SRT and DdRT Similarities

[ QUOTE ]


Moss; I'm interested to hear more about the identical body mechanics. Is this due to similar methods for constant slack management?

[/ QUOTE ]

Description of same ascent technique DRT or SRT, ideal to climb away from the trunk, can be climbed against trunk with one foot on the trunk:

SRT ascent with ZK-2 and hitch
1. Hand over hand pulling rope above the wrench, wrench auto-advanced by bungee or lanyard
2. "Foot locking" hybrid technique, Pantin on right foot, single foot lock with left foot. Feet push side-by-side
3. Maintain vertical body position similar to secured footlock, arms/hands move up per ascent cycle like secured footlock motion or alternate hand over hand.

DRT ascent with hitch
1. Hand over hand pulling rope above the hitch, hitch self-advancing, rides up the rope, performs best with Hitch Climber in the system.
2. "Foot locking" hybrid technique, Pantin on right foot, single foot lock with left foot.
3. Maintain vertical body position similar to secured footlock, arms/hands move up per ascent cycle like secured footlock motion or alternate hand over hand.

For either system configuration easiest on the hands with grippy gloves (Atlas or similar) and 11.5 mm or greater diameter line.
-AJ
 
[ QUOTE ]
Ddrt is much easier to advance higher "tip" imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotcha, Emmett. Although if we focus on similarities of advancing TIP's (without easier, better, etc...), we may need to do close to the same thing with either system.

In DdRT, we need to throw to advance, retrieve the standing end, connect and go (simplest means without a RR FS). In SRT, we need to throw to advance, retrieve the working end, connect and go (if we're redirecting off a previous TIP).

Moss; I figured that, coming from a conifer lover like yourself!
grin.gif
Yes, in pure ascent, we can manage either system with the same overall body mechanics by using tools to remain upright, such as a foot ascender and slack tending pulley.
 
Forgot to add:

pullies, rope grabs, hand and chest ascenders, foot loops, prusiks, fig 8, shunt etc.

can all be used in both systems - if you have alot of knowledge.

Most of the comments in this thread are talking about upper body strength, where as neat tricks can mean that you only need to use your legs for effort and your hands as mechanical adjustment.

Sometimes I wish to tie off a lump (cut and ready to drop) and leave it positioned in the tree, to then use as a gravity device to ascend me on the next climb after dinner, just by tieing the one end off to yourself, with the groundy offering some control, give the lump a tug to snap the hinge, and skyward you go! one day....:)
 
One detail to add, and it has been noted before, I believe by DSMc in an old thread.

In DdRT, I find myself defaulting to using more upper body strength for movement through the canopy during the "work" phase of my climb.
In SRT, I find myself defaulting to using more lower body/leg strength for movement through the canopy during the "work" phase.

This may be more of an issue of discipline and/or self-training than anything. I believe it has something to do with having that 2:1 available in DdRT, so I just end up tugging on the rope with my arms, whereas in SRT, many situations require you to either footlock or clip in the foot ascender to move efficiently.
 
Ironically I've found SRT to be awesome for small ornamental tree prunes, with a well distributed/redirected line I can achieve really comfortable work positions and get to places that would normally require a pole saw and the resulting poorer quality cuts.

So how is that a DRT similarity? Climbers commonly think of SRT for only the tallest trees but it can be used to great advantage in the shorter stuff, just like DRT.
-AJ
 
I was climbing a Dogwood today DRT, tied in midway up a flimsy upright, which, when I stretched out to prune the dead tips, I thought it might snap. I repositioned my TIP and finished. I couldn't help but think though, how SRT with basal anchor would've acted more like a fishing pole technique, or the X Rigging Rings, and not put so much pressure on the TIP.

Anyway, I know I'm dating myself but I think it migh be time for a rope wrench. And I know where you're coming from on the ornamentals, Moss.
 
Tom,

Since the topic of the thread is similarities I will stick to those!
smirk.gif


The four I listed are the things I see most often wrong with climbers as the move from DbRT to SRT-ascent and/or SRT-work positioning.

I follow the logic of DbRT and SRT (any configuration) as having the same family tree. I think Oceans' approach at looking at similarities, singularly devoid of "best/worst" "better/best" "good/bad" opinions rather a stroke of genius. (Eric, you now owe me a beer along with the cup of coffee!)
grin.gif


Regardless of system,technique, preference or opinion, as climbers we must stick to the fundamentals. Your tree must support you. Your tie in point must hold your body weight+, compounding forces in the event of slip or fall must be mitigated through slack management, your equipment must meet the task you are asking of if. The intersection of the gear you are using and the way you are using it must be open and devoid of blind spots and pot holes!

Short of these requirements you place yourself in jeopardy, regardless of system, redundancy, efficiency or motivation. Gravity Sucks... things to the ground. Do not be one of them.

Friends do not let friends climb stupid!

Now if Oceans wishes to open a thread on differences, well then he is gunna owe me some more beer,coffee,beer,coffee,beer,coffee...

Tony
 
Tony, I'll buy you a coffee already...jeesh! And a beer, too!

I'll let you start the thread about the differences, that way I can point out your stroke of genius and then you can buy me a coffee. You should start the thread following Charlotte.
laugh.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
...Both have specific gear and equipment requirements that must be adhered to for proper, safe, efficient function...Tony

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, Tony. This is the point at which it is important to fully understand and communicate exactly what form of SRT is being discussed.

Ascent-only systems bring tool and use requirements that effectively distance them from a normal DdRT system. They have very little in common with DdRT.

Whereas the top dogs in SRT-WP, the Unicender, Hitch Hiker and Rope Wrench, are so similar to DdRT that they can effectively be used in either DdRT or SRT-WP setups by changing the anchor point.

Trying to reduce a discussion title to simply SRT goes a long way towards confusing just what tools are compatible and how they are used because it implies that SRT and SRT-WP are the same, and they are not.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...Both have specific gear and equipment requirements that must be adhered to for proper, safe, efficient function...Tony

[/ QUOTE ]

Whereas the top dogs in SRT-WP, the Unicender, Hitch Hiker and Rope Wrench, are so similar to DdRT that they can effectively be used in either DdRT or SRT-WP setups by changing the anchor point.

Trying to reduce a discussion title to simply SRT goes a long way towards confusing just what tools are compatible and how they are used because it implies that SRT and SRT-WP are the same, and they are not.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's wise of you point this out, Dave. Thanks for the input, as always.
 
Yup. I agree 100%

The largest "problem" I see is tools being used with wrong/faulty interfaces, improper combinations of materials and hardware, with little to no considerations for how it all works together. Assuming it works for one climb is no assurance it will work the same in a different configuration/loading scheme

It is important to differentiate and I think we went a long way to that goal in what ever that was!!

http://www.treebuzz.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=361470&an=0&page=0#361470

Tony
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom