Background to the HSE decision on two rope working

[skyhuck]

Its a shame we have a self-appointed Chamberlain, when what we need is a Churchill.......................? ?

[devon TWiG]

jaborist ....it is true what you say above about Jack Kenyon ...i was a practical instructor at Merrist Wood at the time and did a demo as to how it was virtually impossible to crutch thrust whilst ascending the tree and how it affected balance point whilst branch walking ( full body harnesses with chest attachment point ) this lead on to the "no branch rolling " ie being higher than anchor point so we were never in a "fall arrest " situation but the rope and harness were "work positioning "  never slack rope .....

[Haironyourchest]

Use the second lifeline as a very long positioning lantard?

[jarborist]

Thanks Devon Twig. At least I'm not completely senile. 

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

And we arranged a demo involving several climbers to show how what we do currently is safe if employed correctly by competent people...but still they insist on 2 ropes.

Whilst my colleague, Simon, didn’t sleep rough at any stage, or at least not that I’m aware of, he did have several sleepless nights given the gravity and impact of the situation.

 

[jarborist]

?. Appreciate the work the AA does/has done with limited resources and representing what is  fairly small fry to the rest of the world/hse etc. 

[Haironyourchest]

16 hours ago, carlos said:

your right steve i havent really tried it save for the odd time for a particular secnario, i may well try it if we have a day rate job!

i love my srt set up at the moment and personally consider it a great leap forward over my double rope system and really cant see using 2 ropes as any kind of forward progression.

does the rope industry have a much better safety record over arb in terms of falls from height?

do any other countries enforce this practice?

carl

(I used to follow a YouTube rope access guy) The industrial rope access sector is extremely regulated. No serious client will use anyone who isn't IRATA trained, and the training is comparable to getting a pilot's license. Months of training, three levels of competency, logbooks, a thousand hours of experience under a level 2 signed off by a level 3 etc, before progressing to the next level. Retesting every three years...deaths in the sector are virtually nil. They use a secondary paralell lifeline with an acelloration activated fall arrest gadget that passively follows the worker up and down the line. Anchor points are two, with both lines attached to both anchors with bunny ears, so if one of the anchors fails the worker still has climb line and backup line anchored. Most of the work they do is straight vertical and no lanyards, so the system makes sense. Actually tried it myself at home a few years ago, replacing a double glazed unit on the thrid floor. Chemical mountaineering anchor bolts in a 4" block wall...knee wobbling stuff.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Haironyourchest
Technical Errror

[Guest]

I learnt to climb using both ends of the same rope/ 2 prussiks and used to work powerlines. I turned a job done with the main SSE contractor based on this policy of having to be tied in twice all the time. Funnily enough I still carry a spare prussik especially in large open trees so I can still use the tail end of my climb line occasionally as a second line on long branch walks, when I need that triangulation and its a long way between limbs. Works well. The worst time to have to use that system would be doing powerlines where most trees are smaller, tighter canopies, dense with epicormic from the previous siding/topping. Identifying your seperate lines can be achieved using different coloured ropes and Karabiners, but the friction and general rope mess must be a nightmare in a tight canopy. It would be interesting to know whether the contractors currently working under this policy actually use the 2 rope system or just when they get the heads up they're going to be getting an audit. I imagine its like spiking live/retained trees on the powerlines - it's against policy but in reality common practise.

[Steve Bullman]

19 hours ago, Stephen Blair said:

I seriously can’t see the fuss about using another line, I’ve worked with 3 lines from 3 separate trees in the past for accessing dead trees, I often use 2 lines if the crown has no central leader, it’s great for fighting the pendulum effect.

  I think this is only going to effect guys who don’t like being told they ‘ have ‘ to do something.

 Piece of advice, central line long  friction loop, offset line small loop.

  If you use mechanical then you have the ability to be progressive so you will fine.?

Sorry Stevie, but that is just utter tosh. There is absolutely no way in hell using 2 lines in a tree doesn't slow a climber down and create issues.

 

I reckon in 22 years I probably used 2 lines in a tree on maybe half a dozen occassions. And whilst it was useful and necessary, it was also a pain in the backside.

Whoever came up with this legislation clearly has no idea about climbing trees on a commercial basis.

[wills-mill]

My main disappointment is with the HSE and their inability to process the RIDDOR data to a less than feeble level.

This situation is dealing with information from an absolutely tiny data set, and it should be a straightforward process to infer all sorts of useful scenarios and outcomes from the injuries and fatalities that have occurred. Heights, method of crown access, form of tree or vegetation- surely all this data is contained in the reports that have been submitted.

I would have a bit of sympathy for them if this was dealing with 250,000 instances of a particular medical condition across the UK, but a couple of hundred reports over the course of a year isn't a massive job to interpret.