Should have been butt tied...

Well said Tom, this is what annoys me on TB. A question is asked and someone thinks the question is shite, so brushes the dude off. WTF is that all about, answer the damn question or get the frig out of Dodge. The only way to learn is to ask, ignorance is definitely not bliss. People who think someone's question sucks and feels it is below them to answer may possibly ask themselves why they feel that way. A good self examination might reveal some hidden insecurities. Just saying.....

PS This is a statement in general, directed at no one in particular as that would not be fair. But if the cap fits just wear it and LEARN FROM IT. We are never to old to learn from others whom we even feel are less knowledgeable than ourselves just some things to ponder.
smile.gif
 
OK here it is..

When we tie of a piece, it is often the case on upright limbs and leads that the shortest distance between the overhead anchor and tie off point, leaves the knot on the bottom side of the lead/limb. SO that seems like the best place to tie off a limb, as y9ou would think that the shorter the rope, the less shock loading.. however, as the piece breaks free from the cut, the knot is going to flip around to the top of the limb, causing the piece to flip as well.. It looks a lot smoother when you swing the knot around to the high side of the limb before you make the cut... IMO even though a piece can twist and jerk around pretty fast, it doesn't create a lot more shock load in most situations, however we should be aware of the of the effect and be able to fully anticipate the exact movement of the limb.

In the first video, it was a bad set up from the get go, and this was the least of his problems, AND the stub would not have swung around and got his left foot without the above affect..
 
[ QUOTE ]

Do YOU want me to explain it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not for me...I didn't ask you to explain what you meant. When Marv taught me to rig wayyyyyyyyyy back in the '70's he told me about the fine points too. He sure had shortcomings as an 'arborist' but he was a good teacher. If I ever had a question he would give me an answer not an attitude. Good teacher do that.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Well said Tom, this is what annoys me on TB. A question is asked and someone thinks the question is shite, so brushes the dude off. WTF is that all about, answer the damn question or get the frig out of Dodge. The only way to learn is to ask, ignorance is definitely not bliss. People who think someone's question sucks and feels it is below them to answer may possibly ask themselves why they feel that way. A good self examination might reveal some hidden insecurities. Just saying.....

PS This is a statement in general, directed at no one in particular as that would not be fair. But if the cap fits just wear it and LEARN FROM IT. We are never to old to learn from others whom we even feel are less knowledgeable than ourselves just some things to ponder.
smile.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

IMO the insecurities are more in the asking.. a lot of people have questions but don't feel safe asking them, so they say vague things rather than ask a clear question. I really wasn't sure what he was asking.. Then of course there is the history of a lot of azzholes asking questions with no other intention than to bait a flame war..

And I feel no obligation to answer any questions.. If you're a decent guy and ask respectfully, I AM happy to share my thoughts and experiences.

And of course it gets tiring answering the same old questions repeatedly, time after time.. Just the way it is..
 
[ QUOTE ]

And I feel no obligation to answer any questions.. If you're a decent guy and ask respectfully, I AM happy to share my thoughts and experiences.

And of course it gets tiring answering the same old questions repeatedly, time after time.. Just the way it is..

[/ QUOTE ]


Hmmm...thanks for coming down out of your Ivory Tower and answering a legitimate question that was asked politely and respectfully.

I have to wonder how some of the great teachers that we all have known dealt with people asking basic, simple questions over and over. The teachers that I respect have all done that.

What is that saying...hmmm...There's no such thing as a dumb question. Good teachers will take the time to answer them all. Especially when they allude to the answer. It then becomes a responsibility to answer...if one is really claiming to be a teacher.
 
Daniel, maybe this has already been asked and answered but I'm curious about the face cut in your avatar. It looks to be very shallow in depth but with a huge open face. Seems like a lot of extra unnecessary cutting. Was there a specific purpose in mind? Thanks in advance.
 
I've been meaning to change that.. At the time I wanted to show a big open face notch, as most were still using the traditional face back in '06... I over did it huh? I would never cut a face like that today, unless it was absolutely required by conditions..
 
I had a short section of the screen blacking out around 15 seconds. I guess it might have been from changing from small screen to full screen. I looked at it a bit more closely, second by second on Pause. Just plain all around bad.


What I saw was that the climber was negative blocking down the truck through a natural crotch, not having an overhead rigging point (work piece COG relative to the natural crotch). It didn't have the typical twist at the crotch (loose half hitch for lack of a better way to say it). Don't know if this would have reduced the twist around the stem a little or not. He was tied above the center of gravity, rather than below it, which typically means that there is more shock loading.

Seems like a poor climbing with a poor roper locking up the rope. The climber got bit presumably because of concern over a fence or other ground obsatacles and too much friction from trunk wrapping.

Regarding the knot placement discussion, I don't quite understand about why someone would put the knot on the underside of the piece with a true overhead tie-in point. It would lengthen the fall before the roper could get control over the falling piece, and twist it around, as Daniel was saying.

Daniel, I don't understand what you mean about it being intuitive, though poor practice, for some to put the cinch point of the rope on the underside of the work when overhead rigging. I may not have understood what you meant that some people erroneously do this. This may be poor practice that you have observed other people of doing. I can't understand why someone would do such a thing. Just doesn't make sense to me, and I never considered doing something like that. I've gathered from your previous posts that in your area there are a lot of poor 'techniques' being used by others. I don't see many other people working in my area. A lot of work being done is out of sight from the road, and I just typically will occasionally cross paths with other tree services on the road, but very, very rarely in a neighborhood when/ where they are working.

Thanks for explaining what you meant more clearly.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Run that piece to the effing ground! I don't care how many mistakes the climber made. That piece should have been ten feet below him before it came around the tree. FAIL

[/ QUOTE ]

It all counts! Nobody has made a point about who to blame here. Not running the rope was the single most obvious error but this is an excellent illustration that successful conclusions to rigging adventures involves at least two people, both of whom must execute their tasks properly. The groundsman has to know what he is doing too. Groundsmen should be considered a skilled trade - with training and proper instruction, which they sometimes don't get. Climbers forget to tell groundies stuff or are too arrogant to bother in some cases.

And I agree with Daniel that a climber shouldn't rely solely on a piece moving properly from a death blow situation to a safe distance to avoid death or worse because so many things could go wrong. Stupid to rely on that alone.

This is a good vid to show new groundsmen. And climbers.
 
I agree with team work, mutual respect but I'd look beyond the letting it run solution to the top rope vid. As you know friction devices do what they do with limitations on how precise they grab during the shock load. I think the ground guy had the right amount of wraps and was trying to let it run but the angles involved spun it around. A bit of resistance from the rigging and the heavier butt got it doing the whip.
 
Better it crush a fence or shed then a body. Ground guys should be far enough away so it's not even an issue and the safety of the climber should be number one. I say inexperienced ground crew or they were just high. Some people just don't get the "let it run" thing and I know this for a fact. Some people learn fast, some people learn, and some just don't. What I like to do is foresee what is goin to happen before it happens. This could maybe of helped in this situation.
 
[ QUOTE ]
And I agree with Daniel that a climber shouldn't rely solely on a piece moving properly from a death blow situation to a safe distance to avoid death or worse because so many things could go wrong. Stupid to rely on that alone.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's not quite it Frax.. IN almost all situations a climber can keep himself out of harms way.. It's only in the rarest of situations that a climber must rely on the ground man's actions.. So generally if you are putting yourself in a situation where you need to have a piece run for your safety, your rigging skills are in need of some serious improvement..
 
Here I'm agreeing with Daniel in this case. Me as a climber TAKE NO CHANCES depending on my ground man to save my AZZ. I am looking out for them for sure but by all means I am rigging nothing that is going to put me in a compromising position. If the rigging looks dodgy or my gut tells me this is touch and go, I am changing my program. No way I am depending of my ground staff to correct my mistake in my rigging. However that said my groundies KNOW how to let it run when tell them to. So don't be lashing at me saying my groundies need to be better trained because they have proven themselves time and time again. I LOVE to dump sizable pieces when it makes good safe sense.
 
Keep tops or large wood in line with your spare. No side travel or spin around trunk. Those with experience have done the gin point to a 2nd or 3rd leader. The side sway\whip effect can be devastating. Flip you around like the rag doll. Or log come around to see you as shown. Yes, butt tie would keep log in line. Or even second tag line for more control on large pieces..
 
It doesn't necessarily have to be but tied proper. it could have been tied a foot or two below the stub and made it slightly tip heavy and still keep shock load to a minimum.. Then it wouldn't have taken much run or even just the stretch in the rope to get it past him, if he was positioned properly.
 
another personal rule, when I do need the groundie to run a piece for my safety, is to shut all saws, chippers, blowers etc off, and make sure the ground man repeats back to me the instructions.. Otherwise a hand signal from the climber and a thumbs up or head nod, in response, from the groundie and we're good to go..
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And I agree with Daniel that a climber shouldn't rely solely on a piece moving properly from a death blow situation to a safe distance to avoid death or worse because so many things could go wrong. Stupid to rely on that alone.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's not quite it Frax.. IN almost all situations a climber can keep himself out of harms way.. It's only in the rarest of situations that a climber must rely on the ground man's actions.. So generally if you are putting yourself in a situation where you need to have a piece run for your safety, your rigging skills are in need of some serious improvement..

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we are agreeing, are we not??? I think we just said the same thing differently.

And I'm not lashing groundies either. I have no idea why that piece was not run. I've had things fail to run as planned for a number of reasons. My point was that both sides of the rope require skilled operators AND a good rigging plan. If you have good groundies and the communication is good, then you are running a great operation.
 
I was kidding , could care less about this post( dude in the video was an ahole) . Daniel gets my vote(super teacher) . Seriously , I learned more about you people , especially Daniel( phone booth), than I did about the guy who got hit . Keep teaching , keep learning , but most important , stay alive . I drank a gallon of wine the other night ( this drove me nutz), before my friend pulled the plug on his Mom , and that sucked ( than I read this ,oh boy ).If there is Anything you really learned on that video , than you really are a hungry person . Keep \this post going and I'll drink two gallons of wine after the funeral and really let you know how I feel . Funeral is Saturday , morning , shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh . Great video to show newbies. perfect . LEt's make a " newbie video " yay ! Search Youtube and .... forget it , like going through dirty laundry , see you saturday night . around mid tie , I mean midnight . Bring your game teachers .
 
[ QUOTE ]
That's not quite it Frax.. IN almost all situations a climber can keep himself out of harms way.. It's only in the rarest of situations that a climber must rely on the ground man's actions.. So generally if you are putting yourself in a situation where you need to have a piece run for your safety, your rigging skills are in need of some serious improvement..

[/ QUOTE ]

That is completely opposite of how I opperate.

If the groundperson did not do as I instructed before the opperation, I would be hurt.

I don't think this means my rigging skills are in need of serious improvement. I think WE are fast, efficient AND safe though.

You might be addressing how things are tied in regaurds to risk of impact, but it could also mean other situations.

If the groundperson did not do things as instructed by me, it would result in me getting beaten up by the bouncing spar, or the rigging point breaking out, or something else terrible.

We are a team and the team gets it done. Not everyone for themselves.

If someone can't be trusted as doing things correctly, then they don't work here anymore.

I would say that in 90% of OUR rigging situations, if the groundperson did not do as needed in the situation, someone would get hurt, or something broken, or a near miss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom