The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Debate 2: Figure 8 Descenders Have No Place in Rescue
After misreading the original debate on these forums about the use of the Figure 8 KNOT, I wanted to really get a controversial debate and discussion going about the use of the Figure 8 DESCENDER in rescue.
I for one, will never advocate or promte the use of the Figure 8 for any part of a rope rescue, wheter it be as a descender, belay device, etc.
Here's my reasons, not in any order-
1) No safety mechanism- The Figure 8 has no single or double stop mechanism
2) Human Factor 1- The Figure 8 relies on the rescue having at least one hand on the rope at all times. In a a "lost footing" situation or similar, the rescue can let go of the rope to catch themselves, resulting in a fall
3) Human Factor 2- Two different ways to reeve it. Depending on what way you're taught, you can come up from the bottom or from on top of the device (Does that makes sense?) THis can result in larks heading the device if the unit/rope gets caught on an edge. This in turn can lock up the descender leaving the rescuer stranded.
4) Multiple lock offs- The device can be locked off multiple ways- again they all have different pro's and con's. THis can create confusion to members that may be used to one way, and then having to be taught another way, etc.
5) Load ratings- Again, depending on the type and brand used, there's a load of different load ratings. Again, adds to the confusion.
6) Hands off test- One of the tests we do here when training is to blow the whistle. Every member of the team should be able to take their hands off everything and no one should be able to move or be in danger. With a figure 8, you let you, you fall.
7) Casualty/Rescue safety- If the casualty is combattant (spelling?) or panics, they can put both them and the rescuer in danger by knocking them, etc.
8) Friction- The unit heats up very quickly and is really only best suited to short rappels.
9) Human Factor 3- The unit reuqires the operator to control the speed/friction by hand. This can be too hard to control in a rescue situation.
10) Human Factor 4- Load it up with a rescue and a casulty and you've just increased the isuses around controlling the device and the friction.
For me, I'll take a double stop descender any day over an 8. Recreationally I use the 8 for quick small jumps, but that's it.
Now I know this is going to be controversial, so let's hear your thoughts, but be nice about it!!!!!
I for one, will never advocate or promte the use of the Figure 8 for any part of a rope rescue, wheter it be as a descender, belay device, etc.
Here's my reasons, not in any order-
1) No safety mechanism- The Figure 8 has no single or double stop mechanism
2) Human Factor 1- The Figure 8 relies on the rescue having at least one hand on the rope at all times. In a a "lost footing" situation or similar, the rescue can let go of the rope to catch themselves, resulting in a fall
3) Human Factor 2- Two different ways to reeve it. Depending on what way you're taught, you can come up from the bottom or from on top of the device (Does that makes sense?) THis can result in larks heading the device if the unit/rope gets caught on an edge. This in turn can lock up the descender leaving the rescuer stranded.
4) Multiple lock offs- The device can be locked off multiple ways- again they all have different pro's and con's. THis can create confusion to members that may be used to one way, and then having to be taught another way, etc.
5) Load ratings- Again, depending on the type and brand used, there's a load of different load ratings. Again, adds to the confusion.
6) Hands off test- One of the tests we do here when training is to blow the whistle. Every member of the team should be able to take their hands off everything and no one should be able to move or be in danger. With a figure 8, you let you, you fall.
7) Casualty/Rescue safety- If the casualty is combattant (spelling?) or panics, they can put both them and the rescuer in danger by knocking them, etc.
8) Friction- The unit heats up very quickly and is really only best suited to short rappels.
9) Human Factor 3- The unit reuqires the operator to control the speed/friction by hand. This can be too hard to control in a rescue situation.
10) Human Factor 4- Load it up with a rescue and a casulty and you've just increased the isuses around controlling the device and the friction.
For me, I'll take a double stop descender any day over an 8. Recreationally I use the 8 for quick small jumps, but that's it.
Now I know this is going to be controversial, so let's hear your thoughts, but be nice about it!!!!!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
The rings don't do a great job of keeping the carabiners seperate, but they are rated for omni-directional loading, unlike the rigging plates.
-
-
Permalink Reply by TrainingTECH1 on
-
Many well known and reliable rope rescuers have shown an option to use an 8 plate as a load distributing anchor; including Bruce Smith. (Weaving a 1" peice of webbing around the plate.)
This technique was also published in Response magazine summer of 1991.
I will check with Rescue Technology and get more info on how thay test this product for strength. I can't locate my NFPA 1983 standard...My wife "cleaned" my office. -
-
-
I have been thinking about this...I will consult with Rescue Technology on the capability. From a practical view there is no reason why the device shouldn't hold weight from end to end. It's section modulus is thick enough that it should be more than capable to support a load. Are there better options..YES.
I will try to remember to follow up on this; my contact is out of town. -
-
Permalink Reply by cedric sermeus on
-
For me i'll take a ID , it is idiot proof ( if you put the rope in the wrong direction it blocks himself )
-
-
-
1991 is antique information when it comes to rope rescue.
Bruce Smith's book is focused on single-rope technique, and pre-dated the NFPA standards for rescue loads as well.
I'm very familiar with Bruce and his work - we both used to be members of the same rescue agency. -
-
-
The 8 plates are not tested in a multi-directional pull like the ones they get when they are used as a rigging plate. They are typically tested in a linear, end-to-end, single-direction pull.
If the testing doesn't replicate the real-world forces, vactors, and conditions, then the testing doesn't mean much. -
-
Permalink Reply by Robert Barbarini on
-
Well now very good discussion here . . .me i'm a rack man everyone loves a rack . sorry anyhow i believe someone stated idot proof that is a statment we should look at does this mean we have more idots on rope or doing tech rescue? is it better to have idot proof equipment and drop the skill? that works then we can train less? you all seem to be firefighters also so let me ask you which way do you turn a nozzle to change from fog to stream? ok no how many are turning your hands to double check the direction? why? because its second nature to do it due to the fact that you do it some much with training and fires. so why shouldnt tech rescue be the same what we do is second nature just like self rescue? is idot proof really idot proof? can it be screwed up to cause a problem? if we really think its idot proof just give it to a firefighter one of us can screw it up somehow? TRAIN TRAIN TRAIN I believe is more important than idot proof equipment but i am just my opion. I can do so much more with a rack than an other devices out there and it can be made safe sorry Bruce but also to stop if you so wish but lets get back to basics TRAIN and train like its real . . . . . . now heres a question NFPA 1983 is written for who? ? ? ? Does NFPA set safety factors? ? ? ? hmmmmmmmm check before you answer....
-
-
-
The basic ALLP has two different versions, shown here.
The most common ALLP powdercoat color is red.
The newer version is the ALLP Pro, shown here.
Troll's home page.
The latest ALLP version is the ALLP Pro Tech.
Troll is now apparently affiliated with Miller and their gear may show up cross-branded. -
-
-
Rigging ring photo and description.
-
-
-
It's a trade-off, and most of the time 8's are used in low-angle situations as an assistive device. The consequences of system failure in those situations typically are no worse than a bruised Division C.
-
-
-
Train, train, train sound great, but if you base that training on unrealistic or inaccurate information, then that training time, effort, and learning is worse than wasted, because it results in "Garbage In, Garbage Out" syndrome.
-
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
