Backups in SRT

Did you fix it? Was there something in the mechanism? Was the ascender checked on the ground before starting up the rope? Do you clip a biner through the top hole to capture the rope?


A 'low and slow' inspection should be done before every climb.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I think when people attack the person instead of the issue, you should expect some heat in a thread.

I believe there's been some inappropriate personal accusations made instead of debating the issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll be blunt, and it is not meant to be demeaning:

Do you climb professionally (for a company) as a production climber? Or are you a recreational climber?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Most people are visual learners. This is part of our cave dwelling survival mechanism that is deeply embedded in our makeup.

[/ QUOTE ]

is this a gieco commercial??

[ QUOTE ]
Do you climb professionally (for a company) as a production climber?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure about him but I do smart a$$ and I belive your back up is all bollshot. Do I do it? Yes I do!! (only cuase if I fall out and I didn't have that stupid cord on there my family would lose out on the insurance money), but I do it under the cender not above it. It's more productive under, saves time, and effort.

[ QUOTE ]
I've had mechanical ascender fail multiple times. Luckily I had a back up hitch. Even my grigri and yes, even the god of all ascenders, the uniscender, has slipped before.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what happens when you learn to climb from comic books. Thank you Sherrill and North America Training for putting more arseholes in this feild than Tim the tool man had mishaps. Had you ever had some real formal training, you'd had missed out on these what I like to term (retard moments).

By and by whats experienced to you? 3 years? 5 years? 7 years? I belive there is some on this site with more than the 7 that have had life changing mishaps? Are they the type you say should teach the inexperienced??
 
[ QUOTE ]
I belive your back up is all bollshot. Do I do it? Yes I do!! (only cuase if I fall out and I didn't have that stupid cord on there my family would lose out on the insurance money), but I do it under the cender not above it. I

[/ QUOTE ]

If, as Tom says, there's no "rules" concerning backups on ascenders, then why would your family be deprived of any insurance settlement as a result of your falling?
 
[ QUOTE ]
If, as Tom says, there's no "rules" concerning backups on ascenders, then why would your family be deprived of any insurance settlement as a result of your falling?

[/ QUOTE ]

Cause some dip shot came up with this rule, for tards that can't seem to use gear in a proper way.

[ QUOTE ]
ITCC Rule Book (2009) page 12. Rule 2.2.29:

"A contestant who utilizes mechanical ascenders, as a part of a static climbing system, must also include a system of backup to protect against an ascender malfunction....."

[/ QUOTE ]

Insurance companies will find any loop hole not to pay, I'll not cheat my family, cause a stupid inconvenience, that needs to be done cause Bob's tree service fell out on a fence from miss using his Kong cender. Just what was that tards name we should all know it he's famous now, for being a dip shot. Wonder what the new rule for dropping trees will be?? God knows we don't want it on us right?
 
My kong duel ascender failed when using it for srt. My uni needs to be "dressed" numerous times while ascending. I've switched over to the ol lanyard around the back over the shoulder slam dunk trick and so far so good, but it used to slip while I was footlocking srt and I used a teather around the back of my neck. I'm pretty sure teather angled the uni funny which made it not lock in at times.

I did learn to climb via comicbook. The main characters where "happ hazard" and ed "the animal" heidel. Happ was always getting into trouble but luckily "the animal" would swoop in, reaking of PBR and ether, and save the day. DON'T BRIDGE THE GAP HAPP!
 
Tom, good food for thought on the diff between a backup and a redundancy. I think at this point, for me, they're pretty much the same thing. That is, if the first one fails, the second one catches you.

Putting a biner through the ascender hole doesn't seem like a backup to me. It just makes that attachment point better, like adding a wrap to a hitch that's slipping a little bit.

Two points of attachment on one rope are redundant, one backs up the other. Two completely separate rope systems are redundant, for sure, but what tree guy does that in everyday climbing? Unless there is some unusual circumstance.

As for tying slip knots under you every 10 feet, well, you got me on that one. I wouldn't call that redundant, but it's definitely a backup.
 
[ QUOTE ]
...
What ropes? for many years arbos were using ascenders on half inch ropes. Once Fly hit the market there was no excuse for arbos to not use the right rope with mechanicals. But...even to this day I see people using them with large ropes and with the knowledge that it is wrong, but accepted. What???

[/ QUOTE ]

Why should it be all wrong using Ascenders on 12mm or even 13mm Ropes? Why just using 11mm? Or is it about Rope Constuction also...
Petzl Ascension is recommended (and certified I think) for 8mm to 13mm Ropes f.e., and there is definitly a safety gain with using thicker Ropes, especially with toothed Ascenders, dont you think so?

Please explain the "Diameter thing", would be great !
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If, as Tom says, there's no "rules" concerning backups on ascenders, then why would your family be deprived of any insurance settlement as a result of your falling?

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ITCC Rule Book (2009) page 12. Rule 2.2.29:

"A contestant who utilizes mechanical ascenders, as a part of a static climbing system, must also include a system of backup to protect against an ascender malfunction....."

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Tom noted though, that TCCs are not work. Those rules don't apply to production workers. There are NO GUIDELINES for safe use of ascenders by production climbers. The Z133 does not speak to this issue. Pretty gapping hole if you ask me. Makes me wonder about ANSI's real role in the issue.

Further more, whats the point of installing a hitch "backup" below the ascender?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Those rules don't apply to production workers

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, but, lawers can twist anything around in their favor. When they find this rule during a trail it will be hard to defend against. By being in the ITCC big word is the first thing International, second and third words kills ya Tree Climbing, last word is a nail in the coffin Championship. Knid of means this is a stardard practice amongst any professional tree climber. At this point it really does not have to be in the ansi or the Z. Lawyer will say well he was not a trained pro thats why he fell no money for you. Its a sad story, but it happens all the time.

[ QUOTE ]
Further more, whats the point of installing a hitch "backup" below the ascender?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's attached to my bridge, it moves up the rope easy as I footlock, does the samething as being above but sets better when weighted, Stiff ropes on top of a cender have been know not to grab at all, I'm already to easily switch to the fate system for decent.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Those rules don't apply to production workers

[/ QUOTE ]
Kind of means this is a stardard practice amongst any professional tree climber.

[/ QUOTE ]

So there is an implied rule that speaks to production workers since the Z133 is deficient when it comes to advanced techniques? What do you say about this, Tom?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Further more, whats the point of installing a hitch "backup" below the ascender?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's attached to my bridge, it moves up the rope easy as I footlock, does the samething as being above but sets better when weighted, Stiff ropes on top of a cender have been know not to grab at all, I'm already to easily switch to the fate system for decent.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you mean now. Although I'm somewhat dubious as to the efficacy of this setup, I know Treebing climbs like this and I trust him to be a safe and thoughful climber.
 
There is a misunderstanding about what the Z133's purpose is in the workplace.

The way to understand is that it comes down to two words:

Descriptive
Prescriptive

An example would be the easiest way to get an understanding.

I don't have my copy of the Z to cut and paste so I'll just describe the example.

A stopper knot is required in the end of the climbing line. That is a 'description' and fills the format for the Z.

At one time the Z listed three or four knots that could be used. This is a 'soft' prescription because it gives the impression that the listed knots have some preference. There may be other knots that work better in some circumstance. Leaving the interpretation of which knot to use to the worker/company shifts the regulation back to descriptive.

So, in the current discussion, it is descriptive to say that a climber shall be secured to a rope to prevent a fall. Solve the problem in the best way. If there was anymore discussion about systems or equipment to use it becomes prescriptive and open to complicated interpretation.

The Z is a powerful tool and has built-in flexibilty to meet the changing developments in our profession.

All through this discussion everyone is in agreement on the description but not the prescription.
 
What Tom is saying about redundancy makes perfect sense in my opinion and negates the need for a prussik backup. I have spent thousands of hours on ascenders on rock while putting up new routes and doing bolt replacment at Smith Rock. I also have put many thousands of feet of rope through my ascending system at work as a production climber on the huge trees in the Portland area where a 100' ascent isn't abnormal. At work I have had the top ascender of my system slip when debris got in the cam. But because my system is redundant (I use a microcender under the handled ascender that has its own carabiner attachment point to my harness) there is little risk even if the upper point comes completely off.

Using a handled ascender without a backup is risky in my opinion and shouldn't be done. Tom is not advocating that and is not saying that he is doing that. But throwing a prussik over it and thinking that it is a failsafe backup because that is a technology that arborists are comfortable with doesn't make much sense to me. Do something because it is proven through scientific testing. We are following in the footsteps of many recreational disciplines and industrial user groups with the use of rope access equipment. I want what I do and am required to do at work to be driven by fact and good decision making not by fear and misunderstanding.
 
Use of the term "redundancy" in this way rather than "backup" is somewhat deceptive. In my mind, using two ascenders, each with independent attachment to the harness, is a backup. One ascender backs up the other. Personally, I think reserving the term redundant for reference to the use of a second rope for the climbers safety "backup" is more descriptive.

Maybe thats just me...
 
KS...as Shigo admonished us:

Define your terms

When I use a word in a particular way I share my definition if there might be confusion. In rope access redundancy means something different. Backup, to me, means something different too so I shared my definition.

It gets awkward to say the least to correct a lay person who refers to trees healing when we would use the sealing. It's not necessary to make the corrections for them. In this discussion, choose the term that works for you and use it. All that I've been trying to do is share the conceptual basis for my vision of SRT. The terms may take a generation or two to settle in.
 
I believe Treebing brought this up earlier, but I wanted to see if I could get some opinions on it. Ascending SRT with a hitch tied at your waist, using a bungee or lanyard over the shoulder to tend the hitch, then use an ascender above the hitch with no tether. In this scenario the ascender works only as a rope grab, and if it does slip only the weight of the ascender will be pushing on the hitch. This seems like it would be safe to me. It is only one point of attachment but it is the same as the Fate system and nobody is questioning the safety of that system. Seems like the only issue here is could the ascender really push the hitch? With this setup the only way I could see that happening is if the ascender slipped and the climber froze up and held the ascender down on the hitch.

As I posted before, I have been backing up with a hitch above my ascender, but I am starting to question it a little bit now. This seems like a good system to me. What do you think?
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please explain the "Diameter thing", would be great !

[/ QUOTE ]

Topic for another thread...

[/ QUOTE ]

...that already exists (where ?) or that would have to be opened ? If so it would be greatly appreciated if you do so I am sure, not only by but by many readers on the Buzz !
 
I will try to video me slamming my acent tree down as hard as I can on to my hitch while i'm sitting on the hitch. I think the only real way to answer that qestion is experiment with every possible occurence. I have not been able to knock myself out of the tree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom