acronyms

OMG this BS is way too confusing. Why not scrap the acronyms altogether and just use whole words? Or better yet pictures and diagrams? Maybe hand signals or we invent an entirely new sign language for climbing systems. Perhaps we could encode the language so no-one could understand it? The truth is most people know of two different techniques - with spikes and spikeless. Let's just say what we mean and if people don't understand then a little explanation goes a long way. There's really no way we can expect the whole world to agree on what specific acronyms mean. Sorry if this is too dismissive, just trying to be realistic, FYI, BTW.
 
Agreed.

DdRT came out of the old, old ISA discussion forum, probably 15+ years ago. To clarify, and for ease of typing, I came up with DdRT to differentiate between it and DRT/SRT. When I speak I use the whole words most of the time. If the discussion goes to a variation of one of the typical systems its discussed, using whole words, so that we know what's going on.

The acronyms can be time savers, that was the reason for it's origination. Now, there are too many minor variations. This complicates the use of acronyms.
 
The problem comes in when rule makers make a differentiation based off of incorrect use of acronyms. When people say, SRT climbers need to abide by certain regulations but ddrt climbers don't need to follow those same regulations. I heard that in France, climbers may climb Ddrt but not SRT. To me that makes no sense. As they both are single rope techniques. If no one else has a problem with that than I guess it's cool. But to me it is a misuse of words.
 
It's the evolution of acronyms based on the evolution of techniques, perhaps without enough foresight... Unless the acronyms were based solely on configuration.
 
Hi guys, greetings from France !

As here we can't agree on any standardized vocabulary i come tu use english ones, because SRT is known, DdRT is known and... oh gosh ! It looks like you need aspirin too here...

Hu... my question was "how do you call the technic using one rope for climbing along both sides of it with 2 friction hitches ?"
But maybe should i come back later ^^'
 
Last edited:
It looks to be a popular way to call it, is it ?

It's funny, we use it a lot for sure but i had no idea it came from here and was known to be...
But maybe is it like french fries that in fact come from Belgium.
 
That would be SRT. How many ropes does it take to cut to fall. How many connections doespecially it take to disconnect to fall?
But french style is a good decriptor
 
How many ropes does it take to cut to fall ?
One, but that's the same for DdRT

How many connections does it take to disconnect to fall ?
One too, but again that's the same for DdRT isn't it ?
 
Oh sorry, Yes ! That's what i understand now through your complex discussion. That's defenetly right.
Yes yes yes, it is just an other way to make an SRT. My bad.

OK so what happens with the "frenchy" :
Ascending it's an SRT.s
Descending or limb walking it's a SRT.d
Adding a third prusik as it is made for, it became a DRT.dd or DRT.sd, can even do a DRT.ss
...
So there's no way this technic can be called with new acronyms. We got to stick on the frenchy stuff.

Other statement leading me to my point :
In France we love a lot using belays for recreation. I think it can be right on US soil too.
Belay is SRT, plus it is dynamic. So it is a SRT.d. What's de différence is the DdRT becoming a SRT.d too ? Number of persons, so we should say SRT.d1 for DdRT and SRT.d2 for belay.
Except it is not necessary because everyone knows what a belay is.

So here's the idea, SRT DRT .d .s / whatever, all these are only technical acronyms made to define precisly how things work. The more complex it gets the less people can use it. But they can easily understand what they are talking about if they use commun words such as belay or frenchy.

Problem DdRT has no equivalent in simple words. So if this classical acronym is no longer good to the point it has to be changed and the new one to complex you should find commun words to give a name to it. SOme time we say "auto belay" in France, because it is what it is...


PS: by the way SRT isn't forbidden in France, non EN standardized tools are forbidden, that's a different problem. And as we don't have efficient EN SRT.s tools (who would like to do tree works with a Petzl I'D ?...) we use SRT.d1... as it allows us to have good tools like friction hitches.
 
Last edited:
Hello Hugo! It was great seeing you at the rendezvous!

My feeling is that not so much emphasis should be put on which style of SRT is being used as the margin of safety is the same for all forms of SRT and it leads to confusion with people saying that one form is better than another and certain rules should apply to one form of SRT but not another form of SRT. That's what drives me nuts. SRT is SRT.

Distinguishing 2:1 SRT from 1:1 SRT in any discussion of regulations or best practices is not productive. There are different techniques involved but not different mind sets.

DRT with two ropes is a different mindset and to be used in a professional work at height setting where dangerous tools and the desire to mitigate as many hazards as possible is the number one priority of the day.
 
Hi Kevin, it was so great for me to meet you there !

People may say a form is better than an other wathever the kind of naming you use. But not that much in my opinion if they understand, wich is easy i think, that each system has its specificities and answers to different situations.

I finally get your point anyway. People must understand what SRT really is. It may not change their naming habit, but at least they will know what they are talking about.

I was a bit bugging around cause i'm trying to write an article about that for a webzine, and i don't want to share errors. Thanks a lot it's gonna be way better thanks to your explainations !

Hi also to all your sweet family :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom