Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - Accidents & Injuries

Report Accidents and Injuries

Author

Rescue on Arapiles - Melbourne Cup Weekend


Sabu

9-Nov-2009
11:53:07 PM

On 9/11/2009 Nmonteith wrote:
>Do pagers still exist?
yea CFA volunteers still have them as far as i can recall.


masterofrup

10-Nov-2009
9:53:33 AM

On 9/11/2009 Nmonteith wrote:
>Do pagers still exist?

What about CB's?


ajfclark

10-Nov-2009
9:58:41 AM

On 9/11/2009 gordoste wrote:
>I am not sure why, but I can only guess that it's because when you send an SMS you don't get any confirmation that the person received it.

Pagers are more reliable than mobiles and can work with a much lower signal strength so they'll work places mobiles won't. I'm pretty sure the network that runs them is also more reliable and harder to overload.


nmonteith

10-Nov-2009
10:08:54 AM

So there is a separate pager network being maintained by someone? Is is it some archaic analog radio signal left over from the 80s or a newer system?


ajfclark

10-Nov-2009
10:16:48 AM

I'm not sure of the details Neil; it's been a very long time since I had to carry a pager (thankfully). The one I used to carry was on the Orange network. You might find something on their website or there's a bunch of stuff on the wiki page if you're super keen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pager


nmonteith

10-Nov-2009
10:27:06 AM

On 10/11/2009 ajfclark wrote:
>I'm not sure of the details Neil; it's been a very long time since I had
>to carry a pager (thankfully). The one I used to carry was on the Orange
>network. You might find something on their website or there's a bunch
>of stuff on the wiki page if you're super keen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pager

From that page...

"Most modern paging systems use simulcast delivery by satellite controlled networks. This type of distributed system makes them inherently more reliable than terrestrial based cellular networks for message delivery. Many paging transmitters may overlap a coverage area, while cellular systems are built to fill holes in existing networks. When terrestrial networks go down in an emergency, satellite systems continue to perform. Because of superior building penetration and availability of service in disaster situations, pagers are often used by first responders in emergencies."

gfdonc

10-Nov-2009
10:59:01 AM

Do any of the local services monitor any UHF channels? Channel 5 is the nominated "emergency" channel. I often carry a 2W UHF handheld, which, given clear line-of-sight, should reach Nati from (say) Tiger Wall.

racingtadpole

10-Nov-2009
12:20:49 PM

I may be able to assist with the pager thing. The reason they are still in use is two fold. Firstly the technology is as close to bullet-proof as one can hope for, and secondly its a matter of economics.
All paging systems used by emergency services in Australia are terrestrial based (I have been involved in construction of said systems in SA, Vic, and WA, all of which are less than 8 years old and were very much state of the art when installed). Paging transmitters are usually very high RF output power in the middle of the VHF area of the spectrum. This coupled with how the message is transmitted makes them nigh on bullet proof. With advances in manufacturing technology has come a dramatic reduction in cost of paging units (and most electronics in general), infact they can be had for around $30-$50 these days, with no ongoing network access fees (the state governments of SA, Vic and WA own the network that the Emergency Services pagers are attached to). If you compare this to the initial and ongoing cost of mobile phones, there is NO comparison, particularly when you start looking at how many ES volunteers have been issued pagers.
Hope that helps clarify why we still use stuff that seems on the surface yesterdays technology.


Richard

10-Nov-2009
1:36:44 PM

On 9/11/2009 benwolf wrote:
>Interested in everyone's thoughts...

“Two hours.” he replied confidently.

Here's my thoughts - a better rule is an hour per pitch. Sounds like a long time, but by the time you lead, set up belay, seconder pulls down belay, climbs and removes gear, sorts gear, it all adds up. Not shareing alernate leads aslo slows things down. And after that you still have to get off - add another hour for the down climb (probably slowed by sore feet) through Ali's, or abseil (still takes time - only 1 person at once). So its a slow process. You will never never never do a 5 pitch climb, bottom to top, let alone to return to the start, in 2 hours.

We did death watch beetle, 3 pitches, left camp about 9ish (i think) got back about 2.00 pm. And I did not lead slow, most of my lead pitches were fairly easy, and my partner climbs about 4 or 5 grades harder than that climb. The down clinb was slow, due to painfull toes, and you want to take care on that as its the most dangerous part of the day. We had a camel back with about 1.5 liters - all used.

gfdonc

10-Nov-2009
1:44:06 PM

Yep, the hour-pitch-rule holds up pretty well, for a party of two, not in a hurry, leading within their onsight limit (i.e. not getting stuck or working moves), and setting belays.

Add more for a 3rd person. More if route-finding is an issue. Less if there are bolted belays and the leader is confident.


IdratherbeclimbingM9

10-Nov-2009
2:18:02 PM

Good point Richard.
Plus On 10/11/2009 gfdonc wrote:
>Yep, the hour-pitch-rule holds up pretty well, for a party of two, not
>in a hurry, leading within their onsight limit (i.e. not getting stuck
>or working moves), and setting belays.
>
>Add more for a 3rd person. More if route-finding is an issue. Less if
>there are bolted belays and the leader is confident.
>
+ 1 on that, however another exception (often), to that rule is aid climbing, which is slower again.

Another rule of thumb that I find useful is 3 litres of water per person per day for climbing in the sun. It can vary hugely depending on many factors...

>“Two hours.” he replied confidently.

When I read that in the report, and because I have not done that route, I went and looked up the climb in the guide and noticed it was five pitches, though some were short and one included a ledge.
My thoughts then went along the lines of, the grade is easy enough though one of the party is newish to the game; ... even with long ropes and running pitches together that is still overly optimistic, unless simul-climbing, for a roped party of two ...
☺

X-Link to the parallel thread of this one.

nerdgerl

10-Nov-2009
2:36:17 PM

Thanks for your blog post. Im glad you both got off safely that day and I think you absolutely did the right thing by calling for help.
You weren't to know the quality of anchor your leader had made.
I recently did BBB (270m) with not enough water and that experience coupled with your story will make sure I pack enough on my next multi-pitch.

Hope the experience hasn't put you off climbing or arapiles!

patto

10-Nov-2009
2:53:13 PM

On 10/11/2009 Richard wrote:
>
>“Two hours.” he replied confidently.
>
>Here's my thoughts - a better rule is an hour per pitch.

Better yet know you own speed. I known people who have spent 8 hours on easy 4-5 pitch routes at araps. In contrast how long do you rekon it took muki to lead the first 2 pitches during that rescue? I'd probabably guess less than 15minutes.

Underestimating the time it takes to complete and descend a climb one on the most common flaws leading to minor rescues. (headtorches needing to be brought up etc) I mountaineering and alpine style climbing this has resulted in many deaths, fortunately arapiles is a fair bit more forgiving.

That said if you know you speed and can work well with you partner 20+ pitches are possible in a day. I've climbed 16 pitches in around 5 hours, obviously it makes a difference if you are climbing well inside your grade range.

There are 33 messages in this topic.