UKH

http://www.rockymountainrescue.org/outdoor_safety/AnalysisHappyHour1.pdf

and these were experienced climbers apparently...

In reply to grindelwald: Sometimes even a lot of experience does not stop you from practising dangerously. It would appear!

In reply to grindelwald:

A bad set-up, but the practice of selling "spliced" lengths of tape seems to be asking for trouble. I suspect the retailer may be feeling a little edgy at this time.

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:

yes it seems extraordinary that it does not say this in the safety lessons conclusion - a practice which may well lead to further such accidents if continued

In reply to grindelwald:
Slide 11 looks like it suggests a Lark's Foot!!!

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:

Quite scary, but still they've only got one anchor. Poor buggers though. Mistakes happen. Maybe it was just carelessness rather than ignorance. We've all got stories of silly fu** ups that could have had awful consequences.

In reply to Neil Conway:

It does, for logical reasons; they are trading off one risk against probably a much smaller one in the specific context of rigging with long Nylon slings.

Tying knots in Nylon tape at the crag introduces a minor risk. Using pre-tied slings eliminates some of that risk but you then may need to use a Lark's Foot unless you have a sling twice as long. A Lark's Foot in a Nylon sling is a very minor additional risk.

The biggest safety issue with using a Lark's Foot is tape on tape friction under loading and this is most hazardous with the thinnest dyneema slings especially if the loaded strands don't run straight. Provided you are using Nylon slings and you pay attention to the positioning then the risks are minimal.

However, using a rigging rope is preferable to any other method when rigging a belay for bottom roping from distance anchors.

In reply to Mark Stevenson:

..but as they were rigging a top-rope, why not suggest a krab between the slings rather than a larks foot?

In reply to Neil Conway: I was assuming it is a Lark's Foot around the tree you were referring to. Sorry for any confusion

When you hitch two slings together it is debatable what knot you are actually tying. With slings of equally thickness where it is dressed well you have a reef knot which has no strength issues. It is only where the slings are of differing thicknesses or the knot is poorly tied that it forms a true Lark's Foot.

However the same issues with friction under shock-loading do apply.

With nylon slings in a top-rope situation there is pretty much no risk, so adding an extra karabiner into the safety chain is of minimal benefit.

However joining dyneema slings, or slings of different thickness together poses a much increased risk. So in that case using a karabiner as you suggest, makes sense even where the chances of a large shock load in a top-rope set up are minimal.

In reply to Mark Stevenson:

I think the important lesson I take from this report is to always put knots on the anchors so that if one part fails the other part is still strong.

Very sad.

In reply to niggle:

People seem to be getting caught up in the other issues, but that's the glaringly obvious alternative set up which would have saved their lives regardless of one anchor failing. Surely that's the standout message to take from this.

In reply to grindelwald: The report says it "should be common knowledge that tape comes packaged in this manner" ie lengths spliced together to fit onto the spool.

It should be common knowledge amongst retailers, but I doubt whether many climbers are aware of this - it's certainly news to me, and the climber involved in the accident who purchased the tape was also clearly unaware. It seems he was given a "vague answer" about the masking tape, which suggests the retailer wasn't too certain either.

In the shop these spools are usually mounted in a rack to allow rope or tape to be reeled off, and once mounted the warning on the end of the spool would not be visible.

Nevertheless, the way they rigged the anchor was clearly at fault in a number of details, the most obvious being that it allowed the suspending krab to fall off the end of the other sling following failure of the tape sling.

In reply to IainRUK:

I agree, I thought this was one of the two main principles, "independent" and "equalised". i.e. the independent part.

In reply to Howard J:

Is this not the same set up as the "american death triangle"

In reply to Dr Sidehead: Not quite, a death triangle puts a loop through each anchor and the loading crab to make a triangle. At least the carabiner would be captive in an american death triangle

In reply to grindelwald:

There were two contributing factors to the accident.

The failure of the tape was the first - and I could see that potentially happening to anyone - who'd have guessed that the tape covered a (non) joint in the tape. Some might have investigated. The victim obviously didn't, sadly.

The other was not making the krab captive within the system. That means that they were NOT experienced climbers and is an unforgiveable (literally) basic error.

In reply to Dr Sidehead:

No its far worse.

In reply to grindelwald:

I have to say the sale of tape lengths butt-joined with masking tape is quite surprising, I wasn't aware of that. Even with the warning labels it seems to be inviting trouble really.

Sadly for the folk involved it seems they made some simple mistakes they'd ordinarily have got away with. Makes you wonder how often you've been in a similar position without giving it a second thought. Sobering stuff.

jk

In reply to grindelwald:

yikes...I'm fairly inexperienced and so tend to be a bit overly careful, but have seen partners use less than ideal set ups if in a hurry and can see that it's perfectly suitable for the situation. However looking at that set up (the tape on the sling and the way clipped into the purple sling) I can't help thinking that's way beyond "less than ideal" and working it's way towards suicidal.

In reply to grindelwald: I'm not sure that I agree with the recommendation to clip through one strand of the purple sling as this would create an "American death triangle".

Al

In reply to tradlad:

This is why the the presentation recommends the "Sliding X". This avoids the death triangle. The sliding x would have shock loaded the remaining anchor, but that would have been better than the krab sliding off the sling. Without the x, it would have been the death triangle as you suggest.

The sliding x is self equalising, but is reliant on both anchors holding to avoid shock loading. In this country we usually tie a knot in the sling and clip into the loop created. This prevents shock loading but needs more care with the set up because we have to make sure it's equalised; the system doesn't self equalise.

Mehmet

In reply to grindelwald:

Now I’m not the best climber in the world but at the first diagram i immediately picked up that i would have questioned the tape and would also have locked the krab into the system should one anchor fail for whatever reason. Seems to make sense to me.

Intresting article, shame some poor bugger had to die but i bet this sort of thing goes on all the time.

In reply to Mehmet Karatay: Didn't spot that bit. Note to self: Learn to read.

Al

In reply to grindelwald: Huge sadness for this!
Although the climbers did display some oversights the fundemental failing was the spliced tape.

I am amazed at that practice! Surely, it coud have been reasonably foreseen that was a possible outcome by the manufacturer. In a society where H&S seems to increasingly figure and there have been some notable court cases, I hope that this practice of splicing tape is quickly risk-assessed.

Thanks to the poster for this valuable information as I am not sure that most climbers would have checked the splicing prior to use to the degree that it obviously needed checking.

Is this a practice that occurs in the UK also?

In reply to Neil Conway:

the knot you are referring to is a hitch knot . it is made in the same way one make a lark fott but not pulled back on its self.

It is stronger as it does not do the 'self cutting' that a larks foot does and hence why the larks foot is used by tailors.

anyway small comment

In reply to Wotcha:

No the worst mistake was not clipping the suspention krab to anything leaving it not actually attached to the anchors in any way. If the guy didn't have a child give him a Darwin award.


No the practice of packaging several lengths of tape on to one roll is fine. Particularly with the big warning notices on it. As a climber you won't have come across it because if you ever buy tape of the reel then the retailer will sell you the length you ask for and not sell you the short dog end if they come across a tape join while measuring it out.


The sling wasn't spliced. If it had been spliced it would have held. A splice would be joining the two ends by weaving the fibers of the tape together mammut seem to splice rather than sew their thin slings. This wasn't a spliced peice of tape it was two bits of tape held together with sellotape, to check bend it and if you can feel two flat ends or a join don't use it. If it feels like a thicker bit of tape its OK.


What setting up a tope rope "anchor" where the suspention point is not topologically part of the system? yes I am sure you'll find that happening with the odd suicidal lemming....

In reply to Scarab9:
I've been with very experienced climbers and had to quietly remind them to put a stopper knot in a bowline. Mistakes are made more often than is expected I guess, most of us are just lucky enough to get away with it.