Name change

Yeah it is hard right now when the boss tells me that all my fancy gear is making the job more dangerous than when he did it with nothing but a rope and ladder.

I just feel that changing the word in an acronym without changing the acronym is a rather small difference. I think more focus should be given to separating a SRT ascent system from a SRT work positioning system from an SRT descnet system. When one says "I use an SRT system." we have a very broad statement.

Maybe rather than changing the one word we need to define SRT more specifically and give other definitions their own distinct terms to avoid the confusion.

Get Tony in hear, he gave a god talk on this.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Get Tony in hear, he gave a <font color="blue">god </font> talk on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sure hope that's a typo
tongue.gif
grin.gif






I don't agree.

If we sub-divide tree climbing it will lead to a mess. There was overwhelming support at the TCIA Summit to keep all of tree climbing as one unit. If not, what's going to happen if some new method comes out? More problems. This is going to be addressed during the current Z133 revision. Right now, it seems like all parts of tree climbing will be addressed.

In the end...this is a minor issue. Tomato/tomato...is it a fruit or a vegetable? What difference does it make?
 
[ QUOTE ]

As eloquent and thoughtfully presented post as I have come to expect from you, Eric.

But if you could clarify. Do you recommend leaving all the current acronyms and their meanings as they are and just work around any incongruities, or to go ahead and make some changes, knowing that the vast majority will be able to understand the nuances?

No matter what we do, it will not stop misuse or totally negate the need for further explanation at times.

David

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll cite you for inspiration on any hour of any day, David.

I'm not certain if I can clarify, when I feel that we might just need to be a bit more thorough with or language and descriptions when we discuss, teach, and instruct.

In my mind, I envision a flow chart:
Tree Climbing
And within that we have Dynamic Systems and Static Systems
Within Dynamic Systems, we have Dynamic Overhead Belay/DdRT Work Positioning, etc...
Within Static Systems, we have Ascent Only, Descent Only, and Work Positioning.

We're not far off the mark right now, and if we can begin to speak about our systems in regard to their configuration AND their properties, we can bypass a few speed bumps along the way.

I might add that many folks may appropriately presume that a climber is in a Static Overhead System if that climber says "I climb on a Rope Wrench". In that case, and in the pseudo-flow-chart above, we can easily clarify, if needed, with known and understood terminology. I feel that Single Rope Technique is fine. It sits nicely in contrast to Doubled Rope Technique, and perhaps with the thoughtful and intentional use of our language to clarify when needed, we can prevent going back to the drawing board.
 
Tom, my feeling is that if you want to change the name of the forum, you may want to change it to Single Rope Work Positioning. Otherwise, Single Rope Technique feels just fine. In the post I made in response to David, I hope you'll see my point. If a new climbing technique comes along, we simply need to determine where it fits in the flow chart...under the over all umbrella of TREE CLIMBING.
 
I think Tree Care is due for a mess to separate the climbers who understand and employ the safest and most efficient rope work and those who thrown the ol' spikes and prune a live tree. The standards are to few and to little and they all seem to be open for interpretation. A climber should be trained and certified, not just any moron who buys a saddle and a rope.

I've had enough of being paid the same as other climbers at my company when I get the biggest and hardest jobs; because I have taken the time to learn advanced systems. We are stuck under a glass ceiling, certification is the only way to make a change.

Industrial access has SPRAT and IRATA why is there nothing for Tree work?

You are changing the name of something that is entirely optional to have any knowledge about. The gray area is that people just plain don't know, specifically climbers because they are the ones who count.
 
[ QUOTE ]
In my mind, I envision a flow chart:
Tree Climbing
And within that we have Dynamic Systems and Static Systems
Within Dynamic Systems, we have Dynamic Overhead Belay/DdRT Work Positioning, etc...
Within Static Systems, we have Ascent Only, Descent Only, and Work Positioning.

[/ QUOTE ]

It makes sense, I like it. Just make it clear that both the static and dynamic systems are configured from one rope. It is amazing how this simple truth gets lost.

David
 
It's a good point, David. So, can we imagine that the word "technique" would refer to the system's configuration? If that's the case, we're good, since DdRT refers to a doubled line configuration, and SRT refers to a single line configuration...both using one rope.
 
George, I can certainly understand your frustration...I just want to clarify that my intent would be to get every climber up to speed with our industry's language, not to divide us into separate camps. We're all brothers.

It's kind of like 99% of the bands I was ever in through high school. Most of our practice time was wasted due to the lack of the ability to communicate on the same level. You want to say..."OK, take it again from the second bar of the first verse...1,2,3 4...", and instead, 5 minutes later everyone in the room has finally finished defining what they mean by "halfway through the second part". Language enhances clarity. It's good stuff! ;)
 
You guys/girls are not window cleaners. It is "single rope technique" always has been. Why even bother making a change that the rest of the world would shake their head at?
 
Fairfield,

The rest of the arbo world has shaken their heads at me for a long time while I was saying 'SRT is the future of tree climbing'. Do you think this has come true after saying it for 20 years?

Changing names, inventing words and speaking the same language makes it easier to move forward. This doesn't make a bit of a difference to a lot of people, that's understandable. There's no governing body for the language either. Just common usage. My guess is that this will all settle in within a few years. Just like when 'DdRT' was formed.
 
[ QUOTE ]
ok...... I would think your time would be better spent on something else.

[/ QUOTE ]

grin.gif


I get by on little sleep! this doesn't take much time anyway. Certainly much less than watching a football game a week.
 
I still think the SRAWP or SRAAWP is a perfect description of an ascent/work positioning system in our changing culture. There IS an obvious difference between an ascent only system and an ascent/work positioning system. As these techniques develop, they deserve their own categorization. Our work is constantly evolving, as should we... In our descriptors and our techniques.

S-single/static
R-rope
A-access
W-work
P-positioning

S-single/static
R-rope
A-access
A-and
W-work
P-positioning
 
SRT is tried and true for SRT. When I think of SRT, I think of the way I was taught SRT. Two ascenders and one static climbing line. You get to a place where you can install your "work positioning line"... and go from there. There has been HUGE advances in gear and technique since SRT. There are an AMAZING amount of professionals using SRAWP to complete jobs daily across the country. Some EXCLUSIVELY use a rope wrench setup on jobs. I think that calls for a delineation between SRT and whatever you want to call it. It just makes it easier to understand what a coworker/friend/peer is talking about in the work plan. I am not saying that the heading for the forum should be different... call it SRT... who cares. But when addressing a job that is rope wrenched from the ground until the job is finished... call it something more appropriate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom