Employing lanyard SRT-style: descending?

[Burrapeg]

Your hitch is more of a Distel Sticht, or a Stichted Distel, the original being only wraps/ round turns. Also the ring might be too large and allow slack from the wraps to transfer to the legs, making them longer, with extended use.

Hmmm, I may not have paid close enough attention to your original photos. At any rate, this one works very smoothly, releases easily, etc. at least with this particular 30 inch hitch cord. I did try a slightly smaller ring I had but it was too tight and the hitch would not release nearly as well. The slack from the wraps does indeed try to transfer down to the legs as you said. I have been getting around that by setting the hitch by pulling down on the ring each time. This seems to prevent that happening and the ring makes a comfortable handhold. I believe your idea of using an electrical clamp behind the ring instead of twists would solve that too, and also perhaps allow use of a slightly shorter hitch cord. I am going to pick up one of those clamps tomorrow on the mainland if I can't find one here in the shop. Just thought of a great pun: Stichted Distel has a nice ring to it!

 

[JeffGu]

Actually, it sounds like some sort of medical condition that I don't want to hear about.

 

[Brocky]

If the hitch has long enough legs it should have been able to be adjusted to loosen up by having the small ring farther below the wraps.The four sections of cord going through the ring should be nearly parallel for optimum holding.

 

[Burrapeg]

. . . you can always install a SCAM once you reach your cinched off lanyard, this will allow you to descend and remote release you lanyard once your back on your climbing system.

Remember that using the SCAM to descend will eat up three times the amount of lanyard that was sent up to start with. I have done this a number of times when I sent up the end of the lanyard as high as I could reach with my SideKick pole which extends to 9 feet, and I was able to come back down OK with a SCAM setup since the lanyard was 25 feet long. But if it had been a shorter lanyard, this might not have lowered me back down far enough to the first TIP. Actually, though, I have not been coming back down on the lanyard for the most part; I have been carrying the original TIP further up when I go up higher on the lanyard, leapfrogging higher and higher by swapping back and forth. Also have used the tail of the main rope instead of a long lanyard for this same tactic. It can be slow progress with these cluttered conifers. Too many small limbs in the way to toss up the end of the line while, at the same time, not enough larger limbs close enough together to safely just ladder-climb up. Sometimes wish I had a longer SideKick pole!

 

[Burrapeg]

If the hitch has long enough legs it should have been able to be adjusted to loosen up by having the small ring farther below the wraps.The four sections of cord going through the ring should be nearly parallel for optimum holding.

I think my smaller ring I tried was just too small altogether. It was binding the four parts of the hitch cord and keeping it too tight on the rope. I need to find a ring about halfway between that one and the bigger 2 inch. And I want to try that electrical clamp you showed in a photo.

 

[LordFarkwad]

Question for you, from my understanding you are throwing your lanyard 10' higher than your climbing system and choking it off, then climbing up to that point, but leaving your climbing system below? Then rappelling off of the lanyard back to your climbing system once your ready to descend. If this is the case how are you managing the choked lanyard that you need release once back on the climbing system? As I am sure you know you can ascend SRS on just a hitch, its the descending that causes issues unless you take weight off. If you want to go the 3:1 method you can always install a SCAM once you reach your cinched off lanyard, this will allow you to descend and remote release you lanyard once your back on your climbing system.

Edit: Added headings to enhance readability

Intro
Bear with me, guys. I've read allot of stuff here over the past few months, but very little of it makes sense or 'sticks' until I get out and climb and experience the situations which highlight the strengths and advantages of various devices or techniques I've only read about. I'm learning...

Using Lanyard to advance, but no need for 3:1 on ascent
Upon considering this further, I think the most efficient thing to do, since the hitch only needs help on descent, is to toss the lanyard up and cinch it, then ascend SRS (1:1) to it. Once I am up to the choke and want to descend - or anywhere along the way - I can lanyard in, convert to a 3:1, leaving the cinch in place, descend on just my hitch, then remove the 3:1 and retrieve once I'm back down to starting point.

Upside to using 3:1 (or, rather, non-downside)
I also just realized that this wouldn't require any more rope than MRS would, and possibly a little less, since the three parallel legs don't extend from my starting point all the way up to the cinch; it just extends a few feet ahead (the distance is determined by how far I can advance the hitch/ascender holding the pulley - arm length, more or less).

Climb Line instead of Lanyard
I'm also starting to wonder if there is a way I could accomplish all of this with just the climb line while using a base anchor, by 1) converting it to a choked anchor when I reach the PSP (to hold the basal leg in place once I pull slack into the working end), 2) pull slack though my multiscender, 3) toss a bight with multiscender up as high as I can get it across a branch (and hope it comes back down to me), 4) clip back in to multiscender with it up across the newly acquired PSP, 5) pull enough tail down to attach foot ascender, and 6) continue on up.

The purpose of the conversion to a basal cinch is simply to keep that side from eating up all the slack I pull in the working side. I'm learning that rope is heavy, especially 85' of Vortex (1/2")!

I apologize if this is all very basic, and there are already a billion threads on it.

Lanyard vs. Climb Line
The reason I was thinking "lanyard lanyard lanyard" at the beginning of the thread was because the weight of the line along with the multiscender seems like it would be prohibitively high to toss upwards, whereas a lanyard would be lighter. If the branch was located 6' up, it also seems like I'm going to have to pull soon the order of 4x that much slack in the working end in order to get a bight up and then back down to me. Perhaps this is where a throw ball and throw line become useful? I could toss that up over the branch and then proceed as if setting a basal anchor from the ground?

Edit: Or, as @Burrapeg pointed out, maybe I could do all this using the tail. BUT, that would necessitate moving my multiscender. I'd prefer not to do this, as I'm using an HH2, which would be a little bit of a pain to have to untie, move, re-tie, etc., etc. (although, I am getting pretty good.

Check out my understanding of the scheme using the main climbline (i.e., probably just regular ol' advancing. durrr):

Edit: corrected with an actual choking configuration (but this way, it doesn't accomplish my original goal for configuring it this way, which was to hold the basal leg from slacking - will tie to harness!):

An expository sketch of the lanyard 3:1 scheme (RADS, SCAM-ish):

 

[Jehinten]

Edit: Added headings to enhance readability

Intro
Bear with me, guys. I've read allot of stuff here over the past few months, but very little of it makes sense or 'sticks' until I get out and climb and experience the situations which highlight the strengths and advantages of various devices or techniques I've only read about. I'm learning...

Using Lanyard to advance, but no need for 3:1 on ascent
Upon considering this further, I think the most efficient thing to do, since the hitch only needs help on descent, is to toss the lanyard up and cinch it, then ascend SRS (1:1) to it. Once I am up to the choke and want to descend - or anywhere along the way - I can lanyard in, convert to a 3:1, leaving the cinch in place, descend on just my hitch, then remove the 3:1 and retrieve once I'm back down to starting point.

Upside to using 3:1 (or, rather, non-downside)
I also just realized that this wouldn't require any more rope than MRS would, and possibly a little less, since the three parallel legs don't extend from my starting point all the way up to the cinch; it just extends a few feet ahead (the distance is determined by how far I can advance the hitch/ascender holding the pulley - arm length, more or less).

Climb Line instead of Lanyard
I'm also starting to wonder if there is a way I could accomplish all of this with just the climb line while using a base anchor, by 1) converting it to a choked anchor when I reach the PSP (to hold the basal leg in place once I pull slack into the working end), 2) pull slack though my multiscender, 3) toss a bight with multiscender up as high as I can get it across a branch (and hope it comes back down to me), 4) clip back in to multiscender with it up across the newly acquired PSP, 5) pull enough tail down to attach foot ascender, and 6) continue on up.

The purpose of the conversion to a basal cinch is simply to keep that side from eating up all the slack I pull in the working side. I'm learning that rope is heavy, especially 85' of Vortex (1/2")!

I apologize if this is all very basic, and there are already a billion threads on it.

Lanyard vs. Climb Line
The reason I was thinking "lanyard lanyard lanyard" at the beginning of the thread was because the weight of the line along with the multiscender seems like it would be prohibitively high to toss upwards, whereas a lanyard would be lighter. If the branch was located 6' up, it also seems like I'm going to have to pull soon the order of 4x that much slack in the working end in order to get a bight up and then back down to me. Perhaps this is where a throw ball and throw line become useful? I could toss that up over the branch and then proceed as if setting a basal anchor from the ground?

Edit: Or, as @Burrapeg pointed out, maybe I could do all this using the tail. BUT, that would necessitate moving my multiscender. I'd prefer not to do this, as I'm using an HH2, which would be a little bit of a pain to have to untie, move, re-tie, etc., etc. (although, I am getting pretty good.

Check out my understanding of the scheme using the main climbline (i.e., probably just regular ol' advancing. durrr):

An expository sketch of the lanyard 3:1 scheme (RADS, SCAM-ish):

throwing a bite with your multicender will definitely work, and you can repeat as many times as necessary until you get to where you want to be. Once you reach that point you can pull the rest of your tail up and create a new tie in point to descend from, as others have mentioned just be wary of running out of rope on your way back down.

