I have a harness like this:

Edelrid Atmosphere Harness

Now, I was taught to always tie into the belt and the crotch loop bit, but there’s really not that much room in this one plus the belt is a bit flimsy. Surely it’s ok to tie into the belay loop?

I’m about to take my kids to the climbing wall. It’s been a long time since I last went…

Best practice is still to tie through the tie in points (ie follow where the belay loop runs). Looks to be enough space on the pic linked.

No – tie through both. 2 points of failure in the harness then and space for your belay and bina.

In reality for a climbing wall it probably doesn’t matter so much.. but I’d never do it as it’s a bad habit to form.

It may be O.K. but I’d only tie in as you are supposed to. When things go wrong climbing they go wrong quickly and badly. I wouldn’t tie into the belay loop especially when someone I loved was on the other end.

https://media.edelrid.de/images/attribut/54507_GAL_HARNESSES_SPORT_MS_150603_WEB.pdf

Gives all the acceptable tie-in methods. The wall you’re visiting may also have its own approved method, check their t&cs.

Ah, thanks martinhutch.

Think I may have to replace some old carabiniers but my belay devices look ok.

Do what my missus did (she is a bit absent minded sometimes but has done a lot of climbing) and just krab into the gear loop. Luckily she didn’t fall! Mind you she weighs nothing so probably would have been OK on a tight rope 🙂

Gives all the acceptable tie-in methods. The wall you’re visiting may also have its own approved method, check their t&cs.

Interesting. 8b shows it’s OK to tie on to the loop. I wouldn’t though, I’ve always tied around the waist loop and sit loop. I never belayed off solely the belay loop either, I always clipped into the rope(s) as well as as the loop. Might be overkill but I’m alive.

Still, top roping on a wall I think you are OK for belaying off the loop alone.

Outdoors I’d do it “properly” – half figure-of-eight, through both loops, finish the knot, stopper.

Indoors, meh, I’d overhand a full f-o-8 & stopper and then screwgate it to the belay loop.  Life’s too short when you’re doing multiple short runs, and it’s exactly the same as what’s going on at the other end.

Its called a belay loop for a reason.

The BMC got handed a report a number of years ago showing just how stupid it is to tie in through both parts of the harness over its lifetime.

They ignored it.

Petzl told them not to do it.

They ignored it.

And other manufacturers told them not to do it.

And they…..

Yet every single climbing wall, adventure centre, etc will do an overhand eight and a screwgate biner when they have 20+ kids/adults to put through a course or whatever.

But will tell you that you must tie in through the harness because you must abide by the BMC rules.

Apparently its about “removing possible weak links” in the chain.

They forget that the belay loop is at least 44Kn – twice the strength of the two parts they tell you to tie in through…….

And tieing in is inducing fibre on fibre wear which is increased with nylon self propagating heat…..

@regenesis – so why do Petzl reinforce both parts of the the harness at the tie-in points to reduce fraying from the rope? And if Petzl told them not to do it then why do they show the very same technique on their website?

It’s called a “belay loop” for a good reason – it’s what you clip the belaying device into.

I used to pass the ropes through both tie-in points before tying a Bowline with stopper in each. I used the Fo8 until my first large leader fall …

They forget that the belay loop is at least 44Kn – twice the strength of the two parts they tell you to tie in through…….

… that is directly attached to the two parts they tell you to tie through anyway.  If the tie-in loops are going to fail, using something other than the rope as an intermediary connection to the waist / crotch loops isn’t going to make anything stronger.

I don’t know much about the rest of your post, though your final point about increased wear from fibre-on-fibre makes a lot of sense.  But I can’t see how the relative strength of the belay loop is of any relevance whatsoever (unless it was less rather than more).  A system is only as strong as its weakest part.

Oh, and,

If the belay loop is twice as strong as the tie-in parts, and you’re spreading the load equally over the two tie-in loops, the breaking force overall is the same is it not?

Cougar wrote:

They forget that the belay loop is at least 44Kn – twice the strength of the two parts they tell you to tie in through…….

… that is directly attached to the two parts they tell you to tie through anyway.  If the tie-in loops are going to fail, using something other than the rope as an intermediary connection to the waist / crotch loops isn’t going to make anything stronger.

Indeed – no good reason to use the belay loop and add another potential point of failure. Like slowoldman, when belaying outdoors and tied into the rope I’ll belay off both rope and belay loop as well (and like whitestone I now use a bowline to tie in for lead climbing – spend far too much time waiting for people who’ve taken a lead fall on a retied 8 to untie).

If you think the belay loop won’t fail then you’re probably not aware of Todd Skinner’s death https://www.climbing.com/news/loss-of-a-legend/

I don’t know much about the rest of your post, though your final point about increased wear from fibre-on-fibre makes a lot of sense.

Not particularly – because fibre on fibre wear mainly relates to fibre running over fibre under load – if you’re just threading it through then there really isn’t any significant wear (and the belay loop itself should be between the rope and the tie in points helping to prevent any wear). Any heat issues are also related to running across under load and at speed – you’re not going to get any noticeable heating from tieing in (if you did, then forming the knot would be far more of an issue!)

That’s a very confused post regenesis. Some of it is ambiguous and some of it plain wrong to the extent that I’m not really sure where to start with it.

But I’ll start with this: where is this report you mention about the dangers of tying in through leg loops and waist belt? The one the BMC supposedly ignored?

From your link, Cougar:

“” To wit: On October 19, while they racked up, Hewett had noticed Skinner’s leg loops looking worn out, as well as Skinner’s belay loop, which he says was “15 to 20 percent” frayed. “I very much stressed to him that that’s not good,” says Hewett. “Todd said, ‘You’re right. I’ve got a new harness on the way.’” ”

It doesn’t matter if you tie into the belay loop, or both legs and waist, just make sure your harness and rope look OK and aren’t too old.

It doesn’t matter if you tie into the belay loop, or both legs and waist, just make sure your harness and rope look OK and aren’t too old.

It probably doesn’t matter too much for the odd bit of top roping but it does matter for leading.

I’m keen to the reports and manufacturers recommendations on this.

Ignore what centres and instructors do – half the images I see at centres and walls is ”wrong” according to best practice.

My local wall in Stirling asks people “which of the four images of tying in is correct?”. My answer of “none” is backed up by a mountain guide, an MIA holder and ex head of safety for Mountaineering Scotland, yet 8 years later they use the same images…

The only reason it matters is psychological not logical.

Anyhow this is bad practice:

” pass the ropes through both tie-in points before tying a Bowline ”

because a bowline weakens the rope more than a figure of eight.

And you’ll find the same pepole teliing you not to tie in to the belay loop leading on a couple of RPs on a single rope. (winky) The belay loop is never the weakest link in any fall. (no winky)

@Edukator – Yes the Bowline weakens the rope more, by approximately 5% so that’s a difference in breaking strength of 1kN. A 9mm rope has an approximate breaking strength of 21kN, with a Bowline that reduces to roughly 12kN. Even a fall factor 2 fall on a short length of rope won’t generate that level of force so it’s a moot point.

The reason the Bowline is sometimes regarded as bad practice is that it needs to be held in tension otherwise there’s the possibility that it can invert. This is why it should always be fixed with a stopper knot set against the back of the knot.

Another reason is that some people don’t know if it’s tie correctly, these tend to be found patrolling climbing walls. (wink)

Edukator wrote:

From your link, Cougar:

My link – but the point is that belay loops can and do fail – clearly in that particular incident he was clipped to the belay loop with a krab which was normal for what he was doing, but had he been leading and taken a fall there’s a good chance he’d have been OK if he’d tied in through the tie in points but would have died if he’d used the belay loop. If you read the whole of just that article (there are plenty more articles on Todd’s death, it was a very well reported incident) you’ll also see there’s a suggestion that the belay loop had got particularly worn due to what he’d been doing just before and the damage wasn’t actually visible, hence it might have been a problem even with a harness which didn’t look worn. Though in that case, one other lesson is not to attach fibre straight to fibre for what he was doing with ascenders where regensis’s concerns do come into play (I have to admit I do use a larksfooted sling to clip in when building belays or rethreading at the top on a sport route, but that’s somewhat different and not causing the same sort of wear).

Edukator wrote:

<span style=”font-size: 0.8rem;”>Anyhow this is bad practice:</span>

” pass the ropes through both tie-in points before tying a Bowline ”

because a bowline weakens the rope more than a figure of eight.

We did this one in a previous thread of molly’s – the difference isn’t significant http://caves.org/section/vertical/nh/50/knotrope-hold.html

From your link, Cougar:

I don;’t recall posting a link, but the advice not to climb on buggered gear is sound.

because a bowline weakens the rope more than a figure of eight.

Most climbers use a Fo8 rather than a bowline because whilst a bowline is better in many ways it’s also much easier to tie badly.  It’s harder to get a Fo8 wrong.  I’d respectfully suggest that consistency and reliability is paramount here.

