Hitch Hiker in Comps

[ QUOTE ]
Let's face it, when it comes to advancements, innovations, or improvements, we on this forum are the guinea pigs of the industry. We hear about it first, we buy things the minute they hit the shelves (or sooner), and then we expect the rest of the industry to be on board? The overwhelming majority of TCC's are ISA sanctioned, they have a vested interest in making sure that the systems allowed in THEIR comps are tried and true over time. After all it is their name and insurance on the line. I love the fact that we as a community are pushing techniques further and and further but, I also am willing to recognize that the internet has allowed for a boom in the sharing of ideas which in my opinion should be absorbed slowly. We as a community are the ones who say "slow and low" aren't we.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally hear what you're saying, Banjo, and I agree...until I think about how many people have (and probably will) get hurt, or worse, while using tried and true systems.

You're right, though, and when I think think of the RW, I do so with a great deal of experience, but when I sit back and think about how incredibly big the tree worker industry/rec. climbing world is, I could hazard a guess that MAYBE 25% of those involved MIGHT know what a rope wrench is.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Don't focus just on the RW...SRT isn't allowed, no matter what tool, hitch or configuration.

[/ QUOTE ]

SRT access is allowed and DbRT(?) is allowed off of that i.e. secret weapons and floating false crotches. SRT work positioning is not totally forbidden, it's just limited to an impractical point. The inconsistencies are glaring but I kind of get both sides of the argument. There must be other things that were resisted at first but eventually were allowed, does anyone know of any?
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't focus just on the RW...SRT isn't allowed, no matter what tool, hitch or configuration.

[/ QUOTE ]

SRT access is allowed and DbRT(?) is allowed off of that i.e. secret weapons and floating false crotches. SRT work positioning is not totally forbidden, it's just limited to an impractical point. The inconsistencies are glaring but I kind of get both sides of the argument. There must be other things that were resisted at first but eventually were allowed, does anyone know of any?

[/ QUOTE ]

there was a big stink over the blake's hitch, as well as the VT and MT. I think the fate revolver or the knog robot, conterra scarab methods of climbing should be allowed.
 
[ QUOTE ]
All petzl had to do was write ISA a letter staying that SRT on the rig was acceptable without a backup.

[/ QUOTE ]

WOW, really? If this is true (and I’m not saying that it is not), it just goes to show you how Big Money Corporations have such a large say in getting things approved and passed…such a shame.

All this hassle over the last few years in regards to SRT in comps has really turned me off on the ITCC events I’m sorry to say.
 
[ QUOTE ]
All petzl had to do was write ISA a letter staying that SRT on the rig was acceptable without a backup.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is all the more interesting considering that the only rating I could find on this piece is 14 kN and considering the the piece is used as life support and comes with a quick release......

Seems to me that the Rig breaks more than one of the more important rules for allowing equipment in TCC's...
 
Luckily you live in Ohio. The 2011 winner used a ropewrench. It was used in 2012 in wor climb ariel rescue and The master. The fate revolver was used in 2010 . Ohio has a pretty good chapter. It's the oldest chapter as well.
 
The tricky part is the fact that there are no standards to test these devices too. That is the big conundrum. For example, you will not see a CE figure eight. There are no recognized standards for figure eights. There is a proposed standard but no manufacturer yet tests things to proposed standards. I do believe figure eights are allowed however in tree comps. It's a full mess I believe. It should be remembered that the itcc is an athletic event and not meant to represent innovation or different work practices. It is like bike racing which has very strict rules regarding bike construction. This helps decide who is the most fit, flexible, fastest climber.
 
"This helps decide who is the most fit, flexible, fastest climber. "

Well thats me, we dont need a competition to determine that!

ONLY KIDDING! I am the best looking though, seriously.
 
[ QUOTE ]
It should be remembered that the itcc is an athletic event and not meant to represent innovation or different work practices. It is like bike racing which has very strict rules regarding bike construction. This helps decide who is the most fit, flexible, fastest climber.

[/ QUOTE ]

An excellent point, Kevin. One that is often forgotten or lost in the hullabaloo. Although my experience with ITCC has shown me not a "strictness" per say, but more of a tendency to be overly cautious because it is just an "athletic even" as you so aptly described.

If you read closely, then lookup the Petzl tests on the Rig/I'd you can extrapolate what was reviewed. The ITCC tech committee also listed them in the draft document that was floating around for review. A through description of uses, rope diameters, proper set up is always helpful as well for any new equipment/technique.

Tony
 
Perhaps. I wil have to do some digging. It was posted on here in this forum I believe so perhaps a search will turn it up before I do.

I shall look among my files. Wish me luck!


Tony
 
ISC is now responsible for testing the RW, but when I was responsible I figured the figure eight would be a good model to test too. Come to find that there only exists proposed standards which have not been adopted and are contentious. It seems like there is a lot of battle amongst the regulators. When I presented this problem to the itcc it was suggested that I write the standard myself which is what was done to make the treemagineers CE climb as there were also no standards regarding hitches. They wrote the standard then tested their system that they wrote. That kind of defeats the point of standards if you ask me. . It is my understanding that you can no longer certify any system that needs to be tied and untied such as CE climb. That doesn't mean that the CE climb is not CE, but there will be no more CE systems involving a hitch. Both the rw and the HH system cannot ever be CE. A lot of folks were pissed that the treemagineers were able to get their hitch based systems certified and they made an proclamation that it wouldn't happen again. The whole thing is much less organized and meaningful especially for our industry than people would like. It's very murky, subjective and political waters you start wading into. The sad thing is that for Arboriculture, the closest thing we have to meaningful standards is the itcc rule book.. Which is ridiculous.
 
I am looking to Tony.

Kevin, everything you describes above sounds like garbage if you ask me!

Luck for us we live in good ol America so CE doesnt mean much to me.
 
No joy in finding the draft. My copy is deleted and the document has been removed form ISA's web site since the review period ended.

Tony
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It should be remembered that the itcc is an athletic event and not meant to represent innovation or different work practices. It is like bike racing which has very strict rules regarding bike construction. This helps decide who is the most fit, flexible, fastest climber.

[/ QUOTE ]

An excellent point, Kevin. One that is often forgotten or lost in the hullabaloo. Although my experience with ITCC has shown me not a "strictness" per say, but more of a tendency to be overly cautious because it is just an "athletic even" as you so aptly described.

Tony

[/ QUOTE ]

Kevin and Tony, I hear what you guys are saying on this one, but this was never the way that it was supposed to be.

The original ISA Jamboree, which Don Blair and others helped to get started decades ago, was supposed to represent a climber’s innovation and willingness to present new work practices.

Somewhere along the line, when the Jamboree morphed into the ITCC, the “spirit” of the events was lost.

Sad if you ask me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom