SRT DRT DmRT vs. MRS SRS What do we call it?

evo said:
You are certainly burning too many calories with this.
Don’t waste your time on twin DdRT systems or twin SRT systems. Otherwise I will find a way to use three ropes!
Now what do you call it when I have my groundie hoist my ass up with my GRCS? I can think of at least three ways of doing it.
KISS
Click to expand...
At the 5 minute mark, Richard explains the difference between DdRT & DmRT...

 
yoyoman said:
... The mindset to the 3 pillars or foundations from which we build our systems is that it is about the anchors and support points and when you think about it, what could be more important than what and how the rope is anchored and supported.
Click to expand...
No, I don't believe that the anchor is the most important, nor does it help the uninitiated understand what is being discussed. All this discussion is to hash out a simpler and more intuitive set of acronyms that represent just two primary tree climbing methods.
MRS... A moving rope system that has a mechanical advantage. A system used almost exclusively in the tree industry for decades that relies primarily on arm strength for movement.
SRS... A stationary rope system that has no mechanical advantage and that uses the legs as its primary power for upward movement.
I don't like change any more than anyone else but I would gladly use those acronyms because... They define the most commonly discussed systems that as tree workers we use. They would be exclusive to tree workers rope access methods and not be misinterpreted by other rope access disciplines. It would leave behind the apparently unsolvable riddle of "what the hell does the D stand for?".
They do not cover every possible way in which we can climb within those systems and they do not need to. The possible changes and mixes are going to be endless and can not be addressed in a simple, all-inclusive acronym.
 
DSMc said:
. . . They do not cover every possible way in which we can climb within those systems and they do not need to. The possible changes and mixes are going to be endless and can not be addressed in a simple, all-inclusive acronym.
Click to expand...
On reflection, I find myself agreeing with these two simple acronyms. It seems to me that regardless of the relative complexity, or lack thereof, of the particular system used, the rope(s) is either going to be moving or stationary. As DSMc said, beyond that point the various possible combinations of those are now going to be so numerous as to usually require full explanation anyway, and in that case any further use of acronym is really confusing, useless, and a waste of time. Those two simple designations will cover the overall picture, IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Nor do I believe that an over simplification defines much of anything. Is it a plant, animal or mineral and we are done? It moves it's an animal, it does not move it must be a plant. Make that venus fly trap thing go away.
DSMc said:
MRS... A moving rope system that has a mechanical advantage. A system used almost exclusively in the tree industry for decades that relies primarily on arm strength for movement.
SRS... A stationary rope system that has no mechanical advantage and that uses the legs as its primary power for upward movement.
Click to expand...
Testing this, what is RADS?
I would say it is stationary because it has a stationary anchor, or do we just toss it out with the venus fly trap?
 
evo said:
You are certainly burning too many calories with this.
Don’t waste your time on twin DdRT systems or twin SRT systems. Otherwise I will find a way to use three ropes!
Now what do you call it when I have my groundie hoist my ass up with my GRCS? I can think of at least three ways of doing it.
KISS
Click to expand...
If a groundie hauls your ass up with a GRCS it is a hauling system, not a climbing system. It is important to understand that distinction right out of the gate as it will always have a different mechanical advantage. If you haul your own ass up, you have doubled the rope over the branch and the rope is moving providing a 2:1 MA but it is not defined by the MA.
1,2,3 ropes or 10, those are stationary ropes because each is anchored remotely from the climber. One ascender that captures all 10 ropes or 10 ascenders, one for each rope (because the climber trusts nothing) are ALL stationary because each is anchored remotely from the climber.
 
Yes, I do wake in the middle of the night thinking of this shit.
So throw me some more examples and see what pillar they are supported by. Will it be a stationary rope, a doubled over the branch, building or rock moving rope or simply a double over the branch, building or rock rope technique?
 
yoyoman said:
Nor do I believe that an over simplification defines much of anything. Is it a plant, animal or mineral and we are done? It moves it's an animal, it does not move it must be a plant. Make that venus fly trap thing go away.
Click to expand...

An acronym is by definition an oversimplification. That is why they are used. That is also why you will not find an easy, simple acronym that can, by itself, define the complexities that differentiates a plant from an animal or from a mineral.

yoyoman said:
Testing this, what is RADS?
I would say it is stationary because it has a stationary anchor, or do we just toss it out with the venus fly trap?
Click to expand...

I believe most people would recognize a RADS for what it is: an SRS that incorporates a step phase with mechanical advantage, normally employed for short to moderate ascents. Yes, it is a crossover, it is going to happen because, like the venus fly trap, there will always be complexities that will require explanations.
 
Last edited:
For me this started out being about the acronyms because I thought that was where the confusion was.
I have since realized that the confusion is in the classification of the 3 basic concepts on which rope systems are built.
I'm not a biologist (but I'm not really an anything anyway) and I can't actually say why a venus flytrap, the way it moves and eats a fly is not an animal. But I can tell why a RADS is a stationary rope technique, because the rope is anchored remotely and inaccessible to the climber when the system is in use.
 
yoyoman said:
For me this started out being about the acronyms because I thought that was where the confusion was.
I have since realized that the confusion is in the classification of the 3 basic concepts on which rope systems are built.
I'm not a biologist (but I'm not really an anything anyway) and I can't actually say why a venus flytrap, the way it moves and eats a fly is not an animal. But I can tell why a RADS is a stationary rope technique, because the rope is anchored remotely and inaccessible to the climber when the system is in use.
Click to expand...

