new climbing styles vs. old

[Tree Machine]

The schools differ in the way we handle friction. And there are differences in gear and school preferences, too, but how we manage friction is at the heart of what differentiates our climbing schools.

This difference then dictates our gear choices and rope choices which are different, school to school.

 

[Tree Machine]

If you are making your own devices though I would call that beyond 'new school'.

Well, its necessary to go climb beyond the lip of the galaxy to see what new possibilities there are. Some day we may stumble on a device that is 'ideal'.

Still, new school methods are based in handling friction with something other than a friction hitch. Once you get familiarized with a few different 'new school' devices, they all will share one thing in common; controlling your descent through application of friction on the rope. How they exactly do that may vary, but they all do essentially the same thing, so the result from device to device yields the exact same thing; accurate control of friction using your chosen piece.

I like to explore the nuances of different pieces, and I tend to keep it very basic, very simple and bombproof as possible. I like the variety and trying a few of the hundreds of pieces out there. So many pieces, so little time.

Using devices is so much easier than the friction hitch (old) school. It can be so easy (comparatively) that your jaw may drop.

Friction hitch has what most would consider the one redeeming advantage: You use the same thing to go up as to go down (friction hitch). This is NOT true in the new school, mechanical ranks. Ascenders are used to go up, and you switch over to your descent piece once aloft. Swapping back and forth as needed is one of those 'perceived ' thresholds where a lot of hitch masters would balk at the mere thought of having to go back and forth with seperate tools for ascend and abseil and poo-poo the idea of New School methods before even giving it a fair trial. It's really not that big a deal at all.

 

[SRT-Tech]

Very nicely done Sir Pour.




Points well taken. Defining Old School vs New School need more definition than exercise extreme caution. That goes for both schools. As far as climbing arborists certain lines are drawn at how they are different, not how one is better than another, but distinct lines of demarcation. There are gray areas and overlaps here and there, but the major distinctions between new and old school climbing should be spelled out.

What about SRT Tech who was trained in a completely other discipline where friction hitches don't exist? What about tower climbers who enter into tree care? Search and Rescue guys? Firemen? Do you think a SWAT guy throws on a friction hitch to scale doown the side of a building. These guys are coming in with nothing but new school climbing methods. Until they climb with some traditional tree climbers, they may not know that friction hitches even exist. Their methods are tried and true and have been around since the fifties and the advent of synthetic lines. They are current, widely used by all aerial disciplines except us, and I would rate this as tried and true and tested. There are dozens of books written on the subject and tapes and DVDs and training systems gall over the world, all NEW SCHOOL. No books, however, are written on Tree Climbers and new school methods. We're stuck in our own traditions and conventions.

Tree Climbers went with half inch (13 mm) climbing lines and used friction hitches on a 2:1 DdRT system. The rest of the climbing world went to 11 mm (and smaller) and the use of devices, climbing and descending on 1:1 systems controlling friction through the device in front of them.

That's the big line of difference. Some traditional climbers are using 11 mm, but still with the friction hitches; old school methods using new school rope diameter.[/QOUTE]





and i have taken this even further - by combining Old and New styles & equipment together, in other words "SRT/DRT/DdRT Hybrid style". example: I might use DRT, but i'll use a Petzl Rescucender instead of a Blakes hitch. Or i'll use a TiBloc and footloop instead of footlocking or a prussick foot loop........

 

[Tree Machine]

That's exactly what I'm talking about. New school can switch between all three styles because simple devices can allow that. You choose the one that serves you the most advantage. Free yourself of the 2:1 imprisonment. Work a 2:1 here and there when it is the best choice. Otherwise, new school is primarily a 1:1 world.

Fool school was a poor choice of words on my part. Fool school for instance would include pulling a climber into a tree with a pick up truck with nothing but his climbing rope over a crotch.

That says nothing of how friction is controlled or overcome, TreeCo. You example is that of assisted (mechanical) hoisting.

 

[SRT-Tech]

That's exactly what I'm talking about. New school can switch between all three styles because simple devices can allow that. You choose the one that serves you the most advantage. Free yourself of the 2:1 imprisonment. Work a 2:1 here and there when it is the best choice. Otherwise, new school is primarily a 1:1 world. That says nothing of how friction is controlled or overcome, TreeCo. You example is that of assisted (mechanical) hoisting.

you should see my 30:1 Z-rig system :hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange:

 

[Tree Machine]

The GRCS is a rope winch and a rope bollard in one device and is are the Hobbs. Cutting limbs and rigging so they are pulled upwards against gravity isn't about friction, it's about winching. How about the use of 'spider legs' for balancing loads? That's not friction either.

And you're bringing in examples of rigging into a thread about CLIMBING styles.

The Big Shot is new school for sure and it's not about friction.

The big shot is a new tool (7 years new), not new school. It gets used on both sides. And it's about rope setting, a facet of the climbing process, but again, it is not climbing.


Don't be trying to derail this discussion of diffencess in climbing styles. Stay on topic.

 

[M.D. Vaden]

Old school, has always boiled-down to doing it the best way possible at a point in time, utilizing all the tools at hand. So the old school survives, only as it evolves, doing it the best way possilbe and using everything at it's disposal. So the next generation of arborists are now the old school.

The old school was knives and spears, then that old school added single shot muskets. By WW II, old school included machine guns. Every generation takes-on the tranfer to itself of the old school.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

Twenty years ago I saw the first presentation on using a lowering device and a speedline. Don Blair told us at that time to take a bit more time setting up rigging systems and make fewer cuts in the tree. In the long run this saves time. The bigger benefit is that it reduces the risk to the climber in making more chainsaw cuts. In the ensuing 20 years there have been many more additions to the trade that makes work safer and easier. This will keep more arbos healthy longer and in the trees. Their experiences will be handed off to the new climbers who will adopt and adapt the skills for the following generations.

A while ago I started to think of Traditional and Progressive climbers instead of New/Old school. Like someone said, most climbers tend to be a mix of both. Progressive climbers tend to use more up to date, and complex, techniques. Either way, it is very important to constantly educate oneself and be open to new skills.

 

[Tree Machine]

I figured there would be debate on what constitutes what side, and there is the biggest risk (though just mental) of leading-edge climbers being classified as 'old school' when they're assuming and thinking they are the newest of the 'new school'. Can you see the stir that might create? Tree Spyder and Dunlap and like 99.9999999999% of all climbing arborists are climbing 'old school'. That's a pretty bold proposal, I must admit. Maybe we should re-term it 'old and new world.

There is progress, though, and we've opened up the debate on a topic that's been touched on, but never really defined. Let me offer another reason why the seperation point between the CLIMBING schools should be placed on how friction is handled.

Boiling it down to the least common denominator, technical tree climbing (when you have to climb with tools to do a job in the air) is composed of going up, hanging, and coming down.

Let's say, both schools have ascending figured out in that they both can overcome friction completely. In ascent, friction is completely overcome, you go past it. Ascending and hanging are almost not really about friction and we could term this subspecialty area rope clamping as this is what it is, whether using a mechanical device or a hitch. The only thing left, then, is descending (abseil) and work positioning where friction is controlled and modulated to safely get you around and doing what you do. Handling and fully controlling your position while on rope through the application of pressure, causing friction, is the only thing left and is the means by which we tree care guys are able to do what it is we do.




This is climbing in it's purest, distilled form; Up, down, all around. We're sharing an unprecedented moment where ( ) we are in a CLIMBING forum site in the CLIMBING section in a thread about CLIMBING and we're actually on-topic and talking about CLIMBING. I think we should give ourselves a hand!!!

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Um, uhhhhhhhh friction is good if it keeps ya from falling; it is fighting it to climb i think ye speak of!

i don't think we will ever overcome friction completely; for one of the laws is that there can be no perpetual motion machine/ at every interchange of force there must be a degradation/loss. This we can usually say is friction, with a byproduct of heat released to the atmosphere. In the big picture, all energy coming from Sun, reflected, stored thermally, changed into growth, stored that way etc.; upon breaking down or incurring friction; releases the heat energy back to atmosphere to maintain balance of incoming to outgoing yin/yang etc.

i think it is okay to study rigging here too, as i think of climbing as rigging myself around. Then in rigging try to remember all that, and how the load feels as i felt on the end of a line; what pulled, stretched and steered how etc.

 

[Tree Machine]

i don't think we will ever overcome friction completely.

Hanging on the rope is a case of overcoming friction. Static, non-movement on a rope quickly equilibrates to a state of non-friction (no motion, no friction, no heat generated).


I'm glad you bring the physics into it, Spidey. Descent (abseil, rappel) is applied physics. Gravity is at the root of all of this.

 

[SRT-Tech]

dontcha mean "overcoming GRAVITY" as opposed to overcoming friction?

 

[Tree Machine]

dontcha mean "overcoming GRAVITY" as opposed to overcoming friction?

Gravity doesn't change. The friction we use does. I guess you're right. You would modulate friction to overcome not gravity, but the effects of gravity.

 

[Tree Machine]

Well that is a bold number!

99.9999999..whatever % is clearly an exaggeration. Let's just for fun say 99.9%. That would be 999 in a thousand tree climbers who use friction hitches and / or tress cords as opposed to a mechanical device. I would not doubt that for a moment.


I am sorry about the exaggeration. If we're trying to define and quantify in any scientific sort of way, exaggerations are not acceptable. My bad.

 

[SRT-Tech]

Gravity doesn't change. The friction we use does. I guess you're right. You would modulate friction to overcome not gravity, but the effects of gravity.

yea i meant "effects of gravity", vs gravity itself...

 

[beowulf343]

You know what I love about this argument? In just the 11 years i've been climbing, i've seen some drastic changes. I remember when a split tail and a blakes was pretty much cutting edge. And i'll bet that in 10-15 years, the techniques that the "new school" climbers are using will be considered "old school." And what's even funnier, I'll bet that 10-15 years from now probably 60% of tree climbers will still be using a snap and taughtline because it's cheap, it's easy, and it works.

 

[Climb020]

In a true sense we all climb old school. But we can concider it new school because it is a newer device. Let me show in a side by side.
OLD/ NEW:
Steel Rope Snap/ Aluminum Rope Snap: Same thing just different material. Right.
1/2" Safety Blue/ 11mm Blaze: Does the same thing as a functioning climbing rope.
3 strand with prussik lanyard/ Grillion: Used to position a climber in the tree.

In truth we all climb the same. Just the material that is used more now is different and in cases safer. You can't have a new school with out an old school to compare it to.

All the new equipment made is lighter. That is a big selling point I think for a lot of climbers. But an old schooler might climb with his heavy steel snap and 1/2" line but that is it. The new school guys got all the ultra light gear but bring twice as much up into the tree and I am one of them. So I would conclude that there are two differences. One which I said and that is that climbing is more safe. Secondly is the may one enters or decendsfrom a tree. 99% of us still use some sort of hitch to move laterally in a tree.

 

[1CallLandscape]

In truth we all climb the same. Just the material that is used more now is different and in cases safer. You can't have a new school with out an old school to compare it to. .

exactly..... personally i climb "old school" i learned from my father that has been climbing for 30 years and is still doing it at close to 50 now never and accident climbing old school ( knock on wood).. he taught me to always trust your gear to the fullest ( whethewr it is new or old) and replace worn out ropes, saddles etc. when in need.

i feel that you should stick to what your comfortable with but at the same time expiriment with different techniques and style. maybe not trying these on a huge tree , on an easy one. just like trying a new cut, dont do it on a bad tree. stay within your comfortability range but, always try to push your self to new limits.

-mike

 

[woodchux]

I've always considered "old School" as climbing on taughtline, natural crotch , with no split tail or other "extras".

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

The imbalance betwixt gravity forces and friction is motion; or:
Gravity Forces = Friction Forces + Fall Forces.

So hanging on hitch/ not moving is Zer0 Fall Forces; so Friction Forces must equal Gravity Forces.

The duality of equal/ opposites assures balance in all things (physically and philosophically). The 1st physicists, were the philosophers; as 1 body of knowledge!

Orrrr something like that; okay, okay....:taped: