educated arborist

10mm is the minimum but most climb on either 11-11.5 or 13mm why do you ask?

Trevo did some research into loading binas like this some time ago & has been stressed at every aa trade fair ever since. Not a good way to atach things IMO I have inspected quite a few krabs & hooks which have been bent in this way. The bigger (longer) the conector the worst the effect

Its £40/kit for repeat inspections:001_tt2: I group every1 together in their regeions. Contact me via phone & i can let you know the exact dates i will be in the NE. The sooner people contact me with the greatest notice of their due date the better. But if anyone needs an inspection real urgent then i'll come strait out with an aditional charge for milage.

its up to the inspector, but i wouldn't need them, preferable but not esential. you can contact me via the trade directory or the link below if u'd like it inspected.

the onfo isn't to hand, i did try to look for it briefly & googled it but with no avail. It would have become serious big book time. I am hoping, however, to publish a summary of a duty of care dispute i'm currently working on in court at the mo once it has concluded. sorry i couldn't back up the precident with the case details but theyr'e prety well hidden.

good luck finding lots of case precident on google ha! google & wikipedia "the fountain of all knowlege" that said you did agree with me in your earlyer post. If its on the boundry it may well belong to both & you need both their permission to work on it.

:sleep:ha bloomin ha, I wish i'd thought of that

Ha Ha if you wan't to devote a whole days work (& use up some favour you have with some very busy people) to write an arb talk post then be my guest:001_tt2: deans morals are honourable & if there was so much as a glint of hope for him getting off this hypothetical missfortune then i would have pointed out the wee loophole which might be worth testing. Many legal firms which i deal with will offer three case handleing cost projections pre-apraisal for example >80% apraised success £30,000 <80%>50% £80,000 >50 not all the money in the world!! and dean would be subject to the later

dean, i've allready posted the facts. If anyone needs me to proove it to them then they will have to pay as the references take too much time to fish out & send.

the only way to establish hard fact is if the land was transferred certa Land Registration Act 2002 AND falls within 1m if the deed was in 1:1250 scale map and 2m if on a 1:2500(from the best of my recolection but is pretty close if not exact) otherwise just get both sides to agree. other wise, worst case senario, it depends on what the judges day has been like so far.

well said "its not DEFINITIVE, but it sometimes helps" this area of the law is a MINEFIELD & I have have worked with expert boundry dispute barristers & soliciters & even they loose hair over it.

Andy is spot on mate & if your mate the barrister was taking on the case he would need & be relying on an expert whitness in court, working as an expert whitness & going off of case president ur up the creek without a paddle. "oh no no TPO on that one dean here i'll sign you a disclaimer", again your fked no disclaimer would be worth the paper its written on. (PS if you wan't to pay for it i'll do you a legal apraisal??, case president, underlying acts the lot)

see your point, if thats the case then kepp the weight of the peices down or bite the bullet & invest in some 12mm dyneema or technora (it wont be that much more expensive & can replace the crapy steel cable which is currently on your landy winch) i bought 200m not that long ago and it was dead cheap, since i bought it ive used it a few times. Even with static line a 100m length is gona sag loads right up to its break strain. A millatry rigging expert once told me that a zip on the 11mm static line they used should not be used on any length over 50m due to it becoming overloaded once the nesesery tension was exerted. I am hoping to research the forces on zip lines before long but it is prooving v.expensive & will have to involve funding from several industies.

letter of the law: If the boundry is shared then the tree is a boundry tree & both neighbours must agree to any works other that the removal of branches overhanging the property (without significantly adversly effecting the tree) and you are culpable as a profesional tree surgeon. Unless the tree is dagerous without doubt.

if youre tensioning the line quite a bit/lot then you will overload that absail rope, double esterlon will be stronger but will sag more

true it probably would be more trouble than its worth enforcing it, legally you can only claim back costs incured & a outline of these costs must be included in the T&C mine has an hourly rate/man & 2 milage rates dependant on the size of veihcle. I also take staged payments on certain jobs, especially planting.

thats low, its in my t&c/quote that any aplication is only made after acceptance of the quote. standard cancelation clause if cancelled after acceptance

Do you mean the very same treevolution that used & sugest we use certian items of un ce-climbing equipment/PPE in their climbing demonstrations at the AA fair? The Last discusion I had with Liam regarding this matter was a little while ago but his words were that CE marking was not the concern of loler inspectors but retailers etc he said it is preferable but not compulsory.

seek & you shall find. equipment which complies with en norms may not hold a CE mark. The holding of the mark is the concern of importers, retailers etc.

give me a call & i'll book you in follow the link below or dial 07835 02 99 23

5-1 is not stated as the SF in the arborist section. The rope is not solely designed for arborists & yales recomended SF for some aplications is as low as 4-1 and in exeptional circamstances even lower sf are applied (NOT ARB MIND)

to air on the side of caution lantra & others may wish to comply with this guidance but if you read it fully it does clearly state that the guidence is not compulsory. As for splicing you can't really argue that gear must be CE marked & splices don't, Its the same law & you are altering the construction of the rope. There are seperate CE requirements for splices/ terminations. A good point about EN numbers though some of the manufacturors in this industry have assertained a macheinery CE mark for lifting equipment just so that people that ill-understand the law arn't put off from buying something which doesn't even require one anyway! People need to be educated & taught to interprate the law & stop over inturprating things. I have had clients which have been lead to beleive that you are no longer aloud to terminate your climbing line with a bowline or any other knot & visa-versa that you can't climb on a splice or can't use ascenders, the list is endless. The LAW makes no reference to PPE in use needing to be CE marked, If any one dissagrees then they should post a link/ its extract on this thread. Not some lantra guidence which does not only fall short of law but is not even acop.

In testing Yale break the rope a number of times and average them out to assertain its ABS the lowest at which it broke is the MBS. Yale state: "Working load (SWL) is based on static or moderately dynamic lifting/pulling operations. Instantaneous changes in load, up or down, in excess of 10% of line’s rated working load constitutes hazardous shock load and would void normal working-load recommendation. Consult Yale Cordage for guidelines for working loads and safe use of rope." depending on the ropes aplication & configuration a different SF (safetey factor may be applied) assertaining a higher or lower safe working load. Due to the high levels of abraision, terminations, attachment methods, dynamic loading etc. etc which we arborists subject our ropes to we aply a SF of 10-1 for rigging operations.

8164kg is the average break strain, for typical arboricultural rigging operations apply a safety factor of 10-1 round it to nearest 50= SWL 800kg

reg 9 also states that if it does not have a COC then it should be subject to a thorough examination before use. So are you sugesting that an aftermarket splice is illegal? are you sugesting that manufac' proto types must not be tested in the feild prior to CE certification? There have been a number of cases regarding the use of un ce'd personal lifting equipment (admitidly not in arb) but on these presidents i'd be prety confident in court. In other idustries there are some very clear provisions for the use of equipment which is not ce marked.