Traditional to eye and eye split tail

[Jem4417]

How long do you feel is the appropriate amount of time to spend on a traditional hitch (blake's,tautline) before moving to an eye and eye Prussic like a hitch climber set up? Is it possible that just the basics of a traditional hitch can be taught and basically immediate training can start with a vt, distel, shwabish, and Michoacán for a fresh climber? All this assuming they can tie the hitch proficiently

 

[Limb It]

How long do you feel is the appropriate amount of time to spend on a traditional hitch (blake's,tautline) before moving to an eye and eye Prussic like a hitch climber set up? Is it possible that just the basics of a traditional hitch can be taught and basically immediate training can start with a vt, distel, shwabish, and Michoacán for a fresh climber? All this assuming they can tie the hitch proficiently

I learned on a 4/1 distel and am glad that I did. I feel it is far less dangerous than having to shove the blakes up every time you move.

Send them up on the safer hitchclimber and forget the blakes.

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

 

[Jem4417]

Wow thought it would take a little before i found someone who started on that system. Did someone just teach you that system first? Or did you teach yourself?

 

[Ryan Keats]

I used blakes hitch once before moving on. My thought was why use something I will never use again?

 

[Brocky]

I wish I could see the future so clearly.

 

[Jem4417]

I was thinking of training the hitch climber set up immediately to a new climber and just get them versed in a traditional hitch. But a few people I've talked to said proficiency in the blakes hitch should be the foundation of a novice climber. Yet as I've seen what the progression of climbing systems is turning into I'm starting to feel tail tying is obsolete

 

[Limb It]

I was thinking of training the hitch climber set up immediately to a new climber and just get them versed in a traditional hitch. But a few people I've talked to said proficiency in the blakes hitch should be the foundation of a novice climber. Yet as I've seen what the progression of climbing systems is turning into I'm starting to feel tail tying is obsolete

The issue i have seen with the blakes is a climber getting themselves into a situation where they only have one free hand and need to tend slack.

On a hitchclimber I know that no matter how far i move or if i need to hold myself in place, i can get the slackout of the system one handed. I see this as a huge safety advantage over the "basics" of the blakes setup.

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

 

[Jem4417]

The issue i have seen with the blakes is a climber getting themselves into a situation where they only have one free hand and need to tend slack.

On a hitchclimber I know that no matter how far i move or if i need to hold myself in place, i can get the slackout of the system one handed. I see this as a huge safety advantage over the "basics" of the blakes setup.

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

I believe a main reason for a traditional system being the first system introduced to a fresh climber is that the hitch is easier to tie and is less finicky. It needs less attention during your climb and basically never slips. That being said I think if the components of an eye to eye knot like a vt, distel etc. is just more explained and practiced before the climber is in a live situation they will be able to have a better system from the beginning

 

[DaveyJones]

The traditional climbing system turns you into a beast by making you suffer it's primative nature. Newbies should spend at least six months struggling so they can develop the muscles and mental toughness to deal with frustration in the tree

 

[Jem4417]

The traditional climbing system turns you into a beast by making you suffer it's primative nature. Newbies should spend at least six months struggling so they can develop the muscles and mental toughness to deal with frustration in the tree

I like how you put that. Although I still believe progressive techniques can be introduced earlier

 

[Limb It]

Wow thought it would take a little before i found someone who started on that system. Did someone just teach you that system first? Or did you teach yourself?

I was taught on the distel by the first climber I worked for.

 

[SomethingWitty]

I wish I could see the future so clearly.

Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Seriously though. Learn everything. Everyone should. There are plenty of good reasons to know the least gear intensive techniques available to arborists, and there is no good reason to kill yourself at the beginning using the most difficult systems for ascending.
Study, study, practice and study and practice.

 

[Brocky]

Six months isn't long enough and it should be on the Tautline hitch, for real suffering to take place!

 

[Jem4417]

Six months isn't long enough and it should be on the Tautline hitch, for real suffering to take place!

Me and the tautline never got along.

 

[Limb It]

That tautline hitch is Mother Nature's punishment for bad treeworkers.

 

[DaveyJones]

In all seriousness though, I think it's important to learn the old school methods like the blakes hitch. The ability to climb a tree with only a length of rope is invaluable knowledge. I wouldn't recommend climbing in it full time considering it's hard on the body. However, I've used it several times on the tail end of my climbing line as a second tie in when I'm out on a long limb walk or as a rather extreme rope angle. The idea that you can create a climbing system with minimal gear is a very useful tool.

 

[Jem4417]

@Fairfield

 

[CutHighnLetFly]

i use it pretty often and i climb pretty much 100% SRT. a quick way to set up something helpful for work positioning.
i have two other ways of doing something similar, but if if I'm doing a climb where i don't think ill need much for extras and decide i want to double crotch, trusty old blakey's

i think people should know what it was, how to tie it, how it works, and how crappy it is to ascend on. then move on. nothing bad could come from that.
but come on man don't make em climb on it!

 

[Fairfield]

I started my climbing with Prusick hitches one short at the mid attachment and one below that for my foot. I ascended with that and switched over to a Rack to descend. The Fire school believes it was best to learn that first before moving onto using hand ascenders and a Rescue Eight..... now they teach chest ascenders with Hand ascender and I'Ds or D5s.

Every climbing field has their own thing but all make the same fundamental mistake in terms of teaching climbing IMO. They all teach to a preconceived notion or book method/accepted way. But, where is the harm in taking the extra step as the instructor and finding what is best for the new climber? I can argue to those that say you must know Dbrt first in climbing that you are wrong. I and a lot of others didn't. We learned SRT caving/rescue techniques first before " having to MUST KNOW Dbrt". And be told at that time SRT can't be used in tree work because it just won't work.....
Here is my point, there is no one and only way to first learn climbing. If a person is more comfortable on Dbrt at first then that's the answer, if SRT then that's the answer. Let them and their natural abilities tell you the direction to start in. Then build on it after. But, as the instructor you should know climbing and people very well to make that call. If you can't then it may be a good idea to step back and really ask yourself if you should be teaching.

P.S. There is a whole HUGE industry that only teaches SRT and they do just fine starting off. Although when I mention Dbrt techniques they give me the same bellyaches as some tree guys with learning SRT when new and young.... think outside the small box we were given and truly learn climbing all around.

 

[Jem4417]

I started my climbing with Prusick hitches one short at the mid attachment and one below that for my foot. I ascended with that and switched over to a Rack to descend. The Fire school believes it was best to learn that first before moving onto using hand ascenders and a Rescue Eight..... now they teach chest ascenders with Hand ascender and I'Ds or D5s.

Every climbing field has their own thing but all make the same fundamental mistake in terms of teaching climbing IMO. They all teach to a preconceived notion or book method/accepted way. But, where is the harm in taking the extra step as the instructor and finding what is best for the new climber? I can argue to those that say you must know Dbrt first in climbing that you are wrong. I and a lot of others didn't. We learned SRT caving/rescue techniques first before " having to MUST KNOW Dbrt". And be told at that time SRT can't be used in tree work because it just won't work.....
Here is my point, there is no one and only way to first learn climbing. If a person is more comfortable on Dbrt at first then that's the answer, if SRT then that's the answer. Let them and their natural abilities tell you the direction to start in. Then build on it after. But, as the instructor you should know climbing and people very well to make that call. If you can't then it may be a good idea to step back and really ask yourself if you should be teaching.

P.S. There is a whole HUGE industry that only teaches SRT and they do just fine starting off. Although when I mention Dbrt techniques they give me the same bellyaches as some tree guys with learning SRT when new and young.... think outside the small box we were given and truly learn climbing all around.

Well put jim. It's always interesting to hear from someone with your background for some perspective of how vast rope access techniques are. Would you think the blakes hitch on a traditional system will be taught less and less as more advanced systems become the norm?