Two Rope Working Consultation

[Konstantly]

Any IRATA level 3 qualified operatives out their who wish to input into this topic?

As previously mentioned rescue from an ASAP or similar device will need extra training. Generally in rope access work I believe that a level 3 has to be in close proximity to other operatives in case the need for rescue arises? 

If we are to transfer these methods to tree work dose this mean that a secondary rescue line installed within the tree will still be applicable? Or will two climbers have to be in the tree at all times too? 

More ropes, more targets another person wah... the list can go on..

If the hse are paying any attention to this topic can we please have some input too? 

We all seem to be stabbing in the dark towards a non existent light at the end of the tunnel atm.

A little light to aim towards Would be nice...

 

[carlos]

3 hours ago, Jake Andrews said:

See above reply. The runner is merely to see what working with two ropes is like and not to work on. I have since borrowed another rw.

 

i wasnt trying to be smart, i was just thinking was there any point trying to comply with some things and climbing on devices that arnt CE marked ( not 100% sure if its ce marked or not) although some of these devices are bloody good and i can only assume it costs too much to go through the certification process. which is a shame as climbers are missing out.

[Jake Andrews]

i wasnt trying to be smart, i was just thinking was there any point trying to comply with some things and climbing on devices that arnt CE marked ( not 100% sure if its ce marked or not) although some of these devices are bloody good and i can only assume it costs too much to go through the certification process. which is a shame as climbers are missing out.

Didn’t take it as a smart response. Just stating that the line and system was just there to get used to having another system in a tree to monitor and tend. It’s not CE marked and I don’t think it ever will tbh.

[Jake Andrews]

Any IRATA level 3 qualified operatives out their who wish to input into this topic?
As previously mentioned rescue from an ASAP or similar device will need extra training. Generally in rope access work I believe that a level 3 has to be in close proximity to other operatives in case the need for rescue arises? 
If we are to transfer these methods to tree work dose this mean that a secondary rescue line installed within the tree will still be applicable? Or will two climbers have to be in the tree at all times too? 
More ropes, more targets another person wah... the list can go on..
If the hse are paying any attention to this topic can we please have some input too? 
We all seem to be stabbing in the dark towards a non existent light at the end of the tunnel atm.
A little light to aim towards Would be nice...
 

I don’t think we will get a direct response from HSE but just a updated ICOP and tech guide from AA to work to. I don’t think they are giving much info on it as they are likely to be working it out themselves. Dire situation really.

[Konstantly]

1 minute ago, Jake Andrews said:

 

I don’t think we will get a direct response from HSE but just a updated ICOP and tech guide from AA to work to. I don’t think they are giving much info on it as they are likely to be working it out themselves. Dire situation really.

 

Agreed. Unfortunately so. 

[Marc]

21 hours ago, Jake Andrews said:

 

Didn’t take it as a smart response. Just stating that the line and system was just there to get used to having another system in a tree to monitor and tend. It’s not CE marked and I don’t think it ever will tbh.

 

This is another point and issue which reflects tree work, the rope runner is of course very suitable for its application only it will never achieve CE approval.

There are currently a multitude of devices out there such as bulldog bone, akimbo, HH etc. None of which will ever reach CE approval as the standards are just not adequate for tree work.

Even now it appears the RW CE is under review.

 

It just feels the current guidelines, testing standards, PPE requirements and training standards no longer reflect the Arb industry.

 

i enjoyed what felt like the hey day, where I could configure my equipment and build bespoke climbing systems for my needs, no two climbers where ever the same. Our ropes even come in a multitude of diameter, construction and colours, work positioning harness are plentiful especially if you take into account harnesses from other continents not currently available here.

 

As an industry I am curious how many arborist there are compared to rope access technicians.
From what I know of industrial access technicians their training is more in depth, and the equipment and techniques almost identical. I doubt you will find the multitude of colourful equipment and endless configurations as you do in the Arb sector.

 

Jake this is my point you use non CE approved equipment, from your main climbing system you could argue to even your second system, and you mention using an ASAP that I doubt you or anyone on site has any specific training to use.

The added complexities of two rope working in the Arb sector I just feel cannot be reasonably overcome, not any time soon.

Edited October 21, 2019 by Marc

[Jake Andrews]

4 hours ago, Marc said:

This is another point and issue which reflects tree work, the rope runner is of course very suitable for its application only it will never achieve CE approval.

There are currently a multitude of devices out there such as bulldog bone, akimbo, HH etc.

Even now it appears the RW is under review.

 

It feels the current guidelines, testing standards, PPE requirements and training standards no longer reflect the Arb industry.

 

i enjoyed what felt like the hey day, where I could configure my equipment and build bespoke climbing systems for my needs, no two climbers where ever the same. Our ropes even come in a multitude of diameter, construction and colours, work positioning harness are plentiful especially if you take into account harnesses from other continents not currently available here.

 

As an industry I am curious how many arborist there are compared to rope access technicians.
From what I know of industrial access technicians their training is more in depth, and the equipment and techniques almost identical. I doubt you will find the multitude of colourful equipment and endless configurations as you do in the Arb sector.

 

Jake this is my point you use non CE approved equipment, from your main climbing system you could argue to even your second system, and you mention using an ASAP that I doubt you or anyone on site has any specific training to use.

The added complexities of two rope working in the Arb sector I just feel cannot be reasonably overcome, not any time soon.

I totally agree Marc that this will not be a quick change and i don't think that even when more info is available on how we are to proceed, people will still be climbing on one system in 5 maybe 10 years time. Like i said earlier, i haven't used an ASAP or similar yet. i can just see this being the easiest route into 2 rope working for some 'simpler' arborists.

 

I like how you have described the 'Hey Day' where we made our own gear and every arborist was different. I see your point that this will no longer be the case and we will be rolling out standard arborists with standard setups almost.

 

My gut feeling tells me that whilst this will go ahead, the industry as a whole is not geared up nor ready for such a big change. We will all need much additional training from new gear uses, rescue and general climbing time to get used to such systems. There will also be a shift in trainers and assessors in what they are teaching, so they too will require training. This may lead to a shortage of trainers and assessors for a while whilst they retrain.

 

I truly wonder weather the best way to go about it would be IRATA training with an aerial tree worker specialist ticket. The problem lies in that with all the different levels and responsibilities. But their training as you say, is much more comprehensive than ours. 

 

[jarborist]

Interested in the pre-occupation with irata. Admittedly I have little  knowledge of it. From what I have seen is that a lot of the problematic (and impractical) issues for a while have crept in from folks trying to mimic irata in tree work. Whether WAH Regs, HSE, or  folks in arb involved in writing guidance. Surely we have enough knowledge, expertise and confidence from within our industry to make our own guides. Sure look at others as we have always done and borrow parts, but mimicking won't work as we are dealing with different stuff. 

[javelin10]

I was doing my NC arb when the issue of 2 rope working first reared it's ugly head. As an inexperienced climber we tried out 2-rope at college in a medium sized Sycamore and I found it totally impractical in that particular scenario. Mewps in stead of climbing was also looming and the fact that both eventually 'went away' gave me some hope for the sanity of our authorities.

 

Both these techniques have been developed for working on man-made structures, which are simpler with few or no protrusions. Trees are ALL protrusion; especially with DDrt, managing all that friction with 2 systems and having to constantly redirect around branches so to keep it minimal is an unhelpful extra workload.

 

Without reapeating some of the excellent points made by others in this thread, safety depends on Experience and Attention; the experience to know what your main hazards are in any situation, and the attention to be able to focus on those while excluding other details. Any technique or task that isn't significantly improving your safety therefore, is actively harming it, there are no "well it's a faff but it can't hurt to do it" considerations.

 

Complexity and physical exhaustion are at the core of all Arb accidents, in my opinion; but are hidden by more obvious and well-defined errors, and these are the ones that end up in all the reports.

 

I fully accept that 2 rope working, and also MEWPS, are appropriate for SOME jobs, but it has to be at the discretion of the responsible arborist. Anything else is a futile exercise.

[Mark Bolam]

Great post.