Questioning redundancy of TR solo set up I witnessed

Any sort of rope block like a Reepschnur would be an improvement that still allows pulling the rope without going to the top.  I will normally opt for the rope block if I’m by myself and unsure if I want to take another lap.

I assume the climber in question was not confident he could reach the top of the climb after rapping, and thus wanted to make pulling the rope easier.  If that was his plan, he didn't fully think it through, as hanging from the 2 Nanos would be a tough situation to transition to rapping....

He could have just as easily tied the rope directly into the anchor with a bunny-8 and still used 2 strands for full redundancy.  Most of us are comfortable with a single fixed rope strand and 2 devices, though.  I suspect the guy just didn't really have his shit dialed yet.

I've also found my MT (below either a Lift or Taz LOV, depending on the climb) unlocked halfway up a pitch.  My solution to minimizing this is to never "unlock" it when rapping for another lap, but rather to fullly remove it from the rope, which I find reduces my tendency to forget about it.  Nanos, FWIW, have a lot of drag and suck for TRS.

Jess Buchananwrote:

He is very confident that it is unlikely that a nano traxion will fail and I guess values the easiness of being able to pull the rope to clean the set up more than true redundancy. I realize now he didn’t have an anchor at the top but just the rope running through the rap rings which is why it’s easier to clean.

Well, you tried. He could have achieved his goal of convenience by anchoring one strand to the ground and then using two devices on the other strand. That's assuming a ground anchor was possible, of course. If it wasn't, he'd be far better off doing what someone else suggested: fixing both lines, hiking back up, dropping the rope, and hiking back down. His system introduces serious risk for the sake of sparing himself an extra round-trip hike that presumably isn't a long one.

David Mehrlewrote:

I think your probabilities are off, but your point still stands. 

If the probability that one device fails is p, then the probability that either device fails (or both fail) is the sum of the following three terms: 

1. the probability that both devices fail, which is p*p
2. the probability that device A fails, but not device B: p*(1-p)
3. the probability that device B fails, but not device A: (1-p)*p

The sum of these three is p*p + 2*p*(1-p) = 2p - p*p. Probabilities are always between 0 and 1, so it's still the case that 2*p - p*p ≥ p. 

The loop system is not quite twice as dangerous, but it is still more dangerous than a single device system. 

A redundant system has two independent devices where the system is safe as long as one device is working. This system is the opposite of redundant since it has two devices and requires both devices to work for the system to be safe. Just fixing the rope with a single strand and using one device would be safer. 

This is an interesting thread, not only because of the whole "Is it redundant?" question, but because of another set of questions:

What do we owe fellow climbers in terms of trying our best to get them to change their habits"  Is there such a thing as "due diligence" when alerting others to potentialy dangerous behavior?   How far do we take that?   A personal conversation?  Finding somebody on social media and contacting them?  

To the OP, I'm not trying to call you out, I think talking to the climber at the crag was reasonable, and perhaps following up later was OK too, but it does raise questions in my mind.  

If I saw somebody with a sketchy rope solo system, I'd probably engage with them like the OP, just to see what they're thinking, how aware they are, and so on.  I rope solo often, so I'd be curious. 

Likewise, at my local gym, I've jumped in as politely as possible and offered advice to folks who obviously have no clue (I live in Switzerland, the rules are different, there are no checks or anything, it's all the responsibility of the participants, and I've seen parents come in, clip their kids into a top ropes, and then just start taking in rope hand over hand, no belay device etc). 

I'm not sure I would follow up with a stranger on social media, but I guess it would depend on the spirit of the previous in-person conversation (friendly, receptive, etc).  

Part of me would absolutely want to follow up, and make sure that somebody didn't die doing something stupid, but another part of me would perhaps think, "Well, the information is out there, I tried, and that's the best I can do."  

I would also be turning the magnifying glass on myself, and asking whether or not I was contacting the person at least partly because I wanted to be "right" about a particular situation. 

Again, I'm not saying that's what happened in this case, but I can see controversy about getting in touch with a stranger because something they were doing didn't seem right to me. 

Thoughts?  Am I way off base?  

I have little belife in helping someone that stupid, so I just try to avoid being in their vicinity when they are sketching.

Jess Buchananwrote:

There was no knot in the end so I added one while he was still getting himself set up. 

Please don't tie knots in other climber's ropes

Daniel Winderwrote:

Please don't tie knots in other climber's ropes

Not even if someone is rappelling without them, and it’s obviously an oversight?  Is there a new failure mode introduced by this act? Thanks for clarifying.

David Swrote:

Not even if someone is rappelling without them, and it’s obviously an oversight?  Is there a new failure mode introduced by this act? Thanks for clarifying.

If I was rappelling, knowing full well both ends of my rope (with no knots) were on the ground, I wouldn't think twice before pulling the rope through once I reached the ground. I would be very upset to find that my rope was now stuck because someone else tied a knot in my rope. 

Why not just fix the rope with an 8 on a bite? Redundancy solved. I’ll echo your concerns are justified. I use a grigri and micro traxion when I do it, and always have a knot to isolate the strands. 

Why not just fix the rope with an 8 on a bite? Redundancy solved. I’ll echo your concerns are justified. I use a grigri and micro traxion when I do it, and always have a knot to isolate the strands. 

David Swrote:

Not even if someone is rappelling without them, and it’s obviously an oversight? 

Yeah, no. Not your business

Invite him here 

Jess Buchananwrote:

No, there was no ground anchor at the bottom, just the two strands tied together in a big, loose overhand.

I did reach the guy on Facebook (I had a hunch if I looked for post in the local group looking for a partner, I’d find him and I was right). He was receptive to my concerns and said he had the same concerns when he first started using the system. He is very confident that it is unlikely that a nano traxion will fail and I guess values the easiness of being able to pull the rope to clean the set up more than true redundancy. I realize now he didn’t have an anchor at the top but just the rope running through the rap rings which is why it’s easier to clean.

So I think I’ve done more than my due diligence making sure he is aware of the risk and can only hope he reconsiders his choice of system. I watched him set up rappel before he started TR soloing and one end of his rope didn’t touch the ground. Another climber yelled up to him that it was a few feet off the ground (maybe 3-4ft) but he said it was alright. There was no knot in the end so I added one while he was still getting himself set up. A few feet that would be reduced some with the rope stretch probably isn’t a huge deal but generally the guy is operating a much different level of risk tolerance than I’m used to seeing. 

Before the recent boom in popularity and abundance of information about rope soloing, both lead and TR, some folks used to anchor the rope at the top, doubled, use whatever device on a free strand, and tie backup knots on the other strand (EDK or alpine butterfly) every so often to clip into, so you would always be in direct to the one rope, albeit risking a relatively harsh factor lead fall. I think this method was more popular when the device of choice for TRS was a grigri, which works but it’s clunky and not fail safe. But other than that I don’t know of a lot of methods using 2 strands, and having it run free at the top anchor seems unwise. 

Luke Mwrote:

If I was rappelling, knowing full well both ends of my rope (with no knots) were on the ground, I wouldn't think twice before pulling the rope through once I reached the ground. I would be very upset to find that my rope was now stuck because someone else tied a knot in my rope. 

You and the knots are on the ground, and you send the knot up to stick in the anchor without noticing?

David Swrote:

You and the knots are on the ground, and you send the knot up to stick in the anchor without noticing?

This was in response to someone else tying a knot in another climber's rope for them.