Author Topic: Rescue from heights. (Read 20988 times)

2468 · « **on:** August 08, 2010, 11:53:05 AM »

Who is the best service to undertake a rescue from heights? Sapol (star), Samfs, CFS, SES?

why would mfs be better than star vice versus.

and why would you rely on a volunteer service over a full time (cfs. vs. mfs, or ses vs. star)

bajdas · « **Reply #1 on:** August 08, 2010, 12:14:14 PM »

Not sure if SAPOL STAR squad have enough members to provide a vertical rescue facility now.

Are you asking for response in near Adelaide or the whole of South Australia ?

If you consider the whole of South Australia (eg Great Australian Bight cliffs, Port Lincoln, Mount Gambier, Lime Stone Coast, Murray River, etc, etc) risk areas, then a volunteer presence is required to cover the risk.

Like other emergency risk to the communities, no paid service will be able to cover South Australia completely.

2468 · « **Reply #2 on:** August 08, 2010, 06:56:28 PM »

Very true,

but say there is a rescue from heights in Adelaide,

A rope access tech, or a worker on a high building. Who should do the resuce? SES who train in it, Star cause they are the nominated asset, MFS cause they have the equipment, SAAS Spec Ops cause they have the medical background??

And dear god, no one bring up that crap show off tv

6739264 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 09, 2010, 01:17:52 AM »

Who IS the best service to undertake such things or who SHOULD undertake such rescues?

Metro should be SAMFS assisted by SAAS SOT, and I guess that the country really has to be left upto vollo's (CFS or SES) and SOT.

misterteddy · « **Reply #4 on:** August 09, 2010, 09:34:05 AM »

interesting situation....just who has the gear AND the training??

last few years less and less time and money have been spent on MFS retaining rope rescue skills. Some Drill Squads did 1 day on it...some did 2. Will be interesting to see where the MFS skills end up, or whether they end up deferring to other services in the end with only a POD store and transport role.

SAAS SOTs, part of their role, but more focussed on accessing a patient and stabilising rathwer than effecting the rescue on their own....after all there is only 1 I think on shift at any time (apart from those with the Red Superman Suits on).

SES...well, you have the skills of the respective units (?)with their associated turnout time issues, as well as the paid Special Black Ops Roping guys that are based in the Ikea Store Cafeteria in the Airport precinct. At some stage there was some informal agreement I think that they would take over some of the roping role from the SAAS SOTs, but I think that has died a bit of a death, so now we have 2 resources almost co-located (within throwing distance of a swedish meatball).

CFS - not our role, no service training, no service sponsored equipment, no service clue. There are a couple of isolated Brigades who have put their hands in the pockets of their local communities and raised the funds to train and equip themselves to an accredited level (as opposed to yeah we have a rope that we can fall down). Not many of them though, I could only name 2 or 3 I think.

So the answer to the question I think is...
a) first response Local MFS Rescue resource (with their one harness and one rope - or 2 if you're at Christies), backed up by the Rescue Pod from town.
b) SES stormtroopers from the airport who are self catering and can deploy at a moments notice at least until the next meal break
c) local SES Unit - probably the best response (albeit the slowest)
d) SAAS SOT will get a gig if there are patients, which there usually are at these things. He or she may bring a helicopter and another SOT friend to keep them company.

SA Firey · « **Reply #5 on:** August 09, 2010, 09:58:42 AM »

There are a number of SES units trained in vertical rescue, and STAR Force still have a role there.

An incident at Glenelg last week had MFS, SES and SAAS SOT attend as well as Medstar.

The patient had to be rescued off the roof of a first floor building, and this was achieved with the use of the Bronto and a Stokes litter with an SOT Paramedic.

Noarlunga,Tea Tree Gully SES are Vertical Rescue for Metro Area

More info can be found here on which units do Vertical Rescue http://www.ses.sa.gov.au/site/about_us/ses_units.jsp#special ops

Darren · « **Reply #6 on:** August 09, 2010, 01:04:25 PM »

Ahhh you have also noticed the SES paid God Squad getting around to. I thought it was just me....have had them at several jobs in the hills where the Territory or the Navara rocks up, brakes smoking, engine pinging. 1 of the god squad gets out "we will take over thanks, you WILL wait for the SES unit to arrive"

An hour of thumb twiddling later the SAAS guys go "CFS can you just get on with it".

Andrew K · « **Reply #7 on:** August 09, 2010, 06:42:22 PM »

haven;t had the pleasure of spec ops for any of ours yet, we are normally done by then,

stupid thing is that norlunga and gully are minimum 30 mins away from town if they are needed were as we are about 5 but we can't get people on to the courses as they don't think we have a risk yet we cover half of metro adelaide

our unit has numerous members training to vertical rescue standards but not quite enough for a full crew, and we get out the door in around 5 - 10 mins normally so we aren't that slow compared to some.

haven;t jsut done a job with the mets, a month or so back i know we could have had the casualty down at least 10 - 12 mins faster than they got him down. even with us getting there after them.

tft · « **Reply #8 on:** August 09, 2010, 07:43:45 PM »

Yes, a few questions have been asked about the SES God squad, nice driving skills.Lots of eyes watching these cowboys

rescue5271 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 09, 2010, 09:00:52 PM »

As far as I know CFS ONLY has 2 brigades that are approved to do rescue from heights and they are Naracoorte and Robe this has now become a regional resource and members did the full course not that long ago under training from SES/CFS at STC. There are a couple of brigades who have gone out and paid for members to do a course but not sure if its the right course that SES/CFS want them to do.

6739264 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 10, 2010, 12:20:04 AM »

As long as those partaking in rope work are accredited with the PSTP "Undertake Vertical Rescue" there should be no problem...

Anything less than this (eg: an inhouse course) should be canned in an instant.

Andrew K · « **Reply #11 on:** August 10, 2010, 01:41:35 PM »

the thing is that pstp can vary widely, the ses teach a single rope version, however you do it for mines or industrial rescue, and its all twin rope, training should be the same system across all services so everyone knows whats going on and the services are compatiable

2468 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 10, 2010, 04:03:15 PM »

They'll never be compatible. Too many egos, invested interests and ideas.

Just side note. Saw STAR group doing ropes training off their tower this morning and i think they were doing litter training with one of the local RTO's...

bajdas · « **Reply #13 on:** August 11, 2010, 12:07:50 PM »

Like other specialised rescue response in SA, who gets the funding ?

I suspect that some of the funding for training in Vertical Rescue is from USAR funding. In USAR, multiple services (MFS, SES, SAAS, etc) staff (paid & volunteer) have trained.

MFS have more staff trained than from Drill Squads.

We did a tour of MFS Wakefield St a few months ago and the MFS crew were stating they had done an exercise off the large crane over SAPOL's new building recently. I think they said using dual rope systems.

The approx 200 SES volunteers who expressed interest in the extra training & tighter response times are waiting/training.

Maybe the funding will eventuate one day so that the plans can be fully achieved.

Andrew K · « **Reply #14 on:** August 11, 2010, 12:12:47 PM »

thats the main issue we have is money for training, got the gear, petty much got the turnout time, got the crew will to do the courses, but state doesn't have the money to train us and as we use single rope they won't accept an outside training we still have to do the course even if you have the unit already

SimpleJack · « **Reply #15 on:** August 11, 2010, 01:24:01 PM »

Twin ropes is the only way to go anything less and you are just a tea-bag waiting for the string to break.

Question if you only have single rope & you are required to rescue someone in a harness who foolishly went over the edge on also one rope? The means of rescue by using a liter, how do you do it on one rope ?

You can't safely- this manouvre requires twin ropes for safety of both casualty & rescuer. Double long tail bowline to be tied into the litter yoke then with one tail to the rescuer & one tail to secure the casualty.By means of other equipment both are lowered to the ground.

Mike · « **Reply #16 on:** August 11, 2010, 01:48:42 PM »

Use of a Litter in a single rope setup requires an alpine butterfly for attacment of a western rig, with the running end being used for rescuer mobility.

Works quite well.

SimpleJack · « **Reply #17 on:** August 11, 2010, 02:57:11 PM »

still wouldn't go over without a two rope system

misterteddy · « **Reply #18 on:** August 11, 2010, 04:02:37 PM »

Quote from: SimpleJack on August 11, 2010, 01:24:01 PM

Twin ropes is the only way to go anything less and you are just a tea-bag waiting for the string to break.

Question if you only have single rope & you are required to rescue someone in a harness who foolishly went over the edge on also one rope? The means of rescue by using a liter, how do you do it on one rope ?

You can't safely- this manouvre requires twin ropes for safety of both casualty & rescuer. Double long tail bowline to be tied into the litter yoke then with one tail to the rescuer & one tail to secure the casualty.By means of other equipment both are lowered to the ground.

Quote from: 2468 on August 10, 2010, 04:03:15 PM

They'll never be compatible. Too many egos, invested interests and ideas.

exhibit Alpha

cavers and mountaineers use single rope all the time.... just cos what YOU do is different, doesnt make it any more right. Mike is right, plenty of legitimate techniques for rescue using single rope. Don't know too many people who do 100m + abseils that double dip....but hey, each to their own (just dont tell me its the only way!)

Andrew K · « **Reply #19 on:** August 11, 2010, 06:53:50 PM »

SimpleJack

let me ask you the same question i got asked when i started the ses course coming froma twin rope back ground

Do you 2 ropes come from different suppliers, are at the very least different batch numbers, are carried on 2 separate vehicles or at the very least stored in 2 separate lockers on the one vehicle using 2 different storage techniques? Are the 2 ropes set up by different people using separate anchor points and diverse anchoring techniques?

If not what is the advantage?

gievs yo something to think about, so long as you know your system and techniques and don't exceed any swl then there is no reason why single rope should be unsafe, infact you could say they twin rope lets people slack off because they have the back up

SimpleJack · « **Reply #20 on:** August 12, 2010, 04:43:49 PM »

To answer these questions and I agree not everyone will agree with everyone else but these are my standards & beliefs & what we follow.My safety if it is me going over comes first not happy don't go over.

Same size different colour( also avoids confusion with twin system & components) so we use a different batch & all are dated for rotation out of service!They are stored in separate rope bags out of sunlight & inspected regularly & after use. Anchors are bomb proof & inspected by the person setting them up & by 1 other & the climber before descent where practical(his call) there is always a thorough gear check B4 descent.

If the anchor is bomb proof and far exceeds the requirements for class of rope & weights to be used then why have multiple anchors.The only need for more than 1 anchor for the same rope( 2 ropes two anchors simple) is if the selection in the first place was a poor one. The anchors should not be exceeding angles, sometimes to get a good anchor from a poor choice yes you may have two going to one rope, not ideal & always consider safe working loads, look we could go on rope wan*ing for ages & we probably both wouldn't agree 100%.

you do it your way and I will do it my prefered way .

6739264 · « **Reply #21 on:** August 12, 2010, 05:15:30 PM »

Ugh... "Bomb proof" anchors...

Give me a some Hilti Saferings or some pickets and lashings, and I'll build you a real mans anchor... anywhere!

2468 · « **Reply #22 on:** August 12, 2010, 06:58:49 PM »

Wheres the like button for that last comment???

We all have our preferred way. Some prefer to use two cause they don't have confidence in their systems. Some go single cause they don't want to get tangle in ropes when trying to do a rescue.

Yeah Hilti (any other good brand) anchors and you're set to party

BundyBear · « **Reply #23 on:** August 13, 2010, 03:52:35 PM »

The single rope vs twin rope system argument will go on for ever and ever. I've only trained in the twin rope system but some of the police, ambulance officers, fire fighters and rescuers that came from a single rope background said after seeing the twin rope system they will be pushing their services to adopt that system if they currently did not use twin.

Maybe it is time for SES to change and come in line with fire and industry which use twin rope systems? Might be useful if everyone is using the same system and when persons are dropped it won't be kept secret!

As for Hilti safe-rings how would they be beneficial in a rescue scenario I doubt if they would be in the right location and they are only used in concrete and cavity brick walls and need to be load tested before use as per Australian Standards to 6kn for rope access or 7.5kn for fall arrest systems hence why you see them on commercial building sites.

As for response to heights rescues in the Metropolitan area and major regional centres it should be SAMFS with SAAS SOT's for medical. In country areas it should be SES and if they are not available CFS trained on the same gear as MFS.

Response to these incidents needs to be the quickest and most appropriate!

CFS_Firey · « **Reply #24 on:** August 13, 2010, 04:30:48 PM »

Quote from: Andrew K on August 11, 2010, 06:53:50 PM

Do you 2 ropes come from different suppliers, are at the very least different batch numbers, are carried on 2 separate vehicles or at the very least stored in 2 separate lockers on the one vehicle using 2 different storage techniques? Are the 2 ropes set up by different people using separate anchor points and diverse anchoring techniques?

If not what is the advantage?

The advantage is redundancy. If every part of the system is duplicated, you increase your chances of the system NOT failing by a factor of the probability of failure.

That is, if the chances of one of the ropes breaking is 1 in 1000, (pretty poor odds), the chance of both breaking is 1 in 1,000,000. (Pretty good odds).

I agree with what others have said that about there being no "right" way, but trying to argue that 1 rope is just as safe as 2 would be the same as arguing that The Titanic would be just as safe with no lifeboats.

Author Topic: Rescue from heights. (Read 20988 times)

misterteddy

Darren

rescue5271

misterteddy