If you’re tying in with a bowline then you – hopefully – know the pros and cons and know how to tie it correctly.  I broadly know how to tie a bowline but I personally wouldn’t climb on one because I’m not convinced yet that I could do it safely and consistently.

I was always told to use a bowline for winter climbing as it’s easier to undo with cold hands!  To be honest I was never that familiar with it, so after a while just went back to fo8 as it is second nature to me (may not be a good thing!).

At the wall I always tie into the waist loops rather than a closed fo8 clipped to the belay loop, again really just because it’s what I’ve always done, and I prefer the consistency.  I think the most important thing is to be aware of what you’re doing – in most cases it is the very simple things that hurt people!

whitestone wrote:

The reason the Bowline is sometimes regarded as bad practice is that it needs to be held in tension otherwise there’s the possibility that it can invert. This is why it should always be fixed with a stopper knot set against the back of the knot.

Another reason is that some people don’t know if it’s tie correctly, these tend to be found patrolling climbing walls. (wink)

I use a Yosemite finish on mine – which does admittedly have the issue of making the problem of inspection worse, because it’s pretty much impossible to tell without very close inspection whether it’s tied correctly or the loops are laid in the wrong order (which potentially results in the bowline not being a bowline). I don’t think I could tell with a glance at somebody else’s knot despite using it myself all the time and being aware of the issue.

Cougar wrote:

If you’re tying in with a bowline then you – hopefully – know the pros and cons and know how to tie it correctly.  I broadly know how to tie a bowline but I personally wouldn’t climb on one because I’m not convinced yet that I could do it safely and consistently.

A very sensible attitude – I thought long and hard before switching to it and had practised a lot before I used one in anger – I’ve had the conversation about it with a few people recently and my advice is always that it’s not something I’ll recommend to anybody else and whilst I’m happy to show people how to tie it (and I can and will inspect it if somebody wants me to) it’s up to them to be sure they know what they’re doing before using it.

timbog160 wrote:

I was always told to use a bowline for winter climbing as it’s easier to undo with cold hands!  To be honest I was never that familiar with it, so after a while just went back to fo8 as it is second nature to me (may not be a good thing!).

I don’t think I’d even consider using anything else for winter climbing – the difference in ease of untying is significant even with warm hands in a nice environment (the obvious downside to that is obvious!)

Anyway, having touched on the subject of worn gear, that was one of the issues which concerned me with molly’s posts (though it may be too late now as I guess he went climbing today – though I note he’s not been back…) He mentions needing to replace krabs, but unless I’m missing something he’s using a harness which hasn’t been used for a long time. Personally I’m still using 25yo krabs – I checked on the advice regarding gear wear when I restarted climbing, and apart from manufacturers having to specify a lifetime on gear all sensible advice seemed to be that metal doesn’t deteriorate with age – so I’m not sure what would be wrong with his. However I binned all of my fibre gear, including a couple of harnesses much newer than that – those do deteriorate with age even if in storage.

Of course the other question which nobody else seems to have raised is if he’s going climbing with his kids why does he need to tie in at all (I’m assuming they’re not going to be belaying him)?

Somewhere in the bottom of a rucksack I still have my first harness – a Whillans!  No debate about where to tie in on that one….and if ever there was an encouragement not to fall it was one of those!

I’m so used to tying in with a Bowline – I could tie it correctly with my eyes shut in a blizzard. I didn’t use it in any other climbing situation except for tying in.

Whillans’ harness – I don’t think I ever used one, when I started climbing the Troll Mk 6 had just appeared so used that and its various descendents.

Slight aside about belay loops – in the 1990s there was an accident in the Welsh slate quarries where the harness had “failed” whilst the wearer was abseiling. I turned out that he’d wanted to use a particular set of leg loops with the waist belt but couldn’t push them through the belay loop so he unpicked the stitching of the belay loop so that he could fit them and restitched it himself! (multiple shocked emojis) Luckily it failed when he was only about 2 metres above the deck.

I binned all of my fibre gear, including a couple of harnesses much newer than that

Erm… oops.

I really need a new harness, mine’s probably early 90s vintage.

Yes I’ve got an Alpine Bod from about 1990…..

I used hand-sewn slings back in the day, and sewed slings onto ice axes that I used for belaying. No problem if you use the right grade of nylon thread and the appropriate number of stitches. I lived in Spain at the time, a lot of Spanish climbers still made their own stuff. Whilst the modern bolt routes (this was the 80s) had French goujons in them the old ones had flimsy sort of industrial fastenings that looked more suitable for fixing cupboards to walls than climbing on, worrying.

At the wall I use you’d be politely advised to get a new harness before you came back next time (assuming it looks in good enough condition that they’d be happy for you to carry on). Though the manager has a particular thing for harness age, and claims to be able to tell the age of a harness within a few years on sight.

The report was commissioned by Petzl.

They asked Lyon UK to do it due to failures in industrial use of their kit in the UK and increasingly the EU.

Sperian were also involved (Think Troll/Bacou Dalloz/Sperian/Honeywell)

Mainly based around the practice of tying cowtails around the ventral point incorporating the waist and leg loops (as no belay loop on industrial kit). Climbers using the same principal of tying in through the two parts of the harness as they did in the outdoors.

The testing showed massive loss in material strength with very little use.

Nylon needs very little friction to self-propagate heat.

With webbing – that friction across its width gives a greater reduction in strength than an edge cut due to the number of fibres damaged.

Petzl issued an immediate bulletin and continue to do so to this date to not tie in in this manner. Admittedly the report came from the industrial sector however it was passed over to the BMC who told Petzl and Lyon that they knew better and would continue to issue their own guidance.

As for the”belay loop” – thats a misnomer – its a tie in loop/point. Troll actually invented the belay loop.

The primary connection point – its designed to be at least twice the strength of the harness components due to taking the principal forces involved.

22Kn is the minimum breaking strength of any component and most well exceed that. The “belay loop” will be double that because of how it is fabricated.

There’s plenty more that can be gone into over this subject – stitch blocks, design, load sensitive elements etc but thats not the point.

Tying in through the two parts of the harness is an antiquated method that came about due to old harness designs – the Whillans to be exact.

regenesis wrote:

Petzl issued an immediate bulletin and continue to do so to this date to not tie in in this manner.

and yet:

https://www.petzl.com/GB/en/Sport/Tying-in-with-a-figure-8-knot?ActivityName=Rock-climbing

On their Sport range aracer – its specifically reinforced for this however its not their preferred method of connection.

They will still push for a connection to the belay loop – go to any of their symposiums or training seminars and they actively push for it to be removed from use but the likes of the BMC still stipulating it as best practice means they need to allow for the “lowest common denominator”.

Quite often someone who is still using a harness from the bottom of their bag bought off a guy at the crag in 1982……

We could bring up cross loading of the carabiner but its a poor argument on the bMC’s part to still use what was designed to hold the two parts of a harness together BEFORE the belay loop was invented back in 1978

@regenesis why would Petzl tell people at symposiums to tie in through the belay loop but continue to issue instructions to the contrary?

Industrial harnesses are very different from climbing ones and best practice for one is not necessarily best practice for the other.

The primary connection point – its designed to be at least twice the strength of the harness components due to taking the principal forces involved.

I refer you to my previous comment.  A system is as strong as its weakest component, not its strongest.

Alpine Bod!!!!! Blue Peter finds alternative uses for car seat belt 🙂

I might actually have got rid of mine.

🙂 Yep mine’s destined for the bin. Especially as it’s been used for aid climbing in the Dolomites and stopping my mate falling down a crevassse and rescuing him amongst other things. It has some tales to tell that’s for sure.

He mentions needing to replace krabs, but unless I’m missing something he’s using a harness which hasn’t been used for a long time.

I bought a harness ooh, four years ago I think, and used it twice indoors without falling and since then it’s been stored in the house in its bag in a dark interior cupboard.  I could return it to the shop and get away with it, it’s in mint condition.  Not going to scrap that.

The one it replaced was also in pretty great condition but it was my first harness I ever bought in 1994.  Thought it best to scrap that, despite its fine condition. Forgot the make but they were common at the time – bright blue coloured thing model name Sherpa.

Anyway.  No-one died, but then again no-one fell.  8yo daughter managed several tall climbs without fear, which surprised me since she is the biggest mincer you could possibly imagine on the bike.  Although it turns out even the easy graded climbs are a lot harder when you’re 4’5 tall.

6yo was utterly terrified to let go of the wall, so she’d get to about 8ft high then grab two big hand holds, let her feet go and slither down the slab scraping over every hold as I lowered her off.  She got the proper technique lower down though but was too scared to do it higher up.  They both want to go back though.

Having re-read his posts it seems fairly clear that what regenesis has done is assumed recommendations for industrial harnesses also apply to climbing harnesses. This doesn’t work as the designs and usage are so different.

Tie in how the manufacturer suggests, not how some guy on the internet says!