UK. Two ropes at all times(USA next?)

  • Thread starter Thread starter TC
  • Start date Start date
Can someone that was at aerialrescuechallenge outline two ropes for climbing a conifer please (no limbing out on the way up)? Throwline to two separate limbs and then two ropes? Climbing with one two-way lanyard to bypass limbs or two lanyards?
Wish I coulda gone but would like to hear the gospel. Dave we need a Wesspur video!
And if we're mandating two climb lines used (or available??) why not mandate a complete rescue system is available too?
In all of this there is still a single mode of failure - the harness bridge/ harness . . .
So, Jeff Inman is the one who outlined twin tension system at ARC. He prefaced it with an acknowledgement that it may not be best or practical in all situations, but it's worth considering.

The way you'd use it on a conifer if you're presetting a line is:

- throw over 2 suitable limbs
- double bag the lines back to in-between the two limbs
- Now you have 2 throw lines installed over two separate limbs which allows two independent rope systems.
 
...
For instance, what if you need to bail out of the tree real fast but you’re tied in with two systems and a lanyard?
...
...
I’m all for improved safety. Heck, sometimes I’ll use two lanyards in addition to my climbing line. Or two climbing lines and a lanyard in specific situations.

But is it applicable for every situation?
A well designed twin tension system can be easily operated with one hand. Drop the lanyard and bomb. Less heat build up due to spread out load / heat.

It may not be beneficial in every situation, but I think it can be reasonably implemented in many.
 
Ok, how about a rescue when both climbers are on 2 systems? I might sound like a little punk, but it's worth thinking about, right? I don't really care about production speed, but the layers of redundancy might begin to hinder a speedy rescue, no?

I think if a team is well versed in rescue and operation of dual rope (possibly twin tension) work positioning systems, it's a non-issue.

At ARC (Aerial Rescue Challange) Troll, a SPRAT instructor showed how quickly a rescue could be performed. He used his gear, rescuing an arborist on arborist tools. He had no idea how to operate the different gear at first glance, but it did not slow him down. I'm pretty sure if we'd timed him, he was faster then the arborists who were more familiar with arborist equipment.

Regarding time, just for efficient comparison. I don't think time is usually as critical in a rescue situation as we have acted like in the past.


Great discussion!
 
This makes sense with experts functioning at expert levels. My fluctuating faith in the ground team leads me to believe that simple and basic are favorable conditions for aerial work.
I do love climbing with 2 ropes when I want them!
I really would love to attend something like these events that get referenced. Or see some media at least! Someone strap a damn gopro on that sprat-wad.
 
So, Jeff Inman is the one who outlined twin tension system at ARC. He prefaced it with an acknowledgement that it may not be best or practical in all situations, but it's worth considering.

The way you'd use it on a conifer if you're presetting a line is:

- throw over 2 suitable limbs
- double bag the lines back to in-between the two limbs
- Now you have 2 throw lines installed over two separate limbs which allows two independent rope systems.
Evan thanks but could you explain the double bag idea more please? Are the target branches vertically aligned on same side of the stem or opposed on the stem (say on opposite sides)? I’m having trouble with the visuals.
I don't climb much on conifers with clean stems up to a high top but ours have forests of live and dead branches to wind your way through. It’s a real pain even getting one bag back to the deck most times.
I have been playing with two throw lines and Richard’s magnets to try and get a stem choke set up, with limited success because of aforementioned “stem clutter”. These trees are a “work environment of variable composition”.
 
Can someone explain in simple terms how a tree rescue can be done with victim and rescuer on two ropes each?

I’m thinking of 45 years of tree work and the high percentage of trees only having ONE TIP. Now four are needed. Setup time of two can take how long?

These redundant TIPs need to be chosen to support a two person shock load too.

I’m not being facetious either. These are questions that need to be answered before a regulation is written

How was this dealt with at ARC?
 
I am all for having two systems available, but climbers choice to use it.

This would be where I fall in this discussion. I like to have my options available to me, but I would prefer not to have a pencil pusher dictating how I must operate every second of every day. I'm not a pro, but if I were, it would bug me to have a needle nose trying to tell me what I must do. I would rather rely on my own judgement, as I know well that it is my own life that is on the line. A climber should not be forced to give up control of what happens in the tree. Moral hazard. The people making the rule are not the ones that will be harmed when the rule causes an accident. It is the climber who will pay the price, possibly with the climber's life.

This about sums up my feelings on this issue.

Tim
 
Now four are needed. Setup time of two can take how long?

Twice as long. Or, you can get someone to help and it takes the same amount of time.

I would prefer not to have a pencil pusher dictating how I must operate every second of every day.

So, all government regulatory agencies, including OSHA and the like, hire people whose only experience in life and safety issues is pushing pencils around on their desk? Some of their job listings that I've seen required years of experience in the industry the applicants would be involved in, and often had educational background requirements. Computer skills and technical writing were listed as desirable secondary skills.

But, hey... it's the gubbermint, right? Nobody in government service should be trusted to take an intelligent approach to regulation. They have a little room in the back, where they sit a bunch of looney bin patients at a table and tell them to write regulations for nuclear power plants.

The people making the rule are not the ones that will be harmed when the rule causes an accident.

If a regulation requires a bucket truck operator to be tied into the bucket, everybody hears about it when one doesn't obey the regulation and falls out of the bucket and dies. The people who wrote the rule are villianized for fining the company owner. But, nobody hears about all the operators who were tied in, didn't fall out, and are alive because of it. The rulemakers receive no credit and are villianized the next time they write a rule, regardless of how effective their regulations actually are. And if one person who obeys the rules and dies due to some other stupid thing they did, instantly this becomes proof that rules don't work.

That about sums up how I try to look at things.
 
I was trying to ask the same stuff!... so far the answers were " I can one-hand 2 zigzags" and "the sprat guy could do it."

Yes...I saw, and used, a pre-SRT setup for tending both victim and climber DdRT hitches by clipping a two-ended saddle snap or some such on top of the hitch, like a reverse slack tender. Now, the rescuer has ONE hand for climbing and one for victim.

I know that I might sound like a wet blanket, that's not me or is it my intention. After spending years on Z133 revisions i know that questions need to be asked and answered before regulations or standards are written. If things aren't done right during the process there is the possibility of making outlaws of anyone who doesn't toe the mark.
 
This makes sense with experts functioning at expert levels. My fluctuating faith in the ground team leads me to believe that simple and basic are favorable conditions for aerial work.
I do love climbing with 2 ropes when I want them!
I really would love to attend something like these events that get referenced. Or see some media at least! Someone strap a damn gopro on that sprat-wad.
Michael Oxman captured some of the instruction portion of the event on video and posted them.

Check it out here:

 
Evan thanks but could you explain the double bag idea more please? Are the target branches vertically aligned on same side of the stem or opposed on the stem (say on opposite sides)? I’m having trouble with the visuals.
I don't climb much on conifers with clean stems up to a high top but ours have forests of live and dead branches to wind your way through. It’s a real pain even getting one bag back to the deck most times.
I have been playing with two throw lines and Richard’s magnets to try and get a stem choke set up, with limited success because of aforementioned “stem clutter”. These trees are a “work environment of variable composition”.


In that example the throwline was thrown over two branches on one side of the tree that are say at a right angle to eachother. That angle will push the line / ropes towards the trunk. attach a second line / bag to the end, pull it back until the two fall between the two branches. Now you have a line over two separate limbs.

Can someone explain in simple terms how a tree rescue can be done with victim and rescuer on two ropes each?
If the victim is in a position that the rescuer could ascend on the same lines, and the tree / anchor is suitable, the rescuer could ascend on the victim's lines.

If the anchors or angles are not suitible for a 2 person load, the rescuer would access however they would've accessed the victim with single rope systems. Assess the person, Secure to the victim, assess the climbing system, transfer them over to the rescue system, or use the existing (if sound) system, and if it's time to bring them down, bring them down.

And yes, anchors should be assessed with a rescue plan, that should be a part of every pre-climb assessment / planning. We plan our aerial rescues out before we ascend. It's on our job brief form...



There are a lot of details to work out before I could support a required two rope system rule, but as far as developing very well written rules on how to use them, and as far as the actual equipment / systems to be used.

I've got issues with it already after trying it for only two days in the field, but I'm gonna keep experimenting to see if I can find a solution.
 
I don't climb much on conifers with clean stems up to a high top but ours have forests of live and dead branches to wind your way through. It’s a real pain even getting one bag back to the deck most times.

With another use of the double bag technique you could throw the bag / line over the tree near the center. pull it back, drop it down next to the trunk, hopefully next to a good limb. attach another line on, pull the 2nd bag up, manipulate, and drop the set of bags over the good limb. At minimum you've got a good tie in point, possibly an isolated one if the branches are suitable.

Did that help? It's taken me a few years to finally see more of the application, but it's an amazingly useful technique.
 
I can't find video of Jeff's talk on twin tension systems. I'll link it if one gets posted.

It is NOT the end all solution for two ropes in the trees, but it seems to be the most practical for using two ropes for work positioning in a tree. More R&D needs to happen by us...
 
This isn’t about work positioning only, it also has to pass the requirements of a fall arrest system- fall arrest harness, a line for work- ascending, descending, and work position. And a second, safety line, with something with a shock absorber, that trails along with you.
 
This isn’t about work positioning only, it also has to pass the requirements of a fall arrest system- fall arrest harness, a line for work- ascending, descending, and work position. And a second, safety line, with something with a shock absorber, that trails along with you.
So, this is similar to a concern someone got into deep conversation with Troll about...

Why is fall arrest the necessary classification? If there's not a chance of a fall >2' (my understanding of when fall arrest is called for), then there shouldn't need to be a shock absorber. In a twin tension system, if one rope fails, the climber does not fall, so, no need for fall arrest.

Are the rules in Europe different for fall arrest vs work positioning?
 
@Brocky . That image you posted about work positioning and fall arrest on the first page... Is that a general at height rule, or one specifically being applied to arboriculture?

It is classing the two types of fall prevention systems seperately, and I see no reason the twin tension system I used the other day (MRS and SRS w/2 zigzags, or 2 x hitch and ropewrench for example) wouldn't meet all the requirements of the "work positioning" half of that rule. Do you?
 
There’s a video on YT of a company that takes down a huge tree. They also took a lot of safety protocols. Safety checklists, inspections, meetings, etc.

But one thing I noticed they did in the video was go the day before to install some lines, one of which was a pre installed rescue line in case a rescue was necessary.

So if something happened immediate action could take place.

Anyone remember that video? Would have to try and find it.
 
This isn’t about work positioning only, it also has to pass the requirements of a fall arrest system- fall arrest harness, a line for work- ascending, descending, and work position. And a second, safety line, with something with a shock absorber, that trails along with you.
As I've said earlier, that would really limit our harness choices too, unless you're going to wear a separate fall arrest harness underneath your saddle.
Not all FA backup devices require a shock absorber like an ASAP, the ISC Rocker comes to mind, and it really isn't that much of a pain to use, it is also easily disengaged for fast descents. Plus you can use it as a secondary positioning tool.
 

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom