2 or 1 Rescuer for High Angle.

[Riversong]

[QUOTE=JAFA62;758235]Riversong do you have an email address and I will send u a picture of what I mean.[QUOTE]
Please do. [email protected]

You gave your point and I GOT IT.

I'm glad to hear this, but I was repeating myself because it didn't seem as if you were willing to hear what far more experienced practitioners and trainers were trying to tell you.

Im just saying that this is one of the methods I have learned. And I happened to have liked it.

And this is how questionable practices get promulgated. An "instructor", who typically has himself received minimal training, passes on techniques or "facts" (you wouldn't believe how many times I've heard people claim that a bowline has no place in rescue), which continue to get passed along and eventually become dogma.

High Angle has so many differnet setups. This is just one of many.

There are many variations which are more or less equally functional, efficient, and safe. There are some which aren't.

I use a 6-bar rack where as you might use a Fig 8.

I used the example of a rescue-8 because it is, unfortunately, widely used in the fire service in the US. It offers less friction than any other rappel device (including most recreational devices), and - IMHO - is inappropriate for rescue work, particularly for anything more than a one-person load, and should never be used as a rescue belay.

- Robert

[resqtek]

The system which I have video footage of utilized a brake rack as well. The problem is, if you have a problem while lowering(the rack is not locked off), you can easily create enough force to overcome the friction of the rack. Keep in mind how many bars you would practically have while lowering.

This does not rule out the hazard of a rescuer and patient being subjected to an uncontrolled swing fall when captured by the tether. I have seen the tether lengthened in order to accomodate anchorage and edge transitions as well. In a couple cases, the tether was up to 20 feet long. Proponents of this system will respond with, " it is never going to be needed any way, the system (16mm rope) is too strong". My response to them was, "get rid of the tether then if you are so confident." I think you can imagine where that conversation went.

I will try to scan some of the old documantation for you guys to clarify what we are talking about.

[Riversong]

Looks perfectly safe to me. They have a swing scaffold to catch a fall!!!!!

[jmatthe2]

I know there is a local flavor for rope rescue. I have been to a lot of places where I have said, "I would do it different". I'm not saying if this is right or wrong....but....

I look at a rope system based on its safety and efficiency. Does this look safe or is it providing "safety" to the resuce? This is open to debate. The pendulum alone would be significant enough to create significant rope movement along the edge, and a sudden load to the second rescuers system could be catastrophic as there would be a sudden three person load (Although the peak force would be slightly less due to the pendulum and not a full drop.) How is the tether attached? This could also put a three-person load on the harness or descender. I tend to lean more toward the maybe this isn't the safest way to effect the rescue.

Is it efficient? What purpose does this serve? The second rescuer is nearly 20' away and, in no way, help in the extrication. It seems like a lot of extra rigging and risk or putting another rescuer over the edge and gaining no benefit.

resqtek - you mention 16mm (5/8) rope. Is that just for the tether? (I hope it is) I have a concern of loading three people onto 1/2" rope (which is what the majority of Urban fire departments carry). You guys who comment that 5/8 rope won't break are probably right, but it is only one component of many that could fail...including human error!

Another point of contention is how many belay lines are in this scenario? If the second rescuer is the "safety", than we have violated the long standing practice of not loading the secondary, or belay line.

I just don't see the benefit to this system in a pick-off rescue. If there was a stokes basket and obstacles I would certainly use a second rescuer, but they would be attached to an independant system, or the typical two person stokes configuration.

[Riversong]

resqtek - you mention 16mm (5/8) rope. Is that just for the tether? (I hope it is)

Actually, using a thicker - and more static - line for the tether would NOT make sense if it could take a shock load. The heavier rope should be the load lines, though it's almost never necessary to use such thick rope which won't be compatible with most rescue hardware.

I have a concern of loading three people onto 1/2" rope.

Raising or lowering 3-person loads is not uncommon (litter and two attendants), and is done even in mountain rescue with 7/16" rope. 1/2" rope can easily handle such loads. NFPA guidelines are based on a max 600 lb rescue load (15:1 SF) and wilderness rescue is typically based on a 10:1 safety factor.

If the second rescuer is the "safety", than we have violated the long standing practice of not loading the secondary, or belay line.

This "long-standing" practice is based more on dogma than on either function or safety.

A number of mountain or back-country rescue teams utilize a two-tensioned rope system for lowers, with each rope loaded and serving fully redundant functions. Keeping a belay or safety line loaded prevents the possibility of shock loading, which is the greatest danger when using low-stretch ropes.

In my mind, having identical, fully redundant and interchangeable rope systems is the safest option. This is what I've taught for industrial rescue, as it best meets the KISS principle.

- Robert

[jmatthe2]

Actually, using a thicker - and more static - line for the tether would NOT make sense if it could take a shock load. The heavier rope should be the load lines, though it's almost never necessary to use such thick rope which won't be compatible with most rescue hardware

.

I wasn't clear on this. 16mm rope is not common as mainline rope, at least in my part of the country. I pity the people who have to lug around 16mm rope in a high angle scenario.

Raising or lowering 3-person loads is not uncommon (litter and two attendants), and is done even in mountain rescue with 7/16" rope. 1/2" rope can easily handle such loads. NFPA guidelines are based on a max 600 lb rescue load (15:1 SF) and wilderness rescue is typically based on a 10:1 safety factor.

I make this statement not that a 3-person load cannot be put on a 1/2" rope, but the way this system would load the rope in the event of a failure.

This "long-standing" practice is based more on dogma than on either function or safety.

A number of mountain or back-country rescue teams utilize a two-tensioned rope system for lowers, with each rope loaded and serving fully redundant functions. Keeping a belay or safety line loaded prevents the possibility of shock loading, which is the greatest danger when using low-stretch ropes.

I agree that a two-tensioned rope system is a viable option. However, there are some differences of opinion in how safe rope rigging and rescue is done between mountain and urban rescue teams. (This could be a topic all on it's own!) Instead of saying an unloaded belay is based on dogma rather than on function and safety, I would say it is based on the environment, comfort level of the rescuers, and team preference.

[Riversong]

there are some differences of opinion in how safe rope rigging and rescue is done between mountain and urban rescue teams.

The primary difference is that urban rescue generally involves NFPA standard equipment (1/2" rope, steel carabiners) and wilderness rescue generally involves 7/16" rope and aluminum carabiners.

Other than that, and specific precautions for the particular environment, rigging principles are the same.

Instead of saying an unloaded belay is based on dogma rather than on function and safety, I would say it is based on the environment, comfort level of the rescuers, and team preference.

Please suggest a valid reason for keeping a belay line unloaded, other than the use of a belay device or technique which cannot work under tension (prusiks, 540).

[resqtek]

The mainlines were made with 16mm rope. The tether was made with 11mm dynamic rope. The tether was commonly attached to the rescuers harness which created some dangerous scenarios if the tether were ever needed.

Each system acts as the belay for the other. The mainline is captured by tandem prussics which are attached to the hauling system(3:1). The potential for a problem while hauling opens the door for catastrophe. At this point the haul system would not be tied off and would rely completely on the haulers to make the catch......or how about while resetting the haul?

As for the force created in the swing fall; the force created in a swing fall is the same as a straight vertical drop covering the same vertical distance. The jolt is less in a swing fall since the force is applied and increases over a greater distance. The peak force, however, at the apex of the arc is the same. This common misconception has been a topic in the fall protection community for years.

[kferrara2002]

Pick Off Rescues

We teach and practice the single rescuer method when dealing with "Pick-off" rescues. I note several reasons for this. First it reduces the risk to rescuers because we are not putting more personnel over the wall then we have to. If the rescuer needs equipment, the personnel above them can simply lower it down using a utility line. Second, using a single rescuer reduces the strain on manpower. Most small departments may not have the manpower needed to conduct a full scale rope rescue. By having a single rescuer performing the actual rescue, the other personnel up top can operate the belay systems and set up any other equipment that may be needed on scene. Regarding belay systems, we prefer to use the tandem prussic belay system as opposed to the 540 belay system.

One major factor that I have not seen in the threads posted here is the fact that no matter what system you set-up, you need to start at the anchor. If you do not have a BFR anchor, or multiple anchor points, then there is no need to overload the ones you have; hence going back to the single rescuer method. Obviously, the lighter the load, less risk is found. I certainly hope that everyone is practicing setting up your belays to a separate anchor point rather then to the same one your rappel line is attached to. Should that main line fail, the only direction you and the victim are going is down.

I’m sure each rescue is going to be dictated on the situation. There may be times where a two rescuer scenario will work. But we must always ensure safety and reduced risk is our number one priority.

[WBenner]

No more replys for me.

Its all good. I still prefer 2 man over one. You all have made your points. What you need to realize.. Im not a Rock climber but I'm a firefighter. most of you prefer 1 man but Im 100% sure Im not the only one who prefers 2man. If man power is there.

Have a good day. Be safe.

[Riversong]

Its all good. I still prefer 2 man over one.

It's NOT all good. And the system you describe - two rescuers on two separate ropes, tethered together, with no belay - is a recipe for disaster.

Other than making an inappropriate analogy to fireground partnering, you haven't offered a single valid reason for your preference.

If you can't understand the dangers of your system, then you need to reconsider your involvement in rope rescue.

- Robert

[WBenner]

Riversong God Of Ropes?

I do understand, the system Im talking about.I USE IT as well as many other Fire departments across North America. But maybe your right I should get out of the Rope business and I dont know become an garbageman or something like that. Besides when there are guys like you who seem to know it all. We should just allow you to do it all. But then again are you even in the Fire Service???
Robert This is ONE method, You choose not to use it good for you bad for me. The question I asked was 2 or 1 man rescue for pick off..You choose 1 made your point NOW MOVE ON..

[resqtek]

Hey JAFA, please try not to take it personal. Robert does have a lot of experience and has seen a lot of different teams doing things many different ways.

When you are exposed to a variety of teams, you see many of them that simply do what their instructors have told them with out much thought as to why it is done that way. In fact many of these instructors are often simply regurgitating the same stuff that was taught to them with an equal absence of thought. I encourage my students to challenge anything I tell them because I am confident what I am teaching them is proven, safe and simple. It can be extremely frustrating trying to help people that do not want to take a close look at what they are doing. Particularly when what they are doing violates common standards and laws. (OSHA,NFPA,OH&S) We all mean well(even Robert) and just want to see people working safely and be able to justify their actions. Better to try to find justification now than in court.

Play safe

[kferrara2002]

Safety guys!

Resqtek / everyone,

I agree with what you are saying. Here at our academy, we strive on teaching the newest and obvious safest techniques out there. We demonstrate to our students the simplest methods of performing various rescues. Only when they understand the basics do we move onto the more advanced and riskier methods. We get our training from companies such as CMC and rescue departments around the world. Most departments I have found are self taught though. By operating in that manner, they open themselves for disaster. Just because you got away with it one time and nobody was injured or worse yet died, does not mean you will get away with it the next time. You really need some type of formal training.

We are the same as you regarding challenges presented by students. It’s their feedback that drives us to be better instructors. Granted NFPA does not state that you have to have either one or two rescuers. But it comes down to common sense. As a rescuer, the question must be asked “do I place more risk on myself and other rescuers to get this guy or do I play it safe?” I would certainly hope that the Incident Commander is asking that question initially and throughout the rescue operation. Should the worst case ever occur, you can be guaranteed that when the investigators come in to determine what happened, they will be asking why. Why did the rescuers perform the way they did? Why couldn’t they perform the rescue with one person rather than two?

We can go on and on with this thread, but basically it comes down to safety; and I think that’s what resqtek, myself and everyone else here is stating. If it works, use it but please be safe when setting up and operating the systems.

[MEDIC0372]

JAFA62...Don't let Riversong upset you. He loves to domunate threads with his "know-it-all" attitude and I don't think that he even realizes that people stop listening to him after a while...they just get sick of seeing his ranting posts. He does have some good points but people tend to "tune people like him out" even though he may have something good to say.

.................................................. .................................................. ..
You stated in you post...

So let us know which one you prefer and why..Lets not make this a battle ground.

NOTE: I havent been able to find anything in NFPA to state which one is prefered
.................................................. .................................................. .

Here is my answer...I prefer "one rescuer" to "one rope". If you have enough to send two rescuers (each attached to their own rope) I think that would be great. I do not like the idea of two rescuers and one rescuee attached to one rope.

There are MANY situations where two rescuers would be GREAT and in fact BETTER than one. I just think that it would be BETTER and MUCH SAFER to have two systems in place. I also would not tether the two rescuers together.

If using 1/2" rope NFPA does state that it is only for two people (600lbs). NFPA stated that 1 person weighs 300 lbs and that 2 people weigh 600lbs. If using 15 to 1 safety margin that would then equal 9000 lbs. Most 1/2" rescue rope is rated at 9000 lbs.

Always think safety and keep asking questions. Many of the people here including Riversong stated some good things. We all need to keep an open mind and remember our goal here..."Keep the rescuers alive and well and to save people..."

Be safe, shoot straight but most of all have fun.
MEDIC-0372