Pros and cons of simul-rappelling

Jake Jones wrote:

Not always.  A third hand that can reach the device can prevent it from working, or can get stuck in the device- depending on the cord and configuration.  This effectively fucks both the third hand and the rappel device simultaneously.

If the setup of the third hand is such that it's likely to get caught in your device and thus be prevented from working, then it is not properly setup. Extending the rappel (among other options) is a known way of preventing that. I think the fix is sufficiently easy to implement (and should at this point be sufficiently well-known) that a third hand setup in such a way should be considered a bad setup.

It's still a problem - some people still do it this way.

However, if we compare a good apple with a good apple (e.g. a properly rigged setup on both sides), I still believe my statement holds true.

Hubbard wrote: Maidy; This is a decent practice. The main issue is rope twist and kink gets bad as you near the anchor and on a long rappel this sucks up several feet of rope length. All systems work well done correctly. My comment about the gri gri getting stuck open presumes both climbers were weighting the system. Brad was working on the rope snag. The trigger could have snagged on something in the moment he leaned back to continue. Right then. Going from leaning forward at work to leaning back. Trigger snags and off you go. When this happened to me I was near the top of the rope and so things happened slowly due to all the rope weight friction below. I was able to grab the brake hand side and stop pretty easy. What it showed me is that it can happen and is one more thing to look out for. Brad was at the long stretched end of a less than 10 mil rope. Things would happen very fast in that situation.

I had not heard of the Grigri trigger getting stuck open before this thread. I can see how this can happen with your scenario. I was taught to tie a catastrophe knot below the device when going hands-free, and I will continue to do this. Thank you for the post.

David Baltz wrote: Simul-rapping has always seemed insane to me.  Take the most dangerous aspect of climbing (by statistics) and make it even more risky.  My impression of it is that it became popular because it "looks cool."  I wish the helmet Nazis would turn their efforts toward ostracizing simul-rappers.

Simul rappelling is fine in the right situation for the right people. Where do your statisctics come from?  I just read accidents in north american climbing 2019 and falling was the biggest cause for accidents. It always has been.  

Darrell Cornick wrote: Simul rappelling is fine in the right situation for the right people. Where do your statisctics come from?  I just read accidents in north american climbing 2019 and falling was the biggest cause for accidents. It always has been.  

You're right Darrell. It's a common misconception. Leader falls are by far the most common accident. Rappelling accidents account for about 5% of total climbing accidents, but many rappelling accidents are fatal. So as a category, rappelling accidents have a statistically higher percentage of fatalities than other categories.

Bob Gaines wrote:

You're right Darrell. It's a common misconception. Leader falls are by far the most common accident. Rappelling accidents account for about 5% of total climbing accidents, but many rappelling accidents are fatal. So as a category, rappelling accidents have a statistically higher percentage of fatalities than other categories.

Gotcha. As for the helmet nazis. They can fuck right off  with dynamic PAS folks, ABS only folks  and the anti simul rappel, free-solo and TR with a beer people. Ok. I think that about covers it. Happy climbing all. 

I am 100% positive I will never be injured in a sumulrappeling accident.

But I’m sure that these well thought out Internet forum posts will make it safer for everyone.

In fact, I’m going to look at other things in my life to see if I can increase my likelihood of death by saving a few minutes.
Yeah, that time spent buckling my seatbelt was lost time man, time I’ll never get back...

Maidy wrote: I consider simul rapping something to be done when there is no other option. I'd much rather have my life in my own hands.
The only time I've done one was a counter balance off opposite sides to escape a Wonderland dummy dome with no anchor. 

Quote Mikey S from pg 2:"Instead of tying a stopper knot in the end of the rope before you rap just tie a overhand on a bite and clip it to you.  So when you get to the anchor there isn't any rope to pull up.  Just unclip from the harness and feed it.  And in a place like EPC this reduces the likelihood of the stopper knot getting stuck as you always maintain control of the end.  Also makes it impossible to forget to untie the stopper knot when you pull the rope."

Anyone else try this? Sort of got glossed over early in the thread ... this seems like an extremely sensible suggestion and safer than just a stopper knot - with the benefit of having the ends at hand next anchor. Downside might be potential rope loop snaggage or twisting- but you could always just unclip and drop the knot.  Tethering to your partner- evidently safer? - seems like a hassle and would make me extremely uncomfortable.   

Mikey's method is a good one, and works in many rappel, belay and ascend situations.  (Not just simulrappelling, which I don't do, by the way).

Another post early in this thread that has not been referenced much:

>> Daniel Melnyk:  One starts the pull the rope and the other feeds it through and ties a stopped knot
>> When the climber that is pulling the rope gets to the middle the rope is already threaded there so you both put on your device and you're off.
> Bill Lawry:
> Imagine it can take some time to pull in and knot the second end.

This applies to Mikey's method as well.
It's great for the end you feed through the chains, if you are feeding.
(With 2 ropes I actually always retie the joining knot and do not feed; this has certain advantages like always threading the thinner rope through the rings).
But the other end is the one on the side of the rope that you just pulled down from the upper anchor,
That end is probably 30m or more down the wall below you.
Do people really pull that 30m, 40m, 60m, etc. back up the wall and tie a knot in it?
If people are simulrappelling to save time, the time to pull up that end and knot it will reduce all this supposed time they expect to save.
(Personally, I don't tie any knots in ends unless it's dark and I'm not sure where I'm going).

Clint Cummins wrote:

Mikey's method is a good one, and works in many rappel, belay and ascend situations.  (Not just simulrappelling, which I don't do, by the way).

Another post early in this thread that has not been referenced much:

>> Daniel Melnyk:  One starts the pull the rope and the other feeds it through and ties a stopped knot
>> When the climber that is pulling the rope gets to the middle the rope is already threaded there so you both put on your device and you're off.
> Bill Lawry:
> Imagine it can take some time to pull in and knot the second end.

This applies to Mikey's method as well.
It's great for the end you feed through the chains, if you are feeding.
(With 2 ropes I actually always retie the joining knot and do not feed; this has certain advantages like always threading the thinner rope through the rings).
But the other end is the one on the side of the rope that you just pulled down from the upper anchor,
That end is probably 30m or more down the wall below you.
Do people really pull that 30m, 40m, 60m, etc. back up the wall and tie a knot in it?
If people are simulrappelling to save time, the time to pull up that end and knot it will reduce all this supposed time they expect to save.
(Personally, I don't tie any knots in ends unless it's dark and I'm not sure where I'm going).

If you sincerely think that simul-Rappelling  with knots is statistically more dangerous than traditional rappelling without knots you need to read some ANAM, the majority of rappelling accidents are caused by failure to close the system. In many situations you can catch the rope near the end as it's falling and avoid having to pull it up to tie the knot. 

I'm rather confused why you would ever want retie the knot doing a double rope rappel unless you were using a thin tag line, it's far more efficient to feed it through the anchors as you pull. 

Clint Cummins wrote: 

This applies to Mikey's method as well.

It's great for the end you feed through the chains, if you are feeding.
(With 2 ropes I actually always retie the joining knot and do not feed; this has certain advantages like always threading the thinner rope through the rings).
But the other end is the one on the side of the rope that you just pulled down from the upper anchor,
That end is probably 30m or more down the wall below you.
Do people really pull that 30m, 40m, 60m, etc. back up the wall and tie a knot in it?
If people are simulrappelling to save time, the time to pull up that end and knot it will reduce all this supposed time they expect to save.
(Personally, I don't tie any knots in ends unless it's dark and I'm not sure where I'm going).

I think the below is what you mean about Mikey's method (correct me if wrong).  By the way, here, I'm neither trying to differentiate between a regular single-person rap and a simul-rap nor debating statistics about rap fatalities ... just the relative efficiency of tying knot ends and clipping to harness versus doing neither.

1. Rap to the next anchor with each end knotted and clipped to harness.
2. Get off rappel
3. For the rope-end that is now to be pulled, unclip the knot, untie it, feed it through the rap anchor, retie the knot, and clip it back to your harness.
4. For the other rope end, unclip and unknot.
5. Pull the rope until stopping  the middle at the anchor.  Pull more until the other end falls from above. The last end down is ~half a rope length or full rope length depending on whether single or double rope rap. 
6. Last - Clint's point, pull up all of the rope that probably just fell down the face below, knot it and clip it to harness.
7. Go back to "1." 

Note:  As noted before, the above does not let building coils release from half the rope.

Without the knotted and clipped ends, it would be

1) Rap to the next anchor
2) Get off rappel
3) For the rope-end that is now to be pulled, pull up the amount  that is below which ought to be relatively short, feed it through the rap anchor.
4) Pull the rope until stopping the middle at the anchor.  Pull more until the other end falls from above.  
Ideally, during "4)", the first end is feeding through the anchor eventually under its own weight
5) Go back to "1)"

One of the common situations for not closing the system comes from multi-pitch rappelling.

As you pull the rope, while feeding the new anchor it's easy to knot the end you feed through the anchor. The other goes flying by and drops down the next pitch. Here's three options that come to mind.

1. A good SOP is to pull that end back up and knot it. Do this if you're simul rapping.
2. Stack your rappel. The top person essentially fixes the system, so the first person can rap without having to first pull up the rope and knot it.
3. Do a "J-Rig". The top person rigs for rappel and ties an overhand on bight below their device. Clip that knot to a bolt and send the first person down below the knot. This fixes the system so there is no need to pull the rope back up, and is a good option is not doing extended rappels that is required for a stacked system.

Two more considerations:

Simul rappelling is a useful skill to know, but is often misapplied. Do you really need to simul rap a sport route?

A lot of people are climbing big multi pitch routes with only a Gri Gri. Simul rapping isn't your only way down.

DrRockso wrote:

If you sincerely think that simul-Rappelling  with knots is statistically more dangerous than traditional rappelling without knots you need to read some ANAM, the majority of rappelling accidents are caused by failure to close the system.

It's not possible to estimate the failure rate for each method by using only the numbers of reported/published accidents for each.
You also need the denominator of the fraction - the number of times people used each method.

For example, the number of free solo accidents is fairly small.   But this does not mean using a rope is less safe.  There are a lot more people using ropes.

 In many situations you can catch the rope near the end as it's falling and avoid having to pull it up to tie the knot. 

Yes, especially if you are on a ledge.
But it can hurt.  Usually it is pretty rare to catch it on purpose.
It's more frequent it hits you in the back of the neck as you are trying to duck.  :-)
Also, I prefer to use a method where I pull the upper rope out into the air, away from the surface of the cliff.
This makes it less likely to hang up above you, but also makes it hard to catch the end.
And what Bill Lawry posted just above is correct, too - if you are rapping without the end knot clipped to you, if you are feeding, you need to pull up the appropriate end below you.

I'm rather confused why you would ever want retie the knot doing a double rope rappel unless you were using a thin tag line, it's far more efficient to feed it through the anchors as you pull. 

Yes, I use a somewhat thin tag line (7.7mm twin).

It's a lot lighter to drag behind you when climbing.

And it's less likely to get hung up than a thicker rope when you pull it down.
(Partly because you can get it airborne more easily, so you can often create situations where it does not touch much of the rock above you.)

And usually you have 2 different colored ropes (could also be true if you used the same size ropes).  But you always pull on the same colored one (lead line).

Here is why I believe it is faster to retie the joining knot (vs. feeding):

You are pulling on the thicker / heavier lead line, which is easier to grip (helpful when there is friction to overcome).
When it is reasonably steep and smooth below you (like in Yosemite most of the time),
after you have pulled down say 30', a "gravity feed" helps pull down the rest, much faster than you could feed rope through the chains.
It's true that a "gravity feed" can also operate when feeding through chains, but often the path through the lowest chain links is not ideal,
as you are clipped in above the lowest chain link and lowest links are not as free to move into the lowest friction path.

There is also simultaneous processing.
The first person down makes sure the lead line is hanging down below the station, and checks the tag line for knots.
Often they also pull up the extra tag line and stack it in their lap, which reduces the rope weight when they are pulling down on the lead line.
Once the second person arrives and is anchored (and off rappel - device off the ropes), the first person starts pulling on the lead line.
If there is a lot of friction, both people can help pull.
But the second person's main job is to check the tag line as it rises, to make sure there are no knots in it.
When the joining knot arrives at the lower station, the second person ties an overhand loop knot in the lead line below the joining knot and clips it to the station on the next pull side.
And they tie an overhand loop knot on the tag line and clip it to the station.
These clipped overhand loop knots also reduce the risk of dropping one or both ropes while you are retying the joining knot.
Now the joining knot can be untied by the second person, and retied through the chains at the same time the rest of the tag line is pulled down from above.
The first person can even start down the next rap before the joining knot is finished, as both ropes are anchored via the overhand loop knots.

I could be wrong and it might not be any faster.  The speed might be equal in some cases.
But it has those other advantages - less likely to hang up, and easier to pull down.

Remember folks, taking advice from people who dont wear helmets and dont tie knots in the end of the  rope should be taken with a grain of salt or two. Like me for example. 

Clint Cummins wrote: It's not possible to estimate the failure rate for each method by using only the numbers of reported/published accidents for each.
You also need the denominator of the fraction - the number of times people used each method.

For example, the number of free solo accidents is fairly small.   But this does not mean using a rope is less safe.  There are a lot more people using ropes.

Yes, especially if you are on a ledge.
But it can hurt.  Usually it is pretty rare to catch it on purpose.
It's more frequent it hits you in the back of the neck as you are trying to duck.  :-)
Also, I prefer to use a method where I pull the upper rope out into the air, away from the surface of the cliff.
This makes it less likely to hang up above you, but also makes it hard to catch the end.
And what Bill Lawry posted just above is correct, too - if you are rapping without the end knot clipped to you, if you are feeding, you need to pull up the appropriate end below you.

Yes, I use a somewhat thin tag line (7.7mm twin).

It's a lot lighter to drag behind you when climbing.

And it's less likely to get hung up than a thicker rope when you pull it down.
(Partly because you can get it airborne more easily, so you can often create situations where it does not touch much of the rock above you.)

And usually you have 2 different colored ropes (could also be true if you used the same size ropes).  But you always pull on the same colored one (lead line).

Here is why I believe it is faster to retie the joining knot (vs. feeding):

You are pulling on the thicker / heavier lead line, which is easier to grip (helpful when there is friction to overcome).
When it is reasonably steep and smooth below you (like in Yosemite most of the time),
after you have pulled down say 30', a "gravity feed" helps pull down the rest, much faster than you could feed rope through the chains.
It's true that a "gravity feed" can also operate when feeding through chains, but often the path through the lowest chain links is not ideal,
as you are clipped in above the lowest chain link and lowest links are not as free to move into the lowest friction path.

There is also simultaneous processing.
The first person down makes sure the lead line is hanging down below the station, and checks the tag line for knots.
Often they also pull up the extra tag line and stack it in their lap, which reduces the rope weight when they are pulling down on the lead line.
Once the second person arrives and is anchored (and off rappel - device off the ropes), the first person starts pulling on the lead line.
If there is a lot of friction, both people can help pull.
But the second person's main job is to check the tag line as it rises, to make sure there are no knots in it.
When the joining knot arrives at the lower station, the second person ties an overhand loop knot in the lead line below the joining knot and clips it to the station on the next pull side.
And they tie an overhand loop knot on the tag line and clip it to the station.
These clipped overhand loop knots also reduce the risk of dropping one or both ropes while you are retying the joining knot.
Now the joining knot can be untied by the second person, and retied through the chains at the same time the rest of the tag line is pulled down from above.
The first person can even start down the next rap before the joining knot is finished, as both ropes are anchored via the overhand loop knots.

I could be wrong and it might not be any faster.  The speed might be equal in some cases.
But it has those other advantages - less likely to hang up, and easier to pull down.

Lots of situational assumptions being made here. The fact is that the 3 fatalities in nearly as many years in Potrero all could have been prevented by tieing knots, no other rappelling accidents have occurred. Closing the system is as basic a climbing concept as tieing in to the harness. 

Clint Cummins wrote: It's not possible to estimate the failure rate for each method by using only the numbers of reported/published accidents for each.
You also need the denominator of the fraction - the number of times people used each method.

For example, the number of free solo accidents is fairly small.   But this does not mean using a rope is less safe.  There are a lot more people using ropes.

Spot on Clint! 

Even if failure in either method has never been observed you can still quantify one method as more risky than another by breaking down the constituent components of each and examining their failure rate. For example, how often to do people mis-understand commands or fail to hear what their partner said correctly? Now which method has more reliance on understanding commands or hearing responses from their partner. As I previously mentioned, on a nuclear sub we would look at different procedures and assign risk based on various factors such as number of steps, number of people involved, etc. I've never seen a meltdown but I sure know which procedures I was more worried about possibly getting f'd up. Let's say we had to take a coolant sample off the primary loop (i.e. the coolant in contact with the core). Normally you do this with reactor pumps in slow speed which allows for a slower, more controlled flow rate for your sample. Now let's say the sub needs to be moving really fast to get somewhere quickly (use your imagination) and we are now required to take our primary sample with reactor pumps in fast speed. This is a WAY more complex procedure involving additional personnel and valve operations to ensure your sample valve doesn't look like someone drove over a fire hydrant when you open it. But guess what, it takes ALOT less time to draw the sample because of the higher flow rate. Ok, so why don't we just always do the sample with pumps in fast speed since it takes so much less time? We've never seen it go wrong so it must be just as safe as when pumps are in slow speed right? You can apply the same logic to quantifying risks in simul-rapping. In the case of a sample with pumps in fast speed, we take extra precautions like requiring a mock procedure walk-through and additional supervision. If you're gonna simul-rap cause weather is moving in then recognize that there are more risks and take additional precautions.  

@clint, we've never met but I've climbed a bit with Skyler. I'd love to get your thoughts on applying Bayesian Statistics to this concept of quantify risk in rappels.

I spent 2 weeks in EPC this spring and basically simul-rapped every multi-pitch route I climbed (one exception with a partner who hadn't simul-rapped and wasn't interested).  My preferred system:  each climber uses a Grigri, and at the anchor, each climber anchors into a separate bolt, and then the climbers connect PAS together (directly or by clipping one PAS to each bolt).  I tied knots in the ends of each rope, with a few exceptions when the rope was clearly "down" (on gound or below next anchor).  I can see a case for never making an exception, except perhaps for the actual ground.

We seemed to rap much quicker than most other parties, but that could be because there are a lot of generally slow/inexperienced climbers at EPC, at least on the multi-pitch climbs I do :)
No I don't want a cookie for relaying this bit of climbing trivia, but it seems to me that simul-rapping is a quick, safe, and generally good way to get down from long multi-pitch sport climbs (if not in other situations).  It depends on both climbers being comfortable with the system and each other's style:  I'm not sure I'd recommend it for people who don't frequently climb together (maybe if you're a climbing pro/hotshot and climbing with other hotshots, it's not a big deal).
Even though I don't see simul-rapping as substantially more dangerous than rapping in general when done as I described, I can see how not everyone is into it.

glad you like it.. have your cookie and hope you don't get anyone killed... 

Nick Goldsmith ·wrote · 
glad you like it.. have your cookie and hope you don't get anyone killed...

NickG, nope,  I'm not gonna just leave it there;

pfwein wrote: I spent 2 weeks in EPC this spring and basically simul-rapped every multi-pitch route I climbed (one exception with a partner who hadn't simul-rapped and wasn't interested).  My preferred system:  each climber uses a Grigri, and at the anchor, each climber anchors into a separate bolt, and then the climbers connect PAS together (directly or by clipping one PAS to each bolt).  I tied knots in the ends of each rope, with a few exceptions when the rope was clearly "down" (on gound or below next anchor).  I can see a case for never making an exception, except perhaps for the actual ground.

We seemed to rap much quicker than most other parties, but that could be because there are a lot of generally slow/inexperienced climbers at EPC, at least on the multi-pitch climbs I do :)
No I don't want a cookie for relaying this bit of climbing trivia, but it seems to me that simul-rapping is a quick, safe, and generally good way to get down from long multi-pitch sport climbs (if not in other situations).  It depends on both climbers being comfortable with the system and each other's style:  I'm not sure I'd recommend it for people who don't frequently climb together (maybe if you're a climbing pro/hotshot and climbing with other hotshots, it's not a big deal).
Even though I don't see simul-rapping as substantially more dangerous than rapping in general when done as I described, I can see how not everyone is into it.

pfwein, While the discussion found here may be a 'thick'  the upshot is that while there is a need to know how to go fast & when to apply those skills, needlessly using those techniques is a dubious practice that just piles-on higher risks for no reason.

Really sincerely,  be sure to share this with those who care about you.

 What I don't understand is that you don't understand "Best Safest Practices" 

 Ya' Done gone Blapp Once,  Are Ya' Trying For a 2nd Time?

pfwein wrote: I spent 2 weeks in EPC this spring and basically simul-rapped every multi-pitch route I climbed (one exception with a partner who hadn't simul-rapped and wasn't interested).  My preferred system:  each climber uses a Grigri, and at the anchor, each climber anchors into a separate bolt, and then the climbers connect PAS together (directly or by clipping one PAS to each bolt).  I tied knots in the ends of each rope, with a few exceptions when the rope was clearly "down" (on gound or below next anchor).  I can see a case for never making an exception, except perhaps for the actual ground.

We seemed to rap much quicker than most other parties, but that could be because there are a lot of generally slow/inexperienced climbers at EPC, at least on the multi-pitch climbs I do :)
No I don't want a cookie for relaying this bit of climbing trivia, but it seems to me that simul-rapping is a quick, safe, and generally good way to get down from long multi-pitch sport climbs (if not in other situations).  It depends on both climbers being comfortable with the system and each other's style:  I'm not sure I'd recommend it for people who don't frequently climb together (maybe if you're a climbing pro/hotshot and climbing with other hotshots, it's not a big deal).
Even though I don't see simul-rapping as substantially more dangerous than rapping in general when done as I described, I can see how not everyone is into it.

It seems like you’re just as likely to rap off the ends of your rope rappelling normally as you are simul-rapping. However, when you’re simul rapping and you rap of the ends of your rope you kill two people instead of one.

Carlos Danger wrote:

It seems like you’re just as likely to rap off the ends of your rope rappelling normally as you are simul-rapping. However, when you’re simul rapping and you rap of the ends of your rope you kill two people instead of one.

I suspect that one is more likely to lose control while simul-rappeling, due to a number of factors.

csproulwrote:

The Grigri isn’t a redundant device?

Tube device while rappelling = one  brake hand

Grigri while rappelling = one brake hand + lever

Ie redundant

A broken gri gri is not a belay device. If the cam fails, you may not be able to brake with your hand alone.

Not weighing in on how likely it is the grigri fails, but it isn’t redundant.