Hi Dick,
It would get in the way of the rotation, wouldn't it?
What if you ran the belayer's line through the middle of the tower, through
pulleys at the top so in use, the line from top to climber is outside, but when
not in use, you'd use it to haul a weight to the top? This way, when not in
use, the climber's line is out of the way of the antennas rotating on the
rings. When you needed to climb, you'd undo the line holding the weight, let
gravity bring the line to ground level, attach the climber and up you go.
Thinking you'd also need a snatch block at the bottom of the tower so the line
through the tower would come out horizontal to the belayer.
Ring-mounted rotators also defeat most other continuous-attachment systems,
don't they?
73, kelly, ve4xt
Sent from my iPad
> On Jun 15, 2016, at 8:25 PM, Dick Green WC1M <wc1m73@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting idea, but it wouldn't work with towers that have TIC rings.
>
> 73, Dick WC1M
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: N3AE [mailto:n3ae@comcast.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 9:11 AM
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Sad news N5IA SK in tower fall (Shawn Donley - N3AE)
>
> It's with some trepidation that I respond to this thread, but there''s one
> other climbing technique I have not seen mentioned in this forum.
>
> For modest height towers, say up to 75 feet, why not climb it like a
> top-roped rock climb? Have two (redundancy) mountaineering grade locking
> carabiners secured at the top of the tower with a suitable temporary rope
> loop (like 3/16 Dacron) going to the ground through the carabiners. On the
> day of the climb, use the temporary rope to pull some 9 to10mm static line
> (like BlueWater Assaultline) through the carabiner to the ground.
>
> Attach your harness to the climbing rope and have a competent and properly
> equipped belayer on the ground to take up the rope and protect you during the
> climb. "Competent" in this context means someone you trust your life to and
> vice versa...i.e. a fellow climber.
>
> Advantages:
>
> 1. Always on slight rope tension (provided by the belayer) so minimal fall
> distance and shock loads.
> 2. No energy expenditure (or fatigue related mistakes) hooking and unhooking
> safety lanyards to the tower during the climb.
> 3. Can concentrate on the climb with less distraction.
>
> Disadvantages:
>
> 1. Need to climb in a conventional safe manner once to get the carabiners
> installed.
> 2. Carabiners will need replaced periodically 3. Need a competent and
> experienced belayer
>
> Some comments on rope:
>
> A typical "dynamic" climbing rope with zero slack (belayer has slight
> tension) will elongate by about 10% with a 180 lb climber on it. Example: 60
> ft tower. Say you are only10 ft up the tower. So ~ 110 ft of rope between you
> and the belayer. If you fall, the rope will stretch about 10 ft (but like a
> bungee) and you WOULD land on the ground but softly. Fall near the top: ~ 60
> ft of rope between you and the belayer. So you'd bungee down about 6 ft. In
> either case, there could be risk of injury if an arm or a leg was across a
> tower brace prior to or during the fall.
>
> A "static line" typically used for mountain rescue or rappelling into caves,
> has an elongation < 3% (for a 300 lb load), so in the above example, the
> "fall distance) would be < 3 ft and <1.5 ft.
>
> A "dynamic" climbing rope will be better at reducing shock loads in a fall,
> but I'd be concerned about possible arm or leg injury if either got across a
> tower brace member prior to or during the fall. That's why I'm thinking a
> "static" type rope and zero slack at all times (belayer responsibility).
>
> I've climbed towers and rock for many years. Not so much rock now that I'm
> older. Always felt safer on a top-roped rock climb, even compared to climbing
> towers with conventional "always attached" technique and gear.
>
> So how DO I climb towers? I use conventional methods and gear following the
> "always attached" philosophy only because I rarely have an experienced rock
> climber around to belay. Nevertheless, having been on both towers and rock, I
> wonder which technique would be better (safety and efficiency)?
>
> OK. Ready for the incoming stones and rocks.
>
> N3AE
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|