Riding an A-Frame Extension Ladder

[cdub260]

I know I want to not have chronic pain and potentially crippling injuries at this point.

I'll second this sentiment. Having dealt with my own chronic pain issues for the last nine years, I can assure you that it's not fun. Yes, dealing with my knees has forced me to make some positive changes to my lifestyle, keeping my weight down and staying in shape being two examples. But dealing with the pain on a daily basis is a high price to pay for those changes, which I could have made without ever injuring myself in the first place.

 

[photoatdv]

minor rant coming...

Yeah, some of the regs (don't care what agency/venue/supervisor) are over the top or not practical, HOWEVER if the industry would police ourselves, and we would do it on our own, then maybe OSHA people would just let us do it. The fact that TONS of techs/companies/venues are using overtly unsafe practices shows the need for regulation. If we'd make it where we regulated ourselves then we truely COULD use the best and safest method!

... minor rant over.

 

[fredthe]

The discussion about straddling a ladder is a perfect example, it is much safer and more stable to step over the top then it is to stand the requisite two rungs down and stretch to try to change a lamp with one hand.

Actually, the much safer way would be to use a proper size ladder.

Sure a scaffold would be great but that doesn't work when you are 10 min to house open.

Then perhaps more time should be allowed for lamp check?

It is situations like that where OSHA has over-regulated. That over-regulation is why so many people treat OSHA as an obsticale rather then an ally.

I still fail to see how using improper equipment, or not allowing enough time is the fault of over-regulation.

-Fred

 

[icewolf08]

I think the conversation begs the question: Are practices like these actually unsafe, or do we say they are unsafe because the regulating agency says that they are unsafe? NOting also that the regulation is probably reactionary to an incident that ended either in death or litigation due to someone's stupidity.

Is it actually less safe to straddle a trestle ladder than to work reaching out from lower on the stick? It would seem to me that the potential for falling is about the same, from a physics standpoint it would seem that having your weight centered on the ladder (straddling the stick) would be safer than having your weight off-center by working on the side of the stick.

Again, I am not trying to say that OSHA is wrong. I am sure that they have done more research than I have.

 

[gafftaper]

Is it actually less safe to straddle a trestle ladder than to work reaching out from lower on the stick? It would seem to me that the potential for falling is about the same, from a physics standpoint it would seem that having your weight centered on the ladder (straddling the stick) would be safer than having your weight off-center by working on the side of the stick.

Perhaps, but it's sort of like arguing that it's safer to be hit in the head with a shovel than an axe. Both are dangerous and both are inappropriate use of the equipment. As was noted earlier in this thread, this type of ladder is made for painters to use running a plank between two ladders. Neither riding on top or hanging off the side are what the ladder was designed for.

Icewolf, I'm pretty sure you would never misuse your counterweight system to fly people. How is misusing an A Frame trestle ladder any different? Either way you would have a person at a dangerous height on a device not designed to hold a person in that way.

Sure a scaffold would be great but that doesn't work when you are 10 min to house open. It is situations like that where OSHA has over-regulated. That over-regulation is why so many people treat OSHA as an obsticale rather then an ally.

a) Do your lamp check when you have enough time to safely swap it out, (as Fred said) buy a bigger ladder you can put up quickly, hold the show until you can safely change it, or forget it. No one in the audience want's to go home without seeing the show because there is a fatal injury investigation going on back stage.

b) "over-regulation" We aren't talking about some obscure regulation like "protective clothing must be located near all breaker panels". We are talking about people using a ladder in a dangerous way and furthermore modifying the original design by mounting it on wheels. For this to be "over-regulation" there would have to be a safe way to inappropriately use one of these ladders on wheels. Sorry there isn't, only a less dangerous way.

By the way I want everyone to know that I don't mean anything personal in all of this. I'm enjoying a spirited debate and I hope the rest of you are too. Even if we never agree, any time we can challenge each other to reconsider the way we think about safety it is a good thing.

 

[shiben]

By the way I want everyone to know that I don't mean anything personal in all of this. I'm enjoying a spirited debate and I hope the rest of you are too. Even if we never agree, any time we can challenge each other to reconsider the way we think about safety it is a good thing.

I think its a good thing to discuss. If nothing else, we all should take from this to evaluate our safety practices, because I am sure that even the most safety conscious of us are lax in some area. Also, I feel that its important to try and have an honest discussion of this because at least where I have been, the culture is very engrained that you just dont worry about some things. For instance, my last boss saw no problem with walking the high steel without fall protection, because he never had used it. Sometimes, I felt like he spent more time figuring out how to subvert the rules than following them would have taken, but he truly felt that a harness was unneeded except in a few situations, none of which we ever worked in. In my current job, I dobt that anything except a death will convince the TD that a rolling an A-Frame with a person on it is a bad idea, but im trying to teach the crew people safer practices. Not that im perfect, but I do try. So far, this has been very informative as to learn about what im doing wrong. Its great!

 

[SHARYNF]

The ladder we are talking about was NOT just designed for painters with a plank, they were infact designed to be MORE stable that a large a frame ladder which places the the person outside of the central point. The idea was that you should not go above the top 4 rungs to make sure you had something in front of you to hold on to. It could be argued and proven physics wise that this design is MORE stable with the person on the center section at the same height than the same person at the same height on a more traditional A frame ladder.

Sharyn

 

[jwl868]

....NOting also that the regulation is probably reactionary to an incident that ended either in death or litigation due to someone's stupidity.

Perhaps I am reading too much into the term “reactionary” [which could read as either “knee-jerk” or “measured response”] , but the OSH Act was signed into law in 1970. OSHA addressed decades of nonexistent, poor, and/or unorganized safety practices. (A short history of OSH Act can be found here: U.S. Department of Labor -- History -- The Job Safety Law of 1970: Its Passage Was Perilous)

I’m not sure about how the original regulations were assembled. (After all, at the time, there were some industry-specific rules, and by then, labor unions had done much to improve industrial safety.) But later additions to the regulations do follow a process where public comment is solicited and considered.

Joe

 

[icewolf08]

Perhaps I am reading too much into the term “reactionary” [which could read as either “knee-jerk” or “measured response”] , but the OSH Act was signed into law in 1970. OSHA addressed decades of nonexistent, poor, and/or unorganized safety practices. (A short history of OSH Act can be found here: U.S. Department of Labor -- History -- The Job Safety Law of 1970: Its Passage Was Perilous)

I’m not sure about how the original regulations were assembled. (After all, at the time, there were some industry-specific rules, and by then, labor unions had done much to improve industrial safety.) But later additions to the regulations do follow a process where public comment is solicited and considered.

Joe

I would read it as both. The point being that instead of training people on how to work in factories safely from the outset, it took injuries, deaths and accidents to even get recognized as a problem. Instead of teaching people who to do their jobs safely we just tell them what they are not allowed to do.

So look at the way things work today. Someone does something stupid and kills themself at work. Next thing you know there will be a new list of regulations. Someone flies an airplane into the World Trade Center, the next day "oh, maybe we should actually pay attention when we screen passengers before a flight! Maybe there should be standards."

Our government and society don't plan ahead for people's safety, we react after there is an issue. Take the time to learn how to do things safely and take the time to teach how to do things safely, and there will be fewer incidents that result in death, lawsuits and regulations!

I still want someone to tell me why using a device like a tallescope is considered safe in some countries, but not in ours! I have a feeling that the explanation to that question would reveal a lot about how regulations are set.

If we bother to teach people how to do something safely rather than how not to, people would be safer. It doesn't matter who you are, where you work, how old you are, human nature says that when you tell someone not to do something they are more likely to try it! Be proactive, not reactive. Teach how to do things safely rather than saying "don't do XYZ because it isn't safe."

 

[gafftaper]

I'm with you on the Tallescope Icewolf. We had one of those when I was in high school. It was very stable, and felt very safe to climb up and get in the basket. The fact that they were banned really amazes me as they seemed very safe.

 

[jwl868]

I search the OSHA website for Tallescope, and there are no hits for that word. Not even in any interpretation letters. There does not appear to be a ban on the product.

Judging by the looks of the equipment, it's either a Manually Propelled Elevating Aerial Platform or its a mobile scaffold.

Here are my best guesses as to why there are no Tallescopes in the US:

1. They don't conform to ANSI A92.3 for Manually Propelled Elevating Aerial Platforms which OSHA includes by reference.

2. They don't comply to the Scaffolding regulations.

3. There are patent or licensing issues. (But I would think those could be circumvented.)


Joe

 

[icewolf08]

I search the OSHA website for Tallescope, and there are no hits for that word. Not even in any interpretation letters. There does not appear to be a ban on the product.

Judging by the looks of the equipment, it's either a Manually Propelled Elevating Aerial Platform or its a mobile scaffold.

Here are my best guesses as to why there are no Tallescopes in the US:

1. They don't conform to ANSI A92.3 for Manually Propelled Elevating Aerial Platforms which OSHA includes by reference.

2. They don't comply to the Scaffolding regulations.

Both of these reasons are not good reasons for the product to not be available in this country. If this is the case it blatantly illustrates my point. Blanket restrictions like this are the problem, if they restrict the use of a device because the device doesn't fall into one of the categories covered. Make a new category, be proactive. If it is safe to use elsewhere it is probably safe to use here!

 

[Footer]

Both of these reasons are not good reasons for the product to not be available in this country. If this is the case it blatantly illustrates my point. Blanket restrictions like this are the problem, if they restrict the use of a device because the device doesn't fall into one of the categories covered. Make a new category, be proactive. If it is safe to use elsewhere it is probably safe to use here!

I heard it had something to do with their setup. There is a pin on them that if that pin fails or is not properly installed the whole thing swings to the deck. I don't know if this is true or what, but its the word on the street, at least my street.

 

[fredthe]

I heard it had something to do with their setup. There is a pin on them that if that pin fails or is not properly installed the whole thing swings to the deck. I don't know if this is true or what, but its the word on the street, at least my street.

The school that I help at had one, but it was pretty beat up, and was thrown out during the theater renovation (good thing, it was not in good shape.) It had a label listing a US distributor (in Chicago, I believe) but they are no longer in existence. This probably dated from the late 70's/early 80's.

As I recall there was a pin that locked the ladder upright, but I don't recall the details. It's still widely used in the UK (though it generates lots of debate there as to moving it while in use.) I've just never gotten a good answer as to why it's not sold in the US now. Kyle may be on the right track, though.

-Fred

 

[JChenault]

I heard it had something to do with their setup. There is a pin on them that if that pin fails or is not properly installed the whole thing swings to the deck. I don't know if this is true or what, but its the word on the street, at least my street.

When I was interning at the Asolo theatre in the mid 70's they had a tallescope. It had a pivot at the center of the ladder that rests on a rolling frame. You stand up the ladder around the pivot and attach the bottom of the ladder to the frame. You then raise the basket like an extension ladder. I don't remember how the ladder is fastened, but there was a single point of failure in the latch.

The tallescope was shared by the maintence department. One day a maintenence worker was using the unit to change a light bulb and the latch failed. The unit pivoted around the center point and the worker in the basked hit is head on the floor and died.

Unless the design has changed substantially, I consider the unit very dangerous and would strongly suggest that anyone who sees one does not use it.

While I generally agree with icewolf's sentiments about safety and osha, I don't think the tallascope is a good example for his argument. I can't say why it is considered safe in other countries, but the fact that there is a single point of failure (assuming I am correct and it has not been radically redesigned) makes it (IMHO) inherently unsafe. If you are in it and the latch (which is under tension) fails, you will likely die.

 

[rochem]

I heard it had something to do with their setup. There is a pin on them that if that pin fails or is not properly installed the whole thing swings to the deck. I don't know if this is true or what, but its the word on the street, at least my street.

A local high school I help out at has a Tallescope which they use pretty frequently for focusing the electrics - I'd say it's about 50% Tallescope, 50% A-Frame (without wheels). I'm not honestly sure how the Tallescope works in terms of latching it, as I've only been up in it once or twice, but I know there's a very noticeable sound and movement when the upright structure falls into place. If it doesn't fall into place, it's not locked in yet. As I said, I can't speak to the redundancy of the safety systems, but from my limited experience using it, I like it. Not as much as a genie of course, but it definitely feels more stable than an A-frame.

 

[fredthe]

One day a maintenence worker was using the unit to change a light bulb and the latch failed. The unit pivoted around the center point and the worker in the basked hit is head on the floor and died.

This could very well be the reason they are no longer available in the US. They are still sold and used in the UK; I wonder if they redesigned it, but either can't, or don't want to try the US market again.

To those of you that still have one, a question: When the ladder is horizontal, is the basket on the top or the bottom of the ladder? If it's on the bottom, it could certainly put a lot of stress on the latch.

-Fred

 

[jwl868]

Both of these reasons are not good reasons for the product to not be available in this country. If this is the case it blatantly illustrates my point. Blanket restrictions like this are the problem, if they restrict the use of a device because the device doesn't fall into one of the categories covered. Make a new category, be proactive. If it is safe to use elsewhere it is probably safe to use here!

I can't contribute much more to this because there don't seem to be many facts about why there are so few tallescopes in the US. But one other reason may be competition: Genie and JLG (I suppose there are others) may have cornered the market for aerial work platform equipment. That's got to be a tough market to crack. One would have thought that the ladder and scaffold companies would have something on the market in their product lines. Perhaps they were tried, but were failed ventures....


Joe

 

[teqniqal]

A really elegant and affordable solution is the JLG manlifts "Stockpicker":
Products, then click on the "Stock Pickers".
Reaches to 21', no outriggers, can be moved while 'UP'.

 

[FortMacTech]

There has been lots of reference to fall protection during this post, but I haven't seen a reference to a self retracting lifeline. They work great for climbing ladders or scaffolding and definitely enhance safety. You don't want to be extended laterally or a fall will put on a show like the circus but they are the best for vertical up and down and small lateral movements.