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?
@@Propeller_Head forgive me if I mess up the technical details surrounding the creation of it; but from my understanding Arizona FD came up with a seven step progression to go from a 3:1 pulley system to an 11:1 using the least amount of equipment. Basically you need 3 single pulleys, one double pulley, 3 Prusiks, a MPD with rigging plate (or clutch or whatever), 5 carabiners, and an anchor strap with rope. You start with a 3:1 then add pulleys in different ways to get up to a 11:1. I was told they would test people by saying a random step and youd have to build it for proficiency. I have a good power point for it
I see. No, the gear on my sling wasn’t selected to do that, but it certainly could. It has 4x single sheave pulleys, one double sheave, about 65’ of PowerCord, 15x 40KN twist-lock aluminum carabiners, 2x Rescucenders, a Tri-Link, & a SwivaBiner w/ 3-hole rigging plate. Intent was to augment any potential shortages from our rigging packs. In reality for both real rescues & training the only MAs I’ve seen used were Simple 3:1 w/ & w/o a c.d., Simple 5:1, Compound Batwing 9:1, Compound Batwing 5-on-3 15:1, & the occasional Complex Inside 9:1 for short line tension transfers but an AZTEK is often used for that purpose. Doing complex 5s, 7s, & 11s is fine & dandy to get people thinking about MA but I have yet to see any relevant application in fire-based rescue. Mountain/Backcountry rescue however is a different story where those complex systems do have more applicability in that environment.
can you make a minimum kit and rig for 2 person ( one has zero knowledge )self rescue from building on fire or lack of access stairs distance to ground 85 feet +- ?
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.
Always great information Bob, keep it up man
Thanks!
When are you going to start teaching classes? I’m in
Teaching classes? That's why I make the videos... & they're free!
Hi Bob happy summer, you will end up on one point with your aid climbing kit… unsafe? not for me to decide. Fail a rope access evaluation yeah…
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?
Is that set you have on the that fire-based/ industrial sling set like an “Arizona 7” set up?
I’ve never heard of that. What’s an Arizona 7?
@@Propeller_Head forgive me if I mess up the technical details surrounding the creation of it; but from my understanding Arizona FD came up with a seven step progression to go from a 3:1 pulley system to an 11:1 using the least amount of equipment. Basically you need 3 single pulleys, one double pulley, 3 Prusiks, a MPD with rigging plate (or clutch or whatever), 5 carabiners, and an anchor strap with rope. You start with a 3:1 then add pulleys in different ways to get up to a 11:1. I was told they would test people by saying a random step and youd have to build it for proficiency. I have a good power point for it
I see. No, the gear on my sling wasn’t selected to do that, but it certainly could. It has 4x single sheave pulleys, one double sheave, about 65’ of PowerCord, 15x 40KN twist-lock aluminum carabiners, 2x Rescucenders, a Tri-Link, & a SwivaBiner w/ 3-hole rigging plate. Intent was to augment any potential shortages from our rigging packs. In reality for both real rescues & training the only MAs I’ve seen used were Simple 3:1 w/ & w/o a c.d., Simple 5:1, Compound Batwing 9:1, Compound Batwing 5-on-3 15:1, & the occasional Complex Inside 9:1 for short line tension transfers but an AZTEK is often used for that purpose. Doing complex 5s, 7s, & 11s is fine & dandy to get people thinking about MA but I have yet to see any relevant application in fire-based rescue. Mountain/Backcountry rescue however is a different story where those complex systems do have more applicability in that environment.
can you make a minimum kit and rig for 2 person ( one has zero knowledge )self rescue from building on fire or lack of access stairs distance to ground 85 feet +- ?
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.