How and Why Climbers Use Tandem Rappels

(This post may contain affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links and make a purchase, I’ll receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. This helps support the channel and allows us to continue to make videos like this. Thank you for the support!)

Doing less isn’t always faster. Heck, faster isn’t always better, to being with.

There is definitely a concept that “speed is safety” in the mountains. When we think about time being out and exposed to objective hazards and racing daylight and reaching the top before the storm moves in, we can see why that is often the case. But, we can also pretty easily see that, taken to an extreme, we can stretch that concept into silliness. I guess I only need one piece on my anchor because it takes way less time than making my three-piece trad anchor. I think this is why the conversation has somewhat shifted to “efficiency.” Efficiency is related to a cost/benefit equation. If we ask, “how can we most efficiently keep us safe at this belay stance?” we would rule out the one-piece anchor. That being said, using the same guideline of efficiency, we might also be warned against building a four piece anchor if we’ve got good gear placements. The “cost” of time lost and gear eaten up that can’t be used on the next pitch would simply not be worth the minimal added safety.

Then there is the efficiency of technique, itself. Can we make that anchor without having to stop and ponder too much? Can we tie our knots quickly?

We once did a video on the military concept “slow is smooth and smooth is fast” as applied to climbing. Maybe the most intuitive example of this would be tying a knot. Trying to be quicker than our muscle memory allows often leads to sloppy knots that need to be dressed more carefully, finding unnecessary crosses removing them, loosening one loop of knot here while tightening another loop there. It slows us down. If we tied more carefully at the start, we probably would have saved time by not having to correct any mistakes in the original tying. But we can apply the same concept to bigger-picture climbing like efficiency of movement. If we tried to climb our project route fully in our anerobic zone of effort, we’d get our two minutes of effort and then really start to struggle. If we made big, dynamic moves an skip holds, we likely would pump out. And if we skip the planning of a big mountaineering objective, we likely would spend time weighing contingencies in the field that we maybe would have considered in the comfort of our living room.

The video attached to this blog entry is, I think, another example in that same conceptual thread. A tandem rappel, that is two climbers attached to the same rappel device going down a rappel at the same time, may seem like a big time saver: two people down over the time it takes to do one rappel. But once you get into the mechanics of trying to synchronize body movements, especially when only one of the climbers is controlling the rate of descent, ends up making that potential time savings disappear. The rate of the descent simply gets too slow.

But, there is a more significant cost to a tandem rappel, coming by way reduced risk mitigation. You should probably take a look at the video to learn more. But it certainly makes the “cost” side of the cost/benefit equation a lot larger.

That being said, there are times when a tandem rappel makes the most sense, especially when you have an injured climber who could not be relied upon to control a rappel on their own. So, another tool in the tool box, but one that - like most tools - is best used when the right “job” comes along to make it the “right tool.”