Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - Accidents & Injuries

Report Accidents and Injuries

Author

Accident at Arapiles: November 9th


ajfclark

13-Nov-2010
8:30:40 PM

On 13/11/2010 simey wrote:
>I reckon a lot of the Natimuk crowd do wear helmets but we are not obsessive about it.

I can't think about you and helmets without thinking of that Arno story and smiling.


Pat

13-Nov-2010
9:04:24 PM

I am dog ugly, so wearing a helmet has always been an improvement. And I blame myself entirely for starting this thread.


bel

13-Nov-2010
11:21:55 PM

depends if my hair looks crap ill wear my a helmet otherwise perhaps not!!!! seriously cant we all make a decision based on the environment around us, the quality of the rock, how many beers we have had the night before ect and decide if head protection is required or not. Is it not up to each person to decide before they leave the ground how there feeling and make a decision on what they need? From my experience working in the Horsham hospital climbers are generally thought of as a nuisance who occasionally create extra work for underdone interns in A + E. i don't think this opinion is likely to change if we come in helmet or helmetless!!

martym

14-Nov-2010
8:40:35 AM

Helmet poll was started in 2005 - it's still open so everyone can vote there & keep the Araps Accident 9th Nov relevant to what it is.

But in case that doesn't happen - I think that once someone else is scooping your brains off the road/rock/car window - your personal choices do impact others, often in horrible ways. Part of the brain being scooped up will be for hindsight.

dalai

14-Nov-2010
11:56:59 AM

On 14/11/2010 martym wrote:
>But in case that doesn't happen - I think that once someone else is scooping
>your brains off the road/rock/car window - your personal choices do impact
>others, often in horrible ways. Part of the brain being scooped up will
>be for hindsight.

Agreed! The guy who hung around the streets of Berserkley back in the 90's constantly wearing an old fibreglass climbing helmet had the right idea. Protecting the head from damage whilst walking on the sidewalk plus it helped protect his brain from the alien signals...

One of the joys of climbing is it isn't overregulated. If people want to wear helmets - great. Same for those who choose not to. Fortunately we still have some choice, enjoy it whilst you can.

How about the helmet debate be continued in one of the many helmet debate topics that have raged here numerous times and leave this topic for updates on the accident in question?

TonyB

14-Nov-2010
4:24:09 PM

I think I would have preferred to be wearing a helmet with most of these. Perhaps some may think otherwise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTQhAYR1j40
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEXoWCObLms
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMXZFzxW-bA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TghTaUMM49Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5Sb8ZMNx1k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTQhAYR1j40
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTQcbnfiEYk


Doug

14-Nov-2010
5:52:24 PM

>How about the helmet debate be continued in one of the many helmet debate
>topics that have raged here numerous times and leave this topic for updates
>on the accident in question?

Good idea. (And I agree completely with your thoughts about climbing being not over-regulated.) Given that the climber in question "is recovering well and all indications are that he will make a full recovery in a short period of time", maybe we can get back to aspects of the accident, like why did the block come loose (was it pulled/kicked out by the climber or levered out by gear which then pulled)?, what was the piece?, did the climber invert - if so, why?, how has the belayer come out the other end?, etc.

Olbert

14-Nov-2010
7:45:28 PM

I agree! I would also be wanting to wear a helmet with these as well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-r5bClOqhjQ&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5SRyG6UR2A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6A4DC026p60&NR=1

One Day Hero

15-Nov-2010
11:13:34 AM

On 13/11/2010 Decoy wrote:
>Speaking of the image portrayed to kids...
>
>
>Billy Kool doesn't need a helmet and he climbs to the max extreme!!!
>
>
>

>
So, I reckon Billy Kool is actually Andrew Bull on Hard Candy, as photoed by mr Onsight

Wendy

15-Nov-2010
11:59:05 AM

On 14/11/2010 TonyB wrote:
>I think I would have preferred to be wearing a helmet with most of these.
> Perhaps some may think otherwise.
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTQhAYR1j40

This one's a lesson not to use bandoleers

>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEXoWCObLms
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMXZFzxW-bA
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TghTaUMM49Q

and this one not to climb slabs. Or maybe to wear ankle braces.

>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5Sb8ZMNx1k
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTQhAYR1j40
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTQcbnfiEYk

I'm not even sure what weird things 2 and 6 did to end up upside down. They should have been perfectly ok falls. There's a few lessons about ignorance, stupidity and getting out of your depth in these too.

Edit: i've copied this to the latest helmet debacle where it probably should be.

mtbriderinmonty

23-Nov-2010
2:31:26 PM

I like to have the helmet on when climbing, but I’m just paranoid about safety. I also like the person on belay to have a helmet. It is not so much to protect against the big falls, most big falls will kill you with or with out the head gear.

But to protect the small median size bumps that can result in falling rocks or sometime miss handled gear. Or when I fall I will be moving my second, in most cases I out weigh my follow climber by a good 20 kgs, this will mean that they will be moving somewhere, weather anchored in or not.
If I fall and my second bumps their head then I’m stuffed as well, helmets protect your self and your climbing buddies.

Being semi conscious due to a head injury is short cut to making a poor choice and losing balance.

When I’m out climbing I see a lot of old climbers with their helmets on, they have made it to being old some how, might be the helmet might not.


gordoste

23-Nov-2010
4:31:31 PM

I keep hearing that freedom of choice is so valuable when it comes to deciding not to wear a helmet ... does it mean that a helmet-wearing climber is free to choose not to help you when you smash your head open? Or is freedom of choice only important when it works in your favour?
BTW personally I would help anyway, it's a hypothetical question designed to expose flaws in your position.


ajfclark

23-Nov-2010
4:55:44 PM

Can we please move this discussion to the helmet thread?

http://www.chockstone.org/Forum/Forum.asp?Action=DisplayTopic&ForumID=6&MessageID=15727&Replies=1&MsgPagePos=-1

One Day Hero

23-Nov-2010
5:21:25 PM

On 23/11/2010 joycepg wrote:
>i don't think climbers are the sort that go around telling other non-helmet-wearing
>ones they should be wearing a helmet.

I'm not expecting this situation to last long. A couple of weeks ago I was riding my bike down the shops in sydney when I was hassled by a lycra-clad fukhed. My crime?......rolling across a pedestrian crossing at walking pace (with no traffic about) and not having a piece of polystyrene on my head. Naturally I offered to redecorate this guy's face if he would like, but he declined. I reckon within 5 years I'll be having the same conversations at the crag.

Climbing is dangerous, kayaking is dangerous, riding a bike is dangerous. If you want to be safe, don't engage in these activities. If you want to do dangerous things, do not split hairs by declaring my marginally higher level of risk to be unacceptable, whilst your marginally lower level of risk is considered unchallengable!

One Day Hero

23-Nov-2010
5:26:48 PM

On 23/11/2010 gordoste wrote:
>I keep hearing that freedom of choice is so valuable when it comes to deciding
>not to wear a helmet ... does it mean that a helmet-wearing climber is
>free to choose not to help you when you smash your head open?

Well, that depends. A disproportionate number of accidents seem to involve people climbing at low grades, and I get sick of people taking risks by being shit climbers. Can I refuse to help someone who's had an accident if they climb less than grade 16? After all, not being able to climb hard is a personal choice and I don't see why people continue to do it when its clearly safer to be a better climber.


skink

23-Nov-2010
8:29:29 PM

On 23/11/2010 One Day Hero wrote:
>Well, that depends. A disproportionate number of accidents seem to involve
>people climbing at low grades, and I get sick of people taking risks by
>being shit climbers. Can I refuse to help someone who's had an accident
>if they climb less than grade 16? After all, not being able to climb hard
>is a personal choice and I don't see why people continue to do it when
>its clearly safer to be a better climber.

Hey One Dud Hero, the best climber is the one having the most fun.

Wollemi

24-Nov-2010
9:46:36 AM

On 23/11/2010 One Day Hero wrote:

>Climbing is dangerous, kayaking is dangerous, riding a bike is dangerous.
>If you want to be safe, don't engage in these activities. If you want to
>do dangerous things, do not split hairs by declaring my marginally higher
>level of risk to be unacceptable, whilst your marginally lower level of
>risk is considered unchallengable!

Waddya reckon ODH about the policies of Sydney Rockies, white-water kayak clubs, and the Western Sydney MTB Club, amongst others.
You blow your own violent trumpet, in the face of the law - yet you remind me of of telling youths to settle down on Sydney trains, only to be threatened with assault; would you do the same if I, or your victim at the pedestrian crossing was dressed in a uniform of blue?


gordoste

24-Nov-2010
9:55:54 AM

On 23/11/2010 One Day Hero wrote:
>Well, that depends. A disproportionate number of accidents seem to involve
>people climbing at low grades, and I get sick of people taking risks by
>being shit climbers. Can I refuse to help someone who's had an accident
>if they climb less than grade 16? After all, not being able to climb hard
>is a personal choice and I don't see why people continue to do it when
>its clearly safer to be a better climber.

That's absolute BS. Have a think about the fatalities over the years at Araps and you'll realise it's spread across all skill levels. There are many more bumblies but they spend much less time on rock.

Wendy

24-Nov-2010
10:25:59 AM

On 24/11/2010 gordoste wrote:
>On 23/11/2010 One Day Hero wrote:
>>Well, that depends. A disproportionate number of accidents seem to involve
>>people climbing at low grades, and I get sick of people taking risks
>by
>>being shit climbers. Can I refuse to help someone who's had an accident
>>if they climb less than grade 16? After all, not being able to climb
>hard
>>is a personal choice and I don't see why people continue to do it when
>>its clearly safer to be a better climber.
>
>That's absolute BS. Have a think about the fatalities over the years at
>Araps and you'll realise it's spread across all skill levels. There are
>many more bumblies but they spend much less time on rock.

Actually, beneath the sarcasm, ODH does have a point. It's not bullshit that inexperienced climbers are overrepresented in accidents. And if you did consider that they spend much less time on rock (which i'm not sure about, enthusiastic beginners spend lots of time on rock becoming enthusiastic experienced climbers) then for them to be over represented makes the case even worse. There's something in the saying that if you survive your first 2 years climbing, you'lll probably survive a long climbing career. Inexperience leads to lots of mistakes, poor judgements, crap gear, getting out of your depth. If you look at the Australian Accident register, you'll think that Mt York is the most dangerous crag in the Blue Mtns, closely followed by Shipley - hardly the epitomy of hard climbing in the mountains. As an aside, it also demonstrates that the representation of sport/trad crags is about 50/50, making sport climbing not look any safer. And that if you hit the ground from 8m with a helmet, it doesn't save you from fatal head injury.


gordoste

24-Nov-2010
11:11:59 AM

Yes inexperienced climbers are overrepresented but that's not what he said - he said people climbing low grades are overrepresented. For someone experienced, climbs are equally safe no matter the grade.
So his "refuse to help people climbing low grades" question is not at all the same as my "refuse to help people who don't wear helmets" question because climbing low grades is not inherently dangerous.

Anyway, I am still interested on how the non-helmet people would answer my question. ODH has tried to pretend that his question is equivalent and therefore that my question is just as silly as his. Hopefully I've explained why his question is not at all equivalent.

Another way of posing the question: Imagine you're busy belaying someone on a pleasant well-protected climb. Somebody arrives and starts soloing a hard testpiece next to you. They start sketching out while about 15m up and you are expecting any moment to have them land next to you while you're still busy belaying your partner. Is it fair for them to put you in that situation?

There are 120 messages in this topic.