additional gear loopso to a new harness

[Darrin Turnbull]

  IRE David H said:

looks great but very hard to order or get price on site

 

Weaver WLC-760 Harness Xlarge | SHERRILLtree

 

i was using the picture for inspiration.

[Pbtaylor2014]

will have a play around over three Christmas

[R Mac]

  treequip said:

They need to pass a LOLER inspection though

 

You could remove them but say for the sake of argument you left them on, on what basis would they fail, the gear loops on a Stein Vega are to all intents and purposes double braid

 

[ame=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99FTxPAZ2iI]See Here[/ame]

 

and in the case of the Treemotion simply shockcord See Here

[treequip]

  R Mac said:

You could remove them but say for the sake of argument you left them on, on what basis would they fail, the gear loops on a Stein Vega are to all intents and purposes double braid

 

The point is you said

  Quote

I figure as they're only gear loops and not life support they don't need to be rated,

 

But under LOLER they do need to be rated and the harness needs to be free from modifications.

[R Mac]

  treequip said:

The point is you said

 

 

But under LOLER they do need to be rated and the harness needs to be free from modifications.

 

So the 7mm accessory cord supplied for use with a Stein Vega and the shockcord supplied with a Treemotion is rated? Both appear to be supplied as a length which is cut as required by the user so there's no marking.

 

How would a LOLER inspector establish whether the accessory cord on a Stein Vega or shockcord on a Treemotion was rated or not?

 

Would adding a carabiner to your harness be classed as a modification? for example what if you add a Caritool to your harness, is your harness then going to fail LOLER due to being modified?

[treequip]

You are missing the point, you said they don't need to be to be "rated" and the simple fact is they do need to be rated, the attachment points on the harness need to be "rated" to their load same as anything that suspends a load at height.

[treequip]

  R Mac said:

So the 7mm accessory cord supplied for use with a Stein Vega and the shockcord supplied with a Treemotion is rated? Both appear to be supplied as a length which is cut as required by the user so there's no marking.

 

How would a LOLER inspector establish whether the accessory cord on a Stein Vega or shockcord on a Treemotion was rated or not?

 

No need, if its supplied with (or as a replacement part for) the harness its covered under the harness CE so its not a modification

 

 

  R Mac said:

Would adding a carabiner to your harness be classed as a modification? for example what if you add a Caritool to your harness, is your harness then going to fail LOLER due to being modified?

 

Again, no need, a biner or similar would have its own CE

[R Mac]

  treequip said:

You are missing the point, you said they don't need to be to be "rated" and the simple fact is they do need to be rated, the attachment points on the harness need to be "rated" to their load same as anything that suspends a load at height.

 

I think you're missing the point, regardless of what or where you attach gear loops it'll come down to what part is the weakest link, you also said/implied that a harness wouldn't pass LOLER is it was modified and I asked if adding a carabiner would be considered a modification. In addition how would a LOLER inspector establish what load I or anyone else was going to put on an accessory attachment point, it could be anything from a webbing sling to a chainsaw.

 

On the 2 harness I referred to the gear loops are configured by the user using either 7mm accessory cord, cord that's listed on the Stein website with no indication of what if any standard it meets, or shockcord in the case of the Treemotion that again doesn't appear to be rated to any standard.

 

Quite frankly if a LOLER inspector failed my harness on the basis that he couldn't establish whether the gear loops meet a standard I'd be taking it elsewhere although I suspect he'd be applying common sense.

[R Mac]

  treequip said:

No need, if its supplied with (or as a replacement part for) the harness its covered under the harness CE so its not a modification

 

And how would a LOLER inspector know if the cord/shockcord he was looking at was supplied by the manufacturer or simply 3 party? he wouldn't.

 

 

 

 

  Quote

Again, no need, a biner or similar would have its own CE

 

It's a modification though regardless of whether the biner is CE or not, CE isn't a rating, it's a statement of conformity and not subject to testing, in addition most arb suppliers sell accessory biners that aren't rated, in fact I have some Stein ones.

 

Your argument has more holes than a colander and I'm done with it.

[treequip]

  Quote

I asked if adding a carabiner would be considered a modification.

Of course it wouldn't, FTR a biner isn't a modification its simply a biner.

 

  Quote

In addition how would a LOLER inspector establish what load I or anyone else was going to put on an accessory attachment point, it could be anything from a webbing sling to a chainsaw.

I don't think you have grasped how this LOLER thing works, a LOLER inspection is to establish the condition of the item. How you use it is up to you.

 

 

  Quote

On the 2 harness I referred to the gear loops are configured by the user using either 7mm accessory cord, cord that's listed on the Stein website with no indication of what if any standard it meets, or shockcord in the case of the Treemotion that again doesn't appear to be rated to any standard.

The all components will have a conformity in their own right but as stated, the harness is certified as a unit and is inspected as a single item.

 

In an inspection, most exercise discretion where they can, if an item presented were heading for a fail, say it had an unauthorised mod, the mod can be removed for the inspection. As an example biners are often presented with sticky gates but a quick clean and lube brings them back to a pass.

 

As far as non original parts issue goes, most inspectors know what an assembly looks like, and if they don't, a couple of minutes on google will give the answer so if a part has been changed or substituted, its usually obvious.

 

If an inspector were so minded, they could pass a modified item but it would be at their and possibly their insurers risk. Insurance providers are naturally risk adverse and a policy is likely to have caveats designed to minimise the insurers exposure.

 

The cost of individual items in tree work tends to be relatively low and the mandatory retirement interval for many items is low enough that its often easier to replace them.