Systems "Registry"

Re: Systems \"Registry\"

This is a whole new approach to SRT. The variables of friction are sooo much different than anything that I've ever heard about in tree climbing.

There are things that look alike...as alike as a Husky and a Homelite if you get my drift.

Climbers, in the workplace, have been putting hands above friction hitches and ascending hitches for a long time. Some have slipped...most haven't. Even without a proper hand brake below the friction hitch. The reasons for not allowing hands above in comps is because of the chance that during the frenzy of competition a climber may grab wrong.

Sure, during DdRT there is half the load and half the fall distance. Let's look how climbing ropes have gotten smaller and hitch cords have gotten smaller over the years. has there been an increase in falls or slips? I haven't heard of any and I started climbing on half inch hemp rope/tautline...now I use a Unicender or Hitch Hiker, so I've been on both ends of the dateline.

Muggs has gone rogue...in the best way!...and is living large! How friction works on larger diameter cordage is something that arbos don't know much about. Over the years I've built mechanical advantage systems and needed to attach them in a piggyback way with larger ropes. What I found was that in order to get a good grab/release I had to go with larger cordage. If I used the same size cordage that was compatible with half inch rope it would either slip or bind down and need to be beaten loose with a mallet...or plain cut off because it fused. With larger cordage for my friction hitches I didn't have this binding. Hmmm...isn't this what Muggs has found but applied to climbing?

Caution is certainly justified. Anytime that I teach SRT or DdRT I have climbers tie stopper knots below their hitches. In the worst case they might slip down until their ascender/hitch hits the stopper...but not the ground.

In order to incorporate SRT into your repertoire as a climber a very open mind is required. There is a whole new way of thinking needed. Back to the Husky/Homelite comparison, they look alike but perform much differently.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Well said, Tom! With appropriate caution, I see a lot of promise in Muggs' system. I would like to try the concept using a large rope grab as a back-up.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Tom,

For someone who has always advocated two points of attachment you seem to have changed your tune? Why?

Tony
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Tony, while I appreciate your concern for the safety of a new climbing system, I have to disagree with your assertion that this system is guaranteed to fail. I didn't just try it out on one tree and then jump on Treebuzz and start talking about it. I have played around with this for 2 years off and on, and I have used this system exclusively for over two months now (I climb every day, we don't have a bucket truck) and I can tell you that it grips reliably and releases smoothly. I have no concern for my safety when I am using this system. I think if you were to try it out you would feel the same.

Regarding having two points of attachment to a rope, you mentioned that a rope wrench is used to make climbing with 1/2" rope somehow safer, to make the hitch less of an "on/off switch" as you called it. I couldn't disagree more. I have never used a rope wrench but I do think that its brilliant for smaller rope. As you recall, the wrench evolved out of Kevin's F8-revolver setup. The one and only reason that these systems were needed with 1/2" rope was because a hitch tightens up way too much in an SRT setup. Don't be fooled into thinking that a rope wrench is life support - if your hitch were to fail with a wrench above it, the wrench would certainly not keep you from falling. In the same way, having 2 legs of line above you, as in a DDRT setup, does not make you any safer either - if either leg of line is compromised, the entire system fails and you fall.

I see absolutely no reason to believe that my system is any more dangerous than climbing with a rope wrench on smaller rope. The wrench simply provides extra friction so that the hitch doesn't get too tight. What I have done is basically package the hitch and extra friction device into one unit, by using larger diameter hitch cord on larger diameter rope. This spreads out the friction onto a larger surface area, allowing me to ascend and descend smoothly in an SRT setup, using no mechanical gear at all. Try it out for yourself, go as low and as slow as you like. I think you will change your mind.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

[ QUOTE ]
For someone who has always advocated two points of attachment you seem to have changed your tune? Why?

Tony

[/ QUOTE ]

Just wondering because I had not seen the conversation that this was stated in. Tom are you saying two points of attachment with one line or two points as in two lines with two independent anchor points?
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

I'm with Muggs on this, what he has is no different than a rope wrench set up. Everyone knows the wrench is not life support, its even printed on the side of the device itself. If your hitch were to fail the rope wrench is not going to keep you from sliding down that rope, all it does is take friction away from the friction hitch. Muggs takes this same concept and use larger diameter lines to achieve the same effect. Do you really think that if he had a rope wrench above his hitch, and the hitch were to fail, that the wrench would have any effect of his falling out of the tree?
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Allow me to clarify my question to Tom. In threads past, when speaking to single line systems, much reference to two points of attachment has been made.

In fact this is fairly standard in all high angle disciplines.

My question is why now when looking at not only a single line ascent system, but a work positioning system is not a second point of attachment revelant/necessary?

Am I being clear? It is important in forums such as these that we understand each other as best as possible. I see now how my initial question to Tom was unclear. I hope I have clarified my inquiry as well as the discussion.

Tony
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

I too have understood Tom D to express that two seperate points of attachment are necessary to the single line for adequate safety. I believe that this is what Tony refers to.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

My position on two attachment points hasn't changed. I can see that I've been misunderstood.

Let me see if I can explain...

DdRT is based on one attachment point. This has been adequate for decades. What's the difference if the climber changes to SRT and still maintains one attachment point? The rest of the SRT/DdRT discussion is shelved. I'm talking about concerns with ONE attachment point.

I see no difference.

Now...there is a common mode in arbo SRT to require a backup to an ascender for ascent mode but not for working mode. This is inconsistent to me. To me, a system should be adequate to be either ascent or work positioning. If not, change the system.

My stand on two points of attachment is not mandatory. I've always been comfortable with one point but I use two when a system or situation requires two.

I think that what I've said about backups has been misconstrued to thinking that I was addressing two attachment points. Having a loose friction hitch above a pair of ascenders on doubled rope doesn't seem like the best backup to the ascenders. My preference is to have the second attachment point, which is independent and not construed as a backup, a fair distance away from each other.

Ever since I crossed paths with Morgan and got my first Unicender I've climbed SRT without always having a second attachment point. When I've used a rope walker system I will but I don't always rope walk.

Do we really want to bring the discussion of true double rope systems to arbo work? This means two ropes and two attachments. Most arbos don't understand what this means. It could work but it would be cumbersome and in many instances put the climber at greater risk. There are many simpler ways of mitigating the risk to arbos.

If what I've said isn't clear, please let me know. I'll write more to try and clarify what I mean about two attachment points.

Now that SRT has become a way for arbos to work in trees I want all of the requirements that are being thrown down in front of SRT to be applied in the same manner to DdRT. Inconsistency has never set right with me.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

My only point if attachment is my hitch. Has been since i started climbing in 96. I have climbed a good bit on 9/16ths. I love it. Never thought to try it sans rw. A bit heavy but a blast to swing around on. Definitly going to play around with your concept muggs. What carabiner do you use? Looks like it must be massive to accomodate the 1/2 onch friction hitch.

Ive said this before, but i believe the rule about not putting your hand above friction hitch comes from footlocking where the hitch is extended. This danger is present in a ddrt system that puts the hitch extended away from your body in a straight arm position. I discovered this using the anchor bridge system the first time out. I tried working with my hitch in extended mode. I started descending and slipped and my body reacted and grabbed the hitch tighter. It was all i could do to let go before i slid to the ground. With the hitch at the waist, this does not happen because when uou panic, your arms extend out fully and grab on to rope leaving your hitch unimpeded. Very real danger but one that is only present when the hitch is at extended arm length away as in footlocking.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

I remember when Cary took his fall about a year ago? his hitch failed and I asked him if he felt the wrench slowed his fall. his response was definatly! did the wrench save his life by slowing his fall? IMO the wrench is part of a life support system, after this incident I no longer view the wrench as NON life support and my hitch AS life support. I view the hitch and the wrench together as a life support system (no matter what it states on the sideplate). If my hitch does fail, at the very least I won't go into total free fall because I have the wrench as part of my system.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

There is some truth to that, but from a psychological perspective. I would rather aproach my system with one solid bomber attachment that wont fail. If you aproach things with the mindset of ... Well if this one fails then i got a back up allows you to use an "if it fails device". I dont want an if anywhere in my system.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

I would love to see a test done to see how fast a human like object will fall attached to a wrench vs no wrench in a hitch failing scenario
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Kevin, IMO you can never have a system that WON'T fail especailly with cordage in our environment. Every system, no matter what the system, with the right circumstances can fail! one wrong stroke of the hand saw and thats it, your bomber conection gone (hopefully your tied in twice). there are to many variables in our work environment to say, "my connection will never fail" this is why redundancy is a factor in every work at height industry.

I have to look my system and say to myself, what if this DOES fail, unlikely, but it could happen, what will happen to me if it fails? with the wrench, I will go into a very fast fall, with no wrench, I will go into free fall.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Where has the redundancy been in a DdRT system?

Don't get me wrong...I truly believe that redundancy makes a lot of sense.

Tree climbing is finally at a revolutionary point. SRT is no longer a boutique issue. Now it's time to look at what sort of guidelines should be applied to tree climbing...not just to SRT.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

in the spirit of this thread, I went out tried something, because I use a stiff webbing tether, petzl dogbone which is a bit thick, but more importantly, wide, I purposely stepped off a ladder with no engaged hitch, if you clamp your hand over the wrench and tether, and squeeze them together, it locks you up and either slows or stops you, depending on how fast you are descending.

you then can use that as a brake and descend under control, you will burn your glove up for sure, or if you are dense enough to climb glove-less, your hand
bangtard.gif


last week my GF and I climbed a big bur oak at her Mom's place, her mom is young, just a few years older than me, and in great shape, she wanted to climb, she had tried it before but this was her first time to 50'.

she made the climb and when it came time to go down, even after showing her, she pulled her hitch too fast and was almost free-falling, i reached over and clamped my GLOVED hand around the 2 legs of rope ( she was DdRT), it stopped her on the spot ;) It is amazing what a little added friction can do eh?
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Also, this could only happen on the RW if your hitch failed, or did not grab, I always check it now to make sure it is going to grab, but if it looked sketchy, I would clamp the wrench and the tether pretty fast
grin.gif


and I would not climb with a hitch cord that is worn to the point of possible failure, AND since I use a short cord, I tie dbl fishermans on my hitch cords, and I always check that I have enough tail on the knot and that it has not slipped, they are all marked with tape so a quick glance will tell me if it moved, for the record, none ever have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom