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

  • Thread starter Thread starter TC
  • Start date Start date
How many of you use that tip that your 97% sure of in SRT. I'm definitely guilty of it. It gives you better angles and makes the job easier. But you do the climb half wondering if that TIP is in fact solid. With two ropes you can do this and not risk that %3 chance of failure.

In work access, working on 200 year old bridges and various buildings made with all kinds of materials, anchor strength. always a guess. The creativity and educated guess work, work access anchors goes far beyond arborist anchors. I th I'm nk trees are probably easier to analyze in many cases
 
Last edited:
Two set two separate lines in different anchors. You don't have to throw twice. You just double bag it. You can pull both ropes over their crotches in one pull.
 
I feel like there are two subjects here. The legality of two rope climbing. And the process of two rope climbing. Related but not the same. The regulators are clearly out of touch with the realities on the ground.

As for the actual process of climbing with two ropes... there are tons of techniques and possibilities and advantages, as well a disadvantages.

It is two separate conversations though.
 
... The regulators are clearly out of touch with the realities on the ground... As for the actual process of climbing with two ropes... there are tons of techniques and possibilities and advantages, as well a disadvantages. It is two separate conversations though.

No they are not two separate conversations, they are the topic of this thread.
 
Two set two separate lines in different anchors. You don't have to throw twice. You just double bag it. You can pull both ropes over their crotches in one pull.

That is second option in UK system with justification written down on paperwork during assessment of climb. First option is two seperate anchors...
 
How many of you use that tip that your 97% sure of in SRT. I'm definitely guilty of it. It gives you better angles and makes the job easier. But you do the climb half wondering if that TIP is in fact solid. With two ropes you can do this and not risk that %3 chance of failure.

In work access, working on 200 year old bridges and various buildings made with all kinds of materials, anchor strength. always a guess. The creativity and educated guess work, work access anchors goes far beyond arborist anchors. I th I'm nk trees are probably easier to analyze in many cases

What happened to the two man pull test when testing anchor from the ground? What about installing a safety cinch anchor on SRT line at next bombproof point down from TIP in case of high TIP failure? Things I do regularly already mitigating high TIP failure in those 97% cases.... or 80% cases... or 70% cases... depending on the amount of drop and angles and pendulum action mitigating drop-catch forces to the secondary safety TIP - things you take into account when analysing tree prior to climbing, and during climbing.... things that may not be acquired by a learning climber because now he puts his faith in a second system instead of ensuring the integrity of his single system.

I am all for putting belay systems on learning climbers. But at some point they have to transition to working the angles/forces/redirects and tying themselves in knots with managing a second system may not allow the free capacity to learn as some are supposing.

I would put more value into having a second system available than mandating it’s use. If a newby wants to cut anywhere near his main line he should have the second installed as a backup. If there’s a weak TIP used but strong enough to ascend, Ensure use of lanyards on way up, and have backup system available to descend on. What we should have been doing for decades and maybe hasn’t been done to cause the accidents that authorities want to legislate a second system for...
 
Can you expand on what you mean, please @treebing ?
You hit your high TIP. It looks good, but you can't visually inspect, you tie on your second throw line and drop it into a lower crotch that's 100%. You keep the higher crotch and have a nice beefier crotch below. You can be tie or canopy tie. You have the advantages of the higher crotch but the security of the lower one. With SRT you have to choose. With DRT you don't have to choose.

Pull testing and two man testing are good tools to test tie in points as well. But all that still implies a level of educated guessing.

If I'm going to go through the trouble to use double ropes, I'm for damn sure going to squeeze every possible advantage out of it that I can. If it allows me to feel comfortable using tie in points that would be reckless SRT, than hell yeah!
 
You hit your high TIP. It looks good, but you can't visually inspect, you tie on your second throw line and drop it into a lower crotch that's 100%. You keep the higher crotch and have a nice beefier crotch below. You can be tie or canopy tie. You have the advantages of the higher crotch but the security of the lower one. With SRT you have to choose. With DRT you don't have to choose.

Pull testing and two man testing are good tools to test tie in points as well. But all that still implies a level of educated guessing.

If I'm going to go through the trouble to use double ropes, I'm for damn sure going to squeeze every possible advantage out of it that I can. If it allows me to feel comfortable using tie in points that would be reckless SRT, than hell yeah!

Not saying the technique isn’t valid, and once up to tip can choose a tip if not readily available from the ground, but in cases I am ascending questionable TIPs I am using lanyards as safety on the ascend too.

A second line is a valid technique period. But in congested crowns or highly spread crowns they aren’t necessarily an easy option. A safety TIP on the same line can provide security whilst maintaining mobility.

If I am needing to take a swing to work the tree, separated anchors on two systems can become a challenge.
 
As far as the double bagging-I think he means 1)you throw over nice high but slightly questionanble anchor point
2) set up double bag
3) pull bags up to high tie in point dropping 2nd bag over lower more substantial tie in point on the way up
4) once both bags are on ground separate them and tie one climbing line to one throw line and another climbing line to other throw line
5) pull lines, one goes over high limb other goes over lower limb
I think thats what treebeing was talking about
However this is a drt system which is what most of employ pretty regularly. This is different than “twin tension” that they are using in UK(if I understand correctly) where both lines would have to be anchored at lower 100% solid points. Then you would redirect to go higher (I guess)????
 
My guess is that anyone who uses two rope regularly will find themselves using it to their advantage in order to access the canopy.

defining the difference between a %100 TIP and a 95% TIP is impossible based off the information we have regarding the tree. It is all based on feelings and experience. I have broken out a couple redirects two rope climbing. Redirects that I could not have even attempted to take with one rope. Two rope climbing expands your options and it is only natural that climbers will use those options.
 
My guess is that anyone who uses two rope regularly will find themselves using it to their advantage in order to access the canopy.

defining the difference between a %100 TIP and a 95% TIP is impossible based off the information we have regarding the tree. It is all based on feelings and experience. I have broken out a couple redirects two rope climbing. Redirects that I could not have even attempted to take with one rope. Two rope climbing expands your options and it is only natural that climbers will use those options.

Can be a great tool, I think the long lanyards that cross over into a second system is far more useable for most situations, and a full second system used as required. As said - it’s the mandate that many disagree with, not the technique which is yet another tool in the box.
 
My guess is that anyone who uses two rope regularly will find themselves using it to their advantage in order to access the canopy.

defining the difference between a %100 TIP and a 95% TIP is impossible based off the information we have regarding the tree. It is all based on feelings and experience. I have broken out a couple redirects two rope climbing. Redirects that I could not have even attempted to take with one rope. Two rope climbing expands your options and it is only natural that climbers will use those options.
AMEN , thank to you and others we have great new inovations all the time(always to be used with caution) ! Keep them coming! Limitting options is starting down a slippery slope!
 
. . . The regulators are clearly out of touch with the realities on the ground. . .

This is because many regulatory bodies are responsible for a range of related (but not the same) industries and are looking for blanket regulation to apply to the whole lot. And too often these bodies are office types, government appointees, etc., typical bureaucrats who have a lot less field experience than most of the pros they are regulating. They don't have the hard-earned experience to see the subtle differences in the various trades they are regulating. Not always the case, but too often is. And if there are lawyers in the mix, well that just makes things even more interesting. Most lawyers I have ever met love vague legaleze; they have little incentive towards clear language that avoids litigation and thus does them out of a job.
 
AMEN , thank to you and others we have great new inovations all the time(always to be used with caution) ! Keep them coming! Limitting options is starting down a slippery slope!
Richard Hattier said something in one of his videos - how tree guys may be regarded somewhat as the cowboys of the workplace climbing world, but that he admired the freewheeling inventiveness and experimentation he saw.
Besides engineered/ bombproof tie points found in industry (in process plants these are required to be certified with drawings stamped by a P. Eng.) v.s. what tree folks deal with, I am also struck by the amount of "proceduralized" work practices there are in process industry. Even the rusty bridges example somewhere above is dealt with by procedures written in manuals. Do not deviate. Large process industry doesn't care about cost to manage this work - it is risk analyzed and then standardized practices put in place to bring the level of risk down to acceptable levels. Innovation doesn't matter and work, more or less, becomes a commodity. Tools progress slowly.
The creative freewheeling'ness of tree work is something I really marvel at frankly. I really hope it is not changed to become drudgery and repetitive (maybe we need to do another Apple commercial with the robots etc.). This is for me, given an acceptable base level of safety for all, at the heart of the matter - blanket politburo regulation (the PC metaphor) to ensure conformity v.s. creative, freewheeling work (the MAC). We should be able to use one or two or three, even, climb lines as we see fit for the situation. We work in a "workplace of variable composition" (or something).
 
The thought that we could miraculously become safer by adopting standard rope industry tools or techniques, specifically two ropes, is laughable. This is just a short, randomly picked article, but it gives a fair explanation of typical SPRAT and IRATA protocols.

I have not trained a ton of climbers, but the few that I did stayed under my direct supervision for each days work. It took about 3 years of this to produce a well rounded climber.



"SPRAT a well-respected training and regulation organization for rope access in the U.S., requires an access work plan to be completed before beginning rope access work. That plan should include provisions for providing secure rope anchor locations, an accident response plan, and a risk assessment that identifies all hazards and outlines solutions to mitigate them, among other things.

For example, if technicians cannot find enough secure anchor points to tie off the ropes, or if technicians cannot work out a proper rescue plan based on the location of the job, then traditional scaffolding may make more sense.

Rope access cannot and should not be forced upon every site. If safety can be assured, then your team can reach new heights.


It’s About Time
Aspiring rope access technicians can’t expect to step on a site and wing it. They have to log plenty of rope time before they can get to work.

To be certified as a Level I technician by SPRAT, a worker must undergo 40 hours of classroom time, then be assessed on a jobsite by a third-party evaluator. To reach Level II, a technician has to put in 500 verified hours of rope time on a jobsite, which can take up to a year. Level III requires an additional 500 hours. The Industrial Rope Access Trade Association (IRATA), an international rope access governing body, requires 1,000 hours logged to reach Level II and another 1,000 hours for Level III, along with first aid training."
 
What I found interesting in sprat, and it may just be my unique experience. They are much less concerned by things like screw gate carabiners. Carabiners to carabiners attachment, crossloading potential of carabiners. Things that arborist take as golden rule. They kind of scoffed at all the triple lock biners. It was a different kind of safety culture. But being on two ropes at all times is golden rule. Anchors are all different and rope protection can be very tricky. They have to be very vigilant about something remotely cutting their ropes.


I definitly would want to be anchored to more than one of these. More than two I think... depending

You might throw some of these in some where.

 
Last edited:

New threads New posts

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