Laz

Some very good points raised. But rather than talk amongst yourselves, join this discussion forum that is set up by HSE ESPECIALLY to hear from you (us): http://webcommunities.hse.gov.uk/inovem/inovem.ti/afagpublic/messageshowthread?threadid=1006 You will have to reg your email and a password, then Go to discussions. The common complaint from those at the top that can effect change, is they don't hear from enough grass roots to effect change. Please, get involved.

Thats how I tied mine, but with one extra wrap. You could run the pulley on a micro cord prusik. That way you can pull it down out of the way for Body thrusting. Just a thought.

Tim Sorry about the pics, but I'm afraid I had nothing to do with the photos or formatting - I severed ties with TV before the report formatting was completed. I agree some of the pics are not best presented. Its not me in any of the pics either (cause people often assume). That would be Richard Almond. Anyway, the Helical performed as well as any hitch in the tests. The testing showed that the philosophy that a double leg hitch is stronger than a single leg is flawed; when the hitch tightens enough to test the breaking strength, heat is generated which causes the braids to weld to the line. In the tests, this caused at least one VT hitch to fail twice during the pull before releasing the load. In comparison, one Blakes tied with 13mm single braid exploded at much lower loads. In fact, the wraps seemed to have vapourised, as only two straight sections of cord could be found. That was the strongest cordage used, but it didn't perform as highly. I made note of some specific insights during testing, that were never made public: After the report was completed, a meeting was held to discuss the findings and establish industry best practice. I wasn't invited because I was neither a verifier or a member of TV. Obviously doing all the research and word processing means I had nothing further to offer. It has always been my intention to write a summary of the research for the Arb journal with better graphics and photos to present the data in a more user friendly way.......... but no time or funding is available to me. Until then, based on the test results and cordage used, I recommend a minimum breaking strength of 1700Kg, polyester/ nylon, of double braid or kernmantle construction and 8-10mm diameter on 11-13mm lines, for all the friction hitches save the Blakes (thinner cords tend to bite too tight with this hitch). The success I had with tying the Helical, was to set the braids before tying the bowline, unlike your second photo.

Ha! I like the caveat Craig.....like I'm almost garaunteed to upset anyone at any moment! Tim I'd say the Helical is for you, tied with 10mm cord. The new ISC pulley looks like it was made for it. Don't ask me what its called - Judge will know, and I'm sure he'll supply it at a credit crunch worthy price.

You can say that about any knot, so my point is, the Helical is way more reliable than a VT. I have never found a VT as safe as a Helical, if fine tuning to attempt it to grip without question, yet release easily. This is because the Helical has the distinct advantage of being able to cinch up the Bowline once the number of braids and wraps are found that work with a specific system, so the slack can be adjusted to the millimeter. In comparison, the VT can loosen more, because the legs have no means to prevent them from separating. This makes the Vt able to advance easier, yet that advantage can easily turn into a serious safety concern by not grabbing when required. When competing against each other, Jon Hartill came up with the idea of running both legs through a small stainless steel ring to prevent the VT from separating away from the rope when released. We both moved on to the Helical. I'm not sure why Jon did, but I did for this reason. IMHO, setting up a VT to self tail is just asking for trouble - lightweight climbers can get away with it.

I disagree completely: IMHO The Helical is the safest of all the half hitch free prusiks. IF tied correctly, it can be fine tuned for the ultimate performance. In addition, because of the way it is tied, it can be set to any length. This makes it a great hitch for those wanting something to upgrade from a Blakes/Prusik performance.

I let this one slip, but actually looking at the draft I see huge potential problems for contractors using it as 'all works in compliance with BS3998'. I agree Linda that the EAC guide is much more useful as a guide and checklist for clients. I have tried to read BS3998 draft, but it is so complex, prescriptive and unbalanced, that I can no longer cross reference to it as a standard, and I can't even get to the end of it without falling asleep. If I cross referenced to that in a contract, it just gives the client too much opportunity to query some semantic detail and not pay up. Better to avoid all that altogether. The EAC guide at least highlights the main points such as use of spurs, risk assessment etc and recommends suitable qualifications - after all, the BSI standard reads like a level 3 qualification curriculum, and is totally unecessary because it could just as easily say 'All work should be supervised by a level 3 qualified and competent person'. Problem comes when it is promoted by industry or requested by clients. We wouldn't need such a standard if those engaged in tree work were required to be suitably qualified, supervised and updated. Again it shows how Chainsaw certs are insufficient as a measure of good Arboricultural practice.

There is always this risk on any harness - more so with load bearing leg loop designs. The answer is to 'adjust' yourself properly before tensioning the leg loops properly. I wouldn't recommend loose leg loops - always snug them up. I also recommend briefs over boxers. Leg loop harnesses allow proper articulation of the hip joint when working a crown. Hard seats are OK for hanging around for long periods.

Well that would be telling wouldn't it?

Just to clarify Tim: The TFX pelvic pad comes in three different sizes, to reflect the fact that the hip ds are set closer together or further apart depending upon size. The leg pads are the same size throughout. The webbing adjustment length is different on each size.

I ran about 60 drop and pulltests of arb systems using scaffold knots in a controlled environment with dynos. Not one issue. Have you ever wondered what might happen to a stitched eye if the shrink wrap is over heated? I've seen it a couple of times - the stitching melts but you don't see it. A friction splice pulled out on a Buddy of mine and he fell 35 feet. It was the ropes second day of use, and he is meticulous about safety. The point is, don't blindly trust to things. I will usually prefer to knot my lifelines for many reasons.

"So how would I know your harness was a good buy, should I just believe the salesperson without any proof?" Its what you have to do with every other harness, and with little understanding of the design team's credentials. Good luck - with your understanding of proper human use; we've explained enough about it over the past 5 years to know this isn't a good medium.

Lets just say I know how to get a point across. The comparison to IT sales and medicine aren't valid - they aren't high risk enough in terms of health and injury, and generally pay well enough (at least much better than arb) not to be a financial risk. Its not 'my' system, it is the prevailing system of arboriculture. The statistics prove it from our very own SSC. The conclusion is we are in crisis because of it. When I hear 'Career', it means undertaking an occupation for which we are well trained. The industry is in crisis because skills aren't being retained, because arborists aren't being trained - or at least well enough. By the time MOST climbers reach their 40s they (I know some of you are superheros who will never lie down and die) will move on from this industry because of physical injury or pain. Taking with them all of their acquired knowledge to be replaced by someone without relevant experience. If they studied hard and gained specific qualifications to augment their very important experience, that will enable them to give professional advice to the public, or industry. This is a cycle of increasing returns. And you don't need to be an academic! I am very pleased to hear of those who have said they committed to this industry, and had the good sense to do it properly by studying formally for academic qualifications and/or seeking a 3-5 year apprenticeship. Thats what this industry needs. Its a long road and the 'telligent tortoise beats the hare by a long, long way. Usually the hare cuts a leg on the way, meaning they rarely make the finish.

Quite seriously - Don't do it! There is little career with total committment. With the committment you can afford, you could be physically and financially sorry in 10 yrs time. And then what are you going to do? Have you got qualifications to fall back on? Are you going to keep on climbing everyday into your 50's? Or will you get pushed aside by the next young gun who will run round faster for less money until he burns up, to get replaced by the next young gun..... who will run round faster for less money until he burns up, to get replaced by the next young gun..... who will run round faster for less money until he burns up, to get replaced by the next young gun..... who will run round faster for less money until he burns up, to get replaced by the next young gun..... If they don't become another injury/death statistic first. Or maybe you'll break the cycle and set up in business, forced to undercut the competition and work faster and harder, employing climbers who will run round faster for less money until they burn up, to get replaced by the next young gun..... who will run round faster for less money until he burns up, to get replaced by the next young gun..... who will run round faster for less money until he burns up, to get replaced by the next young gun..... If they don't become another injury/death statistic first. Or maybe they'll break the cycle and set up in business, forced to undercut the competition and work faster and harder, employing climbers who will run round faster for less money until they burn up, to get replaced by the next young gun..... Its coined the cycle of diminishing returns by Jez Lawton, and is typical of this industry. There is no 'Career' in this game I'm afraid. Good luck.

Ha! Seems everyone forgot the weather caveat!