Why do many climbers appear to not trust their belay loops?

My friend's old boss died while rappelling from a belay loop failure. Our belay loops are subject to the most wear and tear- they take brunt of the forces exerted on our harnesses. Many climbers prefer to have a redundant system. The rope is redundant because of the core, on top rope the anchor is redundant. The only thing in a top rope system that isn't redundant is the system attached to the belayer- the belayer's belay loop, belay carabiner and belay device (ATC, belay plate, ETC) It may seem silly or over-redundant, but why not? There is no real harm being done.

posted about 10 years ago

CC BY-SA 3.0

WayfinderAli‭

1 reputation 0 2 0 0

I've seen this kind of behavior.

I think there's a tendency for people to want to continue to do things the way they're used to doing them, and the way they were originally trained. It can be a little frustrating when someone comes along and tells you that the new "right way" to do something is different that what you've done before.

Also, if you're an experienced climber, you were probably trained several years ago. When new recommendations enter the climbing community, they're introduced in books and training classes that are mostly taken by beginners. So you have a situation where the people with the most up-to-date training don't have the context to fully understand what they've been taught, or necessarily apply it safely. This makes experienced climbers unlikely to take their advice.

I've felt this myself - I used to rig a backup autoblock off my leg loop, until a friend convinced me to extend my rappel, and put the autoblock on my belay loop. It was honestly hard for me to hear, because my friend was actually pretty inexperienced, and I'd been climbing for 3 years at that point. But I eventually came around.

FWIW, I hope we can all at least agree that harness manufactures recommend that climbers use the belay loop to belay, and both tie in points when they're tying in or putting a sling or anchor chain on their harness. At least that's what's indicated on this guide from Petzl. Other things may be safe, but I'd want to see some indication that they were at least tested by the manufacturer before doing it.

posted over 11 years ago

CC BY-SA 3.0

DavidR‭

111 reputation 0 48 11 0

I can agree with DavidR - it's the heritage of "old school".

Some (like, 10) years ago, materials and sewing technologies were less perfect. My first harness had a much less durable belay loop, than my current one: it was thinner and made of less "dynamic" material than a rope. That is why there was a rule that you should double it with a rope, which is as strong as the rope you are hanging on. So the belay loop had no chance to be the weakest link of your belay system.

Also people tended to use their harnesses for much longer periods of time, many years in a row. The belay loop got some wear and tear, so the new piece of rope was more reliable (you can replace a rope, but it's harder to replace a belay loop).

And it was even worse more than 10 years ago, when technologies and technics, including midern 3-loop harness, were only emerging. You probably know that there was time when there were no harnesses - just a rope tied with double bowline or the like.

posted over 11 years ago

CC BY-SA 3.0

Steed‭

91 reputation 1 39 10 0

I have never seen what you are describing in many years of sport climbing. Every climber I know uses the belay loop correctly as it is one of the strongest parts of the harness and like the old harness loop has been designed to take the strain of falls and distribute it evenly to the leg loops etc.

Maybe it is different in different areas, cultures. I don't know. And it appears that in the past the belay loop was not the strong point it is now, so as DavidR mentions, a lot of the legacy beliefs may not be applicable after years of development.

posted over 11 years ago

CC BY-SA 3.0

roryalsop‭

826 reputation 7 248 84 0

Obviously there's a good case for considering the wear and tear on the belay loop and harness itself. Consider the case of Todd Skinner:

http://www.climbing.com/climber/loss-of-a-legend/

They discussed the worn harness, talking about how people back up the belay loop with a tied sling, but neither considered it a significant safety hazard.

posted almost 10 years ago

CC BY-SA 3.0

Mark Bostleman‭

1 reputation 0 1 0 0

The answer is simple, if not trusting the belay loop grants you safety then why would you trust it? Their lives depend on it, of course they won't trust it and will take measures to ensure that if it fails that they got a backup to fall on.

A new born baby can't move at all, but no mother would leave it on a bed where there is a possibility of a miracle of that baby falling of that bed, unless that mother has no clue of such a possibility existing.

The cautious people are those who survive critically small errors which could killed them whereas somebody who takes other peoples word that something is indestructible doesn't live to tell if that one thing really was indestructible.

posted almost 10 years ago

CC BY-SA 3.0

JavaRookie‭

1 reputation 0 1 0 0