Climbing Techniques

[Tree Machine]

I love that, though it seems it will only do SRT. Could that invention be 'reinvented' to accommodate not only the one line, but the option of one OR two? And could it be made to apply and remove midline instead of having to feed the rope's end through? I'm just thinking the guy doing a 40 foot ascent and all he's got is his 200 foot rope. That would mean (SRT) 40 feet up, 40 feet down leaves 120 feet of line to feed through before the climb can start, or pre-feed the device 80 feet in and THEN set the rope.

Can spliced terminations fit through the device?

Again, I think the innovation is grand. I tend to shoot for the practical, though, as well as the versatile.

There are a LOT of SRT devices out there. Good ones. Rated. Time-tested.

To have a single device that applies mid-line, accomodates SRT, DbRT, or DdRT and does both (frictionless) ascent and (precision control) descent with convenient soft-lock and hard-lock options, now there's an invention that needs inventing. This does not exist that I know of, and anyone, please correct me if I'm wrong. That piece would set professional tree climbers in a truly unique class. And it should have a handle so you don't have to rely entirely on your hand grip on the rope.

Right now we're 30 years behind other disciplines. We have some incredibly resourceful climbers, I think it's possible.

 

[moss]

To have a single device that applies mid-line, accommodates SRT, DbRT, or DdRT and does both (frictionless) ascent and (precision control) descent with convenient soft-lock and hard-lock options, now there's an invention that needs inventing. This does not exist that I know of, and anyone, please correct me if I'm wrong.

I really like tools that are very good at one thing. It seems that a device that can do it all will not do one mode quite as well as a dedicated device. A worthy quest though. The Unicender gets close but doesn't cover DbRT.

DbRT does take away the SRT problem of easily moving or removing a rope from a TIP. DdRT still remains super convenient for climbing in the crown without the problem that SRT still has with taking the rope out remotely when you have to repitch etc.

Love the Rope Wrench!
-Andrew

 

[moss]

Right now we're 30 years behind other disciplines. We have some incredibly resourceful climbers, I think it's possible.

In some ways technical tree climbing is ahead, there are unique demands and requirements compared to many high angle disciplines that are basically up/down or "across". Or in the case of high angle rescue involve massive amounts of gear and are personnel intensive.

Doesn't mean that tree climbers aren't going to continue to push ahead and innovate.
-Andrew

 

[Tree Machine]

I really like tools that are very good at one thing. It seems that a device that can do it all will not do one mode quite as well as a dedicated device.

I very much agree. A exception is a dual ascender that ascends SRT as well as a single ascender + can ascend twin line equally well.

DbRT does take away the SRT problem of easily moving or removing a rope from a TIP.

... and eliminates the doubling effect at the tie in point, AND half the rope stretch/bounce and gives twice the amount of frictional area for footlocking. Those are the basic DbRT advantages, in addition to what you stated. There are more. I'll elaborate

DdRT still remains super convenient for climbing in the crown without the problem that SRT still has with taking the rope out remotely when you have to repitch etc.

Don't forget about this; 2:1 DdRT,there is rope friction being administered to the tree's cambium and the added wear to the rope, and the variable friction caused by differing limb diameters and bark textures and variable friction if that limb tie-in point is dry, wet or snow or ice covered and filth impregnating into the rope as it grinds across bark and moss. Or you can add a friction saver to the DdRT system, but that requires time setting it and retrieving it remotely from the ground. Also note that DdRT requires your weight and pressure to pull rope through the hitch and up and over the tie-in point. Requirement, not an option.

I would consider all the factors before assigning a method as super convenient. I read you carefully, Andrew. You say super convenient for climbing in the crown. If you add the part of using DdRt for ascent to get into the crown, it's a deal breaker as 2:1 is much more work and motion and time.

Even if you were to go twin line to the tie-in point, you still now have to flipline in, pull the tail of the rope all the way up, ensure it doesn't get away from you and fall to the ground, fashion a friction hitch, tie, dress and set it, weight it, re-set it, add your stopper knot, THEN climb. Add setting the friction/cambium saver if you choose to smooth out the system and preserve the trees sensitive living tissue. Then you have to somehow remotely retrieve the friction saver from the ground, hoping it doesn't get stuck. On resinous conifers (without a friction saver), DdRT impregnates the rope with pitch as it passes over, gumming the rope and adding a sticky substance that can collect grit and debris. Resin does not wash out with soap and water. It requires a solvent.

Personally, I find DbRT 'super convenient' because it streamlines everything by taking all the above out of the equation, though you can opt to include any one of the above if it presents an advantage.

The problem with DbRT (1:1 twin) is the right descent gear has not yet been developed commercially. That doesn't mean the rope technique isn't superior in all respects, it just means the gear is not there yet to take full advantage of it. Stating the goals I just have, we are close to to imagining, and then developing that piece

I see an ideal descent piece as that it handles SRT or Twin equally well. If it does SRT, if you anchor the tail to YOU instead of the tree, you are now 2:1 DdRT, so really, all we need is a piece that can handle one single line, or the two lines. If it handles two lines it needs to handle them identically and simultaneously, OR independently of one another.

 

[moss]

Don't forget about this; 2:1 DdRT,there is rope friction being administered to the tree's cambium and the added wear to the rope, and the variable friction caused by differing limb diameters and bark textures and variable friction if that limb tie-in point is dry, wet or snow or ice covered and filth impregnating into the rope as it grinds across bark and moss. Or you can add a friction saver to the DdRT system, but that requires time setting it and retrieving it remotely from the ground. Also note that DdRT requires your weight and pressure to pull rope through the hitch and up and over the tie-in point. Requirement, not an option.

For initial entry for a high TIP I cinch the limb single line, hitch is on the rope, ascender above the hitch, SRT up, when I reach the TIP quick switchover to DdRT with hitch already in place.

I always use a conduit cambium/rope protection for DdRT, very easy to install and take out. I make my own, very inexpensive as tree climbing gear goes. It's not as friction free as a pulley/block but it runs MUCH smoother than rope on bark. See photo below.

When I climb DdRT or SRT my hitch just rides the rope, very little friction, I don't sit back on the hitch per pull. My DdRT rig is not superior to 1:1 but for climbing in the crown it is very good considering all the other DdRT conveniences.

Simple to install and take out "Dan House" cambium/rope protection

Example of climbing SRT with hitch riding the rope ready for DdRT in the crown, hitch rides the rope the same position when climbing DdRT, grabs when loaded, hands just pull rope, for SRT a bungee moves ascender up automatically.

By the way, I appreciate your calm and rational way of discussing climbing technique.
-AJ

 

[Saw Dust Smoken]

dual

Tree Machine how do you descend with dual ropes? Or change over to 2:1 to go down?

 

[Tree Machine]

Sawdust, I will answer that in just a moment. Let me reply to Andrew first.

By the way, I appreciate your calm and rational way of discussing climbing technique.
-AJ

As do I appreciate exchanging with you. We're actually having a discussion about science and physics; friction vs gravity, basically. This not a debate or opinion-fest, or who prefers what. It's an objective look into three rope techniques and defining the advantages in the different methods of controlling friction.
Thank you for your pictures, Andrew. They're very helpful.

I've been having these exact same conversations for almost 10 years, since these forums were born. Most climbing arborists seem to deny that twin line technique even exists, and that SRT is gear intensive and technically difficult. All they've learned is DdRT, most are married to hitch-based friction and very few climbers I've ever met truly understand how inefficient 2:1 ascent is as they have no experience with the other rope techniques as a point of reference. 2:1 DdRT may be all a man ever climbs in his Arborist career. He may try SRT and attempt it solely with a hitch, but this is a guaranteed recipe for failure. Since twin line work is possible only with a dual ascender, without that piece of gear, the only remaining option is the one pretty much all arborists use; 2:1 DdRT.

I hope everyone can see why 2:1 DdRT is king in our industry. It's not because it's the best technique. It just started out as a practical and effective technique in the age of Manila rope, before there was any gear that could offer something better. Now, it's programmed into our tree climbing culture, both professional and recreational, generations deep.

 

[Tree Machine]

I have pointed out quite a number of differences between and advantages of one rope technique over another, however, I have (personally) found one and only one advantage of 2:1 DdRT over the 1:1 techniques, and that advantage is ONLY on the way around the crown and downward, not upward. I have to say, I find it a minor advantage at best, though it seems to be at the heart of it all, and that is
the 2:1 DdRT friction hitch system allows you to remove your hands from the rope and you will hang suspended and if your hitch is tied and dressed properly, you will stay suspended, full weight, on the rope.

In other words, you don't have to lock anything off to secure your position. The hitch constricts the climb line automatically, that is the 'advantage'. It does it whether you want it to or not. Important point.

The setup I will show you in the next post, you are always securely affixed to the rope, but you need to place it in lockoff, which takes me somewhere between 1 and 2 seconds. You are in lockoff only if you choose to be.

for climbing in the crown it is very good considering all the other DdRT conveniences.

I pointed out the one advantage that most consider to be an advantage. May I ask, what are all the other conveniences of 2:1?

 

[Tree Machine]

And if the DdRT convenience is one that is shared by the other two techniques, don't bother listing it, for example; DdRT does not twist the rope. Well, that is a basic advantage of the others, too.

 

[Saw Dust Smoken]

dual descender

TM I found you info on the other forum. Ill have to try the ATC.

The USHBA is made in a handled form? Would like to own one of these. With the tilt of handle - you descend.

With some slight mod. The rope could be ran through mini rack made with handle. Release handle- on hard lock. Rotate handle - descend.

 

[Tree Machine]

A rack is a poor choice, for this reason and this reason alone: tending slack (pulling the tail of the rope down through to progress upward) is less than reasonable. If you're just going down, albeit slow to put on and take off, a rack is a good choice.

Just as the new enhanced safety dual ascenders allow you to easily adjust back downward, a good descender should allow you to pull slack easily through it and advance the descent piece upward as you climb the tree. In this respect, depending on the tree's structure, you can go up, or down, on the ascender or the descender. As Moss and I agree, we like individual pieces that do very well what they do. To have each able to cross over into the other's 'job', well, that just allows you a lot of personal flexibility once into the crown. With a handled ascender (single or dual), you don't have to tend slack anymore. Advancing the ascender IS tending the slack. In contrast, going upward with a descent piece, you almost always have to pull slack through as you go. With a hitch, it's not an 'almost always'. It's an ALWAYS have to pull rope through. Friction hitch is never a self-feeding system. For this reason, I generally work off the duals on the way up and around the crown, and change over only when the work becomes a downward issue or I'm ready to come out of the tree.

Little known fact: you can have ascenders and a descender on the same rope, at the same time, one in wait of it's mission while the other it actively being used. Moss has shown an example of this exactly, but opposite in order and function of what I might do. His ascender pushes up a friction hitch in wait. In reverse order I might be on my descent piece for a fork drop-thru at the end of a long limb-walk. I might leave the ascenders on the rope, attached still to my harness, but cams disengaged. Drop down using the friction piece, reactivate the ascender cams (you're secured now by BOTH devices since you are stationary) do the work vertically below your drop-thru point, and finally disengage the descender and go back up and through. This sorta move is not even possible on a 2:1 friction hitch system.

An ATC, I will address this in detail, but PLEASE, do not adopt a piece of gear because I show a picture of it. I'll use the same wording as Moss

Example of climbing.... (insert rope technique)

It will be nothing more than an example, not a method I will prescribe for anyone. The ATC has a great number of benefits and advantages but is overshadowed by one single issue; use it wrong, you can die.

Now, if you read Arboricultural accidents and injuries on any of the forums, you see men of our industry dropping like flies, a very disturbing and sobering read. Or read our industry death reports from the TCIA Magazine. If you see that a climber fell, and there's no indication of the tie-in point failing catastrophically, you have to read between the lines to exactly why he fell. Cops and reporters don't know the difference between a rope and a hitch, and may not be specific on whether a rope broke (yea, right) or a knot came untied. To them, the specifics may not matter so much as getting the report done so they can move on to the next.

The men taking falls are quite likely climbing DdRT because that's pretty much all our industry climbs on. Why and what failed? The exact details are rarely ever spelled out.

Climbing is inherently dangerous. Do NOT assume because I show an example that you are safe to climb on it. You are safe, only if you successfully keep yourself safe. You can not rely on a hitch or a friction piece to keep you alive. Your head has to be in the game and self-vigilance is the name of the game.

With that disclaimer, also know that I am in no way an instructor or a teacher, so don't assume that I am. I am a technician 8-10 hours a day, but in these forums, its show-and-tell, NOT instruction and guidance, got it?

 

[Tree Machine]

The USHBA is made in a handled form? Would like to own one of these. With the tilt of handle - you descend.

Umm, no. Not exactly. Tilt the handle you downwardly adjust. It is very important to know the difference between downward adjustment, and descent. They are different animals. Any ascender is downwardly adjustable, but only if your weight is off the system.

USHBA, made of titanium alloy, brilliantly designed, a lightweight mechanical piece of art, though not a dual ascender. Being a single handled single ascender, it can only do what a single ascender does. If you are hanging suspended on rope, SRT, the USHBA does not allow you to go back down on it. In my world, that limits your climbing options.

A dual ascender allows you to do anything a single ascender does, but also allows short 2:1 descents (in twin line mode, not SRT) while fully weighted and suspended on the rope. Any single ascender, USHBA or otherwise does not allow this.

 

[moss]

I pointed out the one advantage that most consider to be an advantage. May I ask, what are all the other conveniences of 2:1?

Besides zero configuration change needed to switch between ascent and descent mores (Singing Tree Rope Wrench solves that for SRT, nice!) the main convenience for DdRT (for me anyway) is how easy it is to remotely install and remove the rope from the TIP.

It may be that my typical climbing scenario doesn't match up well with typical work climbing. I'm often lead climbing in tall conifers where I have to constantly repitch my way up, SRT doesn't make sense. For a climber following, yes, I'll set them up SRT.
-Andrew

 

[Saw Dust Smoken]

New

The USHBA does not descend being loaded. Modification is needed. Put weight on other parts of same unit for descent.

TM. On trying new equipment. Slow and low first. Ten plus year of climbing here.

Doing more mechanical climbing this past year. Looking for less friction up and down.

 

[kevin bingham]

Besides zero configuration change needed to switch between ascent and descent mores (Singing Tree Rope Wrench solves that for SRT, nice!) the main convenience for DdRT (for me anyway) is how easy it is to remotely install and remove the rope from the TIP.

It may be that my typical climbing scenario doesn't match up well with typical work climbing. I'm often lead climbing in tall conifers where I have to constantly repitch my way up, SRT doesn't make sense. For a climber following, yes, I'll set them up SRT.
-Andrew

I think that people assume that with SRT you have to be trunk tied. On a large porcentage of my climbs I will tie off with a running bowline or a caribiner girth hitched. Throw your line up high clip and pull and climb to the next spot. I find the true advantage of SRT climbing comes when actually working the tree, ascent is whatever, it is the difference between 30 seconds footlocking fast or 5 minutes body-thrusting slow. In the scheme of the day, the ascent is not that important. its the next four hours that you are working your way around the canopy. Single line is the simplest and most efficient in in terms of rope management and friction management.

 

[arborpros]

Ten plus year of climbing here.

Doing more mechanical climbing this past year. Looking for less friction up and down.

I find myself in the same position with roughly the same amount of time aloft. Do you think there is a reason for looking in to new techniques at this point of our careers? I find that I just did not know of anything else than what I was doing and I didn't have the money to buy the new equipment even if I wanted to. But in the last year I discovered a 2 in 1 lanyard, a few different rigging techniques, Treemotion saddle(holy crap!), and some new ways to assend. Makes life a lot easier and I love learning new things.

And they say money doesn't buy you happiness.

 

[D Mc]

A dual ascender allows you to do anything a single ascender does, but also allows short 2:1 descents (in twin line mode, not SRT) while fully weighted and suspended on the rope. Any single ascender, USHBA or otherwise does not allow this.

TM - What is the advantage here? Do you set a friction saver when working in this mode to prevent damage on thin-barked trees?

Besides zero configuration change needed to switch between ascent and descent....

I'm sure by now both you and TM have tried out the Unicender and found it lacking? How so?

Do you think there is a reason for looking in to new techniques at this point of our careers?

Absolutely. I have been climbing a long time and to stop learning and adapting is ignoring the life going on around you. I can't tell you how often I think to myself, I wish I had known then what I know now.

Dave

 

[arborpros]

I agree Dave. I have found myself just getting comfortable with my techniques to the point of not wanting to try anything else. If it isn't broke don't fix it you know? Now I'm getting a little older and more beat up and I'm thinking to myself how to make things easier. I wish I would have been more open minded in my younger years. It would have paid off.

 

[moss]

I think that people assume that with SRT you have to be trunk tied. On a large porcentage of my climbs I will tie off with a running bowline or a caribiner girth hitched. Throw your line up high clip and pull and climb to the next spot. I find the true advantage of SRT climbing comes when actually working the tree, ascent is whatever, it is the difference between 30 seconds footlocking fast or 5 minutes body-thrusting slow. In the scheme of the day, the ascent is not that important. its the next four hours that you are working your way around the canopy. Single line is the simplest and most efficient in in terms of rope management and friction management.

I also utilize a cinched SRT tie-off with carabiner or running bowline for certain moves in a tree, it's just that you have to climb back up to it to take it out or implement a pulldown of one kind or the other. That's near enough to keep it from replacing 2:1, plus I haven't tried your nifty singing tree rope wrench yet, that might change my mind.
-Anderw

 

[moss]

I was thinking more about 2:1 vs. 1:1 for climbing in the crown today, while I was climbing in the crown of course. I noticed I was doing something that 2:1 allowed to work well, I was working past some limbs that were slightly redirecting the path of the rope. With one foot on the tail with a Pantin and a free arm holding me off the limb I was passing, the other arm pulling rope combined with the Pantin power allowed me to climb past the limb easily. In a 1:1 situation I would probably need two arms on the rope to move up, I could do it one-armed but it's asking more to climb one-armed 1:1. If that makes sense. I'm not saying 1:1 is not good or can't work for that situation but wanted to show an example where 2:1 made it very smooth.

I will remain open to pushing more SRT into my crown climbing but the utility of 2:1 is pretty strong for me at this point.
-Andrew