explorer arb

Rock exotica do you the best of both worlds with their pulleys, ALLOT stronger too then you can use it with the cheek located for general re-directs too, multi purpose, much higher quality ,manufacture, no brainier if you ask me

also known as the 'rope rocket' method of ascention

marlowbraid will take allot of abuse is proper static but can kink up something chronic due to its 3-strand core. Yale double esterlon is good, will make a great rigging line as well but is a bit more money, portland braid is the cheaper weaker version so might not be a bad bet polydyne should be avoided at all costs, it stretches like buggery & is not as strong when wet the ideal line would be a polyester covered dyneema, its super static, very light, super strong but the most expensive, it'll be a bit stronger than equal diameter double esterlon but remember the cover is not even getting loaded basically 100% of the strength is coming from the core & as a result the cover is much less likely to get damaged & a little damage will not have the domino effect that itb would on double esterlon which is a 50/50 sharer. Marlow & teufulberger make similar versions of the same rope, hope it helps

an enjoyable read for many i suppose perhaps more so to those new to the industry/ in college etc rigging is not an art form it is a science miss configured equipment in the photos, no mention of the industry specific guide to hand signals, or any of the useful things to come out of RR668. all that said nice to see how a 'joe bloggs' in the industry interprets & practices rigging it certainly highlights how little most arbs are taught about rigging. I hope the one of the next articles focuses on the movement of the centroid, something we all should have a good grasp of!

ahh you posted whilst i was typing...... keep some blank quote & acceptance forms in your truck, scribble down the works 7 get them signed. If it is a super rush & they are not available to sign get conformation via sms or e-mail that they have read & accept the quote & T's & C's sorry to hear you were trying to do them a good turn by rushing the job only to learn the hard way that you need a written conformation of terms no matter what the rush xxx

T1: remove Quercus robur (oak tree) to ground height S1: grind out the resulting stump resulting from T1 to a minimum depth of 30cm clear enough? furthermore the T's&C's printed on the reverse of every page of a quote & acceptance form elaborate into what stump grinding & removal tgh entails, acceptance form must be signed to acknowledge T's&C's before any TPO checks etc are carried out let alone before works commence. if your paperwork isn't up to scratch i suggest you bite the bullet and grind for free, furthermore get onto sorting your paperwork out ASAP! if they took you to court the judge will be making his decision on the balance of probabilities not on proven facts, what that means is it depends on what that single judge had for breakfast or whether or not he has been left feeling ripped off by a tree surgeon in the past. Were you to disagree with his decision an appeal typically costs allot as you must put forward your entire case for appeal in one application, if you wish to reference anything said by the judge or the claimant in the aforementioned hearing you will need to pay between £250 &£1250 for a transcript of the court recording from a court approved transcripter i'm not siding in all this merely stating the systems the UK have to deal with such disputes, like i said my advice is to put this one down to experience and sort out your blooming paperwork!

that's funny i swear i saw a video of the ascender in question being repeatedly drop tested with a 100kg mass on a static lanyard with a fall distance of 2m with no visible damage to the ascender what so ever! that goes way beyond what they have to withstand for their bsen & ce mark! Don't slate a product that you clearly know very little about, there's no need.

Skyland: sorry it was a bit of a long winded response but I hope it helped. If an examiner has passed an item as safe to use then an employer stands on firm ground as you would term it. In fact if you are to use an item that was not designed for lifting or at least not as WAH PPE it must be examined BEFORE first use and the examiner’s decision trumps the fact it wasn’t designed as PPE In the same sense as a mot if your car fails at one station then you take it strait to another & it passes you have a valid mot. MOT’s are not the greatest example as they have FAR FAR stricter rules on failure criteria etc especially since it went computerised. For example did you know that a car battery must be secured but in a type 7 (3-3.5 ton) the battery does not have to be secured but its examined position must merely not be obstructing/ causing damage to any vital components such as breaks, steering etc. In either case failure can come down personal opinion/ interpretation and in this case many would not consider it black & white, for me as an examiner I view the issue of 2-way HOOKS being FFP as black & white but only through literally 10’s of hours of research & consulting arming myself with numerous defences should the worst happen. Most things in our industry that are black & white become muddied or ignored by people in our professional community and before long they blur from black & white to grey due to rumour & manipulation which has its advantages & disadvantages there are allot people on this forum that complain about over-regulation and fight to make things/ keep things as muddy as possible often for their own ends. Perhaps you should recommend an examiner to your clients that has liaised with you to advise you if he/ she considers any of your current stock as not FFP as PPE? Agrimog: it doesn’t appear to be the case that someone has overstepped ‘the mark’ or assumed authority they do not have, despite the fact that I would disagree with the examiners reasoning and he. She has every right to comment on its proposed use, that is the only thing here that IS! black & white! The fact that you refer to he/she as an inspector is grey though but most people slang a Thorough Examination By Competent Persons, As Defined By Lifting Operations And Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 as a ‘loler inspection’ by a ‘loler inspector’ which I personally think has the ability to confuse people. Might I also add that I have a great deal of experience when it comes to refusing payment in these circumstances and it seldom ends well for the complainant, I had a firm that had had £1000’s of gear failed which when I examined it one week later the vast majority of that failed equipment passed. Despite the fact that I advised them that I believed it off the top of my head highly unlikely they would be able to successfully make a claim against him they paid me to appraise the legal situation. Despite the extremes of their situation I advised them that they had less than a 15% chance of a judge up-holding their claim and suggested mediation or surrender. They mediated outside of the court’s mediation service with me acting as their advocate and negotiated a 60% refund which is far better that they should have hoped for, after my fees this was far from a profitable exercise. Stubby: you are indeed obligated to state the equipment’s current & intended application; most professional loler examiners re-iterate this in their T&C’s all passed equipment should be returned marked clearly for PPE or non PPE use

a lanyard is a short length of rope, sour side strops are lanyards a flip-line is a steel core lanyard and should be used when chainsawing on an upright step stem see afag 401 both are typically used as a primary attachment point as well as secondary maybe you should check this link out & have a few reads through the guides listed on this page: AFAG Publications hope that helps

the examiner has to assess whether the item is Fit For Purpose the application in this case is arboricultural climbing operations so lets set rigging aside. the examiner has many resources at his disposal to form a decision on whether or not the item is FFP for this application, many of which nod has noted. this decision can certainly be described as an opinion and ultimately the responsibility of the decision on the record lies with competent person. My decision relating to 2-way HOOKS for this application differs to my decision in relation to 2-way 'twistlock' karabiners. in certain theater & circus rigging applications these 2-way hooks are regarded as a far safer method of attachment than a 3-way karabiner as it requires two synchronized, opposite opposing motions to open it as opposed to the single diagonal motion on a 3-way krab, i'm sure many of us have had one 'roll open' against a branch? Many of these hooks are designed to click onto 'end bolts' of a set diameter which have a double nut stopper on the end to prevent them from sliding off naturally earning them the name 'clickers' in some industries Ultimately the decision rests with the individual examiner if he/she is satisfied that the design of the connector is FFP they may 'Pass' it if not then they are entitled to 'Fail' it. The fact that a 2-way hook is 2-way would certainly not lead me to fail it, i know of a firm that had every rope failed because it did not have a manufacturers marking on the outside of the rope, that company decided to go back to their old examiner who did not deem this necessary, perhaps you should look to change your examiner if your not happy?

don't clip into your toothed ascender, use it only as an aid, what rope are you on?i think the worst in the jap tests was tachyon, if it weren't for the stopper knot in the end the sheath would've come clean off the core!

do you mean toothed ascenders? such as the croll & ascention? some are far less tolerant of falls/ rope friendly during falls than others, furthermore the standard they are tested to allows for very little shock loading. some relatively unscientific research has just been completed in japan on this subject and over the years several people in our community have tested these systems also. the rope ascender combo changes the ball game completely! in fact 16strand ropers such as yale xtc & marlow gecko have been found to sustain very little damage where as core dependent kernmantles covers have broken, their core's still holding but the user sliding many feet striking branches & what ever else along the way the loleruk guys doing the demo at the arb show were talking allot this year about encouraging people to move away from using toothed ascenders as an attachment point in any configuration/rope combo, as as you point out, if an anchor deflects through skipping or a branch breaking a shock load in excess of what the ascender is designed for can soon be reached. the wrench & the uni perform very well in this config' but their are many un-researched combos. the problem is we have no standard in the arb industry for our climbing systems leaving the manufacturors to apply en's that arnt strictly relevent. Many designers, manufacturors will carrry out lots of aditional tests to simulate their actual working conditions and as a result produce great, safe devices/ systems for us to work on. Some dont do this and we end up with things that arn't really FFP Sometimes the aforementioned 'pro-tester's' forget to consider things from a certain angle like petzl's zig zag. Petzl employed loads of 'expert users' many of them prominent in our industry but none of them fed back to petzl that they had re-orientated the top karabiner whilst on a pole or added a rubber O-ring to hold it captive although after the event many of them realised they'd done this assuming all end users would do this. what do we want from our systems? what do we require? until we answer these questions we wont move forward! in answer to your question, maybe maybe not, depends on your combo of rope & ascender

new tribe are the only people who make tree climbing harnesses for kids, some of those harnesses restrict the movement required to climb trees and are not comfortable for long periods of suspension & in extreme cases can cause injury from prolonged suspension, get the real deal get a new tribe kids twist it will even fit your average smaller woman (size 6-10) dependent on how wide her hips & ass are New Tribe TWIST for KIDS! [sDLTWK] - $99.00 : Zen Cart!, The Art of E-commerce

weather forecast is awesome! sun & medium to high level cloud, most importantly: no rain! i'm off to help set up a little later so will see you all there, Mike T says he's gonna bring some gurt big joints of cow or pig to cook in a stone pit oven, BOOM! Like I said everyone welcome so PLEASE come down and check it all out don't miss out on this awesomely cheap event.

yes it deffo is, i spoke to mike Tucker yesterday or the day before. Maybe it would be good for people to post if they are attending, where they will travel from & if they are camping or just there on the sat? that way people can pm for lift shares etc!

if your coming to the treekend this weekend in the Cotswolds then bring your rope with you & if there's time & its not too dirty i'll do a splice for you on the weekend if you like? also you'll be able to try a whole range of different ropes & termination options ill have gecko with 3 varying spliced eyes and a gecko with the streamline sewn eye, yale xtc with spliced, velocity, tachyon, aeris, the works! that way you can play all day to try before you splash out ordering something you wont like!

BUMP! due to be a great weekend for all who attend! they'll be more gear than you can shake a stick out to have a go with, uni's pulley savers, ropeguides, lockjacks, spiderjacks, rope wrenches, ID's, HC's, ascenders, pantins & everything in between! i'll probably bring a few tree boats if any1 wants some tree top camping? i have 2 spare 1st come 1st served last year was great the rescue practices/ scenarios really got you thinking, some of what we see at shows turns out not to be all that easy or even remotely useful TBH! Really friendly guys run the show so all are welcome of any ability and/or experience level, just google the postcode & turn up! I cant wait

the marlow splice is very bulky, so called 'closed knots' or as i prefer to call them, self-tailing hitches such as the vt, distel etc can have a tendency to get caught (when using HC/SW) after a period of ascent the hitchgets held 'open'/'disengaged' on the super bulky splice solutions: tie your hitch differently & use a short krab in the hitch-climbers upper hole so that it never compresses bellow the splice get a slicker splice either on a new rope or you could have your gecko spliced (providing its not too dirty or milked as this can make splicing much harder) hope it helps x

is it me or havent ISC's HMS's & Lukes been like this for many years? not exactly the same but the spines are too thick for a hitch-climber or fixed cheek micro pulley etc to slide round They did so specifically for IRA guys who were complaining about side loading.

The TCI warned us against using rock climbing harnesses as they are much quicker to cause suspension trauma. check out New Tribe's purpose designed rec' tree climbing harnesses.

i wonder how far in advance the roots were pruned? if at all, does any1 have any more info on the move?

the ID is very quick to give or take extra length from/to the climber as it takes about 1.5 seconds to flip the rope out if he's stropped on or to pay some out/in if not, it is expensive & the weight can add to the flop effect if you don't set it very well.

Ive got one of each including the kong, the new petzl's are by FAR the best IMO i never climb without it (apart from wee apples etc)