Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Minerals
Social climber
The Deli
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 27, 2005 - 06:10pm PT
|
Sorry – I only wish that I was a McPhee. The word “cannot” was used in an ethical sense, rather than an actual or physical sense. Maybe “shouldn’t” would have been more appropriate?
Obviously, safety standards for passenger vehicles as well as race vehicles have greatly improved over the years, with advancements in technology and from lessons learned. Air bags have saved many lives; so have seat belts. Modern ‘race cars’ are even fitted with ‘restrictive devices’ that prevent higher top speeds; safety regulations are also imposed on the ‘car’ design and set-up – technology has been subdued in the name of safety.
But climbing isn’t like auto racing or a trip to your local grocery store. You can update your rack of climbing gear with the latest and safest gadgets but ethically speaking, you can’t (shouldn’t) change the route in the name of safety. Weathered anchors that are unsafe should (need to) be replaced, but if done correctly, the ‘safety factor’ should not change (relatively speaking) from that of the original ascent.
Just imagine if Erik’s sense of ‘safety’ was imposed on passenger vehicles… Freeway speed limits would be dropped to 25 mph… And small, efficient cars would become extinct, as larger, safer vehicles became the norm.
|
|
Lambone
Ice climber
Ashland, Or
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2005 - 09:45pm PT
|
We could go back on wording all day...
But the way I see it, Eric Whoever could turn every move of Tangerine Trip into a 3/8 bolt with hanger, argueably making it "safer". However, you will still have people who can't tie into the rope properly fall off and die.
So in that case you can put some safety into a climb, but can't allways put safety into each climber.
Not that I think climbs should be made safer, I agree they should remain in the original style as much as possible, including bolting techniques.
|
|
Max
Social climber
santa booze
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 03:52pm PT
|
Hmm... Small, efficient vehicles, versus exceedingly large, safe ones?
Which catergory does the DeathStar fall into Bryan?
he he he
|
|
ricardo
Gym climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 04:07pm PT
|
bryan:
.. its tough to argue these sort of points in an internet forum .. since alot of the people chiming in have not seen the rebolting in question for themselves..
.. i have mixed emotions about the rebolting work on el capitan..
for example on tangerine trip.
I was relieved to hit the beefy bolt ladders (we're talking belay bolts + hangers on an aid ladder). -- since it allowed me to move faster through those sections -- only bothering to protect every 4th or 5th bolt.
The only question about the rebolting work is: Was that what the bolt ladders used to look like? -- or were they smaller rivets (or dowels) that were replaced with belay bolts + hangers..
==
Looking back at the experience, i was thankful for the beefy protection, but i would have prefferred to have suffered through a rivet laadder. hanging my own rivet hangers, rather than having shiny new ASCA bolt hangers.
That being said, i still donated to the ASCA after my TT ascent because i appreciate that someone is out there beefing up belays, and other critical equipment.
My $0.02 ... make the belays bombproof.. the rest of the climb should remain at the same risk level as the F.A. -- (replace lead bolt for lead bolt.. rivet for rivet .. almost seems like there should be a table of what compares)
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 04:18pm PT
|
You know why the Tangerine Trip has such a shitty rivet ladder? Because Porter wanted off and he didn’t have the money to pay for all those bolts. Now he figured later ascents would do the justice it deserved.
Instead people thought that a fu-cked up road needed to be replaced by a fu-cked up road ......
Modern education nice stuff ..............
|
|
Wrathchild
climber
right behind you
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 04:29pm PT
|
The Trip is a done deal, but it would be a shame to see the machinehead wall (native son) get the same treatment. If you've done it, you know what I mean.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 04:39pm PT
|
In the future they'll try and fix everything for you to protect you from yourself. It's man trying to play God.
Unfortunately it becomes a total disaster.
|
|
Wrathchild
climber
right behind you
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 04:42pm PT
|
God tried to play man once, and that didn't go so well either.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 04:46pm PT
|
Never ever happened Wrath .........he's not a cheater like us.
|
|
ricardo
Gym climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 05:45pm PT
|
werner :
agreed -- from the line that the route follows on the last 3 pitches, its ovbious that porter had had enough of the route and just needed to the get the heck out of there...
.. but was it really neccesary to replace a line of shitty dowels with super-safe-i-will-hang-my-truck-and-mother-in-law beefy belay bolts..
.. anyways .. my point is that rebolting of lead bolts should be done to preserve a sense of adventure -- using huge bolts + hangers on a rivet ladder is overkill.
|
|
'Pass the Pitons' Pete
Big Wall climber
like Oakville, Ontario, Canada, eh?
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 06:08pm PT
|
I bloody wouldn't hang something as valuable as my truck off the same bolts as I'd hang my mother-in-law.
What the, what the hail you thinkin', boy?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 06:11pm PT
|
Man ricardo, I don't know what's right. That's what some guy named Sloan did. Do I know this guy? Doesn't make any diffrence does it? I leave all that stuff for you guys to sort out.
It's your generation, you guys need to figure it out.
Hint ("It's really not about the bolts nor about climbing what-so-ever")
Good luck . .......
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 09:00pm PT
|
Just to make sure everyone knows the exact current relationship between the ASCA and Erik: Erik receives NO SUPPORT at all from the ASCA.
Erik has done a tremendous amount of rebolting work and was one of the founders of the ASCA.
