HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis)
Subject: Re: emergency techniques
Organization: University of Virginia Health Sciences Center
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 21:35:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.091158.354@halfdome.sf.ca.us> bob@halfdome.sf.ca.us (Bob Pasker) writes:
}In article <1992Aug25.120014.15444@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:
}> In article <1992Aug24.202903.350@halfdome.sf.ca.us> bob@halfdome.sf.ca.us 
}> (Bob Pasker) writes:
}> }because to hold a body belay, you have to have your hand crossed in front
}> }of you in a "locked off" position. holding your control hand at your side or
}> }scratching your ankle with your control hand pinky means you have to MOVE IT
}> }and quickly to the locked off position.
}> Gaaak!  To me, you never have an option to move your control hand anywhere
}> but on the rope.  The hell with your itchy ankle.

}you don't understand: it is possible to scratch your ankle with your
}pinky while still holding the control rope.  trust me on this one.

OK, I will.  (btw, rereading this I think I seem to be a lot more
hostile than I meant.  Sorry about that.)  I haven't been in a 
serious belay situation in about 20 years, and have no familarity
with techniques used today.  Back in my day (we died, and we liked it
that way) body belays were all there were, and our main concern
was dynamic versus static belays (only the rich had dynamic ropes)
and if you knew and had practiced them.

}good, cause i would have a hard time trying to belay someone who 
}was hang-gliding.  do you rappel down when the thing high enough?

I think the weight of the rope would be prohibitive.  But it does
pose an interesting contest.  Can you reach the ground before the
glider goes out of control?  Kinda cools your enthusiasm for height...

--
       hang gliding mailing list: hang-gliding-request@virginia.edu 
     Galen Hekhuis  UVa Health Sci Ctr (804)982-1646 gjh@virginia.edu
  chinaware from China, indiaware from India, and underwear from down under
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
From: bsbarron@eos.ncsu.edu (BRADFORD SCOTT BARRON)
Subject: North Carolina Climbing Guide
Originator: bsbarron@c00498-118rd.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: bsbarron@eos.ncsu.edu (BRADFORD SCOTT BARRON)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 19:00:43 GMT


A Triangle-Area Guide to North Carolina Rock Climbing	- Kimberly Tenai

cost: $5.00 

This book is designed for those in the Research Triangle area
(Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill) of North Carolina.  It is mainly for people who 
are either new to the area or new to climbing.  It is written by a local
climber, with the input of the local climbing population.  


Contents Include:

	* Climbing instruction in the area
	* Bouldering, Rock Gyms, local climbing
	* Climbing shop reviews for the Triangle
	* Day trips in NC
		- Pilot Mtn.
		- Cook's Wall
		- Moore's Wall
		- Sauratown
		- Stone Mtn.


This book is not ment to be a topo list and does not include route
descriptions. In the day trip section, we focused on access issues, accurate
directions, hospitals, area facillities, and important phone numbers. 
It can serve as a valuable addition to your guidebook.

In addition, we have included information on lodging, food, atm machines, 
stuff for non-climbers (fresh drivers) to do, and other essentials of life.

If you are interested, please send me return E-mail with your address.  I'll
mail you an order form.

	-Brad
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: Re: Factious Assinine Quibbles?
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 00:03:03 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.202912.3719@guinness.idbsu.edu>
jahn@guinness.idbsu.edu writes:
>OK, I HAVE to ask ... 
>
>Does FAQ stand for Frequently Asked Questions, or does is
>really stand for Frequently Argued Questions?
>
>Factious Assinine Quibbles?
I like this one.

FAQ stood for Frequently Asked Questions when Mark Horton and Gene Spafford
and others of the old ARPAnet got a hold of them.

I preferred Frequently Answered Questions when I started doing experimentation
with them working on their design, and we formed the Self-moderation Project.
(Note: I DIDn't say Right answers 8^).
Note that the news.group is called news.answers not news.asked.

Frequently Argued Questions is a logical outgrowth (r.b. is a good better
place to see this where several posts were specifically set up for this).

What's interesting in traffic to note from the stand point of climbing:
No jokes based on the Batman Returns film from the concept of batmaning a
rope.
No commentary of driving up the Tioga road past the Priests Grade where
all the veg has been burned off.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Resident Cynic, Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Second Favorite email message: Returned mail: Cannot send message for 3 days
A Ref: Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, vol. 1, G. Polya
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
From: czichon@psyche.csc.ti.com (Cary Czichon)
Subject: Re: NEW Casio Alto Watch...
Organization: Texas Instruments
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:50:20 GMT

In article <106480254@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> eao@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Ed Ogle) writes:
>
>By the way, it still only goes to 13,120 feet (4000m) which is a little low
>for Colorado and cost $160.00.  

This watch can be had for a lot less than $160.  Campmor lists it for $130.
I have both the new Casio alti watch and one of the older models.  The new
model is a much better watch.  Lots more functions.  Lots more memory.  It
graphs trends on a minature dot matrix display.  User's manual is 50 pages
long.  Max altitude is 19,680 feet.  Allows you to switch between English
and metric units (Celsius vs. Fahrenheit, millibars vs. in.Hg, meters vs. 
feet).  Pressure sensor seems larger than on older models.  Fully digital.
Back light display.  I brought the new model to the last mountaineering club
meeting.  Most people were impressed.

Cary Czichon
czichon@csc.ti.com



From: j_elison@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Jeff Elison)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:45:35 GMT
Subject: Horsetooth Hang details
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.climbing




Last time I posted about the Horsetooth Hang, I didn't have the full scoop.
So here it is:

WHAT:      2nd Annual Horsetooth Hang Bouldering Contest
WHEN:      Sunday, September 20, 1992
WHERE:     Horsetooth Reservoir, Fort Collins, CO
           Specifically: The Tropics, Land of the Overhangs, Rotary Park

CHECK-IN:  7:00 -  8:30 am / Expert and Elite
           8:30 - 10:00 am / Recreational, Intermediate, and Advanced
           The Tropics, west end of LaPorte Street, Fort Collins

CLIMBING    9:30 am - 2:30 pm / Expert and Elite
TIME:      11:30 am - 3:30 pm / Recreational, Intermediate, and Advanced

SCORING:   Routes are given points based on their difficulty and "pump factor".
           Contestants climb as many routes as they want; the top ten routes
           count toward the climber's score.

COST**     $30 / Pre-registered        $35 / On sight registration
           includes a contest tanktop, 4-5 hours of climbing, a slide show,
           and food and drink at Washington's Bar & Grill

** NOTE: $4.00 will be donated both to the Access Fund and the
         American Mountain Foundation for each contestant.

Regionally Sanctioned by the American Sport Climber's Federation

Men and Women Elite Prizes:  1st Place: $1000
                             2nd Place: $ 500
                             3rd Place: $ 250

Other Categories: $6000 merchandise prizes for other categories.



===================================     =======================================
|               |  MEN            |     |               |  WOMEN              |
| ELITE (12c up)|                 |     | ELITE (11d up)|                     |
|=================================|     |=====================================|
|               | MEN | LOCAL MEN |     |               | WOMEN | LOCAL WOMEN |
|=================================|     |=====================================|
| EXPERT        |     |           |     | EXPERT        |       |             |
|  (11c to 12b) |     |           |     |  (10d to 11c) |       |             |
|---------------------------------|     |-------------------------------------|
| ADVANCED      |     |           |     | INTERMEDIATE  |       |             |
|  (10c to 11b) |     |           |     |  (9 to 10c)   |       |             |
|---------------------------------|     |-------------------------------------|
| INTERMEDIATE  |     |           |     | RECREATIONAL  |       |             |
|  (9 to 10b)   |     |           |     |  (up to 8)    |       |             |
|---------------------------------|     =======================================
| RECREATIONAL  |     |           |
|  (up to 8)    |     |           |
===================================

** A local is anyone who has bouldered at Horsetooth more than six times
** RATING IS WHAT YOU CAN BOULDER AFTER A FEW TRIES
** Sandbaggers will be moved to the next higher category


hope to see you there,
Mort
From: bobh@fuji.hwr.arizona.edu (Bob Harrington)
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
Subject: Re: Joining Ropes
Date: 29 Aug 92 02:20:49 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona -- Tucson, AZ

>In article <1992Aug28.200319.3627@morrow.stanford.edu>
>AS.MSW@forsythe.stanford.edu (Marc Whitney) writes:
>	Simultaneous second belays
>
>>I've heard of this technique only once before.  It was mentioned by
>>a Austrian who had moved to Lake Tahoe and was running his own guide
>>service.  He used it so he could belay two clients at once,
>>generally on easier ground.  I've never tried it myself and whenever
>>I mention it the response is usually a raised eyebrow or two.
>>Still, it sounds reasonable if you have good rope handling skills.

My current climbing partner is Austrian, and this is his favored way
for climbing as a party of three on easy ground. I ridicule the 
techique as being akin to the "Austrian neck belay" in its dangerousness,
he maintains that Americans are very set in their ways.

Bob Harrington
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
From: nancy@wilbur.coyote.trw.com (Nancy Jensen)
Subject: Re: boots
Organization: TRW Inc., Redondo Beach, CA
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 01:32:24 GMT

czichon@psyche.csc.ti.com (Cary Czichon) writes:

> For that sort
>of money I decided to try Asolos.  I ordered a pair of 102s.  They're flexible
>enough for glacier hiking but I couldn't get the inner boot to fit right
>regardless of sock combinations.  I tried the older 101s.  They're stiff as
>hell (carbon fiber shank) but they fit perfectly.

One way to fit plastic boots: My AFS 101s (the older ones? -bought in
'87) were a bit wide.  I got help tuning the fit from a place that
fits alpine ski boots.

-Nancy
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
From: eric@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Hirst)
Subject: More Lame Gear Questions -- Aid Stuff
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:37:56 GMT

Well, I hate to ask, but I will anyway.  I've decided that my life is
not complete without the sublime joy of aid climbing, and the North Face is
having a sale.  I'm trying to decide between the Petzl Expedition ($68.00)
the Clog Expedition ($88.00) ascenders, and between the presewn Petzl
aiders and a home-tied or home-sewn version.  I'll also be picking out
such goodies as camhooks, skyhooks, and fifis.  If you E-mail gear advice
(e.g. how much flat webbing for a 6 foot 5 step etrier), I'll summarize
and post, and even keep my summary file around to nip the next round
of aid gear ramblings in the bud.

Also, if Washington climbers have recommendations on clean aid routes at
Index, let me know and I'll post a pnw distribution summary.  (e.g. City
Park C1, Iron Horse C1+/C2, etc. -- I am not ashamed to aid 5.12's.)

Eric Hirst
eric@milton.u.washington.edu
From: j_elison@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Jeff Elison)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:21:09 GMT
Subject: Re: unexpected hazards of climbing
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.climbing

>>
>They were looking for salt too.  They 
>went around from camp to camp looking for fresh piss.

My folks have a hunting cabin in PA.  We would see more porcupines at the
outhouse than everywhere else combined.  Over the years they had eaten 
18" holes in the sides.  That made for some cold visits when the winter
wind was whipping from the right direction.

Us males, being configured as we are, would often just pee off the porch.
The porcupines would come up and eat away the edge of the porch also.

Mort

Newsgroups: rec.climbing
From: allen%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Allen Sanderson)
Subject: Re: Leading on 9mm?
Date: 2 Sep 92 09:30:29 MDT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

paale@stud.cs.uit.no (Paal Ellingsen) writes:

>I'd really like to try 2x9mm double rope instead this time.
>However, there is one drawback about the 9mm that I don't like:
>I'll have to bring along 2 ropes for a 1-pitch-climb in the afternoon.

Yup, thats a problem.  I have lead 5.12 a single 9mm rope (didn't fall
however ;-).  Two ropes are better suited for longer climbs.  At any
given time I own several ropes (10.5x50 crag rope, 8.5x100 ice/alpine
rope, 9x30m glacier rope, and then there is usually a old junk/top
rope rope and haul lines, etc).

If $ is a problem for buying ropes I would definitely go for buying 2
8.5mm ropes and put up with the sometimes inconvience of taking two
ropes. If the route is short enough, half a rope length, you can just
double one rope and use it like a double rope.  Having two ropes is
far more flexible than having only one.

Cheers,

Allen R. Sanderson

Salt Lake City, Oootah



"I always wanted to climb those peaks ...
	 just didn't think I would do them all in one day."

	My climbing partner after hiking/climbing in the Wasatch.
From: mangin@debussy.inria.fr (Frank Mangin)
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
Subject: Re: emergency techniques
Date: 26 Aug 92 09:50:46 GMT
Organization: INRIA, Sophia-Antipolis (Fr)

-- 

  Good old times, when climbers were real hard men, yeah... Only nostalgia can
explain that so many people still defend body belays. It's a useless and
quite dangerous practice. Letme say that I am more often climbing in mountains
than on cliffs, and that I have met the problem more than once:

- Speed is the worth argument: I can settle my device faster than anyone can
settle a body belay
- Body belay is OF COURSE less safe. Those who pretend the opposite can make
extensive testing if they want, but I don't think they really trust what they
say.

Some points: you can never suppose in advance that a fall will be small. You can
move around far more easily with a belay device, and you can quickly get both
hands free if necessary,... and well, inseat of trying to demonstrate that body
belays are as safe as belay devices, just explain us why they are better??

	Frank Mangin                
	Inria                            Phone #93 65 78 66
	2004 route des Lucioles          Email: mangin@mirsa.inria.fr
	06560 Valbonne Cedex
	France
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
From: timha@microsoft.com (Tim Harris)
Subject: Re: emergency techniques (was Re: Cathedral Pk. Accident, Yosemite)
Date: 25 Aug 92 22:57:56 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1992Aug24.194000.1@cc.helsinki.fi> mjokinen@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
>In article <BtE2pu.Iz8.2@cs.cmu.edu>, cline+@cs.cmu.edu (Kenneth Cline) writes:
>> In article <1992Aug21.213427.6180@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> bobh@minaret.hwr.arizona.edu (Bob Harrington) writes:
>>
>> PS (in response to another article):  Most belay devices do provice
>> dynamic belays.  See the warning letter by Ed Leeper in _Climbing_
>> regarding the (non-dynamic) GriGri.
>
>Could you shortly describe the warning letter of Ed Leeper?
>
  It basically said that a GriGri is a totally static belay and 
has the potential to cuase great shock on any pro which could potentially
cause it to fail.  The letter was a strong recommendation against
using the GriGri for belaying a lead climber.  
  From my asking around about GriGri's I was told that they are
great for top-roping but should not be used for leaders even though
the Petzl catalog recommends them for belaying a leader.  They have two
problems - one the hard stop and two the difficulty of feeding out
slack quickly when needed.  

  Tim


Newsgroups: rec.climbing
From: franki@prso.pttnwb.nl (Frank van Ierland)
Subject: Re: NEW Casio Alto Watch...
Organization: PTT Telecom b.v. The Netherlands
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 11:31:21 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.082800.19948@sol.UVic.CA>, dmanke@caliban.UVic.CA (Dennis  Manke) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug26.084756.1213@sol.UVic.CA> dmanke@active.UVic.CA (Dennis  Manke) writes:
|> >Major highlights I can recall are: .....
|> >
|> 
|> Firstly, I must point out that I have the original Casio Watch and have found
|> it to be very acurate, dispite any wild temp changes. I do however keep it
|> on my wrist and in very cold conditions it's under a glove or something.
|> Staff at MEC have also tested them and claim they find the Casio watch
|> reports an alt within 5m of a top of the line, temp compensated aneroid
|> altimiter. In one of the more recent (maybe 6 months back) IEEE journals
|> (possibly the spectrum) they had a article on semiconducter pressure sensors.
[stuff deleted]
|> 
|> P.S.   What we need is a comprehensive survey of altimeters in Climbing
|>        or Rock & Ice. Anyone with connections out there ...

A few months ago there was a comparisment between these casio watches and some
normal altimeters in a dutch backcountry magazine. They tested the
watchs and altimeters in height chambers. The result was that these
watches where _at_least_ as acurate as the altimeters tested and where
always whitin 10 meters of the actual heigth. As i'am writing this from
the head i can't recall anny more details but if your interested i can
look them up.  

---
Frank van Ierland                     ||  Domain: franki@prso.pttnwb.nl
Cap Gemini Pandata T&D                ||  Voice : (+31) 70-39.57.206
#include <disclamer.h>                ||  CIS   : 70032,3223
From: trzyna@CS.ColoState.EDU (wayne trzyna)
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
Subject: Re: Joining Ropes
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:00:20 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Colorado State University, Computer Science Department

In article <1992Aug29.022049.19157@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> bobh@fuji.hwr.arizona.edu (Bob Harrington) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug28.200319.3627@morrow.stanford.edu>
>>AS.MSW@forsythe.stanford.edu (Marc Whitney) writes:
>>	Simultaneous second belays
>>
>>>I've heard of this technique only once before.  It was mentioned by
>>>a Austrian who had moved to Lake Tahoe and was running his own guide
>>>service.  He used it so he could belay two clients at once,
>>>generally on easier ground.  I've never tried it myself and whenever
>>>I mention it the response is usually a raised eyebrow or two.
>>>Still, it sounds reasonable if you have good rope handling skills.
>
>My current climbing partner is Austrian, and this is his favored way
>for climbing as a party of three on easy ground. I ridicule the 
>techique as being akin to the "Austrian neck belay" in its dangerousness,
>he maintains that Americans are very set in their ways.

It's really not so dangerous, and remember, speed is safety.

Of course, one climber could fall and swing, knocking the other climber off,
but this is inconvenience, not danger.  One obvious danger is if one climber
climbs above the other, the latter is exposed to rock/ice fall.  But if you
keep this possibility in mind, you can work around it.

I frequently climb this way with two partners on ice.

-- 

-Wayne Trzyna
 trzyna@CS.ColoState.EDU
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
Subject: Re: lawn chair belays
Date: 1 Sep 92 05:58:21 GMT
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA

In article <TIMSC.92Aug31200130@aspen.cfsat.Honeywell.COM>
timsc@hwcae.honeywell.com writes:
>"You brought lawn chairs all the way up here?!"

Lawn chairs?
You mean you did climbs without picnic tables at the base of each climb
like at Big Rock?  Occasionally useful to tying off as a belay anchor.
Certainly has a flat surface to place your lunch.  Cheating to stand up
on any part of the table when taking off.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Resident Cynic, Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
Second Favorite email message: Returned mail: Cannot send message for 3 days
A Ref: Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, vol. 1, G. Polya
From: bobh@fuji.hwr.arizona.edu (Bob Harrington)
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
Subject: Re: Known details of Cathedral accident (additions/changes) to Morton
Date: 28 Aug 92 05:30:57 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona -- Tucson, AZ

In article <1992Aug27.170758.3090@Cadence.COM> bruceg@Cadence.COM (Bruce Gustifson) writes:
>In article <1992Aug19.211037.7498@morrow.stanford.edu> AS.MSW@forsythe.stanford.edu (Marc Whitney) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug19.181307.27758@nas.nasa.gov>,
>>A decently placed friend or TCU *alone* should hold any force a
>>second could normally generate.  Two of the equalized should be very
>>strong indeed.  Since they were found intact, one can assume that
>>they pulled.  This is something that shouldn't happen.  The modes I
>>can think of that might permit this include:  placing them behind an
>>"expando flake", using an excessivly flaring crack, using a dirty
>>gravelly crack, using a crack that is too wide allowing the cams to
>>invert.  Thus if the belay stance is definately known, examining it
>>for each of these conditions could shed some light.
>  Along this line, I was wondering how people feel about the solidness
>of good nut placements vs. good active camming placements. I tend to
>trust a good nut placement more, but not to the extreme that
>my partner does (I've never hardly even seen him place a cam). 
>

Active camming devices (well, any camming devices) put a greater normal
force on the sides of the crack than does a simple chock. This is why a
simple chock is preferable to a camming device when placed in an expanding
crack -- the "good" nut placement is less likely to expand the crack, an
especially important consideration with TCUs, where just the slightest
expansion could cause the unit to rip. I think this was pretty widely
publicized when friends first were introduced. 

Bob Harrington
Newsgroups: rec.climbing
From: AS.MSW@forsythe.stanford.edu (Marc Whitney)
Subject: Re: Known details of Cathedral accident (additions/changes) to Morton
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:14:37 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.170758.3090@Cadence.COM>,
bruceg@Cadence.COM (Bruce Gustifson) writes:
>  Along this line, I was wondering how people feel about the solidness
>of good nut placements vs. good active camming placements. I tend to
>trust a good nut placement more, but not to the extreme that
>my partner does (I've never hardly even seen him place a cam).
>
Yup.  There's something about an inert lump of metal vs. a gadget
with several moving parts that is reassuring.  (There's also
something about just being able to "plug in" a friend when the run
out is getting a little desperate.)
Newsgroups: rec.climbing