Auftriib
Select Page

Lead Rope Soloing – filling the summer gap…

overview of my lead rope soloing setup

Lead Rope Soloing (LRS)

Why I’m tired of the ‘danger phrase’ – or:
Can LRS be safe and fast?

The DANGER intro

 

Yes I do understand that nobody wants to be held responsible for a potential imitator’s accident.

But what irritates me are all these tutorials that tell me I actually shouldn’t do LRS because it is genuinely dangerous without going into details of the specific dangers nor offering measures to address them.
I believe: Dangerous is not primarily WHAT we do but HOW we do it.
Apart from the fact of being alone out there, I do not see why any unjustifiable risk should be inherent part of rope solo climbing.

Or in other words: There’s got to be a relatively safe way of climbing solo.

My approach:

  1. Analyse: What are the relevant LRS-specific dangers?
  2. Then search: What can be done to address them?

After quite a bit of thinking, experimenting and re-thinking – I have found a setup that I can justify to my family and enabled me to climb an 835m / 21 pitch route solo in under 12h.
Now I would like to share my experience in order to contribute to an objective discussion.
I will do so by starting from the modifications and specific techniques, followed by the reasons for me to deploy them.
My modest contribution will be closed by some open questions/ideas for further discussion.

Head and shoulders (A and B)

 

I see two equipment measures to address an LRS-specific and relevant danger: unconsciousness and consequently a hanging trauma.

  1. Helmet shock sensor (Specialized ANGI)
  2. Chest harness

What I am most afraid of is an upside-down fall or rockfall with unconsciousness as a consequence. Without prompt rescue, hanging in a normal sport climbing harness unconsciously will most likely turn into a serious situation. Have you ever tried what happens when you imitate unconsciousness while hanging in a harness? No good!

A chest harness seems to be the logic answer. But I need to do more research regarding the harness question (Do chest harnesses imply secondary risks?). For the time being, I work with an improvised upper part built with a 120cm sling. This feels better to me than a commercial one I’ve tested, especially under a backpack.

Furthermore, if your climb is within mobile network coverage, Specialized’s helmet sensor ANGI may provide some safety in case of a hard impact.

Having ‘observers’ close by while on a big climb may also help. And informing friends or family about my exact plan is also a must for me.

The belay REVOlution (C)

 

OK, I will be clear: I am anything but neutral when it comes to the REVO, as I used to work for Wild Country and have accompanied its journey from a first 2kg prototype to its commercial release.
But I have reflected quite a bit and have come to see it as the belay device that gets the closest to an ideal LRS device.

Why?

  1. It is almost too frictionless.
  2. The REVO offers very reliable locking function(s), regardless of orientation etc.
  3. It is a 3in1 device: You can lead, rapel and TR the pitch all without a single manipulation/change.

The only objection here is the fact that it hasn’t been designed for soloing. When I compare the scenario of a worst possible LRS fall to the norm test (EN 15151-1), I don’t see any obvious issues. The norm falls are also really hard ones, with the belay device hanging upside-down on a static anchor, arresting a high-factor fall of an 80kg mass of steel.
But the remaining uncertainties are well worth some sort of backup or redundancy (see next paragraph).
Experience shows us furthermore that the attachment of the device can be an issue. This is why I work with modified locking karabiners:

First of all, they shouldn’t twist (DMM Belay Master). Secondly, the REVO should be prevented from sliding over the bend of the karabiner. A rubber stopper or some tape solve the problem.

You may have noticed another small ‘modification‘: I use one or two layers of duct tape in order to prevent the REVO’s Tube Nose to engage on the side of the dead rope when pulling through slack too quickly or – much more likely, by getting caught on the rock or some gear while climbing. 
This has clearly reduced unwanted REVO locking whilst it doesn’t prevent the REVO from locking in case of a fall.
A fall simply rips the tape apart and the Tube Nose engages just normally.
Please note that the REVO lock even if the Tube Nose was really prevented from rising (there is a second locking mode).

TAKE TWO – or: backup vs. redundancy (C)

 

What do you do when you climb an alpine route with potential of sharp edges and rock or ice fall?
Or what do you do when you have to build an anchor on Friends? Even if you have a bomber splitter with a perfect placement for a .75 Friend, you will hopefully look for at least a second piece of pro.
So, isn’t it just logic to introduce a second rope to the LRS discussion?

So far, there was mainly discussion about backup systems (knots etc.), as – obviously – people do not trust ONE system 100%.
Backup knots have one big downside: they slow you down!
Or even worse, they may make a smooth rope management impossible.

Wherever we truly rely on a safety system, we work with systems that are rather redundant to the main system than backing it up while being dependent on that same.

Backup knots are serial, while a true redundant system needs to be parallel to the main system.

Two ropes and two REVOs are only logic to me:

I need a second strand of rope for abseiling/bailing out anyways.

Rapelling x times with swings, lateral movement of the rope while cleaning the route has never felt very comfortable to me, so having two strands doesn’t hurt.

Not having to worry about backup knots on lead and intermediary knots when rapelling saves me much more time than carrying an additional strand of rope costs me.

Only trick needed here: how to load the two REVOs to have both dead strands on one side.
Then I keep the two dead rope strands apart from the live rope by clipingp a quickdraw to them (which I attach to my right leg loop).

Maybe you have been wondering why I load the REVO this way (live rope near the body).
Well, the next clip shows why. This way you can abseil and then re-climb the pitch without any further manipulation.

Rope management (D)

 

LRS is all about mastering the details regarding rope management. 

Avoiding twisted ropes is essential!
So, properly stack the rope in the backpack and you will be fed properly.
Keeping the two strands separated (with one finger or else by pulling them through two karabiners) while stacking helps a lot.

Reduce the risk of stuck rope ends by covering the end knots (anchor side AND dead end side) by a kitchen funnel. PE is ideal (doesn’t break so quickly), but I cover them with tape (think of safety glass…) anyway. 

After lots of experimenting with multiple cache loops, I stick to one loop of approx. 3m and a free end, knotted off and covered by a funnel.
I fix two Micro Traxions to my harness with duct tape for one-handed cache-management.

Points for discussion

I have tested various kinds of solutions to the live rope drag problem: from slip knots and munter hitch, clove hitch on longer slings to self-made aluminum clips attached to some karabiners.
But none of these solutions has really convinced me. Either they were too slow to apply or they prevent the entire live rope’s lenght to stretch in case of a fall (important!).
I am looking for one gimmick that lets me clip/apply one-handed and fast.
I do have some ideas for karabiner modifications with a ‘rope drag brake’ but I doubt there is a market for such thing…

In any case I am looking forward to learning from feedback, questions and ideas!

Cheers, Andreas

 

Update June 21st 2021

 

I have come up with a seemingly easy way to solve the backfeeding-issue in a quick and one-handed way: adding some rubber (rings or bicycle tube) to the bottom part of a ‘belay HMS’ karabiner. 

A first test has proven the system to work well for me. The handling can get smoother with time. Generally speaking, it is always easier to clip when your hip is close to the bolt’s height. 

FAQs ‘redundant flow method’

NO. My experience and understanding of the REVO tells me not to play around with its internals at all. As a former member of the Wild Country family, I believe having quite an understanding for this device's potential and limits. And my biggest concern is about the eccentric shoe being prevented from moving freely. So beware of sticky liquids, ice - and messed up springs!
I have been using my 8.5mm double ropes. I strongly recommend testing the interaction of any rope with the REVO on the wall - with a backup from above. According to edelrid, you should NOT use their aramid-reinforced PROTECT ropes!
Some first tests indicated that the aramid fibres - which protect the ropes' sheaths and make these ropes much more resistant to sharp edges - can actually lead to worryingly low slippage and thus to damage of the ropes in case of a factor 2 fall.
I do not see any scenario - neither in theory nor from experience. First of all, the REVO cannot be manually hindered from locking at 4m/s. The only exception I know of is an immobile eccentric shoe. For example due to ice or glue inside. Then I make sure the two REVOs are attached parallel to each other, with two krabs of identical size. Ideally, I connect the backs of the two krabs with a rubber ring. This way, the REVOs attachment points always stay close to each other. Velcro and stuff will tear apart under asymmetrical loads.
If that makes you feel safer, then you should definitely do that! If I were to climb with only one rope and one REVO, that ONE connection between myself and the belay system would definitely need to be absolutely bombproof. An HMS krab with a solution to prevent twisting of the entire krab as well as to prevent the REVO from sliding over the bend feels safe to me. Especially since I can count on two redundant systems.
Here again, redundancy is good for my nerves. Fixing a device in a bench vice and then pulling on over the biggest possible lever arm is one thing. I've tried to be evil and find scenarios without any vice that could lock the REVO into the krab's bend so as to break its attachment points. But I couldn't find any. Then I use rubber rings to keep the REVO from slipping over the krab's bend.
Sure, having a connection between the two anchor points will add even more safety margin. Our routes here are almost always equipped with two solid bolt anchors. So the scenario of pulling a bolt and then having the other rope cut over an edge feels very very unlikely. But I agree, connecting the two points doesn't cost much and definitely makes sense, especially on not-so-bomber-anchors.
Four backfeed brake krabs work fine for me. In theory, with a 50m double rope, you'll be pulling up the entire ropes' weight after 25m of climbing. Sooner or later after that, the ropes will start backfeeding. The exact sequence of placing the brakes is rather a question of feeling for me than of numbers. My rules of thumb: When the pull gets noticeable, I first place the backfeed brake. Then I start with cache loops. No cache looping before the first backfeed brake of course. If you can keep your cache loops rather long, that lets you climb longer before having to place the next brake.
Potential issues I see: 1. damage to the rope in case of a direct fall into the backfeed brake krab. --> as always: test before you trust! --> the rope under load must be able to push the rubber rings away. In fact, the rings should either break or be pushed to the side. 2. reduction of the ropes' dynamic shock absorbing properties. --> Sure, if you are concerned about rope drag, zig-zaging etc., then you could clip the backfeed brake into the bottom krab of a normal quickdraw. That way, it should do its job as a backfeed brake while still allowing the rope to stretch as it would without that brake.
Fortunately not. 🙂 I've run a couple of tests where I'd swing around the helmet in my hands until the alarm went off on my smartphone. Then my father texted me what I was doing so it worked out. Not sure how much safety this thing can add when high up on a wall, as my main concern is about hanging symptoms with limited time to react.
I see two aspects that reduce speed: the additional weight and the potential of interference of the two ropes and thus the need for additional care when pulling and bagging them. On the other hand, this redundancy makes me feel comfortable without any backup knots - the biggest speed (and flow - and fun) killers. Furthermore, I personally feel much more free and unburdened and thus save time through fluidity on lead and on rappels.