Descent on the parachute cord. https://youtu.be/Vp0jmKd0PFw

>>854426
whats your point?

>>854426
probably not a great idea. static ropes are really bad for descents/ climbing.

>>854513
Paracord isn't really static, it's nylon and has a minimum stretch requirement for when your parachute opens. It's a bad idea to descend with because the safe working load for a single strand is 55 lbs.

>>854513
To descend, it's best to have a great rigidity but the cord you use to climb must be relatively extensible or you are going to die.

>>854537
>It's a bad idea to descend with because the safe working load for a single strand is 55 lbs.
Close. OSHA standards for life-safety devices are 15:1. If the paracord's maximum tensile strength is 550 that means the safe workload is a measly 36.66666(repeating) pounds.

Further, paracord is only 4mm thick. The human hand cannot grasp anything less than 5mm thick. If your belay device fails you can't even try to grab the paracord to save your own life. You'll just slice your hand open as you fall to your death.

File: pPETNA-5014754_main_t300x300.jpg (15KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 300x300px

>>854426
that's a decent descent. pic related is too.

>>854544
>36.66666(repeating)
glad to knows its repeating, that means because ad infintum, the rope will never break because the breaking point can never definitely be reached. buying 550 stocks now. thanks xeno

>>854426
there are micro-abseil sets that militaries have used, but the material is pretty expensive and no climber would deny themselves a hank of climbing rope instead. something called the british rope company or however makes the line that is apparently the industry standard.

File: 1391695186281.gif (1MB, 320x181px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x181px

>>854804

>>854513
Static is what cavers use. We also have special equipment for it and aren't typically climbing up the wall.

>>854513
>static ropes are really bad for descents
Static line is actually preferred for descending.

File: bats_approved.jpg (98KB, 662x722px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 662x722px

>>854426

>>854513
You are wrong. Static is preferred for descending and for a tag line.

>>854426
That isn't paracord. It's accessory cord that's probably rated around 7kn.

>>855245
>7kn
I assume that's maximum tensile strength which means the safe workload is a little more than 104lbs.

Show me a channer that weighs 104 pounds and i will show you a channer that should be underage b&!

>>854426
Take some 850 cord and braid two cords of it together. Much safer.

>>855255
Are you so fat that you're afraid a 1500 pound rated cord won't hold your body weight?

>>855323
A) It's the OSHA standard

B) If you're moving around you can easily exceed that 1500lb limit

>>855323
>I don't know what K=1/2mv^2 means

>>855323
If you fall for almost any length of time, a 100kg load will snap a #1500 rated cord like a sewing thread.

>>855334
You're a coward.

Nobody is talking about taking a leader fall on static cord. For body weight and rappelling it can and is done.

Obviously not ideal but for what is shown in the video, no problem.

>>855334
If climbers followed osha standard we would use steel carabiners, full body harnesses and all kinds of superfluous shit.

>>855364
>>855365
Nice knowing you.

File: cowardly.jpg (8KB, 264x191px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 264x191px

>>855469
Nice knowing you too.