Rope Rescue tools and methods. To change or not to change?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jeffrey Post on January 12, 2010 at 7:35pm

I agree with the break bar, I have always been a fan of it for it's diversity. I like all the other stuff too, The prusik is still a hard sell on my job. I think guys are intimedated by it, the break bar too as I think of it. I brought the 540 to the table. I used it in training at the academy in some of the rope training I took, so we got a few and put it in "tool box", I think the jury is still out. Some like it, others don't, others just are not ever going to be happy and some think there isnt anything a ladder truck cant reach, so toss the ropes away.

Stick to what is tired and true, keep it simple, experiment in training and be open to change if it works for you.

Be safe

Permalink Reply by Jeff Matthews on January 13, 2010 at 1:57pm

Paul,

The questions you pose are becoming more and more common as technology of rope rescue components continue to improve. It's sounds like the system your department currently deploys is very proficient. Personally, I am not a big fan of pre-rigged systems. 1. I think it reduces efficiency in the teams ability to operate outside those pre-rigged systems, and 2. The team should be compentant enough that a pre-rigged system would not necesarily improve response time....just my perspective.

The rack is certainly a capable device for most all rope rescue needs. I am not certain about what you mean by having a load release pre-rigged on the mainline. I assume you mean that you have a LR immediatly available and not physically connected. Have you had much practice with the Petzel I'd? We are starting to use this device in our classes and spent a couple days in a mountain environment doing some lowering and rappells. I must say I am quite impressed. The device runs smooth and has the auto-stop feature, adding yet another level of safety to the system. I would recommend getting one to play with. FYI - The TUBA is a pretty good device although not variable friction during operation and it is NFPA G rated.

Belay methods are really starting to come to the forefront. With the advent of auto-stop lowering devices, there are some groups that have fallen back to single rope techniques. The problem with a tandem prussik belay is that there is an infinite combination of mainline ropes to cord manufacturers. When a manufacturer puts testing numbers out, it normally is their rope being tested with their cord. What if you have X manufacturers rope and Z manufacturers cord? We really don't know how the two will behave unless we go out and drop loads. With that being said, I prefer a tandem prussik belay. BUT I only use a rope/cord combination that has been tested (by a competant person). I like the soft interface and let's face it cord is cheap. The 540 is a great device and I have used this frequently in the courses we delivery. It works very well across all of the rope brands I have used including Rescue Technology, CMC, PMI, and Sterling. It can be troublesome but with some practice, it works well. The bottom line is will the belay catch a fallling load and the answer is that in COMPETANT hands either does the job.

I am curious...What LRH are you using?

Take care and good luck!

Jeff Matthews
President, Technical Rescue Consultants, LLC