProject community to see what my tribe thinks. Thanks for letting me pick your brains!

Does lowering happen more or less often than rappelling?

I like the accident numbers in ANAM/ANAC, but it feels pointless for making decisions without incidents per total event count. I really with Extreme Mountain Dew (TM) (R) Sports had decent information about risk for the individual subcategories, like multipitch versus single pitch, sport versus trad versus bouldering versus aid, et cetera, et cetera.

"Tous les grands chefs sont tues en rappel."

Wasn't this quote from Rebuffat? I am entirely working from a shaky memory here.

Of course, lowering is safer then rappeling (less rope manouvres, no need to tigh out), IF you put a knot in the end of the rope! There are plenty of braindead idiots who can't be bothered though, which explains the high accident rate. I am talking about single pitch climbing here.

I suspect lowering is more dangerous.  As pointed out above communication issues are the problem and it is much more likely to miscommunicate with your partner than to miscommunicate with yourself.

Josh Cameron wrote: Canyoneering with a buddy of mine today and got into a discussion over whether lowering or rappelling causes more accidents.  We both agreed it was lowering. In "Accidents in North American Climbing" it seems there is a disproportionate number of climbing accidents from people getting lowered off the end of their ropes. But maybe that is just what is reported and put in print. Thought I'd ask the MountainProject community to see what my tribe thinks. Thanks for letting me pick your brains!

As has been said, neither is inherently more dangerous than the other, each has it's own issues.  With rapping, generally the issues are incorrectly identifying the middle of the rope and/or not having knots in the ends up the rope then rapping off the end.  With lowering, the issues are generally miscommunication where the climber tries to lower while the belayer thinks the climber is rapping, and as with rapping, not tying a knot in the end of the rope and lowering off the end.  

So far, the consensus on this thread seems to be that rapping is safer because it removes the reliance on communication with the belayer.  I would argue that this is incorrect and that the best way to remove communication issues is to always default to lowering (for single pitch cragging).  The reason that we have these lowering accidents is because the belayer assumes that the climber is rapping when in fact they are not.  If the belayer always defaulted to lowering the climber they would always remain on belay and these accidents wouldn't happen.  The reason to always default to lowering and not rapping is that there are many routes where rapping is just not possible either due to traversing or an overhang, so having the default be to lower means that once you encounter one of these routes the belayer doesn't go on autopilot and take the climber off belay.  Yes, there are also routes that require rapping, but even if there is a breakdown in communication and the belayer defaults to lowering, there is no safety concern.

As far as the other failure mode of either rapping or lowering off the ends of the rope, again I would say that lowering is safer because the climber has a better chance of being closer to the ground by the time the rope goes through the belay device than when rapping where the climber gets distracted or mistakes a non-middle mark as being the middle mark then raps off the end of the rope (obviously, if the climber does get to the middle of the rope and it's just not long enough the fall will be shorter than when lowering, but this doesn't seem to be the common failure mode with rapping from what I have observed over the years).  Also, this failure mode has the same mitigating action (i.e. tying a knot in the end/s of the rope), so it is no more or less likely that the knot/s be tied.

The euros have it right in this case, lowering is the way to go for single pitch cragging, and I can guarantee that if every climber defaulted to lowering in single pitch cragging situations the rate of accidents due to lowering/rapping errors would go down.

my personal preference is to lower, yes there are more links in the chain so to speak, but since the climber is never off belay, it adds another redundancy to the PAS which I dont get when I go off belay and PAS into the bolts for rap. on multipitches the party can stack and double check all the setups so there's also the buddy check which I don't get when cleaning a route on rap. 

Ken Noyce wrote:

As has been said, neither is inherently more dangerous than the other, each has it's own issues.......

The euros have it right in this case, lowering is the way to go for single pitch cragging, and I can guarantee that if every climber defaulted to lowering in single pitch cragging situations the rate of accidents due to lowering/rapping errors would go down.

Ken... good post. 

I always wonder WTF? When at the “sport crags” and I watch “climbers” trying to communicate with each other! “I’m at the anchor!” “Are you in direct?” And the worst is this one... “I’m at anchors- “off belay” then minutes later hear... “OK- put me back on”!!!!!!! And it’s not just gumbies.  There is really no need to do this at all if you just accept the fact that when“sport climbing” one always lowers. I only tell the belayer to “take-lower”. 
Rap away if you wish, nothing wrong with it- unless there is a line of folks waiting on you and you wish to display your incompetence. 

Lower its safer....

From the AMGA website

"Second, many climbers misunderstand the actual impacts lowering off the rings make on communal fixed hardware. Lowering off rings, undoubtedly, wears rings out faster than rappelling.  But, it is important to remember that the rings are engineered for the purpose of lowering. They are designed to sustain the wear and tear of lowering, and then be replaced. Even if lowering resulted in drastic ring erosion, it is worth considering how a more efficient and safer lowering sequence may be worth it.  As accident data surrounding rappelling accumulates, it is worth considering that our friends and family members are more valuable than stainless steel rings, and the only real cost of keeping them safer is replacing rings more frequently. "

https://americanalpineclub.org/resources-blog/2016/3/15/5ipkouk0id07cgc3dqks4fljnsgnx6

According to the textbook, lowering is safer.

Problem is that some climbs don't adhere to the texbook. I've encountered climbs where the chain links are too small to pass a 10mm rope trough, or that there is enough wear on the rings that they are dubious. In the textbook world, anchors always have the proper hardware and are always maintained. In the real world, not always.

Lowering is ideal, but everyone should know how to rappel if necessary.

Kirtis Courkamp wrote: Lower its safer....

 But, it is important to remember that the rings are engineered for the purpose of lowering. They are designed to sustain the wear and tear of lowering, and then be replaced.

Are Mussy hooks "designed" for lowering? I thought most of them were "tow hooks" and not made for climbing, even though they are widely used.

Edit: Note that the article referenced is not from the AMGA website, but from the AAC, which is a different organization.

FrankPS wrote:

Are Mussy hooks "designed" for lowering? I thought most of them were "tow hooks" and not made for climbing, even though they are widely used.

No, not designed for lowering, but they are plenty strong and have a lot of metal to wear through so they last a long time.