Todd Skinner

Post by **Canuck** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 6:19 pm

On the topic of redundancy, one other thing that I haven't seen mentioned is that he wasn't (apparently?) using any back-up knot on rappel - either a prussik (attached to the leg-loop and belay-loop) or an autoblock (attached only to the leg loop) should have held.

Post by **B.J.** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 6:23 pm

Canuck wrote:On the topic of redundancy, one other thing that I haven't seen mentioned is that he wasn't (apparently?) using any back-up knot on rappel - either a prussik (attached to the leg-loop and belay-loop) or an autoblock (attached only to the leg loop) should have held.

I noticed that too. He'd still be alive if he had simply backed up his rappel.

Post by **Saxman** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 10:39 pm

This will most likely never kill anyone or hurt any rope but a smaller radius is potentially formed during a hard fall as the rope and the nylon of the belay loop try to form the smallest curve possible. Imagine folding a thin slip of paper in half. The rope is curving against the belay loop at a 90 degree angle. When you belay through two points, this is less likely to happen. This was in something I read years ago. Might have been Petzl lit or a Long book.

Post by **the lurkist** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:38 pm

something to consider that I haven't heard mentioned. Skinner's belay loop failed while he was rappelling. I am guessing that the force on the loop wasn't much of a dynamic force, but more of a static force.
Thinking of all the belay loops I have seen and how beefy they are, his must have been incredibly worn to fail under a static load (assuming this was the case.)

Post by **ynot** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:47 pm

Something in his setup had to be chewing on it. Maybe a really small locker gate, doesn't make sense. I was thinking the same thing Lurkist.

Post by **Saxman** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:26 pm

ynot wrote:Something in his setup had to be chewing on it.

Why? Just because something can hold a static load one minute doesn't necessarily mean the next load will hold. Since his loop failed under a static load, it means he crossed the threshold of how many fibers could hold his weight. Let's say that's 300. On a previous rapel or part of a climb, thread 301 snaps which he has no way of knowing. Starting that rapel, number 300 snaps, now he has 299 which can't hold his weight so they all go at once. If it had been a slow rip, he might have had time to do something about it. It makes sense it would rip through completely all at once.

Post by **ynot** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 6:11 pm

The report clearly says it was worn. something was chewing it away. it's a no brainer.

Post by **rhunt** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 6:37 pm

can't it just be "worn" from normal use and being old? The report says his partner noticed and made comments about his worn harness. Sounds to me like the whole harness was old and worn not just the belay loop.

Post by **Saxman** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:19 pm

Isn't funny when the people who say it's a no brainer aren't thinking clearly? Why is that? Why do your jeans get holes in them without anything sharp touching them??? They get worn which means they wore out, not got cut. You use your harness enough it will wear out, just like slings, draws, ropes, anything we use that is woven. Hell, even our metal gear is subject to metal fatigue. It can catastrophically fail as well without anything chewing it up. All those micro-cracks just waiting to join up and ruin your day.

Post by **gunslnga** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:19 am

I think jeans are not a good example in this situation. Just because you cant see the micro abrasions doesn't mean they're not there from some rub or snag you don't remember and starting to progress into a hole. Denim is very strong material, not much different in toughness, to say...rope?? When we drag our ropes up and down the rock, get dirt in the sheath or just plain abuse it, it starts to break down and so do jeans, harnesses, shoes, etc. etc.
I have had gear made for the desert environment made both by the Government and by private contractors, I have seen them destroyed by the use and environment, and I don't think I was half as tough on them as I am on my climbing gear. My climbing gear has outlived other gear I thought were much better made and better suited for it's purpose, however if I even think it's a risk, to the garbage it goes. So as for the chewing theory, who are any of you to say that YNOT is wrong, none of us were there, pure speculation at best on all sides.
This is one of those discussions that will go on and on, because it makes people question they're skills, knowledge, safety, personal beliefs, and overall ability to admit they don't know it all. It's all subjective, tie in on the belay loop, dont tie in on the loop, two points of contact, one point of contact, flip upside down, stay right side up, replace your harness, let your harness kill you..........