However, his vision of bolt replacement on Yosemite wall routes differs so substantially from that of the community that the ASCA has completely withdrawn support for his work. Last fall, he gave Chris everything he had left and then I picked that up from Chris. No ASCA money goes to any supplies for Erik.
I hope that Erik finally listens and stops replacing every rivet with a big fat bolt, but on the other hand maybe he has already adjusted his methods - has anyone been up Ten Days After before and after his work who can let us know details? Has anyone sat down and discussed the particular replacement job he did on that route? In my opinion, it's premature to pronounce Ten Days After a "victim" without having that information.
In any case, I just wanted everyone to know that their donations are not going to support Erik's idea of bolt replacement on walls. I hope that Erik changes his methods so that the community can once again fully support his extensive rebolting efforts.
|
|
Wrathchild
climber
right behind you
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2005 - 10:07pm PT
|
Well, that pretty much says it all.
A good man corrupted by power...24 volts of it.
|
|
bhilden
Trad climber
Mountain View, CA
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2005 - 02:11am PT
|
I think there is an interesting point worth debating here.....
Fixed climbing gear deteriorates over time. The rivet or even the bolt placed by the first ascentionist 30+ years ago is not the same piece of gear now. If you agree with that contention then if the fixed gear is never replaced, routes get harder as they get older.
Is it acceptable to require future climbers to use the aging gear? Clearly, the route is now harder then it was for the first ascentionist since the gear now is less safe.
I don't know what the right answer is, and maybe there really isn't once correct answer. The fact that somebody stood on a 30+ year old rivet and it held really has no bearing because if that same rivet is a ticking time bomb and it finally blows for the next climber, it was unsafe. It is hard to make the same claim for a properly placed 3/8" bolt which will be safe for years to come (assuming it is the proper materials and properly placed).
What does everybody else think? Is it OK to replace 1/4" bolts with 3/8" bolts because they (1/4 bolts) were thought to be "bomber" when they were placed. But, is it not OK to replace rivets because they were never bomber and part of the game is dealing with sketchy pro?
Is the goal to drill a minimum number of holes (especially during re-bolting) so if you are going to have to drill, fill the hole with something that won't appreciably deteriorate over time like a rivet which might require an entirely new hole if it blows? This would be an argument against replacing a rivet with a rivet.
Can we ever reasonably expect to experience a climb in the same condition as the first ascent party? Is that really the ultimate goal?
Hmmmm?!?!?!
Bruce
|
|
Michael Moron
Social climber
Davison, MI
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2005 - 02:19am PT
|
" IMHO that is disrespectful to the first ascensionists who sweated it out with hand drills. "
That is a stupid thing to say. Anybody that does a route in something other than exactly how the FA was done is disrespecting the FA? Criminy! This "respecting" of the FA is getting out of hand. What do you do, bow down three times a day and pray to the first ascentionist? I think this idol worship crap is getting ridiculous.
|
|
Wrathchild
climber
right behind you
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2005 - 10:29am PT
|
The point is:
Replace a rivet with a rivet.
Replace a bolt (any bolt) with a good bolt.
The reason being that rivets are to cross blank rock, bolts are for protection. By replacing rivets with bolts, the character of the pitch is changed.
And the disrespect comment, I assume, is because he uses a power drill.
|
|
landcruiserbob
Trad climber
the ville, colorado
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2005 - 11:33am PT
|
Sorry for popping in on the aid climbing mechanical bolt wars,but you guys bitch more than sport climbers(they bitch a lot).Lambone made a good point about the trip.Can't see that being done by hand.Have a great day flaming.Free it or leave it for the next generation.rg
|
|
bhilden
Trad climber
Mountain View, CA
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2005 - 12:05pm PT
|
The problem I have with placing a rivet for a rivet is that if you can't use the same hole, then you start drilling a lot more holes in the rock. I always thought the ultimate goal was to drill as few holes as possible. If trying to keep the climb at the same difficulty will require a lot of holes to be drilled over time then that is bad.
And historically, rivets were used not to cross blank rock but to save time (and money) on drilling bolts. The first ascentionists weren't trying to make the climbing harder, they were just trying to get up without having to spend a lot of time drilling deeper holes. If somebody wants to take the time to drill deeper holes what's wrong with that?
If you really want to go back to scary aid climbing let's return to using "bat holes", 1/4" deep by 1/4" diameter holes into which
you slot a specially modified bat hook. Those were really scary and didn't hold up to multiple ascents.
Bruce
|
|
ricardo
Gym climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
i think you're missing the point ..
in my opinion -- there is not much difference between a good 1/4" rivet and a good 3/8" rivet .. the operating word is good .. either one should hold.
.. to me the difference is when the rivet is replaced with a bolt + hanger..
a rivet ladder has a different feel than a bolt + hanger ladder.
it is possible to rip a few placements in a rivet ladder -- while ripping placements in bolt+hanger ladder does not enter the equation.
---
for example .. the 2nd pitch of virginia .. has alot of rivits with some crappy gear thrown in between .. (heads, etc) .. if you blew it -- you'd sail for a bit .. the rivets may or may not stop your fall .. (not from the rivet failing.. but from the rivet hanger breaking or falling off) ..
.. if those rivets were replaced with bolts+hangers .. that pitch would not be nearly as enjoyable as it is today.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!