"General" Mountaineering Not Well Served By Modern Ice Axes. Ergomomic Analysis by a New Zealand climber provides evidence of a wrong turning in technical change.
Brian Wilkins, a mountaineer from New Zealand, has some thoughts about the history of climbing equipment, and especially ice axe length. Old timers may remember when ice axes were about waist high, as shown in the photo below from 1970 of a party ascending Mt. Banner in the Sierra Nevada.
Brian Wilkin's comments and illustrations follow (Photos courtesy of Adventure Consultants ltd. Copyright 2004):
Short axes are not as new as many believe.
When the waist-high axe, with which Everest and virtually all our own mountains
were climbed, supplanted the chin-high European alpenstock, it didn’t have
things all its own way. Geoffrey Winthrop Young and J.P. Farrar, discussing an
86 cm axe in 19141 , state “Its lightness and shortness have
advantages, especially for one-handed cutting on difficult steep ice. But it
cannot be used as a third leg, as can the normal axe, and the climber carrying
it must be a very good technician with his claws2 since it is of
little use for long heavy cutting of steps on big mountains. Nor has it the
merit of being much lighter in hand, since it has to be made solid and stout
enough to serve for safe rope-belaying and anchoring on ice and snow”.
They
also mention an axe, popular with some, that, for carrying, can be taken apart
at half its length and which, because the strengthening made it heavy and
unbalanced “is only usable on mountaineering where the major effort of the day
is spent on rock, and the ice work is only occasional or simple”. For winter
climbing in Great Britain they advise two shorter axes, one of 48cm “ suitable
for gully work and stout enough for “gardening” “, and another, even shorter
“more like a pick hammer” “for Scottish verglass and waterfall ice”.
Canon Newton first climbed with Graham in
1903, having come from England after five seasons, mostly guideless, in the
Swiss Alps, and is recorded4 as having passed on to Graham his
knowledge of safe climbing. I don’t know how often Graham used two
axes, but fifty years later the one axe method was certainly the normal
technique. Graham had a good deal of contact with Northern Hemisphere climbers,
and would have known about short axes, but nowhere is there any indication that
he doubted that his long axe was best for the work in which he built up an
impressive record of accomplishment and safety. Frank Alack, another great Grivel added “front points” to crampons in
1932, but it was only in combination with Chouinard’s modifications of short axes,
and their manufacture by Charlet in the 1960’s, that a new technique came into
prominence. Steep ice faces, short and long, summer and winter, became the
playground of the new two-handed exponents who by now have a range of
specialised hardware, and a literature describing their impressive
accomplishments. But not everybody is willing or able to
climb facing inwards on their toes while putting their leg muscles to such a
severe test, or to wear stiff plastic boots to help alleviate the stress. We
know that the vast majority of the climbs in the
None of the three claim to be written primarily for anyone other than the “general” mountaineer, but since they describe the ice axe as “commonly 70cm”7 , or “normal length…about 70cm”8, thus excising a major chunk of our collective memory without explanation or discussion, we must put a few questions to them. The third book6 depicts shortness only in the form of the apparently stretchable shafts present in diagrams, a tricky feature also of ref.8.
Having accepted the shorter axe without
explanation, they already have difficulty defending their candidacy for inclusion
in my manual? But their problems are only beginning. In the descriptions of the
deployment of the axe across the body, where the head of the axe is held in one
hand and the other is some distance down the shaft, we read7 “ an
elegant and efficient bracing method when you have a moderate to long-length
axe”, and “ is mainly used for traversing steeper slopes and is best suited to
longer axes”8, and “ used for moderately steep
terrain…the axe in the brace position as a ”third leg” for balance”6.
So far so good, but the language is loose. How long is moderate to long? How
steep is “steep” and “moderately steep”? Avalanches can slip off slopes as
gentle as 150. We know that lives are lost on what are classed as
moderately steep slopes.
A great deal of the information in these
books is conveyed by means of diagrams and photos with plenty of detail,
including angles in relation to the slope, the climber, and the ice axe. It is
profitable therefore to look at the angles in our climbing environment to see how
they match what is published.
“Place the ice axe across your body with
the spike on the slope and the shaft as
near as possible to the horizontal” (italics mine) is the good advice in
one book7. A near horizontal shaft pressed down on the slope offers
a stabilising levered force capable of being varied constantly in response to
our movement, to the buffeting from wind, and to the varying stability of our
footing. The contact with the slope is necessarily away from the body and, for
balance on the move, is greatly superior to one in which the axe is pointing
more or less straight down into the snow or scree close at hand. However, as in
the other two books, none of this advice
can be acted upon using the short axes that they endorse. In fact, if they
had attempted to portray it with dimensions approaching some sort of accuracy,
it would have looked embarrassing.
Why this selectivity? It can’t be that the
slopes in the 30’s are too safe to worry about: we know that is not true. If,
as we also know, these books are for the general mountaineer, why are we not
shown a climber using the ice axe as a third leg, a firm cross brace, in the
most common situation in all our climbing, traversing scree, snow, or ice, of
an angle, say, in the low thirties? We know that good balance greatly enhances
safety as well as reducing fatigue.
Fig. 1 is redrawn to the proportions and slope angle of the only diagram in ref.6 that shows “third leg” bracing. Assuming the climber to be the height of an average NZ male, 175cm, the ice axe, in order to reach the slope, must actually be about 90cm. What if we place a 70cm axe in his hands? Fig.2 shows the problem and the impossibility of an anywhere near horizontal shaft. In Fig.3, with the 100cm axe, everything is a little better. Again the almost vertical contact, even of the 91cm axe in Fig. 5, is undesirable. But what happens to bracing on slopes that are other than very steep? Ref.7 avoids depicting it.
The problems appear when we look at 320 slopes, the most common and realistic situations of the lot. The 9 cm shortening, as in Fig.5, has a major influence on the angle of contact with the slope. Note that Figs. 1, 2, and 4, show the hands a little further to the side, away from the centre of the body. Fig.6 tells us clearly and unequivocally that it was not by chance that climbers adopted the waist-high length, and not merely unthinking conservatism that kept them using it for a century.
The waist-high axe is not, of course, for
the specialist rock climber, but that problem was dealt with a century ago.
Even the 70cm axe will tend to get in the way. I recall axes being passed among
our party while rock was being negotiated, and pulling my 100cm axe up on the
rope after climbing a rock pitch. But for the general mountaineer the longer
“third leg” can be of great value in many rock situations, such as moving
along near the crest of ridges, and
especially during descent. The waist-high “third leg” is also indispensable in bush.
My manual will also bring back the glissade in the form in which it can be enjoyed with ease and control. The handbooks generally describe three methods, recommending control with the axe for the sitting and the crouching methods (the two most awkward and least controllable methods), but, for the obvious reason that the axe is too short, not for the standing method. Just how messy the situation has become is illustrated in the Seattle handbook where we see a climber executing a standing glissade, holding the ice axe out in front (italics mine), while we read these challenging, unnerving, words in the accompanying text “The standing glissade is the most comfortable, elegant, and efficient method which permits the most effective method of steering and turning. It also gives the best view of the way ahead. To slow down put more weight on the heels by rocking slightly back to dig them in”.
My diagrams for this article are drawn with acknowledgements to the lively figures created by Bruce Dowrick.
Recent Comments