Alexthetreesurgeon

On 01/01/2022 at 11:18, john87 said:

I tried that with my lanyard once before and it did not work too well because of the relative lengths of the pulley/karabiner compared to the "legs" of the Prusik. I will try it again though, put fitting the pulley a different way i think..

 

john..

Yeah, either get a shorter prussik 75 cm or try a few different knot configurations. Lots of folks like a distel or knut cos they can get pretty compact. I tend to use a vt or xt. Deffo worth it, way smoother than a rope grab. 

On 29/12/2021 at 01:27, john87 said:

The makers state 9 to 13mm.. Thing was though, it just did not feel right.. I think what the issue is, the maximum diameter may very well be 13mm ROPE, as this is squashy, so the grab has no problem grabbing. Indeed, my climbing rope is 13mm and it will grab that no problem at all.

 

Now, when i tried it on a steel core flipline of 11mm, [i think it actually measures a bit more] it worked fine, but did not feel "happy" shall we say.. It was certainly much happier on my 11mm [or thereabouts] squashy rope lanyard.

 

I think the difference is that the flipline is hard and incompressable so the grab cannot get such a firm grip.

 

Think of it like this; If you dangled a half inch diameter rope vertically down from a beam and grabbed it with your hands, you might well be able to hold your own weight. If you swapped the rope for a smooth half inch steel bar [or indeed a wire rope] and tried again, you would have no chance..

 

Do not misunderstand, it worked ok on the 11mm flipline, but if i went up to 13mm, i have an idea things might not have been too good at all.

 

I swapped it for a Prusik.. It works really well, but it is a bugger to adjust. If i was doing it all day every day like you lot, it would be tempting to go back to the rope grab as the Prusik is hard work.. But for me, although a pain, at least i know for a fact that no matter how much a flap the flipline about, when i go to lean back i will not fall off the tree!!

 

john..

Put a pulley on your flip line under your Prussik and you can tend it real easy and one handed. 

The SRT kit i use daily and recommend:  60m rope, rope wrench, maillon rapide, foot ascender, neck tether, and 2 old I to I’s with larger biners for munters hitch redirects. 

I also have hand ascender which is great with a pulley or revolver attached to set up mechanical advantage system for downward sloping branch walks.

6 hours ago, Paddy1000111 said:

A suitable back up that is 99% of the time made from rope 😂

I’ve found a non-rope solution that works really well..... be careful if someone’s got the backpack blower out though, it’s not fun being blasted all the way down the road hehe

Angel Wings costume Christmas day costume Wings photo prop | Etsy

WWW.ETSY.COM

---

Charming wings for your costume for any event. Wings can be a great costume for the artists, dance...

4 hours ago, Old Mill Tree Care said:

 

Ok so I’ll re-phrase that. “Two rope climbing & work positioning - TRC&WP”
I just meant Getting It Done With Two Main Lines. (GIDWTML)

 

Hehe. 👍👍👍. Wait til the aa wade in with their standard stop calling it “two ropes” malarkey..... I think you mean “one rope and a suitable back up”

Just now, Stubby said:

What is it ? just a bit bored really . 🙂

Ask Paul Poynter (softbankhawks) for more detail.... but basically it’s srt with two slightly thinner diameter ropes(8mm) through one device. So you basically can carry the retrieval leg with you and traverse through a million conifers easily. Amongst other benefits....

51 minutes ago, Old Mill Tree Care said:

I’m looking at this in my phone and can’t see the voting thing. Where is it?
Anyway, I’ll vote “yes I do use twin ropes”.
Although I’ll never admit to how many times in my climbing career that I have used TRT .

TRT is something slightly different though....

Nice one for creating this poll, really important and interesting. I hope HSE are paying attention....

   Well done. My 2 cents is.... get a decent helmet, some chainsaw trousers, boots and a silky. Don’t worry about a chainsaw for a bit. It’s likely you won’t be chainsawing for a little while and if you are, you will prob start off doing a little processing with the firms groundsaw. Asking questions is groovy, the most important one being... “ is there anything I can do to help at the mo.” Sometimes groundying can be a bit stop start and will take a while to know when to go full beans or when to chill.  Another thing I think is important is don’t be afraid to say “I don’t know.” Clients may ask you awkward shit sometimes, like the scientific name of a species or more likely “ while you’re here can you just” and the worst thing is when a nervous groundy makes up some bullshit or talks you into work.  Just be truthful. “I’m new to this, ask the boss” Ask sensible relevant questions and colleagues will appreciate it.  It sounds like you have a decent work ethos so It sounds like you’ll do great. Get paid for it. But don’t ask superstar wages yet. Work ethic and willingness to graft/learn are far more important than technical knowledge at this stage. Alex

Great idea. 

   So the training videos show “a working solution?” Can’t wait til my boss asks me to go to the clients house and “just go up and down a metre or 2 on the nice Beech stem” 
  Im interested? What are you other arbs charging folks for that kind of technical work??

Please please don’t say safety net just in case HSE get any more bright ideas!!!! 

   But like others have said before.... this 2 rope “safety net” approach is not “understandable” and very easy to “Argue (disagree” with.  This is because It seems many arbs feel that it maybe less safe overall due to number of factors:  

1) More time spent working at height, and the fatigue that accompanies this.

2) increased mental and physical fatigue due to increased rope management. 
3) higher risk of falling/thrown debris hitting a larger target area of rope in the tree.

4) increased likelihood of rigging ropes and climbing rope entanglement.  
Etc etc etc.

 I suppose “we are where we are” but I’d rather keep discussing the  implications of this decision with my fellow arbs so that if/when the next accident happens and the discussion is reignited with HSE, fellow arbs feel like they have “back up” hehe and all the information and opinions from the “coal-face.” Furthermore if we properly discuss the “actual” reasons people may be falling from trees we might be able to move towards a more positive future with less falls instead of just hoping for it? ?
    

     I remember they did also post a table with more details during the “consultation” period which went into slightly more detail about falls from a rope and harness. And I remember thinking the majority of incidents “may” have still occurred even with 2 ropes. I.e bowline tied wrong. There was also no mention in the Injury table of competency levels either.
 
   Personally I feel 2 rope working is a decision based on really unscientific  analysis of data. Classic WYSIATI. “What you see is all there is.” If one person died cos they cut their rope then 2 ropes would have saved em.???       Are Hse really confident enough about that to enforce a serious practical change to the way most arbs operate? Affecting safety, fatigue and wellbeing. Using HSE’s science I could suggest that Khriss’ example proves that 2 rope working is more dangerous.
 

     Might have been better to have a proper consultation with the arb industry first about what we thought might be causing the majority of incidents??    For instance, a lot of people on here seem to feel the training system could improve...etc etc etc  
 

   One last thing Paul. “ Plus of course inexperienced climbers are more at risk.” Any stat evidence to back this up Paul? Because it may actually be the case that more experienced climbers face more risk because they may do bigger stuff with less supervision. Maybe.?? But I’m not gonna presume things without doing research first.  
 

 Sorry to be a “nob head” Khriss and give Paul more “flak.” I’m more than happy to share it around if anyone from HSE fancies chatting to anyone from the industry. Alex.

There’s this. some basic numbers about arb/chainsaw without much detail.

7 hours ago, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

Hi Paul, more 'technical clarity' is detailed in the Technical Guide 1- tree climbing and aerial rescue (TG1) currently a draft document.

See Arb Assn website at www.trees.org.uk for further info.

Regards

Paul

 

   There you go Paul Poynter. You obviously just didn’t read it properly the first time. ? ?

4 hours ago, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

Provided you have an effective 'backup system', in case the primary system fails for any reason, which I think is what you are proposing, then that's fine. Many climbers have chosen to adopt '2-rope working', in many/most cases, to very good effect so certainly worth considering as an option.

Probably academic, but just to clarify, that climbing systems we use fall under the 'fall protection' category rather than 'fall arrest.'

Cheers,

Paul

     Thanks Paul, but when i said “fall arrest“ I was referring specifically to the fall arrest device option you are proposing. 
   
      Secondly, I know my preferred option (2srts) is “two rope working” as opposed to “primary and back up systems.”   I was suggesting that the other options of either an extra mega long lanyard or a fall arrest device on a separate rope “basically” equate to “two rope working.”  I suppose there is a tiny bit of difference If people can use an extra long lanyard attached to a suitable anchor. But then it basically comes down to whether it’s clipped to your bridge or side d’s. So “effectively” making it what I would call “two rope working” 

   We could chat about phraseology all day long but how about we discuss the inadequacy of the industry “consultation” process (a one day jolly climb with a small amount of people and 2 really limited surveys after the event?)
    
      Or the integrity of the incident stats  relating to “Arb” that were used to implement this change to industry practice. (no methodology, sampling size,etc) 

    Personally I do not feel that there has been adequate real industry consultation or professional scientific analysis to make changes this big to people’s choices about their own safety. 
    Thanks Paul. From Alex.

2 hours ago, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

The guidance cites the requirement for a "backup system" to meet the requirements of the W@H Regs. which may be 2 ropes but can be achieved by other means (see sects 6.5 & 6.6 p.31-32).

Regards

Paul 

    Yeah I saw that but it’s effectively the same thing. I think 2 lanyards is mega clunky so the other option is use a fall arrest on another rope. A fall arrest seems pointless too, when I could just use another rope wrench and at least have another system that is useful. 

 The tg1 is out for “consultation” now. It seems they are expecting two rope systems at all times.

Two half ropes are mainly for trad climbing. sport climbing and abseiling is generally on one 9-10mm rope. Although two half ropes may be  a little safer on really sketchy anchors  they are also mainly used to prevent rope drag from unwanted redirects leading to a sticky situation. Which is kind of the opposite to two ropes in tree work.