party of 3 on multipitch

Greg Dwrote:

It's a judgment call.  A single half rope is adequate for top rope falls. But, the margin of safety for a possible cut rope is reduced.  Perhaps it is ok for easier terrain where falls or sharp rock are unlikely.  Probably not ideal for climbing at your limit.  But, a party of 3 is not ideal for climbing at your limit either.  

It's also worth noting that not all half ropes are equal. Although they do all meet the same lab standard, some are a lot burlier than others. Some half ropes are pretty flyweight and I wouldn't especially want to follow on one strand except on easy terrain. By contrast, the old Mammut Genesis 8.5 mm half rope is super burly, and I'd be comfortable following on a single strand on almost any terrain.

Although everyone gets hung up on the UIAA cert for single/half/triple/etc, this is not the only criteria that matters, and there are some real-world performance attributes that can matter more than the lab cert. I find that for real-world performance the Genesis half rope is better and burlier than the more recent triple-rated ropes of similar diameter. Despite the Genesis having a lesser cert.

That was a tangent, but basically one strand of burly half rope is super good enough to follow on in most scenarios, while a skinnier flyweight half may be reserved just for cruiser terrain. You need to judge based on the individual characteristics of the rope, the terrain, and the climber, not just the cert.

Karinia Gaston wrote:

Alpine butterfly should be used over figure 8. The only potential issue I've come across as the last follower is traversing. If it was more difficult I would have liked the second to reclip instead of cleaning gear. The second in this scenario was a new climber and the route was easy enough that the traverse was an afterthought. The rope's position under the second should also be considered on a traverse. If the third falls the rope could maybe injure the second. I think this just comes down to the third not falling.

Eta my first multipitch was a party of 3 at Lumpy and it had a traverse (backflip). Didn't have the issue I mentioned bc we used two ropes and the second protected me. Fun day! 

Hi Karinia.

Why is the alpine butterfly better than a figure 8? With two carabiners, one of them locking, how is the figure 8 knot ever a liability? 

And why would a traverse pitch affect the integrity of a figure 8 knot or the safety of the second? I don't see how or why I would protect a traverse differently with 2 versus 1 people following, as I'm still going to place pro as needed to protect a swinging fall by either party. I'm just trying to understand why you brought up traverses.

bryanswrote:

A few dozen times I've climbed as a party of 3 where we use one rope and the two followers tie in 15 or so feet apart, the middle climber using a figure 8 knot connected via two carabiners, at least one of which is a locker. I see other methods mentioned here, but is there anything "wrong" about this set up that I'm missing? It does require the lowest climber to keep pace with the middle climber, so you want the stronger climber on the bottom, as if they fall they'll likely pull the middle climber off, but so far the lowest climber has never fallen - does anyone have a bad story about the bottom climber falling and causing any kind of accident? With both parties on top rope and a decently tight belay I don't see how any real serious accident could result, other than the anchor suddenly taking the weight of both parties...

Although I have never heard of an accident resulting from a third pulling off a second I think the possibility is enough to avoid using that method.

I use two ropes and belay them in guide mode. Good to have two ropes for a rap anyway.

Karinia Gaston wrote:

Alpine butterfly should be used over figure 8. The only potential issue I've come across as the last follower is traversing. If it was more difficult I would have liked the second to reclip instead of cleaning gear. The second in this scenario was a new climber and the route was easy enough that the traverse was an afterthought. The rope's position under the second should also be considered on a traverse. If the third falls the rope could maybe injure the second. I think this just comes down to the third not falling.

Overhand on a bight works great for this, and is simpler to tie.

Karinia Gaston wrote:

8 is unidirectional.

A figure 8 on a bight is totally fine in this application. 

Look at your figure 8 tie-in, and tell me why there is any less strength coming from the knot in the tail vs in the climbing line. Or another way to think of it: if you were to fix a line using a figure 8 on a bight clipped to the anchor, does it matter which side is the load strand and which side is the tail? It does not. Similarly, if you were to fix a double strand by clipping  the mid-point of the rope to the anchor using a figure 8 on a bight, both strands would be equally strong.

An alpine butterfly would be preferable if you were using it mid-line to isolate core shot, because it won't roll like a figure 8 will when it's under load. But in the application we're talking about, the middle climber's biner would stop the role so it's a non-issue.

FWIW, I would also use an overhand on a bight in this application, as I do in glacier travel.

Tradibanwrote:

Although I have never heard of an accident resulting from a third pulling off a second I think the possibility is enough to avoid using that method.

I use two ropes and belay them in guide mode. Good to have two ropes for a rap anyway.

Belaying 2 followers with 2 ropes has some advantages, but can also add some significant complexity and pitfalls that aren't immediately obvious.

I once got held up behind a party of 3 who were using 2 ropes because they failed to apply the "outside, inside, under" rule. The inexperienced followers found their ropes tangled, stuck in a fully hanging gear belay, and out of earshot of their leader who was unaware of the issue and making the problem worse by hauling from the top on the bad assumption that a follower was just having trouble pulling a crux. My party was able climb up and assist, but it was a messy situation and I'm not sure they would have solved it without help.

Here's a webinar from the AMGA explaining some of these issues and how to keep your ropes organized when climbing with 2 ropes as a party of 3:

johndricowrote:

Belaying 2 followers with 2 ropes has some advantages, but can also add some significant complexity and pitfalls that aren't immediately obvious.

I once got held up behind a party of 3 who were using 2 ropes because they failed to apply the "outside, inside, under" rule. The inexperienced followers found their ropes tangled, stuck in a fully hanging gear belay, and out of earshot of their leader who was unaware of the issue and making the problem worse by hauling from the top on the bad assumption that a follower was just having trouble pulling a crux. My party was able climb up and assist, but it was a messy situation and I'm not sure they would have solved it without help.

Here's a webinar from the AMGA explaining some of these issues and how to keep your ropes organized when climbing with 2 ropes as a party of 3:

Agreed. As with anything you have to know what you are doing. It's the leaders responsibility to set up so problems don't occur. 

It's definitely better than tying a third in on the same rope though.

Drew Alldredge wrote:

This way is pretty straightforward and fun- plus the benefit of two ropes. I'd think someone in the party would be happy to TR the whole route to keep it simple and clean which is the method we've done.  I think it took about 5 hours to climb Hermit Spire (900 ft.) this way.  It's important, as mentioned, for the second to leave and back clip directionals for the third and the leader needs to keep tabs of those pieces if needed on the next lead.  

Speaking of directionals, how do you TR a traverse pitch with a microtrax? Or do you just not climb any routes with a traverse?

Caves.org test shows Figure 8 is actually stronger end to end. Loop to end they are the same.

Either one works fine. I like the way the AB sits a little better.

As mentioned usually the weakest climber is in the middle, but with a little kid I may put them last because they probably won’t pull an adult off  but an adult pulling them off would suck. 

We did Rosanne in Tuolumne in a party of 8.  Each person trailed a rope.  The leader finished as the last person was leaving the ground.  We had a blast!

Normally though I would climb on double ropes if I have to belay two followers.  They can climb at roughly the same time, each on their own rope and I can lead on doubles which cuts down on drag anyway.

Go Back to Super Topowrote: 

This aged well.

A little of topic but... people keep saying things like "speed = dangerous" or similar commentary. This is often (usually?) not the case (I prefer the term "efficient" over the words "fast" or "speed").

For example, a poster made the statement that it "it's only 15 extra minutes per pitch." Well, on the most commonly climbed easy long multi in yosemite, that equates to 3.5 extra hours on the wall. For many (most?) parties, that is going to result in rapping under darkness, which is most certainly not "safer."

A few days ago I took a couple of friends up said multi, using the single rope w/ AB tie-in at 25ft from bottom. This allowed for efficient climbing *and* for easy switching of leaders, as I was able to easily unhook the 2nd and tie the 2nd in 25ft from me (as I'm now following), in order to allow the 3rd to lead some of the mellower pitches, We started approx 3hrs behind a party of 4 who were climbing in series, w/ three ropes (each follower tagging a rope up) and caught this party right at the end. We too plenty of breaks and never rushing our climb. Although we lost approx 1hr by having to wait for them on the raps, we used creativity to cleanly pass them on the rappels (only crossing their line one time, causing a 1-2min delay for one of their party - fair considering the hour we lost, IMO) and ended up safely on the ground before dark. The party of 4 ended up hitting the ground approx 2hrs after dark, doing some of the most tricky raps in the dark. Had they used a more efficient strategy (several have been discussed in this thread), they'd have been on the ground in daylight. I would not characterize our more efficient style as "dangerous speed," but rather "safe efficiency." YMMV.... but less time on the wall nearly always equates to greater safety factor.

Christian Heschwrote:

Well, on the most commonly climbed easy long multi in yosemite,... a party of 4 who were climbing in series, w/ three ropes (each follower tagging a rope up) and caught this party right at the end. 

Just say no to Royal Arches party of 4. Yikes.

This account should be cross posted to the "Don't simulclimb above others" thread where people are arguing about whether it's ok to pass. A party of 4 taking 12 hours on Royal Arches...definitely going to pass them.

I'd belay both at the same time in guide mode on an ATC personally

but less time on the wall nearly always equates to greater safety factor.

So speed climbs on the nose simuling with 80’ runouts on 5.11 are greater safety? No. Speed and safety don’t equate one way or the other. But it’s correct that a big part of speed is efficiency and that won’t cause any added risk. But simul is riskier than pitched out all else being equal. Someone trailing 3 ropes on RA is riskier since they are obviously inexperienced and slow.

Gloweringwrote:

So speed climbs on the nose simuling with 80’ runouts on 5.11 are greater safety? No.

Yes, bc clearly I equated simuling the arches w simuling the Nose and only placing 1 piece per pitch (are there really people in the world who are *this* dense?).
I will give you an A+ for the strawman though, well done. 

 
Remind me again how many people have the ability to safely do that on the nose… (hint, it’s quite small)

I'm not so sure about this business of having the third come up a fixed rope with mini/micro tracs. It leaves you with a rope hanging down the pitch unattended if it gets stuck.

I watched a team of three (friends of mine, I hate to admit) get screwed like that on Thin Ice, at the Needles. #3, having ascended the rope to the belay, started to pull up said rope. No go. Swinging around in the breeze, the very end of that rope had become hopelessly jammed behind a flake. The end that jammed was way down there, almost to the deck. So, while #2 was still belaying #1, who was very slow dealing with that flared bit, #3 rapped down and, with some effort, managed to free the rope. By now #1 was making noises sounding as if he were being eaten by lava monsters, so #2 was still occupied, and not in a position to bring up #3 on a normal belay. #3 again began coming up the rope on his own. This time he’d tied the end of this rope to his harness, thusly trailing a loop ever increasing in size. Then, as if things weren’t bad enough, that loop latched itself up under something. He whipped it all over the place, but it wouldn’t drop out. I was taking all of this in from the third belay on Spook Book, across the way, and it looked to me like he was making it worse. Whatever. They told me later that it was just barely snagged, but it wouldn’t free. #3 untied and dropped the end of the stuck rope, which remained stuck, and got back up to the belay. #1 now had a good reason to abandon his battle with the flare. They bailed.

The after-action report: Some of the decisions taken after the rope got jammed could have been different, but the epic began when the trailing rope, un-attended, got stuck. Fortunately, the wall was steep, and the descent straightforward.

As an aside, the fellow who got beat up in the flare was actually a good climber, with several proud FA’s under his belt. But he was a largely framed man and couldn’t help but get in his own way in the flare.

I didn't enjoy belaying my followers at the same time. I found keeping good tension on each rope difficult. Now on easy terrain like the East Face of the First Flatiron, I have had two guys on the same rope with fifteen feet of rope between them. For that route this worked out great, plus the guys were friends and could chit chat while climbing. But the last time I signed up for a rope team of three for Wham Ridge, I opted out in the valley below and just waited for my friends to do the climb. 

Christian Heschwrote:

Yes, bc clearly I equated simuling the arches w simuling the Nose and only placing 1 piece per pitch (are there really people in the world who are *this* dense?).
I will give you an A+ for the strawman though, well done. 

 
Remind me again how many people have the ability to safely do that on the nose… (hint, it’s quite small)

You’re the one who wrote

 less time on the wall nearly always equates to greater safety factor.

Yea I picked an extreme example, but that’s not a straw man argument you may want to look up the definition of that. But simul is safer than pitching it out? The fact that you think moving faster means a greater safety factor is just weird. Beating darkness or weather yes, but again otherwise they don’t have a lot to do with each other unless you are employing riskier techniques (eg simul) to move faster. 

"A straw man fallacy occurs when someone takes another person's argument or point, distorts it or exaggerates it in some kind of extreme way..."

Tell ya what, how about "you win" this one, b/c I don't see much informative discussion going on in this section of cognitive dissonance, err, thread drift... peace out.