Long ascents

[Arran Turner]

The HAAS ticks all the boxes for me.

I'm excited!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

 

 

They are as good as they look, I've used one quit few times now and after the first few steps were you have no weight In your rope you get going and you are off like a rocket . Got a mate who literally runs up the trees. You'll love it

 

Might have been said but if you do take a big fall all your toothed ascenders are under your hitch

[Marc]

its 4kn without breaking or breaking the rope, they did break the rope. The uni has been put to similar drop tests before, the results were much more encouraging. The wrench has also been extensively drop tested and preforms much better. We would aim for a low peak load of course but whilst slippage may reduce the PL it also increases the chance of us striking a limb on the way down. The FA BSEN limits PL to 6kn and slippage to 1m. They are not designed to take dynamic loads. If your anchor is 100% bommer then cool, but how can we be so sure? do binoculars show us all we need to see?

 

a few years ago people would use hitches above their ascender as a back up, now there are better alternatives why not use them?

 

with all you questions mark maybe you should conduct some of your own tests? then share your results with us on AT?

 

I would like to but lack the resources or technical knowledge, I just feel stating 4kn can mislead, there are many other factors to consider.

I understand that slippage may lead to striking a branch but I'd rather slip than come to a sudden stop.

I'm also all for better alternatives.

[BenR]

its 4kn without breaking or breaking the rope, they did break the rope. The uni has been put to similar drop tests before, the results were much more encouraging. The wrench has also been extensively drop tested and preforms much better. We would aim for a low peak load of course but whilst slippage may reduce the PL it also increases the chance of us striking a limb on the way down. The FA BSEN limits PL to 6kn and slippage to 1m. They are not designed to take dynamic loads. If your anchor is 100% bommer then cool, but how can we be so sure? do binoculars show us all we need to see?

 

a few years ago people would use hitches above their ascender as a back up, now there are better alternatives why not use them?

 

with all you questions mark maybe you should conduct some of your own tests? then share your results with us on AT?

 

There is nothing wrong with asking questions.. I believe there isnt much need to do anymore tests and post results as Paul has already done it. Regardless of the situation: bommer anchor or not, makes of ascenders, whatever, The important thing is a good understanding of the system you are using and its benefits and limitations. Just be sensible out there and try to spread good knowledge about without giving people stick for asking questions and wanting to improve safety for everyone.

 

For what its worth, I personally think any ascent system should convert into a descent system instantly... whether it be RADS, wrench, hitch hiker or uni.. ...Or climbing on ascenders (on a suitable rope) with a ground based belay system/lowerable base anchor.

[Old Mill Tree Care]

 

For what its worth, I personally think any ascent system should convert into a descent system instantly... whether it be RADS, wrench, hitch hiker or uni.. ...Or climbing on ascenders (on a suitable rope) with a ground based belay system/lowerable base anchor.

 

I strongly agree with this. We all feel relatively safe due to familiarity and assume to be in control of our situation,

until the unexpected happens.

 

It's just not possible to be too careful in this job because the consequences are too severe.

 

 

Sent with my iPhone from me, to you!

[Marc]

I strongly agree with this. We all feel relatively safe due to familiarity and assume to be in control of our situation,

until the unexpected happens.

 

It's just not possible to be too careful in this job because the consequences are too severe.

 

 

Sent with my iPhone from me, to you!

 

I have to agree with Minty Ben and yourself to.

[BenR]

I have to agree with Minty Ben and yourself to.

Why, because I'm so fresh Marc? I need to live closer so I can come and work at Heritage full time:blushing:

[Mr. Squirrel]

Why was 16s one of the best?

 

I wondered that too... was a break test ever done on the ropes after the drop test? The strength of a 16 is distributed 50/50 between cover and core is it not? Whereas static lines designed to be used with ascenders, yeah the cover may rip but the core, where most of the strength it, is still largely intact. As I understand. Potentially leaving a significantly stronger rope?

I guess what we can pretty safely say is that shock loading static ropes is very bad, you shouldn't do that. I'm still very much a fan of toothed ascenders, and will speak no ill of them; but will say that the ability to get yourself down without having to add/remove bits of kit is highly advantageous.

[Tommy_B]

I wondered that too... was a break test ever done on the ropes after the drop test? The strength of a 16 is distributed 50/50 between cover and core is it not? Whereas static lines designed to be used with ascenders, yeah the cover may rip but the core, where most of the strength it, is still largely intact. As I understand. Potentially leaving a significantly stronger rope?

I guess what we can pretty safely say is that shock loading static ropes is very bad, you shouldn't do that. I'm still very much a fan of toothed ascenders, and will speak no ill of them; but will say that the ability to get yourself down without having to add/remove bits of kit is highly advantageous.

 

16 strand rope has most/nearly all its strength in the cover. The core is there to stop the rope flattening and to keep its shape.