 

[Jehinten]

Remember that using the SCAM to descend will eat up three times the amount of lanyard that was sent up to start with. I have done this a number of times when I sent up the end of the lanyard as high as I could reach with my SideKick pole which extends to 9 feet, and I was able to come back down OK with a SCAM setup since the lanyard was 25 feet long. But if it had been a shorter lanyard, this might not have lowered me back down far enough to the first TIP. Actually, though, I have not been coming back down on the lanyard for the most part; I have been carrying the original TIP further up when I go up higher on the lanyard, leapfrogging higher and higher by swapping back and forth. Also have used the tail of the main rope instead of a long lanyard for this same tactic. It can be slow progress with these cluttered conifers. Too many small limbs in the way to toss up the end of the line while, at the same time, not enough larger limbs close enough together to safely just ladder-climb up. Sometimes wish I had a longer SideKick pole!

This is true, but the OP is already installing a 3:1 so that he can descend on just a hitch, so the SCAM will not use any additional rope to the method already being used.

 

[SomethingWitty]

Edit: Added headings to enhance readability

Intro
Bear with me, guys. I've read allot of stuff here over the past few months, but very little of it makes sense or 'sticks' until I get out and climb and experience the situations which highlight the strengths and advantages of various devices or techniques I've only read about. I'm learning...

Using Lanyard to advance, but no need for 3:1 on ascent
Upon considering this further, I think the most efficient thing to do, since the hitch only needs help on descent, is to toss the lanyard up and cinch it, then ascend SRS (1:1) to it. Once I am up to the choke and want to descend - or anywhere along the way - I can lanyard in, convert to a 3:1, leaving the cinch in place, descend on just my hitch, then remove the 3:1 and retrieve once I'm back down to starting point.

Upside to using 3:1 (or, rather, non-downside)
I also just realized that this wouldn't require any more rope than MRS would, and possibly a little less, since the three parallel legs don't extend from my starting point all the way up to the cinch; it just extends a few feet ahead (the distance is determined by how far I can advance the hitch/ascender holding the pulley - arm length, more or less).

Climb Line instead of Lanyard
I'm also starting to wonder if there is a way I could accomplish all of this with just the climb line while using a base anchor, by 1) converting it to a choked anchor when I reach the PSP (to hold the basal leg in place once I pull slack into the working end), 2) pull slack though my multiscender, 3) toss a bight with multiscender up as high as I can get it across a branch (and hope it comes back down to me), 4) clip back in to multiscender with it up across the newly acquired PSP, 5) pull enough tail down to attach foot ascender, and 6) continue on up.

The purpose of the conversion to a basal cinch is simply to keep that side from eating up all the slack I pull in the working side. I'm learning that rope is heavy, especially 85' of Vortex (1/2")!

I apologize if this is all very basic, and there are already a billion threads on it.

Lanyard vs. Climb Line
The reason I was thinking "lanyard lanyard lanyard" at the beginning of the thread was because the weight of the line along with the multiscender seems like it would be prohibitively high to toss upwards, whereas a lanyard would be lighter. If the branch was located 6' up, it also seems like I'm going to have to pull soon the order of 4x that much slack in the working end in order to get a bight up and then back down to me. Perhaps this is where a throw ball and throw line become useful? I could toss that up over the branch and then proceed as if setting a basal anchor from the ground?

Edit: Or, as @Burrapeg pointed out, maybe I could do all this using the tail. BUT, that would necessitate moving my multiscender. I'd prefer not to do this, as I'm using an HH2, which would be a little bit of a pain to have to untie, move, re-tie, etc., etc. (although, I am getting pretty good.

Check out my understanding of the scheme using the main climbline (i.e., probably just regular ol' advancing. durrr):

An expository sketch of the lanyard 3:1 scheme (RADS, SCAM-ish):

I like your drawings. Everything you have said it correct, but if you want to use less line on descent, you have to pause to lower your moving rads anchor much like you do for ascent.

 

[LordFarkwad]

Cool - I will definitely try each approach to see how much fiddling each is relative to the other.

Edit: Is the knot/carabiner that I have drawn for the purpose of keeping the basal leg from pulling my working end slack out superfluous? It seems like it is, but I'm not exactly sure how to make the process of pulling slack into the working end less fiddly.

 

[LordFarkwad]

I like your drawings. Everything you have said it correct, but if you want to use less line on descent, you have to pause to lower your moving rads anchor much like you do for ascent.

I luhhh making dem diagrams.

 

[LordFarkwad]

Also, I think I'd definitely take the basal leg choke off before ascending up to the new PSP.

Edit: and, that being the case (that I'd remove it before ascending) there is no point in putting a holding knot on there that is capable of life support. Could probably get by with something simple like an overhand tied around the original basal anchor branch with a bight of line. Then pull it out before ascending.

Sound like the easiest thing to do?

 

[SomethingWitty]

Also, I think I'd definitely take the basal leg choke off before ascending up to the new PSP.

Edit: and, that being the case (that I'd remove it before ascending) there is no point in putting a holding knot on there that is capable of life support. Could probably get by with something simple like an overhand tied around the original basal anchor branch with a bight of line. Then pull it out before ascending.

Sound like the easiest thing to do?

Rock the cinch. I did it the other day to change the load direction on my TIP. It is a nifty trick and it eliminates falling to your death from going over a basal point. Just remember to untie it on the way down.

These pictures are the before (canopy access base tie), solution (butterfly and quickie to a lead opposite the direction of my work), and result (a reasonable direction to load this mature silver maple lead that had a funky union and lots of storm damage that I needed to get to).
It's not the same as scenario as yours, but the technique is solid. It's much quicker and easier than having your line untied and pulling it up to reset with a predirected canopy anchor.

 

[LordFarkwad]

Rock the cinch. I did it the other day to change the load direction on my TIP. It is a nifty trick and it eliminates falling to your death from going over a basal point. Just remember to untie it on the way down.

These pictures are the before (canopy access base tie), solution (butterfly and quickie to a lead opposite the direction of my work), and result (a reasonable direction to load this mature silver maple lead that had a funky union and lots of storm damage that I needed to get to).
It's not the same as scenario as yours, but the technique is solid. It's much quicker and easier than having your line untied and pulling it up to reset with a predirected canopy anchor.

Clever, man. So it was like a basal tie you ascended on, that you then effectively relocated the base TIP for once you were on the tree, so as to get a resultant force vector putting the stem you were being supported by in compression, right?

Did you just pull enough slack from your working end to run the line over to that other lead, which you then cinched, leaving your original base tie slacked off?

 

[SomethingWitty]

Clever, man. So it was like a basal tie you ascended on, that you then effectively relocated the base TIP for once you were on the tree, so as to get a resultant force vector putting the stem you were being supported by in compression, right?

Did you just pull enough slack from your working end to run the line over to that other lead, which you then cinched, leaving your original base tie slacked off?

Yep. Only enough to easily tie the knot. I didn't want any dangling loops to snag debris and give me a wad to fight.
I took those pictures for Chris Coates. He was giving me a hard time about canobasing because the forces are the same. My argument was a simple one. The directions are different.

 

[LordFarkwad]

Yep. Only enough to easily tie the knot. I didn't want any dangling loops to snag debris and give me a wad to fight.
I took those pictures for Chris Coates. He was giving me a hard time about canobasing because the forces are the same. My argument was a simple one. The directions are different.

If you open the angle up, isn't the force on your original PSP different, i.e., less? It looks like you took the angle from zero degrees to something greater, which, discounting the effects of friction, would decrease the ideal 2:1 ratio to something less.

No?

 

[moss]

Yep. Only enough to easily tie the knot. I didn't want any dangling loops to snag debris and give me a wad to fight.
I took those pictures for Chris Coates. He was giving me a hard time about canobasing because the forces are the same. My argument was a simple one. The directions are different.

Love the "Canobase"! Makes life easier getting out of the tree, clear your redirects and then a nice and easy retrieval from the ground.
-AJ

 

[SomethingWitty]

Love the "Canobase"! Makes life easier getting out of the tree, clear your redirects and then a nice and easy retrieval from the ground.
-AJ

I don't know who coined the term, but I picked it up from Bryan Brock.
It really is a viable technique.

 

[southsoundtree]

I don't get the cano-base reference. Please inform.

 

[SomethingWitty]

If you open the angle up, isn't the force on your original PSP different, i.e., less? It looks like you took the angle from zero degrees to something greater, which, discounting the effects of friction, would decrease the ideal 2:1 ratio to something less.

No?

I assume that the friction is similar enough to not make a huge difference, but that lead was bowed towards the center of the canopy and I didn't want to pull it over with my MA combined with a thirty foot lever.

@southsoundtree Just smooshing canopy and base together.