"sham" wrote:
Red double flowered rose repeat flowering climber required to climb in a
shady area, any recommendations please??

I think that some on-line catalogs have some suggestions for roses that
can tolerate some shade, but though I've been looking for them I can't
find them. Beales' book _Classic Roses_ has a little glyph next to some
entries in his "dictionary section" of varieties that indicate some shade
tolerence: Parkdirektor Riggers is described as "almost single," though
"deep red to crimson" and a climber. Actually, most roses descended
from R. kordesii seem to have some shade tolerance, according to Beales
anyway, but most are not climbers (some are tall bushes that could maybe
be trained as such, such as Raymond Chenault (semi-double), or Hamburger
Phoenix (semi-double)). These are all repeaters. You could try one if
you can find one.

I have NO idea how well these do in even partial shade.

Supposedly some rugosae can take a bit of shade, but only a few are red
and I don't know of any climbers among them.

My only recent experience of growing roses in partial shade suggests, at
least for the varieties I have tried, "Don't do it." But those haven't been
kordesii or rugosa roses. They do okay but barely bloom. And I'm talking
full sun all afternoon after shade in the morning, and the intense sun of 30
degrees north latitude (okay, intense compared with most of the temperate
parts of the world).

Good luck.

Mark.