kevin bingham

You know, I'm not sure but I believe kettle bell swings and circuit was the biggest help. It kind of calls up all the muscles. But I can't climb on anything less than 11.7 either. Yale 11.7 for me all the way.

I had terrible elbow issues for a while. It's an overuse issue. Started light lifting and strengthening and I haven't had issues for several years. When some muscles are too strong and others are weak they can pull your whole body out of wack. The best thing you can do is a conditioning program outside of work. It is a mistake to think that doing this kind of work is all you need to stay in shape.

It seems the more you look into all this stuff the less sense it makes

I'm just sweating you I know what you meant and really I agree in some perspective. The whole concept of this particular thread points to the confusion there is on the subject and this is not the first time I have heard this. "If we start climbing single line we will start to have to follow rope access rules". Should 2:1 single rope climbing be viewed differently than 1:1 single rope climbing as far as what should and shouldn't happen. Why is it that when people hear SRT and 1:1 climbing the legality is suspect. Does climbing 2:1 have a margin Of safety so much greater that a backup is not needed? I honestly think most tree work is perfectly safe SRT. But I also don't think DRT or two rope climbing is as awful as people make it out. On top of not being awful, it is actually awesomely useful if you can utilize both ropes while not getting tangled. That is just a matter of practice. I have so far not had a climb where the two ropes did not help me accomplish a task safer and better than in SRT. Double rope technique.

I think that would be good except almost everyone including the arbtalk description of this forum says SRT is single rope technique. But I'm not sure it matters as long as there is a clear difference between using one and two lines and one line.

It doesn't matter what you care about, this thread is about the law cares about. The regulators care how many lines you have not how those lines are folded.

No, I don't find it gets in the way much at all and it actually makes setting and going through redirects easier. It also means I don't have to feck with my lanyard all the time. When climbing SRT I find I cheat a lot and don't use my lanyard when I should because that would be tedious. With DRT I can just cruise through the tree cutting at will with excellent work positioning. My ability to get to the tips of the branches is greater with DRT than with SRT because I can alternate my redirects and never place my full weighat in the tree. Advantages and disadvantages. But so far I have really enjoyed it. Working with two ropes gives a lot of options. It takes practice thoughost and you have to keep everything clear. Two bridges is also a must for climbing drt.

If a single rope is tied as a base anchor, it also means a lot more rope is in the system, meaning more stretch in the system, meaning LESS force is generated on the climber and the crotch during a fall than in a canopy tied anchor. If the canopy tied anchor is doubled than there is even half the stretch available and impact forces Will be higher.

I have not in the past month of always being tied in to two ropes found any situation where the second line causes additional hazard. I can not think of any situation where it would. To me it makes perfect sense in a work at height environment where we are exposing ourselves to swings, falls, and sharp tools

There is not going to be any distinguishing between DDRT and what arborist call SRT. From a regulatory standpoint a single rope is a single rope.

There is misuse of the term SRT in my opinion as DDRT is also a single rope technique. I can't think of one difference as far as safety between using one rope Or one rope folded. I have lately been using two ropes on every climb (DRT) to much success. I find it very useful in many situations.

Just a normal friction hitch and a kong robot as a quick descent option Too. Good way to go as well

Midline attachable would make me lean toward a lock jAck. But from what I understand the zz works great with an RW. Why not a uni?

Thanks Marc! There is no end in sight as far as the perfect toll goes. Yes about the kleimheist I would not ever descend on one without a friction device. But I think it's fine for ascent.

Joe why would you not recommend a kleimheist on a single line? I have heard that before bit I have found it quite appropriate.

Service life with the uni has a lot to do with how you use it. Either way, it will make its money back for you long before it wears out. Climbing on a croll and changing over sounds awful.

One time you think it's a fluke that your an idiot, the second time your sure that your one.

Tried the whole lanyard less thing. It only takes one or two dropped saws to rethink it.

I have the ct rocknlock that I can mount on to a Clevis on my harness so it sits tight.

[ame] [/ame]Posted this over at the buzz, was told about this thread over here. Is this kind of what your talkin about TomD?

The oar and the rope runner work by quite different mechanisms. Both the oar and the runner are both heavily influenced by the fundementals of the rope wrench. but yes it is fair to draw comparisons between this and other mechanical devices. It's not the first nor will it be the last. As to availability. I want to hear feedback and adjust where necessary.

here is a pic

never have figured out a reasonable way to SRT crane work either. too easy to double line it

[ame] [/ame]Try this set up with the eight, it will give you enough friction and allow you to make some upward adjustment as well. That eight you have might be a bit large. You don't need a revolver but it works the best

This tether looks beautiful.