Follower falling while simul-climbing / leader consequences

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 1 - 36 of total 36 in this topic
cadl

Trad climber
Long Beach, CA
Topic Author's Original Post - Jan 20, 2006 - 03:14am PT
Over the past few years, my partner and I have discovered the beauty of simul-climbing the easier sections of long alpine routes. The subsequent increase in speed and freedom of movement has been totally eye-opening and provided a much larger window for avoiding the Sierra afternoon thunderheads and padding beer-time.

However, I’ve been noodling through the consequences of the follower peeling and have some unsettling thoughts. So here’s my simplified (but fairly realistic) scenario:

> Leader and follower are simul’ing with a 60m (200’) rope and there is minimal slack in the rope between climbers
> Both climbers are equal in body weight
> Leader is 20’ above his last piece which is bomber when the follower peels
> Assuming both climbers fall at the same “rate” (e.g. they’re both on similar terrain with similar steepness, or in other words, one climber doesn’t hit a ledge which decelerates their fall, etc) and the rope slides “frictionlessly” through all the pro, the two climbers will experience the following upon impact:
- The follower will fall 20’, but will have the full 200’ of rope, for a very soft .10 fall factor
- The leader will also fall 20’, but will hit the top biner with zero rope out (e.g. since the follower is falling at the same rate, the follower has effectively “pulled in all the leader’s slack” while he is falling). Thus, the leader’s deceleration will be entirely dependent upon the rope sliding through the top biner at the same instant that the rope is arresting the followers fall). Even though the climbers are the same weight, I can’t imagine that more than a few feet of rope sliding thru the top biner. Optimistically (my conjecture), even if 10’ of rope slid thru, the leader is still looking at a factor 2 fall. Anything less than 10’ means a 2+ fall factor – GRIM!

So, here are my questions:
> Are my assumptions about the leader’s impact experience correct? Am I missing something here? If my assumptions are correct, then the leader is seriously looking at a 2+ fall factor.
> What are your thoughts for mitigating this risk? Some of my thoughts:
- Obvious #1 – you shouldn’t be simul’g if you think your follower may fall
- Obvious #1b- the follower must NOT fall (and yes, the better/more experienced climber should always follow)
- Obvious #2 - don’t simul if you can’t hack the risk
- Use screamers on all protection
- The leader should attach a screamer between the rope tie in point and his harness (e.g. tie rope into one end of screamer, use two opposed biners to attaché the other side of the screamer to his harness)
- Use a low-impact rope
> Does anyone have actual first-hand experience with the follower fallling when simul'g? What was the outcome?

Thoughts?
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Jan 20, 2006 - 03:53am PT
I suspect we're in for a long and tedious (but interesting to many) physics geeking thread here.

My suspicions:

1. The rope will actually absorb more of the leaders fall than you expect. It will not be a 2+ fall factor.

2. If you are really worried about the follower falling, then either don't simul or use the dangerous and deadly tibloc technique (which is still probably safer than the follower falling without a tibloc in the system)

peace

Karl
Michael Hjorth

Trad climber
Copenhagen, Denmark
Jan 20, 2006 - 06:05am PT
Some years back there was a serious accident on a two pitch ice climb in Norway. After simulclimbing the leader reached the top and was just starting to make a three-belay. Follower fell and pulled the leader back over the edge w/axes and all. Icescrews popped, and both fell to the ground (but survived). Many broken bones.

Michael
Doug Hemken

climber
Madison, WI
Jan 20, 2006 - 08:42am PT
My experience is with about 130ft between me and the second, on easy terrain, ~5.5. A foothold gave way while he was on steep terrain, and he dragged me down about 25 feet over the ledges I was on. Kind of log-rolled me. Seven broken ribs, a broken collar bone, and a collapsed lung. I was only able to climb another pitch or so before I had to throw in the towel and ask for assistance (rescue).

He *pulled* me, if that helps you with your rope/carabiner question.

Once I started down, I had a bit of momentum.

Theory uninformed by experience would indeed be tedious.

I still simulclimb regularly, but it sucks being pulled off the rock when the fall isn't clean.
nate

Trad climber
virginia
Jan 20, 2006 - 09:36am PT
seems if the follower yelled as he was coming off and the leader jumped both could get a fairly soft catch based on how much rope is out. 200' is a lot of boing.
Nor Cal

Trad climber
San Mateo
Jan 20, 2006 - 09:47am PT
If there is a chance the second may fall while simul-climbing perhaps you should not be simul-climbing.
Karl mantioned the death tibloc, a tibloc can be placed in the "haul" mode on the "top" piece of the leaders pro. Say you are climbing with 100' of rope between you and the leader, the leader would ideally place a tibloc in the haul mode every 100', then if you fall the idea is that the tibloc will lock off on the rope and catch you with out pulling the leader off.
426

Sport climber
Buschville, TN
Jan 20, 2006 - 11:31am PT
Consequences are dire, any way you cut it, the first rule is 'no one fall'.


The second rule if feasible, is have a way strong leader. Like Rick Lovelace, in the push of the NA Wall. He had a partner fall while simuling 5.10+/11 and caught the fall...
August West

Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
Jan 20, 2006 - 12:01pm PT
I've simul climbed a great deal with my regular partner and since he climbs a number grade harder than I do, I'm always in the lead and I've thought a lot about the potential falls.

I've experimented with using screamers between my tie in point and the rope. However, I'm not willing to rely on a single screamer to connect me to the rope. Particularly since there is a potential for a very large force. When I've done this, I connect two screamers in parallal. So the force is going to be twice the normal screamer load. I'm ok with this since screamers are designed for low forces, I believe you could double it up and be ok. Furthermore, if the dual screamers deploy, you have got to be in better shape than if you didn't have them. Dual screamers with a couple of lockers is a bit bulky.

I have also toyed with the idea of coiling (or bunching up) ten feet of rope or so and "tieing" to the side of my harness with a piece of velcro. The idea being that if I got "sucked" into the top piece, the ten feet of rope would end up on "my side" of the top biner. However, this is going to cause a ten foot greater fall even if you don't get sucked in and it is going to be awkward/bulky to climb with etc.

Still looking for good ideas...
hobo

Trad climber
Jan 20, 2006 - 01:32pm PT
Tie in like normal. Attach screamer to harness. Then clove the rope into the end of the screamer, with ample slack between your tie in point and the clove.

Personally, it seems like a hassle with little gain. Not falling would be much better, and make for a more enjoyable day.

I fell about three feet while simuling once, onto a small ledge when a nubbin broke. Partner didnt see or feel it. Later he said, "you started climbing a little slower there for a second huh?"

I said, "uhhhh, ya"
WBraun

climber
Jan 20, 2006 - 01:59pm PT
Simul-climbing is very dangerous, one must have good faith.

I felt always comfortable with people like John Bachar, Kauk, Croft etc.
hobo

Trad climber
Jan 20, 2006 - 02:02pm PT
Agreed there. I think i can name one or two people i would be comfortable simul-climbing with. You know, people like kenny and jesse.

James

Social climber
My Subconcious
Jan 20, 2006 - 03:09pm PT
Simul-climbing is dangerous. To try and rationlize ways to make it safe is foolish. Accept the seriousness of the situation and do it in the simplest fashion or don't do it at all.
Burns

Trad climber
Arlington, VA
Jan 20, 2006 - 05:58pm PT
There's a great writeup on Andy Kirkpatrick's site: www.psychovertical.com that addresses simuling in which he makes an excellent point regarding the choice to simulclimb. He essentially says you need to understand that it is essentially soloing. The rope is less of a safety net and more of an inattentive guardian angel, it might save you, but you'd better not be counting on it.
ThomasKeefer

Trad climber
Monterey, CA
Jan 20, 2006 - 06:04pm PT
I have done some testing on the tibloc 'death' set up. I never use this set-up anymore after this testing. I noticed that normally in the hauling mode, the unit requires some gently coaxing to lock up properly. I think that this coaxing will come at a certain point from the rope moving around wildly during the fall but the problem you are looking at then is that the sliding rope will be stopped by a toothed device which is likely to open the sheath. I have resorted to using wild country rop-man devices for this purpose. I think that the fact that they are spring loaded and stay engaged the entire time and that they have no sharp points on the cam make them far preferrable for this application. Normally you need to find a spot to either sling a tree or set a two piece 'anchor' to attach the ropeman to so allow for multidirectionality while preserving the proper direction of pull should the need for it to stop a simul fall exist.
I have actually seen a simul fall on royal arches but it was of little consequence though. The person is a user on here so I wont embarrass him (he might not even know it). His girlfriend and he were climbing a few years ago trying to train for an ascent of CJ and wanted to suss the RA approach. He was climbing the face section just beneath the headwall and she was still traversing to the base of that section. He had placed a tibloc and so the rope never really pulled him at all and she was back on pretty quick. I saw later that they had posed beta on RA to CJ so I think that they made it through both just fine. Also, Hans Florine has a short anectdote on simul climbing in his speed climbing book. I think that he has taken a leader simul fall after being pulled off by his falling follower.
cliffhanger

Trad climber
California
Jan 20, 2006 - 07:12pm PT
"> Leader and follower are simul’ing with a 60m (200’) rope and there is minimal slack in the rope between climbers
> Both climbers are equal in body weight
> Leader is 20’ above his last piece which is bomber when the follower peels"

In this case both climbers will experience about the same fall factor. After all the leader still has 100' of dynamic rope that will stretch and run up over the carabiner, cushioning his fall. The leader will experience somewhat higher forces because of the friction of the rope running over the carabiner. Each climber falls on 1/2 the rope. The middle doesn't move as it's being pulled equally from both ends (not taking the friction into account). The middle of the rope is like the anchor point. That's a fall factor of 0.2 for each climber: 100 feet of rope and a 20 foot fall.

I like ThomasKeefer's advice on the Wild Country Ropeman.
Jaybro

Social climber
The West
Jan 20, 2006 - 07:35pm PT
How hypothetical.
timmy_t

Trad climber
Fort Fun, Colorado
Jan 20, 2006 - 08:09pm PT
I'll second the ropeman. I had a partner fall and it caught them. Keep in mind that it isn't designed for large loads though.
'Pass the Pitons' Pete

Big Wall climber
like Oakville, Ontario, Canada, eh?
Jan 20, 2006 - 11:01pm PT
Ask Hans and Dean - they'll tell you. The Secret Weapon is the Ropeman.
Jaybro

Social climber
The West
Jan 20, 2006 - 11:18pm PT
Keep the rope reasonably taut between the climbers and it's no big deal, especially with a long rope and some twists and turns.
I think you guys are making a bigger deal out of this than it is.

As I have posted at least twice before;
I was the leader when my second fell on the Harding route on Keeler needle. We were simulclimbing on a 60. I was leading one of the 5.10 pitches (at the crux) when he slipped, it felt like a slight tug at my waist, way less then a toprope pull. I held on while he swung back onto the climb; a fifteen second delay with no consequences.

We had the full rope out, there were peices, slings and corners.I wouldn't count on it being that way another time, but it worked for us.

Still, always assume you're soloing when you simu-climb.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jan 21, 2006 - 08:35am PT
I always consider simulclimbing as soloing with a backup which will possibly prevent a fall to the ground. Generally I've simulclimbed on ground you wouldn't want to fall on, even if you are caught by the rope and anchors... not pretty.

I almost never do it with the full rope length, but more like alpine travel with 1/2 or 1/3 of the rope between the two climbers. Put a lot of pro in so that it you've got a chance. But still, "the leader and the follower must not fall". That being said, you always have to consider soloing instead, it could actually be safer because the consequence of falling is more obvious to both climbers.

Probably simulclimb mostly on relatively easy ground in areas where I haven't climbed before and there may be enough concern of loose rock or snow and ice so that you'd like that "safety net".

Forget the physics, it ain't gonna save you, DFU.
Andy KP

climber
Jan 23, 2006 - 02:28am PT
I've been using the ropeman system for a long time now on terrain where I'd probably be happy to solo (if I didn't have two kids and a wife). It's far from perfect, but if done correctly I feel it can give you almost the same level of protection as belayed climbing (although you should consider it soloing).

The important things to remember are

#1 Know your partner, and both have the system dialed. Don't go off using the set up with someome new.

#2 Never allow the second to build up slack, as this could couse serouse damage to the rope in a fall. Ideally you should climb at a steady pace.

#3 Keep the rope short (45m) and thin so as to reduce the added drag.

#4 If you exstend the ropeman climb with a loop of rope in one hand so you can't be dragged off.

#5 Cut off the wire loop on the ropeman as this can hang up on the gate of the locker and stop it from working.

#If you need to ask why people simul climb then the answers irrelivant anyway.

#The technique dosn't always work, so prepared to pitch it or do a true simul climb.


And yes I've had a partner fall off and I didn't notice a thing.

here's that link as well:- http://www.psychovertical.com/?10speed


Cheers

Andy
Doug Hemken

climber
Madison, WI
Jan 23, 2006 - 10:24am PT
cadl -

Not many people seem to have experience with this system after both climbers come off (at least, not many who are around to talk about it?).

Unless the pull is vertical, the rock is perfectly smooth, and the fall really clean, once the second climber comes off this system quickly heads toward chaos and unpredictable results. If either of the falling climbers catches a foot or bounces, all bets are off for your "fairly realistic" model.

So all the advice you see here is geared toward keeping the system from reaching the inflexion point past which chaos ensues - the leader must not be pulled off by the second. Leave no slack, use a ropeman. Communicate like crazy.

If you are both aware of the risks, and communicating well, then I would guess the system only reaches the state you are trying to model after *both* climbers have been taken by surprise and gone airborne.

Then your anchors should be really, really bomber.
TradIsGood

Trad climber
Gunks end of country
Jan 23, 2006 - 11:06am PT
You do not want to look at this with simplistic fall factor analysis. Too see this, consider the example where the leader is a defensive end for an NFL football team and the follower is a butterfly. Sure, they will both fall the same distance in almost the same time assuming that each is falling free and that the follower and leader fell at the same time. When the leader reaches the protection, he keeps on falling slowed by the weight of the rope (and butterfly), and friction until the butterfly's knot catches in the piece above him (the unfortunate butterly died at the end of his fall due to the huge acceleration - so much for the static FF analysis, which suggests that he gets a soft catch!). At that point...

Real world
 The followers fall is being slowed by all of the friction of each piece in the system, however little that might be.
 The fall of each may involve loss of kinetic energy with each collision with the terrain.
 The energy of each climber matters. Fall factor analysis involves an anchored rope tied off (i.e. not moving on impact, absorbing energy mechanically instead of in the form of heat.).
 The more energy the leader has the more rope will move through the top biner.
 Seems like a really dangerous thing to happen.
 Skip the theoretical stuff and figure out how to try it out, with weights and ropes. (Might save your life.)

Doug - You want the anchors to be bomber in the sense that they stretch a lot, otherwise the rope breaks.
August West

Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
Jan 23, 2006 - 11:18am PT
James

"Simul-climbing is dangerous. To try and rationlize ways to make it safe is foolish. Accept the seriousness of the situation and do it in the simplest fashion or don't do it at all."

Rock-climbing is dangerous. To try and rationlize ways to make it safe is foolish. Accept the seriousness of the situation and do it in the simplest fashion or don't do it at all.

Burns

"He essentially says you need to understand that it is essentially soloing. The rope is less of a safety net and more of an inattentive guardian angel, it might save you, but you'd better not be counting on it."

Perhaps it is soloing if the two climbers are equal in abilities. That is not situation in my case. If one is doing a long alpine climb, on some type of ground (whether it is the approach, the middle, or the exit) one is going to climb/scramble/hike unropped. And at some point one ropes up and climbs. The terrain that I want to rope up on is easier than what my partner feels he personally needs a rope for. And this isn't surprising since he is a stronger climber. When we scramble unropped or when we simul-climb, my chance of falling is [presumably] greater than his. If I fall scrambling, thats it. Simul-climbing we can climb almost as fast and I get a belay for free (well, almost for free, there is some chance my partner might fall). Not a very attentive belay, but a belay. And alpine falls tend to be bad anyway. In addition, being in the lead, I can always place a piece when the climbing gets a little harder.

For long climbs (especially in the mountains) there is a tradeoff between moving fast (beating darkness/storms etc) and belaying every pitch out. Since I have faith in my partner, I am more likely to choose simul-climbing on sections that with other partners I would just (in the interest of speed-is-safety) solo.

Another trick I have learned: if on terrain that is mostly easy but then has a short section (5'~10' say) of more difficult climbing, I'll put a piece in before I do the moves and yell down to my partner about the section. When my partner gets to that section, I'll place another piece and clip directly into it. My partner then does the "difficult" section while I'm clipped in direct and then once he is through it, we go back to simul-climbing. I don't waste time actually putting him on belay (he generates slack as he climbs), but I'm safe against a fall. In the unlikely event he falls on that section, it will be shorter than the normal simul-fall.
Jaybro

Social climber
The West
Jan 23, 2006 - 12:01pm PT
What August said, though a lot of time, the climb time is faster, if the stronger climber drags a rope for the weaker climber, than if the both solo. Beats waiting.

Also, I kinda presupposed that anyone taking it as far as simulclimbing had already abosrbed the knowledge from AW's post, below;


"Another trick I have learned: if on terrain that is mostly easy but then has a short section (5'~10' say) of more difficult climbing, I'll put a piece in before I do the moves and yell down to my partner about the section. When my partner gets to that section, I'll place another piece and clip directly into it. My partner then does the "difficult" section while I'm clipped in direct and then once he is through it, we go back to simul-climbing. I don't waste time actually putting him on belay (he generates slack as he climbs), but I'm safe against a fall. In the unlikely event he falls on that section, it will be shorter than the normal simul-fall."

Lots of long climbs go faster (no bivy!) as cluster-solos punctuated with belays.
cadl

Trad climber
Long Beach, CA
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 24, 2006 - 01:38am PT
Thanks everyone for the valuable feedback. I had forgotten about the ropeman trick.

We’ve utilized the majority of the “good protocols” mentioned in many of the replies above, namely:

> Only simul’g on easier ground where both of us would consider solo’g
> Have the stronger climber follow
> Minimize slack in the system
> Fixed belay either climber thru short sections of more difficult climbing (AW’s earlier suggestion)
> And last, but probably most importantly, understanding the implications that simul’g is a high stakes DFU activity

The main impetus for my posting was the proverbial “what if” game we all play. I have had one friend break an ankle and hand (leading) from a foot hold breaking loose, and I have personally had two alpine rock fall experiences over a 15 year period (struck on Mendel, luckily no damage, and one near miss on Temple Crag). I’ve always treated the simul’g experience as soloing, but it’s those objective or semi-objective hazards (e.g. we could probably spawn a whole thread on the merits of whether broken holds and rockfall are subjective or objective hazards) that you can’t always control.

A few additional thanks:
> Karl, Werner – thanks for helping to moderate this crazy forum (whether intentional or not)
> Hobo – I like your idea for clove hitching in a screamer. May not be appropriate for all occasions, but another “tool for the toolbox”
> A. KP – great website. Your words definitely contribute to the furthering of mankind.
I hope good karma comes your way in the form of advertising links, book deals, or some other monetary form. Barring that, trust that your words of experience are helping keep us mortals out of trouble. Keep up the great work.
> Everyone else – thanks for contributing!

Climb safe!
jpdreamer

Trad climber
St. Louis
Sep 16, 2008 - 01:40pm PT
I had my follower slip off while simulclimbing Matthes Crest this weekend. (He made a poor decision to downclimb 15' to a ledge about halfway along the climb and slipped off when the rock hwedged in a crack he was standing on popped out.) Pro in the system was pretty much running the rope back and forth between flakes along the ridge. The fall wan't pleasant, but I wasn't pulled that hard, no more than trying to climb with the rope stuck. I had all the slack out of the system because what he was doing looked a bit sketchy as it was not the way I climbed it. He ended up falling through a tree and was a bit scraped but no real damage. He was a bit mentally beat though.
Nickawb

Sport climber
St. John's
Jan 29, 2017 - 12:23pm PT
Hi all, very much reviving a dead thread here, but nevertheless...

My partners and I just finished a comprehensive article on simul-climbing that integrates all of the information presented here, as well as other information we've learned from further research, into a cohesive picture of a good simul-climbing system.

Make no mistake, I am happy to post here at the end of this thread because of the many appropriate cautions that have already been expressed. Although the system we present in our article minimizes the risks associated with simul-climbing, it is a serious departure from the safety margin achieved when using a pitched climbing system.

We apologize if the language used in the introduction makes the practice seem too inviting. Please approach simul-climbing with all due caution.

http://chossboys.weebly.com/theory/theory-of-simul-climbing
Batrock

Trad climber
Burbank
Jan 29, 2017 - 12:41pm PT
If you are worried about fall factors you probably shouldn't be simulclimbing.
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Jan 29, 2017 - 01:15pm PT
Seems to me that between the time this was last resurrected that Bill Wright and a partner had an accident in Eldo while simul-ing.
StahlBro

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
Jan 29, 2017 - 01:22pm PT
+1 for Batrock. If you are simulclimbing you are comfortable on the ground you are climbing. The rope is to hopefully keep you from dying due to some unexpected mishap.
Clint Cummins

Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
Jan 29, 2017 - 01:59pm PT
The Tom Karpeichik - Bill Wright accident was on June 26, 2010.
In this accident, the leader fell (140'), and the follower was pulled up 25' to the nearest protection, so it is a different situation than a fall by the follower.
It was a very serious accident, as the leader was knocked unconscious, and the follower did not have any remaining slack rope to lower him or escape the belay. Fortunately they were in Eldorado Canyon, and other people called in a rescue and assisted.
Tom and Bill were trying to simulclimb 100 pitches in a day (they were on pitch 34).
Bill is the coauthor of a book on speed climbing with Hans Florine.
http://publications.americanalpineclub.org/articles/13201104602/Fall-on-Rock-Simul-Climbing-Colorado-Eldorado-Canyon-State-Park
https://www.mountainproject.com/v/another-eldo-accident-6-26-2010/106809275
clockclimb

Trad climber
Orem, Utah
Jan 29, 2017 - 02:46pm PT
Great write-up Nickawb! A wealth of information in your link for the experienced climber.
phylp

Trad climber
Upland, CA
Jan 29, 2017 - 03:20pm PT
Very interesting write-up. Thanks.
Technogeekery

Trad climber
Sydney, Australia
Jan 29, 2017 - 08:31pm PT
Nickawb - what a fantastic article, thank you.
AP

Trad climber
Calgary
Jan 29, 2017 - 08:41pm PT
Try this while ice climbing just to add that extra fun factor
Messages 1 - 36 of total 36 in this topic
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta