Two-rope Working - an update

[Alex O]

If it’s the vid I’m thinking off , still anchored in the large top he was felling he busted up a few ribs and as he fell his leg got caught in the crouch of the tree and destroyed his pelvis, he did survive the incident, but very lucky. I’ve heard quite a few horror stories since I’ve been here in Aus mostly deaths of in experience lads and guys .

[benedmonds]

Not sure if the link will work. It was posted on UK's Tree Surgeons Facebook

 

https://www.facebook.com/brady.viger/videos/2593500190705363/UzpfSTYyNjkxMjg0MzpWSzoxMjQ5MDk0MjU1MzAwNDc2/

 

Edited December 9, 2019 by benedmonds

[Gray git]

Frequently mentioned is anchor point failure, surely if your increasing the number of points needed your upping the chance of picking a poor one due to lack of choice or going around 2 side branches in the same central leader instead of over them around the main limb so if it fails it'll still take you out. Think I'm just repeating what has been said but repetition of the facts hits it home more!

On a spar it's going to be even worse trying to organise two choking friction savers and associated roped a flip line and then any rigging if it's needed all within 18" of pole which to me is going to end in a accident as that's the most frequent could have gon wrong iv seen where something in the life system ends up on the wrong side of the rigging.

[Joe Newton]

Presumably all of the harnesses with a single bridge will be deemed inadequate for tree work now too?

 

The AA have rolled over with this one. A self appointed body claiming to be for the benefit of the industry should have had our backs, instead they've gone along with it knowing full well it's not making us safer, but there opposite. 

[Jake Andrews]

Presumably all of the harnesses with a single bridge will be deemed inadequate for tree work now too?
 
The AA have rolled over with this one. A self appointed body claiming to be for the benefit of the industry should have had our backs, instead they've gone along with it knowing full well it's not making us safer, but there opposite. 

That’s my thinking too. Surely we can’t work two lines off of one bridge as that will still be deemed the same system. Doesn’t matter how many lines you have on one bridge if it fails.

That makes probably around 80-90% of harnesses redundant overnight as they won’t allow the attachment of a secondary bridge. Incredible really.

If it’s not in the newly updated ICOP that we must use two separate bridges for two separate systems then this situation will become even more farcical. Or even a full body harness with dorsal or sternal attachments.

[Craig Johnson]

44 minutes ago, Joe Newton said:

Presumably all of the harnesses with a single bridge will be deemed inadequate for tree work now too?

 

good job there's some designed with two or three independent bridges then? 

Edited December 9, 2019 by Craig Johnson

[TIMON]

It seems to me that ‘2 ropes’ will only mask the underlying problems of inadequate experience and poor working practices, it’s very sad that the real issues are even less likely to get addressed now.
I’m just an average climber and advancing in years now but I have always placed safety as being of the utmost importance.
I am really not looking forward to using two separate systems, the majority of the work I do will be made much more difficult now and I am struggling to see any real safety benefits.
Self rescue will be MUCH harder to perform, especially in the event of a big bleed. Imagine having to disengage or ‘cut’ yourself from one of the systems under tension while bleeding out...
Added fatigue, added pressure to get the job done quicker. Etc.etc..
And one thing that no one seems to have considered.....
both systems will still only be attached to ONE BRIDGE on a climbing harness which in turn will be subject to much greater stress and wear & tear due to the excessive congestion of the added connectors.
Very disappointing.

[Jake Andrews]

good job there's some designed with two or three independent bridges then[emoji6] 

Tell me more[emoji6][emoji23]

In all seriousness. Was two rope working one of your considerations when you were designing your harness?

[Craig Johnson]

2 hours ago, Jake Andrews said:

 

Tell me more

In all seriousness. Was two rope working one of your considerations when you were designing your harness?

 

Yes but not as a mandatory requirement. Fail to Safe, built in redundancy and the wider choice of options. I don't use two lines alot  but the two bridges add a lot of stability when branch walking, as the two rings are usually apart etc. It's also nice to have that option as the work plan often changes once you are up in the tree.

[Rich Rule]

This is a question for Paul or HSE reading this ...  

 

I have heard in the past that if an Employer sends out an employee with inadequate kit, no LOLER etc and there is an accident.  If the HSE get involved then the employer can be prosecuted.

 

However, if the same employer has the same accident with the same Kit they would be exempt from prosecution by the HSE as they are the director of the company.

 

Will this be the same situation if a director investigated by the HSE for not following the new guidelines?