Name change

Better things...like?

Seriously, in the SRT vein, what do you suggest should be done?

There are lots of SRT things going on that aren't private or behind the scenes by any means. They just don't have a visible platform so these things are hard to see.

The way arbos use ropes is different than any other profession. We're now coming of-age in the industrial rope access arena. Because of that we're attracting attention within and without our own profession. There are some people inside who think that arbo SRT should look like industrial rope access...IE two-rope system. There is a LOT of energy being used by some very talented and dedicated volunteers to make sure that how we use rope clearly stays under our control.

What I've done in this thread is to use TB as a platform to launch and idea. This has never been a thread to be mistaken as a pulpit to try and lead from. By having the attention of a group of climbers it helps me understand how something looks to others.

So...list off some of the Better Things to Work On so we can move ahead.
 
PT,

At the SRT Summit there were a couple of times when another name/term came up that is a stumbling block.

I've asked this before on TB and other places too.

This will likely go into a new thread at some time but its a good place to bring it up now.

What do we call the tools that go up and down a rope without a changeover?

You used 'ropewrenching' as a verb/action but that can't be used as a noun/name for the action of moving up and down in trees.

Personally, I like transcender. but there are adolescents who can't get over their snickering so some other name might be used.

Mulitcender has come up. That would be 'my' second choice, no big deal.

We're at a place in arborcultural history now where it's important to be as clear as possible. To those of us who step into a saddle every day and go up the rope to make a living it sure doesn't matter a lot what the jargon is. Where it makes a difference is many steps above us. Ironing terms out in the same way that the practical on-rope issues have sorted out is important. This will continue to be a revolution from the boots in the field.

Keep up the good work.
 
SRT and SRTWP= Single Rope Technique Work Positioning. Why are we making it so difficult? Theres work positioning and there is simple ascent. Theres the distinction. Its like were trying to reinvent the wheel!

I can't wait to go to work tomorrow and simply climb a tree, Wait i mean i climb the rope installed in a tree. So i should probably change the name of tree climbing to. Rope climbing in a tree! For goodness sakes!
 
If anything, I'd like to see the terms be simpler. Ddrt and SRTWP are too long. Just make it:

SR = single rope
DR = doubled rope

It seems all the variations in techniques can be lumped under one of those.
 
I like the sound of this for tree work, S.O.D.R.T.b.M.A.H.WP.a.w.U.S.A.E (single or double rope technique, but may also have work positioning as well unless spikes are involved) I think it has a nice ring to it. If only I can add bacon to it somehow....... any thoughts?
 
You're right about the HH, RW, Unicender requiring a product category name.
Wesspur calls them "hybrid" devices.

To digress, everyone calls the animal we get beef from generically a cow, and the birds we eat are chickens. But cows are female bovines and chicks are juvenile fowl. Really beef on the hoof should be called domestic cattle and birds on the table are domestic fowl. But names are peculiar and not always full of meaning.

Before there were ascenders and descenders, there were just friction knots. Somebody, a manufacturer, no doubt coined the term ascender for a one-way grab, and so it went.

So you could call the tools that go both ways, blodgets, or any other nonsense word and after awhile that could stick.

I would go for something a little more technical: managed friction amplifier, MFA, or climbing grab (maybe just "grab").

The Hitch Hiker MFA. The Hitch Hiker Grab. How does it sound?
 
mechanical ascenders I believe were first referred to as Jumars (coming from one of the first and most popular hand ascender being named Jumar by the company)....... but now I am just nit picking, sorry.... as you were.
 
I agree with the argument that srt is not a very descriptive bit of nomenclature, and think personally that srwp is a bit better. I also think transcender or multiscender are good descriptions of the action those tools perform. And should be added to the lexicon.

However, I also feel that it is too late to get rid of srt as a catch all. And that people in different regions don't even call trees by the same names. There is never going to be one set of terms that everybody understands every time they are used. We are probably just going to keep having to go into specifics when describing our climbing system to other climbers.

I foresee this discussion going nowhere productive. Unfortunately. Are we going to publish a dictionary of terminology and hand it out to all the tree climbers? We can only try to be as clear as possible when speaking to each other, and not jump down one another's throats for using a term in a way that we don't personally see as effective.

Language will always be confusing to someone.
 
I think exact terms for the different rope climbing techniques would be great!
Unfortunately the ones mentioned so far dont attract to me at all...
In the German language (my mother tongue, I am from Austria) its even worse!
 
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