Why SRT for canopy access

[rmihalek]

I've read in a couple places now that single rope technique (SRT) is a preferred way to gain access to the tree canopy but that once in the tree the doubled rope technique (DdRT) allows better manuverablility.

As a newbie, I don't see why SRT is a faster way to climb other than the fact that mechanical ascenders are used. Is that all there is to it?

 

[moss]

You can move faster up the rope SRT 'cause it's 1:1 as opposed to 2:1 for DdRT. It's more of an issue for arborists who want to get to the canopy quickly. Or for rec climbers who climb huge conifers. Just about any tree can be climbed DdRT. You just a need a long enough rope to get to the first branch. The current thinking in rec climbing instruction is master DdRT first then learn SRT. SRT gives you another skill set and more options for entering a tree.

 

[rbtree]

With SRT, it isn't necessary to isolate the crotch so that both line ends tail along the same path, which is next to impossible with many conifers. And it is less strenuous than body thrusting which also can damage the tree if a friction saver isn't installed. Accomplished footlockers have little reason to bother with the extra gear SRT requires.

 

[notahacker]

SRT saves energy and time. Period. I use a combination of both nearly every climb. Sometimes I access the tree using SRT until I get to a good spot to switch to the DdRT and then the manuverability is there.

For example, a 50' tree. I hit a shot at 40' ascend only 30', switch and then work DdRT.

Then there are times when I will access SRT, go to the top and switch to DdRt and work my way down.

Some removals I will use SRT. I will hit a high shot, ascend SRT, de-limb on my way up, and the tree will be nearly done. After I have made it to my throw shot targeted crotch, I will then switch to DdRT and chunk out the rest on my way down.

If I am working a large removal and I need to get a water break, then re-access is much easier SRT, than hip thrusting 40'.

Like stated the reward for your work is 1:1 with SRT. I like to say you get more "bang for your buck."

 

[Tom Dunlap]

If you look around the rest of the working-rope world, you'll find that arbos are the only ones who work on a moving rope. In ALL other rope disciplines the rope is stationary and the climber moves on the rope. In time, there will be more arbos working on SRT.

Did you read this article?

http://tinyurl.com/er9d9

 

[1I'dJak]

sooo.... would this be acceptable for srt?: install rope over crotch... anchor rope with running bowline....tie in saddle to rope with split tail (blake's hitch)... set ascender below friction hitch (toothed petzl hand ascender) and footlock my way up...
I don't wont fancy ascending systems and like to keep it simple...

 

[sawn_penn]

If you look around the rest of the working-rope world, you'll find that arbos are the only ones who work on a moving rope. In ALL other rope disciplines the rope is stationary and the climber moves on the rope. In time, there will be more arbos working on SRT.

Yep. I don't climb and cut, but I've used SRT for caving, aid climbing, mountaineering, and industrial access. It's a versatile technique. There is a lot of slick Petzl gear that makes changeovers from (up to down or down to up) really fast - a couple of seconds.

It's a shame that none of this stuff is antigravity.

 

[moss]

Some excellent information in this thread though the recreational climbing part has been left out a little. Considering that a rec climber may not be in a rush to get to the top and is not approaching the climb with a "I'm going to prune or limb this tree as efficiently as possible" mindset where does SRT fit in? I detect an assumption that body-thrust is the only way to ascend DdRT, rbtree rightly pointed out that footlocking works very well DdRT. Rec climbers can also use a footloop prusik or Pantin if they aren't proficient footlocking. Using any one of the footlocking/footloop techniques allows a DdRT climber to ascend all day without getting tired.

The SRT upside for rec climbing
1. No need to isolate the crotch for conifers or hardwoods with dense branching*
2. More efficient climbing for long ascents
3. Allows the use of lighter weight static ropes for long ascents (easier to carry in)

The SRT downside for rec climbing:
1. More complex equipment configuration
2. Requires hardware switchover in most scenarios to go from ascent to descent
3. Switchover to DdRT for canopy climbing requires SRT and DdRT gear set
4. Increased load potential on limb

*Using a split-tail and lanyard DdRT negates the branch isolation problem solved by SRT. For rec climbing the climbing slowdown required to lanyard in, detach and reattach split-tail to pass a trapped limb is not a factor except in densely branched conifers. At that point the climber might want to use the alt lanyard technique anyway.

I think rec climbers will always want SRT in their toolkit. The question is whether or not current SRT technology/technique can match the simplicity and flexibility of DdRT as an all purpose rec climbing system.
-moss

 

[Tom Dunlap]

The SRT downside for rec climbing:
1. More complex equipment configuration

Not really...Most everyone can make up slings to substitute for any mechanical tools. A great lower attachment point can be made from a short sling with a slack tender below. No different than a climbing hitch on SRT. The upper doesn't have to be an ascender, ropes and hitches work too.

2. Requires hardware switchover in most scenarios to go from ascent to descent

In some systems all that needs to be done is to remove one of the ascenders.

3. Switchover to DdRT for canopy climbing requires SRT and DdRT gear set

See #2
4. Increased load potential on limb

This is the only real change from DdRT climbing. BUT!!!... a climber needs to understand safety factors. If a tie in point will only support the load plus a bit more...the safety factor is only 'a bit mnre'. All of the rest of our gear is made with at least a 10:1 safety factor. Why would anyone trust that their anchor point, the place where their life is supported, doesn't meet the same requirment.

There are some rope/hitch combinations that work very well on SRT. When I've been testing various setups, my goal is to find a rope/hitch that performs as well as a DdRT setup. So far, the closest that I've come is around 70% More people need to be doing the research. The sooner we get more creative people searching, the sooner we'll have a viable solution.

The next phase of testing will add some sort of device to the round turns of the friction hitch to add diameter. Similar to a Bachmann hitch.

 

[Sizzle-Chest]

Tom, I would like to point out that choosing a climbing system is based not just on function but personal preference as well. Earlier you said something about how arborists are the only ones in the "working-rope world" to use as dynamic climbing rope system (in the sense that the rope moves). Part of this has to do with the fact that arborists start at the bottom and work up, rather than the other way around and that branches facilitate Ddrt in a way that few other climbing situations can. At the same time, in the recreation department i believe that rock climbing still utilizes a similar rope system for belays.

What I'm getting at is Ddrt has an established reputation as a useful method, both in tree and rock climbing. I don't like to use the banal saying "its like apples and oranges", but along those lines, a more fitting comparison (especially in the world of recreation) is skiing and snowboarding. Both are means of getting down a snow covered slope, but people usually prefer one over way the other because of certain subtleties. For instance, if your going for pure speed or moguls, skiing is the way to go. In the same sense, SRT gets you straight up the tree and for long ascents its definitely the way to go. But lets say you like to stop and hit every jump you can find or go to the half-pipe, then you're probably going to be snowboarding. Similarly, when climbing Ddrt, you can ascend a little, descend a little, quickly go up a little more and then drop to the ground without ever having to change even one piece of the climbing system. With skiing you have more gear (poles) and snowboarding is considered easier to learn. And a person can Ddrt without special ascending gear and its easier to learn. Then you got telemarking, which is like double footlocking long ascents. You see dudes doing it and wonder if they enjoy punishing themselves (just kidding).

Outside this comparison, there are other reasons a person might prefer Ddrt over SRT. For instance, if the tree is short and how low-lying limbs, it would be asinine to spend the time rigging up an SRT system to climb 20 feet. And some people simply like Ddrt climbing. Personally, i like to footlock my rope, which isnt much of a possibility SRT. That being said, I like SRT when the application is appropriate.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

SC,

All good points.

I don't think of rock climbing as being a rope-climing situation. The rope is for a belay...but let's not quibble about details. The RADS works and is used by some rock/rescue people. I've spent time refining the RADS and it works pretty well.

At the present time, DdRT is the system of choice. That's not surprising since it has close to a century of tradition behind it. In time, SRT will break part of that tradition. Over time we're going to see it become more normal instead of being considered radical or outlandish.

Agreed, both have their place for a working system. I don't think that there is much arguement about SRT being a simpler, easier way to access the crown though.

 

[Sizzle-Chest]

agreed. another point i forgot to make was that an emphasis on SRT might have a benificial impact on recreational tree climbing as a whole. tree damage caused by Ddrt climbing is one of the most significant problems surrounding RTC. fortunately, this problem can be entirely avoided using SRT. granted, setting false crotches/ cambium savers does mitigate this problem. however, the hassel and expense involved makes it a less than desireable option. just another advantage of SRT i guess!

 

[xtremetrees]

Shoot im lazy anymore I hurt all over. Ill just walk rite upside a tree and dont even body thrust to advance my knot. just walk up it and flip up then advance my hitch

 

[moss]

Rec climbers are lucky to have Tom leading the way as SRT researcher and evangelist. I was looking at some tall white pines yesterday and thinking:
a. No way I can throw to the first branch
b. SRT

 

[Fireaxman]

Rec climbers are lucky to have Tom leading the way as SRT researcher and evangelist. I was looking at some tall white pines yesterday and thinking:
a. No way I can throw to the first branch
b. SRT

No way to throw to the first branch? No Big Shot? No RetrieverTrainer? I've had good luck with a bow and modified arrow. Pulled the point from an aluminum shaft, filled the shaft with bird shot, and screwed an additional lead weight into the threads where the point screwed in. Got the shaft weight up to 8 oz. Put a line 80 feet up a loblolly last week with a 45 lb recurve on the first try.

 

[moss]

No way to throw to the first branch? No Big Shot? No RetrieverTrainer? I've had good luck with a bow and modified arrow. Pulled the point from an aluminum shaft, filled the shaft with bird shot, and screwed an additional lead weight into the threads where the point screwed in. Got the shaft weight up to 8 oz. Put a line 80 feet up a loblolly last week with a 45 lb recurve on the first try.

I'm throwing by hand only for now. I'm getting some high throws using the the cradle throw. Still have to work on the final frontier in hand throwing, the dreaded but powerful backwards cradle throw. The first time I tried it a while back I cut a nice line burn in my forearm and direct hit the trunk extremely hard about 10 ft off the ground I'm over the trauma, time to work on that throw again. It's got a ton of power in it, just have to calibrate the release angle (a lot).

I guess big shot is next on the list. I know I haven't reached my max potential height on hand throwing so I want to continue trying. I like the bow idea, any model/type bow to recommend? Is a 45 lb. recurve the way to go? Are you using a small diameter throwline like Zing-it or are you using monofilament with the bow?

 

[Sizzle-Chest]

moss, put the big shot at the top of your list. i put off buying it, but the first time i used it i'de wished that i'de bought it a long time ago. Seriously, it only takes one shot to realize what you've been missing!

 

[pantheraba]

moss, put the big shot at the top of your list. i put off buying it, but the first time i used it i'de wished that i'de bought it a long time ago. Seriously, it only takes one shot to realize what you've been missing!

Sizzle be speakin' truth...I have used a bow and Big Shot...the BS is amazing in it's accuracy. Throwing is OK but the BS shines.

 

[Sizzle-Chest]

hey panthro, havent seen you for a while! how's life treating you?

 

[pantheraba]

Tryin' to keep up with life. Re: trees...I tried some SRT again this week, still don't have a good system yet. I do lots better with DdRT, ropesaver, ascenders and pantin...a little slower but my technique is a lot more efficient.

I'll be rigging a small speedline tomorrow...I have a thread started on that at the Buzz:

http://tinyurl.com/onzhm

I trust the bambino is fine. Bring me up to speed on what you have been doing with trees lately.