How to split 3-5 people into rope teams for glacier travel?

I would not agree that 4 members is a bad number. Having 4 roped together during glacier travel with the risk of creavasses is still quite good and not much worse than 3 but if things become more technical (with the need for belaying) they can split into two parties of two which is the ideal number for climbing with belays. I myself did all my climbs as a party of two which is not ideal for glacier travel but that's how we ended up always. I did many climbs in the Alps, South- and North America, Central Asia and only once fell into a crevasse completely but as you can tell from this post the fall was arrested by my partner. If you are a party of two it's a good practice to have the lighter person below (i.e. behind on the way up and in front on the way down) This way the lighter person has to be pulled upwards in case of a fall of the heavier, so it should be easier for her/him to stop the fall.

posted almost 5 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

Bernd‭

11 reputation 0 2 1 0

I went ahead and fished out my copy of Mountaineering: The Freedom of the Hills, which happens to be the 50th anniversary 8th edition.

The reason there isn't much detail in the list you quote is that it's in the primer chapter. In chapter 17, Glacier travel and crevasse rescue (p.375), you have to go to the Fundamentals of glacier travel (pp.381-382) in the Rope Teams paragraph. There, you find a good explanation of the line you quote:

Rope teams of three climbers each are ideal for travel on glacier where no technical climbing will be encountered. With a rope team of three, two people are available to arrest a rope mate's fall into a crevasse. A minimum party size of two rope teams is recommended so that a team involved in an accident will have backup help. In some instances, a party of four may climb on a single rope; for example, if one of the climbers may not be able to arrest a crevasse fall, or if just one of the party is experienced in crevasse rescue.

[...]

On technical glacier terrain - with slopes steeper than 40 degrees or with severe crevassing - belaying may be necessary, making it more efficient to travel in two-person rope teams. In this situation, having a second rope team as rescue backup becomes even more important. While the person who is on the same rope as the fallen climber holds the rope fast, the second team can setup a snow anchor and initiate the rescue (see "Crevasse Rescue Response" later in this chapter).

As mentioned in other answers, if you can't meet the safe minimums for rope teams for glacier travel, it is probably the best idea to change plans. 4 climbers could potentially rope up into two teams or as one team, but in the second case it requires a full-length rope (or double ropes):

Glacier travelers usually put 3 people on a 37-meter (120-foot) rope, and three or four people on a 50- or 60-meter (165- to 200-foot) rope. These configurations space the climbers far enough apart so that as the rope team crosses a typical crevasse, only one person at a time is at risk. Where there are truly humongous crevasses - in the himalaya or the Alaska Range, for example - greater spacing may be necessary.

A team of more than 5 becomes more risky as the distance between members isn't large enough for safe travel. There is also an efficiency component as the larger the rope-team, the worse the rubber-banding will affects travel speed as each member tries to keep the rope taut.

posted almost 5 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

Gabriel C.‭

296 reputation 1 61 30 0

You are not going to like the answer, but a 5 member team should recruit a 6th person. I think 3 people per rope is ideal. 4 people always seems like too many and 2 people makes stopping a fall really hard. A one person rope team is not a rope team.

The way I would break things down:

1 person - Find more people to climb with

2 people - If you are both experienced and the risk of falls is relatively low and the route well traveled (e.g., the standard route on Mt Rainer), this is ok. If the route is not well traveled, the risk of a fall is high, or you are not experienced, find more people to climb with

3 people - This is perfect for all but the most remote and infrequently traveled routes.

4 people - Kick someone off the team, find more people to climb with, or be prepared for logistical difficulties

5 people - See 2 people (but with the added benefit of a second team)

6 people - You are golden

posted almost 5 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

StrongBad‭

499 reputation 26 120 57 0

A bit later it states that during glacier travel, there should be a minimum of two rope teams.

Is there any explanation why there should be 2 teams? The only case where this makes really sense is that a whole team falls into a crevasse. This must not happen under any circumstances.

If the idea is that a second team can start the rescue immediately, this is a dangerous approach. After a crevasse fall has been stopped, it is paramount to build a reliable anchor (T-anchor or ice screw, depending on conditions) before anybody moves on untested terrain. A second team rushing to the rescue can easily cause a second fall into another crevasse nearby.

Probably the perfect size for glacier travel is 3 persons. The chances of holding a fall in a 3 person team are sufficiently good and recovery of the fallen person is relatively easy with 2 persons at the top. On the other hand, the smaller the team the more agile. Every irregularity in your pace (either by terrain or irregular pace of the leader) will add with every person on the rope. This turns the last position of a team into a kind of stop and go (or rather stop and run) pace. 1

Considering this, for a 3 and 4 person team there is only one option which is going as a single team. For 5 persons there is the option of a single team as well, which is still ok as long as the terrain is rather regular [2]. If this is not the case or if the teams are preferring smaller teams and sufficient experience for the smaller teams, you can split this into a 3 person team on the front and a 2 person team behind. This combines the advantages of small teams with the benefit of a second team in case something goes horribly wrong. Note that in this case the second team has a tested trail and therefore the disadvantage of having only a second person for holding a fall is greatly diminished although not completely removed

1 For this reason it is often recommended to have the fittest members of your team towards the back and the weakest at the second or third positon.

[2] A typical example of an irregular terrain is a crevasse zone where you have to change direction all the time. Keeping the rope taut all the time is more difficult with a bigger team.

edit:

On the concept of avalanche terrain and a second team digging the first team out. This is extremely wrong.

1. Avalanche terrain is not the norm on a glacier. Most glaciers are quite flat most of the time and there is no risk of avalanches.
2. If there is a realistic danger of avalanches and you cannot turn around or do not want to, the sensible thing is to keep a bigger distance between members (~50m). This has two positive effects. First, the snow is loaded less at a single point and the risk of triggering an avalanche is smaller (minimizing the risk). Second, in case of an avalanche only one person is affected (minimizing the damage). Roping up makes it impossible to keep a good distance and is a guarantee that the whole team is affected by an avalanche. (It has to be noted that in this situation you are likely in a spring ski tour where the glacier is snowed up properly and the risk of a crevasse fall is very small anyways)
3. Avalanches can only be triggered in steeper terrain (dry snow avalanches are most common on slopes between 30° and 45°). In steep terrain a single member stumbling can pull the whole team with them if the snow is sufficiently hard. This is definitely a situation where you do not want to go roped (even though a lot of mountain guides have no issues short-roping 4 clients on an icy 35° slope...)

posted almost 5 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

Manziel‭

111 reputation 2 34 11 0