And because it doesn’t move and all the friction is at the climbers connection point

Ps plants aren’t defined by their lack of movement
 
  • Like
Reactions: evo
Ok so I am going to go into a little rant,

I am noticing a wave of rec climbers coming to the arborist world. Some are doing this just for fun, others ego. Seems like trees are just another object to conquer, and these folks also appear to be in a cush financial position to afford the best of the best gear.

Some knowledge is gleaned from the arb community, an idea is taken then it’s colinzed as if it’s been done wrong all along.

Years ago I learned the difference of DdRT vs SRT vs DRT. Sure it’s not the clearest to the layman, but it shouldn’t be! It’s really not hard to learn and understand, and all it should take is a few minutes of asking some who has been in the industry for a while.

So why do the waters need to get muddled with all these new acronyms? As one learns more they build experience and move past the initial learning phases and the acronyms matter very little.

If I hire a climber and I ask them if they are proficient with double rope, and they pull out a DRT system I know they are full of shit. Likewise if they get a blank look on their face. Sure they might know how to climb, but it shows their lack of training and experience in the industry.

Soon we will need to differentiate between canopy tourists, and professional climbers. Much like weekend rock climbers vrs high scalers.

Why should professional arbs bend to the whims of the tourists? Let’s just lead, and not loose sleep over defining all the details.

What’s wrong or broken with “ I climb DdRT with a vt”. Or “ base anchored srt, with a rope walker technique” both are very clear and concise. Sure it takes a minimal background in Arboriculture to understand, BUT it should!
 
yoyoman said:
If a groundie hauls your ass up with a GRCS it is a hauling system, not a climbing system. It is important to understand that distinction right out of the gate as it will always have a different mechanical advantage. If you haul your own ass up, you have doubled the rope over the branch and the rope is moving providing a 2:1 MA but it is not defined by the MA.
1,2,3 ropes or 10, those are stationary ropes because each is anchored remotely from the climber. One ascender that captures all 10 ropes or 10 ascenders, one for each rope (because the climber trusts nothing) are ALL stationary because each is anchored remotely from the climber.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ, a GRCS is not allowed to haul in that manner. However, if you take a few wraps on the tail of my DdRT line I am being hoisted on my climbing system. HA!
 
John@TreeXP said:
At the 5 minute mark, Richard explains the difference between DdRT & DmRT...

Click to expand...
The fundamentals of DRT is not understood or explained in this video accurately at all.
DRT is two independent lines. One primary and one backup used in the industrial rope access world. On your primary you have your ascender/descender, and on the backup you typically have a floating fall arrest device. Sure you could just use prussics, but this doesn’t change the function. One primary one backup, two anchors.
With Richards rope doubled over a limb there is no backup.
In the rock climbing world there is twin line but we don’t really care about that. Also rappelling on two stationary legs from a rope doubled over an anchor, but once again who cares we aren’t rock climbing.
 
evo said:
I beg to differ, a GRCS is not allowed to haul in that manner. However, if you take a few wraps on the tail of my DdRT line I am being hoisted on my climbing system. HA!
Click to expand...
If you're hauling ass, it's still hauling ass whether it's legal or not.
If someone is pulling down on the tail of your doubled over the branch moving rope technique that has a 2 to 1 mechanical advantage it is no surprise to me that the classification would be entirely different for the hauling system with absolutely no mechanical advantage.
One is a climbing system and one is a hauling system. As different as 2 is to 1.
 
yoyoman said:
If you're hauling ass, it's still hauling ass whether it's legal or not.
If someone is pulling down on the tail of your doubled over the branch moving rope technique that has a 2 to 1 mechanical advantage it is no surprise to me that the classification would be entirely different for the hauling system with absolutely no mechanical advantage.
One is a climbing system and one is a hauling system. As different as 2 is to 1.
Click to expand...
So when I put my son on a DdRT system, and he can’t haul himself up, I take a hand on the tail and pull aiding him climb (not hauling his ass) is this a / ahs/DdRT ass hauling system or is it a technique?
 
Burrapeg said:
On reflection, I find myself agreeing with these two simple acronyms. It seems to me that regardless of the relative complexity, or lack thereof, of the particular system used, the rope(s) is either going to be moving or stationary. As DSMc said, beyond that point the various possible combinations of those are now going to be so numerous as to usually require full explanation anyway, and in that case any further use of acronym is really confusing, useless, and a waste of time. Those two simple designations will cover the overall picture, IMHO.
Click to expand...
When you look at all four systems, SRT, DRT, DdRT and DmRT, the only two that are tree climbing industry specific, both from a standardized and commercial standpoint are SRT and DdRT and maybe a bit of DRT. I also agree SRS and MRS are simple, straight forward, easily adaptable replacement acronyms.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom