PAS Advice

caesar.salad wrote:

It really doesn't matter. The most important part of sport climbing anchor cleaning is that you NEVER GO OFF BELAY. 

Thank you all for this helpful advice. Cesar, at my climbing crags, I have to come off belay to rappel down, as we are not allowed to run a weighted rope through the chain links. But thank you all for the helpful advice. I am now just using slings and locking carabiners. 

climbing friend,

the PAS is pointless waste of money and redundant extra gear and is not needed, especially for the single pitch climbing sport. You will probably get rid of it to avoid looking like the gumby if you climb for some time and develop moderate skill and moderately sculpted guns.

you also will look like the extreme ass hat if you wear it between your legs as one does the thong. Please pleasae do not be doing this.

Sure, there are PAS´s rated to 22kN, so are slings and draws so what´s the point? Like the rest of the world I either use a sling girth hitched to my harness or a draw or two. That none of it is dynamic isn´t what will kill you, it´s f#cking up re-tying your knot or you and your belayer being on different planets or the ropes too short or whatever.

Shane Gustman wrote:

Thank you all for this helpful advice. Cesar, at my climbing crags, I have to come off belay to rappel down, as we are not allowed to run a weighted rope through the chain links. But thank you all for the helpful advice. I am now just using slings and locking carabiners. 

Is someone going to issue you a citation for lowering or something?  You mentioned sport climbing in the OP, if you are sport climbing you should be lowering not rapping, you can look up the multiple threads currently going about the safety benefits of always lowering off of sport routes.

Shane Gustman wrote:

Thank you all for this helpful advice. Cesar, at my climbing crags, I have to come off belay to rappel down, as we are not allowed to run a weighted rope through the chain links. But thank you all for the helpful advice. I am now just using slings and locking carabiners. 

If there are "chain links" on the anchors, you can lower through them, because chains are easily replaced. If you had aluminum rap rings on the anchors, without chains, then yes, rappel.

The flip side of "you can lower through the chain links" advice is that you should be one of the people who takes ownership and replaces those chains as needed...

Lena chita wrote:

If there are "chain links" on the anchors, you can lower through them, because chains are easily replaced. If you had aluminum rap rings on the anchors, without chains, then yes, rappel.

The flip side of "you can lower through the chain links" advice is that you should be one of the people who takes ownership and replaces those chains as needed...

Thanks Lena,  Very true, we all need to be better stewards and get used to carrying supplies to update anchors as needed.  It's really not that expensive or too heavy to keep in your pack.

Clove with the rope, thread the rings, then tie in with an eight on a bite and biner, take to test the the system, untie original eight/pull through, finish cleaning anchor, lower, clean gear. 

Simple and do not need any extra gear, except for a locker or two. I bring one to clove into and then use one off my top rope anchor for the tie in/clip in (use a quad w/ opposed lockers at master point).

climbing friend,

you may receive the citation for public display PAS thong by the grigristaz police! they get you! throw you in dark sack, imprison without trial.

Aleks Zebastian wrote:

climbing friend,

you may receive the citation for public display PAS thong by the grigristaz police! they get you! throw you in dark sack, imprison without trial.

The grigristaz. Everyone needs to appreciate that.

Kyle Tarry wrote:

We have no idea where the OP is climbing, or what the local ethics are.  To suggest outright that he should be lowering is asinine.

I am definitely a believer that lowering is safer, and I do it whenever I can, but making blanket statements like this without any familiarity with the OPs situation is ridiculous.

It really doesn't matter where the OP is climbing, if he is sport climbing and the local ethic is to always rap, then the local ethic needs to change, and he can be the one to start that change.

The sterling chain reactor I believe is the only PAS device out there you can buy that is designed to take a factor 2 fall (even though you should never take a factor 2 on any type of homemade / bought PAS).

ViperScale wrote:

The sterling chain reactor I believe is the only PAS device out there you can buy that is designed to take a factor 2 fall (even though you should never take a factor 2 on any type of homemade / bought PAS).

Just look at any of the 5 or so threads over the last week where it is explained in detail many times why lowering is safer in a single pitch sport climbing situation.

Or the AMGA's official position statement...or multiple fixed gear organizations...

I admit I got into the same argument as you are currently in...I believe it was even with Ken!  Ultimately, however I found his (and others') arguments convincing and recognized the error of my ways.  Long story short:

your life > piece of metal

Ken Noyce wrote:

It really doesn't matter where the OP is climbing, if he is sport climbing and the local ethic is to always rap, then the local ethic needs to change, and he can be the one to start that change.

Having a self-appointed safety expert with no understanding of a local situation prescribing how an entire community ought to manage their affairs is the height of presumption.  Encouraging others to violate local norms goes beyond presumption and edges into hostile action.

Perhaps such presumption would be justified if we had some kind of incontrovertible proof that rapping was exponentially more dangerous than being lowered.  The reality is that both methods are safe when the proper procedures are carried out, and both methods can be fatal if one isn't paying full attention.  

It may be that there are a few more ways to mess up a rappel transfer than a lowering transfer, and that this might make rapping slightly more dangerous in theory.  On the other hand, the kinds of communication errors that have created lowering accidents are eliminated by rappelling.   Five pages of arguments and AMGA recommendations notwithstanding, I'm far from convinced that there is much difference in terms of real danger, and I also know for sure that I in particular will always be safer rappelling, because I'm not going to mess that up and when someone I might not know very well is lowering, I can't say the same thing.   Meanwhile, the local area may have concerns about anchor ring wear that they judge to outweigh the slight extra risk of rappelling, so go there and argue with them if you must, but don't tell people to violate the area norms.

Ken Noyce wrote:

Just look at any of the 5 or so threads over the last week where it is explained in detail many times why lowering is safer in a single pitch sport climbing situation.

I guess if you don't know how to rappel it is safer to be lowered but if you know how it is safer to rappel because you aren't relying on others.

The Sterling Reactor doesn't meet UIAA requirements in terms of maximal impact force.  But unlike the dyneema tethers, it doesn't just break in a factor 2 fall. 

Kyle Tarry wrote:

 While you can easily break a dyneema tether in a 2-foot factor-2 fall in the drop tower (as evidenced by the DMM video, and others), this is not indicative of real-life behavior.

The chain reactor survives exactly the same test.  So you have two tethers, one which breaks during a test with weights that is to some extent unrealistic, and the other that survives the possibly overly severe unrealistic test.  The tether that survives when the other one breaks is also less expensive.  Which makes the most sense to buy under these circumstances?

A second issue not directly addressed is what the peak force in the tether is.  This is the load applied to the falling climber, but also to whatever is serving as an anchor.  There was a fatality  in the alps in which a climber fell on their tether and the load broke the anchor sling.  So a nylon tether, which will develop a lower peak load, is the way to go even if neither tether actually breaks, because there is the possibility that something else could break as well.

Your point does need repeating though.  A heavy steel chain would also survive a factor-2 fall, but the load transmitted to the faller would be catastrophic.  A factor-2 tether fall is not going to be a happy event no matter what the material.  Keeping as much slack as possible out of tethers is important, which is one reason why adjustability is a good idea.

As a bit of a tangent, I've settled on a purcell prussik tied out of dynamic cord.  It's cheap (<$10), lightweight (~150 grams), easily adjustable even when under load, and has many additional uses, including in self-rescue.  

Additionally, tests in the document below suggest the peak force on a 7mm static cord purcell prussik with a FF1 and a 183 lb. steel plate is <7kN.  This is at least a 35% reduction from nylon slings in the DMM tests.  Obviously this is a bit of apples vs. oranges, but it makes sense the prussik slipping should result in lower peak force.  

http://caves.org/section/vertical/nh/pdfs/nh54.pdf

Yes, it's an extra piece of gear, but well worth the convenience for multi-pitch. 

ViperScale wrote:

I guess if you don't know how to rappel it is safer to be lowered but if you know how it is safer to rappel because you aren't relying on others.

Nope, that has nothing to do with it.  As I stated, go look at the other recent threads of near accidents as I'm tired of explaining it.

rgold wrote:

Having a self-appointed safety expert with no understanding of a local situation prescribing how an entire community ought to manage their affairs is the height of presumption.  Encouraging others to violate local norms goes beyond presumption and edges into hostile action.

Perhaps such presumption would be justified if we had some kind of incontrovertible proof that rapping was exponentially more dangerous than being lowered.  The reality is that both methods are safe when the proper procedures are carried out, and both methods can be fatal if one isn't paying full attention.  

It may be that there are a few more ways to mess up a rappel transfer than a lowering transfer, and that this might make rapping slightly more dangerous in theory.  On the other hand, the kinds of communication errors that have created lowering accidents are eliminated by rappelling.   Five pages of arguments and AMGA recommendations notwithstanding, I'm far from convinced that there is much difference in terms of real danger, and I also know for sure that I in particular will always be safer rappelling, because I'm not going to mess that up and when someone I might not know very well is lowering, I can't say the same thing.   Meanwhile, the local area may have concerns about anchor ring wear that they judge to outweigh the slight extra risk of rappelling, so go there and argue with them if you must, but don't tell people to violate the area norms.

There are lots of areas that are behind the times when it comes to standard safety practices, that doesn't mean that we can't work to change that.  

Yes, it would be the height of presumption if you just went and started lowering at these areas without doing anything to change the perception, but in my opinion, if you go and start replacing worn anchors at these areas and show how easy and cheap it actually is to replace anchors, that gives you the right to start lowering instead of rapping.  

In my experience, it is either noobs, or old trad guys who argue against lowering (the noobs because they are being taught this by the old trad guys).  Everyone I have ever met that actually does the work of replacing anchors or putting up sport routes agrees that you should lower.  I was once in the always rap camp until I understood the benefits of always lowering, and realized how easy it actually is to replace a worn anchor.  Now, I doubt that a month goes by without me replacing at least one anchor, and you know what, the cost is probably an order of magnitude less than what I spend just in gas to get to the crags, so, no, it's not presumptuous to try and bring backwards areas up to current practices.