Видео

I’ve never heard of that. What’s an Arizona 7?

Thanks. No clue, they were sourced, cut, & sewn together by another employee for use in all our gear bags.

I think I might have mentioned it in a few videos…. “Whats on a rescuers harness”, “Passing Knots on Rappel”, “Passing Knots on Ascent”, “How Should I connect into my Rope Rescue System”, & I also use them in my High Angle Litter Rigging & Steep Angle Litter Rigging videos

@@Propeller_Head thanks!!

Describe “one point” a little more in depth. One point because all your connections are going into one point on your harness ventral ring? Or one point because the dual lanyard shares one attachment point due to the fact that the terminal end is a sewn eye into a single carabiner, instead of two completely separate lanyards through & through. While I don’t work as a rope access technician, nor do I evaluate any testing, my common-sense reasoning tells me that this is perfectly fine, regardless of what anyone or any other organization or institute thinks. Unless there is specific & repeatable testing that can prove that this is an unsafe practice. That’s what you were referring to right?

The single carabiner is the “issue”, harness attachment points are generally considered acceptable as a “single point.” Carabiners are not and I have had the same model twist lock open on me doing rope access style stuff, I caught it right as it happened and no big deal. That being said, I can’t sit here and keyboard warrior to say if your equipment is properly inspected and inventoried going to a single carabiner is unsafe in the aid climbing context (at least horizontal) because you are in often in plumb suspension. As soon as you go out of plumb and introduce more likelihood of some gate interference I think there’s reason to have a conversation. I do know of one (I would bet there are more) fatality that resulted from going to a single point on aid, however it was an anchorage failure, not the technicians equipment. If you aren’t doing rope access under some formal org that requires adherence to strict guidelines then who cares.

Right on. Thanks for the insight. I agree the twist-locks can be dangerous in the wrong set of circumstances. Theoretically most styles of carabiner gates can be unintentionally defeated. But I do love the twist-locks for ease of manipulation for most things (not all things though; I did have one gate open up where a tensioned line pressed against the gate & began to roll the gate open). Also agree on how things change the moment you are no longer plumb. As far as a purely horizontal aid application goes however, if you combine a Progress-Adjust-I lanyard with a Progress-Adjust-Y lanyard, & you are executing proper sequencing as you progress through the anchor points then at no time should you ever be connected to any fewer than two anchor points at any given time w/ two completely separate lanyards to include the pair of connectors into your ventral ring. This applies for moving in either direction (left-to-right, or right-to-left)... If at any point in time you fell or lost balance, you would always be connected on two anchor points with two separate lanyards & two separate carabiners that go to your harness.

@@Propeller_Head in order to move either direction you must at some point remove the progress adjust-I lanyard, leaving one connector from the progress adjust-y lanyard to your harness. The adjust I lanyard will still be connected to the ventral ring but not anchorage. You have 2 anchor points and one connection to the harness. You then regain that connection before you go into motion, which is why in all reality this is probably totally good enough. That’s where the problem would be on evaluation day.

You are correct. I know how to get passed it though…. How about taking a Prusik & hitching onto the Adjust-Y lanyard, then attaching that to your harness with another (3rd) carabiner?

Your welcome… Credit goes to Rigging for Rescue where I first saw it, but learned that they actually got the idea from some random ski patroller somewhere in Colorado once upon a time.

Maybe for the catenary angle at the top, but I was aiming for the angle of the foot of the latter at the bottom relative to horizontal..... It was actually around 56deg, about 10deg too shallow/acute

Worth a try, especially if we were gear-limited & did not have a tag line or an extra person to manage the tag line. However, if those two resources are available then the tag line option it is definitely a simpler approach. But I like the creativeness.

www.yatesgear.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=316_319&product_id=579

Glad to help!

Teaching classes? That's why I make the videos... & they're free!

In this video I have no slings for gear... unless you are asking about a gear sling that I show in another video, which is made by Metolius

@@Propeller_Head 🤣Yes Was supposed to commented on "What's on a Rope Rescuer's Harness? ... It Depends" auto play must have got me before I posted it! Thanks Bob!

I guess anyone can make anything they want. Your question is both fairly specific but also vague. 85+ feet is a long way to go for a minimalistic self-rescue kit. Also, who will be needing this? A firefighter or just a resident or office worker in a high-rise building? From a firefighter perspective, there are a handful of manufactured “bail-out” kits designed for firefighters to self-evacuate from an elevated window or roof. These systems are limited because firefighters have a lot of weight and other things they carry in their turn-outs, so space, weight, & bulk are limiting factors that typically limit the diameter & length of line to around 7mm of 50ft. With these kits, you can lower someone else to the ground first & they will need to detach so you can get the terminal line back & anchor it to the structure so that you can then rappel out, assuming that you have time for that. There are just so many variables & factors that go into that, it’s hard to give a simple explanation or solution.

Thanks!

Thank you

No, different canyon

Glad it was helpful!

Thanks. I see your point on having that primary working line connected higher on the sternal point instead of the ventral point to ensure a more upright position in the event of unconsciousness…. agreed, also an acceptable option

Thanks! It’s manufactured by Yates. We have the same problems & frustrations in our organization. We are hard on our gear & don’t have any separate rope gear dedicated to confined space. I cringe when I see people grabbing webbing, cordage, & ropes that are in our rope rescue bags & start using them in vehicle extrication & trench applications.

We thought about it but didn’t want to inadvertently leave knots in the line just in case someone forgot to untie it before raising the next person… for fear of getting hung up at the top of the VORTEX… but a good thing to consider for sure

Thanks, & spot-on observations. Under normal operating & training conditions, as well as when we teach, we are also tied off on fall restraint systems when near the hole, however in this video if we omitted that then that was by design because it interfered with our ability to get the video content & narration I was looking for. But yes you are correct. You are also correct on the connectors. Technically if we want to adhere to strict verbiage of OSHA then all the carabiners not only need to be auto-locking but also have that beefy 16Kn gate strength. Most all of the auto-locking carabiners that I use in other videos are my own. My department only has screw-lock, which are common for many fire departments out there….. There’s the letter of the law, then there’s the spirit of the law.

Right on!

Thanks! All valid points. I just showed the 2:1 for consistency & familiarity, as it seems to be the most well known & widely used technique. We’ve moved away from attaching directly to the airpack frame after there was a training incident some years ago where the pack frame broke (& don’t know the full details however).

So true! Thanks for watching Sir

There are max load placards located at each welded eyelet that is part or the aerial frame. Each eyelet on our aerial says “Max 250 lbs”. Yes, if you elect to rig webbing around the aerial rails then I would argue that your capacity “could” be more than if you were rigging to just the eyelets. Rigging anything to the aerial beyond those small bolts is a No-Go.

My pleasure… Happy to help out where I can

You are correct. The definition of the term is primarily based on intent…. the “theoretical” MA system that is being implemented is intended to tension things together, not to move/haul anything. And because of this intent, these are almost always rigged using only carabiners instead of pulleys.

Right on

Is this because of the rip on the back of my shirt in the video & you feel sorry for me? Or is it for promoting purposes?, because I have to be careful about promoting/advertising, as my channel needs to be as unbiased & neutral as I can possibly make it.

Just giving you a hard time about the rip. Love the videos. I was going to send you a union shirt from our department.

😂

Sure thats fine

You bet!

Right on, thanks!

Professional teams use Static Rope. Defined per Cordage Institute as having between 1-6% elongation at 10% of its minimum breaking strength

​@@Propeller_Head Thank You. So in one main line and one belay line system, both ropes are static ? And what do you think about tying backup knots every few feet when ascending a rope ? For example, when using ID and a hand ascender with no seperate rope and ASAP as backup. Is it ok to fall on a static rope like that in case something fails ?

Yes both lines are static. If you are starting out learning how to climb rope, its not a terrible idea to tie knots below your descender especially if you are using the “RAD” technique (as you described it), which would also be more relevant if using a device other than a descender such as a Gri-Gri, etc. But after you gain experience climbing with a variety of different gear & techniques, you’ll find that tying knots in your line can be cumbersome & excessive. I don’t ever tie any additional knots in any of my lines anywhere at any time, even when passing other knots. But I would advocate that it’s a good idea to tie a knot below you and clip into it any time you are going to start a process of removing components, such as when passing knots. I do not see any reason to be on a single line with both an I’D and an ASAP above it because your I’D is auto-locking AND it also has an anti-panic function to stop you when you screw up… this would be called “conditional self-belay”. Rope Access professionals & often Rope Rescue professionals will tend to use two lines and separate their gear out between these two lines: one line gets an I’D and the other line gets an ASAP, & this would then become an “independent self-belay”. You can fall onto your ASAP as long as it has the appropriate ‘Sorber shock pack attached to it. otherwise it’s a nasty tooth-cam rope grab that can damage the rope…. basically its the same thing as falling onto a handled ascender at that point

@@Propeller_Head I understand using two lines and separating the gear like you said. I wouldn't use the ASAP on the same rope as my ID. I was talking about having only one rope and ascending it with RAD or some other system. Are backup knots necessary in that case ? Or is it enough just to have a sling or PAS attached to the hand ascender as second point of attachment ? And does it make a difference which device I'm using as progress capture. For example, is it ok to ascend a rope using just croll or ID as progress capture and a hand acender with only a foot loop attached to it. No backup knots, and no second rope with ASAP ? I know falling on asap with apsorber is ok, but what about falling on a backup knot in a static rope ? Thank you for your time.

So when climbing on a single rope I do not see any need to tie knots in your rope below you unless you are operating way beyond your knowledge, skills, & abilities. Again if you are starting out, you CAN tie a Butterfly knot below you and then clip that into your harness to prevent you from falling to your death if you really screw things up. But then as you ascend a couple of feet, you’ll then need to disconnect & undo that knot, then repeat the process with another knot that is closer to you. In theory this will keep your freefall potential to a minimum. Now, if you are ascending w/ a croll & handled ascender (frog system), you need to have a cows tail connected between your harness and the handled ascender. That way if you come out of your croll and fall, you fall onto your handled ascender. On the flipside, if you step up and for some reason you fall back down onto your croll, that will stop you, but these accidents can damage the rope. If you break the rope at any of these points, tying knots below you on the line will not protect you… Yes its fine to use a croll or I’D as the capture and only have a cows tail to the handled ascender… Just limit your freefall potential to less than 2ft at any point in time

Thanks!

Right on… We’ve got Sundown, Iceman, Slider, & Sanchez among others

Right on. Fire

Mind blown? Your welcome

Bitteschoen

Try searching a 2007 ITRS paper called “Again… Are You Really on Belay?” written by Reed Thorne

Thanks for watching!

www.youtube.com/@UnifiedFireSpecialOperations He has another channel i found here. i reference his stuff a lot while teaching the fellas

Me too

Right on, thanks!

A bunch of hands. Unless you are referring to the steel rack frame that's a custom fabrication.

@@Propeller_Head I was referring to the frame. I'm currently trying to find something similar for my mountain.

What resort are you? The frame has always been around as long as I've worked there (possibly built around 2004-2005 ish), so I don't know how/where it came about. But if you contact me via e-mail, I may be able to send you some different pics of what the frame looks like & possibly point you in the right direction for a contact who might know more about it.

I'm not super passionate about one over the other & there is no such thing as a "one-device quiver" to do it all.... just like "all-season" tires are sort of ok but only in the mid-range of the weather elements. It all depends. Am I choosing it as an item for my personal kit or some other "team" kit? And what do I foresee the majority of application? What is my "mission profile"? For example, fire-based technical rescue teams for the most part, in all reality, will use team-based systems. Therefore I would choose a Maestro hands down all day over a Clutch because there is no "anti-panic" feature that tends to be annoying when operating the device at an anchor (fixed brake/DCD). Plus the release handle is setup to be more ergonomic when operating at the anchor, but less so if using it as a descender. I also find it easier to operate it as an "independent team belay" if needed, vs. the Clutch. On the other hand, the Clutch offers more versatility, as it can be used as either a travelling brake (descender) or as a fixed brake (DCD). And while the Clutch does not have a built-in friction horn like the Maestro, you can always route the rope through a carabiner re-direct to make up for it. Personally I think it would be awesome if the Clutch did not have the anti-panic feature & was more like a Petzl Rig, in size as well. So my personal kit that I keep at my fire-based job I keep an ascending kit with a Petzl Rig in a side pouch on my harness. The Rig is there because it cuts down on size, weight, and does not have an "anti-panic" feature which for me I really like (but for people who don't do this very often then that may be dangerous). The team equipment that we carry consists of a handful of IDs, Maestros, & MPDs. My personal "On-Rope" & Rope Access kit that I have at home I have a Clutch. Clutches are hands down my favorite for on-rope work, albeit they are HEAVY, so I would not be taking it anywhere that would require me to hike or travel on foot a significant distance.

@@Propeller_Head Awesome, I very much appreciate the time and thought you put into things. Haven't had the opportunity to use a Maestro but you've piqued my interest in it. At my department, we basically use the clutch exclusively, unless someone has their own kit along with them, there are some who do. Lots of petzl rigs and the like. Situation normal - we have more than enough FD clutches and gear to accomplish nearly anything, within reason. That being said, if our one and only heavy rescue is not available (distinct possibility given the breadth of their responses) we will not have access to our long lines or vortex, amongst other things. Additionally, generally speaking, our best and most experienced rope techs are assigned to the rescue, thus taking them out of play also. Therefore, I frequently try to train in a manner that forces us to solve problems as a Squad company with limited (rope tech) help and equipment. That leaves us with only 2 clutches. An eye opener when setting up a high line, for example. Anyway, thank you for sharing your knowledge. Your explanations are outstanding and immensely helpful, even for a simpleton, like myself.

Right on, thanks. Yea I guess if you wanted one device to do it all relatively well, then the Clutch is it. But if money is no object..... I'll take them both please