Personally I'd rather be dealing with counterweights because it just seems to me that a really good flyman can be in sync with the show in a way that automated flying can't.
We had 16 linesets of high-speed motorized rigging (well, the 4 electrics are low-speed) included as part of a high school theater renovation a couple of years ago, and having worked with them I do think they are the best option for flying in an environment where you don't have well-trained operators or permanent staff to do the flying, such as high schools or community theaters.
There were several reasons given by the theater consultant for going with the motorized system.
- safety (as has already been mentioned)
- ADA compliance (someone in a wheelchair can theoretically operate the system)
- They had to raise the roof for the fly system, but with the winches they didn't leed to raise it as high (compared to counterweight,) which reduced some costs as it kept the roof low enough to not require a fire curtain. (Which we sill wanted, but didn't get)
It's unclear if this really saved any money over a counterweight system. For the same money, if we'd gone counterweight we'd probably have been able to get lines for our legs and borders... but I think the safety aspect overrides that.
Others have mentioned maintenance... one thing we learned is to plan in access to the motors. Ours are hung from the beams on the fly loft roof, and they only access is to bring in a portable lift, or scaffolding... which adds to the cost of the annual inspection.
Speaking of inspections, our controller will display an "Inspection required" warning every year.
Even with the automated system, we still only let students (or anyone else) who have had specific training operate the system. With an automated system, it's easy to get a false sense of safety and just push the button without paying attention... even if the batten will stop when it hits someone's head, it's still going to injure them. The training is about 50% the mechanics of using the system, and 50% safety. We've even put the controller on a 3' platform, to give the operator a better view of the stage when running the system. (So much for ADA)
-Fred
We've got the J.R.Clancy Powerlift system, with the SceneControl 500.
Whenever this question comes up, the issue of safety is raised (and rightly so). My question is, statistically speaking, how dangerous is a counter weight system? In other words, does anyone have a number or comparison that we could assign to describe the level of unsafosity? How many people per year are hurt/killed by counter weight fly systems?
<snip>
I'm not saying that they aren't potentially dangerous, just wondering how often actual incidents occur.
Whenever this question comes up, the issue of safety is raised (and rightly so). My question is, statistically speaking, how dangerous is a counter weight system? In other words, does anyone have a number or comparison that we could assign to describe the level of unsafosity? How many people per year are hurt/killed by counter weight fly systems?
I ask because there was comment in another thread concerning safety and the NEC code. Someone asked why something or another wasn't included in The NEC. one of our members who works on the code replied essentially saying that the thing in question didn't actually happen that often so it wasn't really a concern.
I wonder if the situation might be the same with counterweight systems and their level of safety.
I'm not saying that they aren't potentially dangerous, just wondering how often actual incidents occur.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.