Neeves
Well-Known Member
I'd like something like this attached to standard harness, with the attachment point on the chest part of the harness.
Jonathan
Safety Harnesses--What Would You Actually Wear?
- Thread starter thinwater
- Start date
I'd like something like this attached to standard harness, with the attachment point on the chest part of the harness.
Jonathan
TLouth7
Well-Known Member
I agree with all of the above, though I find the greatest snag issue to be the collar of a lifejacket getting caught under the guardwire when sitting on the rail.
It is possible to get climbing harnesses without gear loops (or cut them off - they are not fundamental to the harness), and also there are harnesses (typically alpine geometry) with buckles such that you do not have to step in to put them on. For example the Black Diamond Couloir:
https://eu.blackdiamondequipment.com/en_GB/climbing-harnesses/couloir-BD651084_cfg.html
In terms of the attachment point it would be very unwise to rely on a climbing harness waist point only as there is a known risk of flipping upside down and then you could fall out. Note especially that climbing harnesses rely on some waist definition to stay in position; this may be lost if wearing bulky oilies.
This thread made me think that tying a minimalist climbing harness to a standard lifejacket chest harness and then using the lifejacket attachment point might be a good compromise, effectively adding decent leg loops to the lifejacket harness. The challenge would be to find a good solution to joining them, ideally adjustably.
Climbing harnesses are good for going up the mast, especially as they give you enough mobility to climb rather than being hauled up. Note however that they are not comfortable to sit in for any length of time as they send your legs to sleep.
thinwater
Well-Known Member
I did NOT wish to imply I thought this was the right answer. Daydream Believer mentioned that leg loops falling down was a serious problem, I agreed, and pointed out that this was the only known solution to keeping the leg loops up. It was meant to illustrate that the extra straps would be a pain. As a specific example, it is also all wrong for a deck harness, more than anything else, because of the attachment point.
And so the search continues for a light weight solution to a deck harness that can withstand at least some fall.
Mainsail1, I'm assuming you have never had to care for someone with traumatic brain injury from an accident. My wife helps with a friend's 20-year old child, who will now forever be a child, requiring 24/7 care. The boy will never have a life, and my friend will never have a retirement, as they alternate sleeping to manage his needs. No helmet. At least when you fall of the boat you generally just die.
I had bike racing accident in my college days. From a safety perspective, it was the best thing. I learned I was mortal and that it will happen to you unless you are mindful.
Can tethers and helmets make people complacent? In that Mainsail1 was correct. I've seen it in beginning rock climbers. The don't understand that the helmet is really for small falling rocks and icycles, not falls, and then place themselves in more hazardous places.
Daydream believer
Well-Known Member
Probably because you are falling & the gravitational effect is less as you are going down & the blood has to catch up. I have no idea how long you are up there but one would not expect for as long as it might appear. On the other hand hang glider pilots are up for a long time ( if they can that is)
thinwater
Well-Known Member
a. The opening force of a chute is on a par with a good fall. Google US Airforce data on this. This is the source of much harness impact force data (the only department that could use real people!).
b. Once the parachute reaches steady speed (a minute tops), there is no difference due to the fact that you are still falling. General relativity.
c. ~ 14,000 feet is a common jump height. Descent is about 24 ft/s. So about 10 minutes. Could be more (higher drop, better chute) could be less (delayed opening, lower drop).
All that said, I've spent hours in harnesses up in towers. 20 minutes at the mast head is nothing special; last time I was up there, for example, I was drilling and tapping 6 holes plus some other stuff, so it was a while. But in the wrong harness your legs will go to sleep in 5 minutes tops. So it depends. If you wonder abou the harness you have, hang in it for a while and see how it feels. Your legs will tell you long before there is any danger. One of the simplest improvments for up the mast is to slip extra firm padding under the leg loops. It really helps.
Real danger takes the wrong harness (leaning on the femoral artery) and significant time. What they are trying to avoid is industrial situations where someone is hanging, and then has to wait 20 minutes for the fire department; they need to have a lowering plan, just the same as a boat needs to have a simple, robust MOB hoisting plan. The point is to make people understand that the victim may be in real distress and they need to be able to do something, not just stand around a wait for someone else.
b. Once the parachute reaches steady speed (a minute tops), there is no difference due to the fact that you are still falling. General relativity.
c. ~ 14,000 feet is a common jump height. Descent is about 24 ft/s. So about 10 minutes. Could be more (higher drop, better chute) could be less (delayed opening, lower drop).
All that said, I've spent hours in harnesses up in towers. 20 minutes at the mast head is nothing special; last time I was up there, for example, I was drilling and tapping 6 holes plus some other stuff, so it was a while. But in the wrong harness your legs will go to sleep in 5 minutes tops. So it depends. If you wonder abou the harness you have, hang in it for a while and see how it feels. Your legs will tell you long before there is any danger. One of the simplest improvments for up the mast is to slip extra firm padding under the leg loops. It really helps.
Real danger takes the wrong harness (leaning on the femoral artery) and significant time. What they are trying to avoid is industrial situations where someone is hanging, and then has to wait 20 minutes for the fire department; they need to have a lowering plan, just the same as a boat needs to have a simple, robust MOB hoisting plan. The point is to make people understand that the victim may be in real distress and they need to be able to do something, not just stand around a wait for someone else.
Last edited:
mainsail1
Well-Known Member
Quote: Mainsail1, I'm assuming you have never had to care for someone with traumatic brain injury from an accident. My wife helps with a friend's 20-year old child, who will now forever be a child, requiring 24/7 care. The boy will never have a life, and my friend will never have a retirement, as they alternate sleeping to manage his needs. No helmet. At least when you fall of the boat you generally just die
Read more at http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthrea...d-You-Actually-Wear/page5#mzAQkB8OCZJFRQUw.99
It is very sad that your friend's child was badly injured but there is no evidence that wearing a cycle helmet has any effect on the outcome. All the evidence suggests that in the real world wearing a cycle helmet does not save lives. In fact, it stops people cycling which in turn means they take less exercise which in turn leads to more deaths from lack of exercise. I refer you to the data from Australia ,which has compulsory wearing of helmets, to see real data rather than emotional hearsay.
Read more at http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthrea...d-You-Actually-Wear/page5#mzAQkB8OCZJFRQUw.99
It is very sad that your friend's child was badly injured but there is no evidence that wearing a cycle helmet has any effect on the outcome. All the evidence suggests that in the real world wearing a cycle helmet does not save lives. In fact, it stops people cycling which in turn means they take less exercise which in turn leads to more deaths from lack of exercise. I refer you to the data from Australia ,which has compulsory wearing of helmets, to see real data rather than emotional hearsay.
johnalison
Well-Known Member
You must be jumping into a black hole to reach relativistic speeds, I would have thought. I have never parachute-jumped, but I'm pretty sure that Mr Newton would be qualified to look after me if I did. The force on my body from my harness would be the same as if I were suspended under the parachute hanging from a gantry with a blast of air at whatever speed one falls blowing upwards. If anything, I would experience very slightly less force when parachuting at its terminal velocity than when hanging in the harness alone in a static rig without a parachute above me.
thinwater
Well-Known Member
. General relativity includes non-relativistic speeds. The central premise is that all non-accelerating frames of reference are equivalent. A sky diver at steady speed is non-accelerating.The upwards wind would be about 15 MPH, accounting for only a few pounds, probably no more than the weight of the helmet. So no net difference.
johnalison
Well-Known Member
I did say very slightly. I didn't want to be accused of sloppy arithmetic.
The upwards wind would be about 15 MPH, accounting for only a few pounds, probably no more than the weight of the helmet. So no net difference.
Daydream believer
Well-Known Member
delete
Last edited:
thinwater
Well-Known Member
About 32 ft/second^2.
They don't really accelerate the way you are thinking. The plane is going perhaps 120 ft/s, which is slowly converted to a more vertical drop, with little change in speed. Terminal velocity depends on mass, position, and the jump suit.
Parachute opening force ranges from 600-1200 pounds, depending. 1200 pounds is the overload stress on a sailing tether, so we are in the same range (the force on the Clipper sailor is known to have been 800-1200 pounds). If you would like the explanation for the latter you will need to subscribe.
1200 pounds is accepted by the military as the upper threshold before an excessive portion of the soldiers are too injured to fight effectively. That is wearing a full body harness. I believe I already posted that the UIAA (climbing standards) has this to say about impact force on chest harnesses:
UIAA 105, 3.1.4
Chest harness (type D); a harness which fits around the upper part of the body around the chest and under the armpits.
NOTE 1. This type of harness alone cannot support a person in the hanging position without permanent injury in less
than one minute.
Once he is under the canopy, hanging, the speed will be 20-25 feet/second. Google it.
Uricanejack
Well-Known Member
At the risk of upsetting everyone.
I am perfectly happy with my (mustang) life jacket with built in harness. I expect its quite similar to the many other varieties available.
My life jacket is in no way designed, suitable or intended to be used for fall arrest. I would not be happy to use it for climbing the mast or any other job involving the risk of a fall from height.
If I intend to work at height I will wear a full harness designed and fit for propose along with an appropriate fit for purpose tether.
When I am at the mast or on the fore deck of my boat. I require a harness which is suitable for fall prevention. which is entirely different from fall arrest. I have a suitably sized tag line or tether with what I believe to be suitable carabineers which are certified by my local H&S fro fall prevention. The main principle for fall prevention to work. Fall prevention prevents someone from falling off the edge.
If a fall prevention system allows the possibility of an individual wearing it to reach the edge and be able to fall off.
It is not fit for purpose.
Truthfully, My boats system. Is not fit for purpose, due to lack of appropriate anchor points.
I am perfectly happy with my (mustang) life jacket with built in harness. I expect its quite similar to the many other varieties available.
My life jacket is in no way designed, suitable or intended to be used for fall arrest. I would not be happy to use it for climbing the mast or any other job involving the risk of a fall from height.
If I intend to work at height I will wear a full harness designed and fit for propose along with an appropriate fit for purpose tether.
When I am at the mast or on the fore deck of my boat. I require a harness which is suitable for fall prevention. which is entirely different from fall arrest. I have a suitably sized tag line or tether with what I believe to be suitable carabineers which are certified by my local H&S fro fall prevention. The main principle for fall prevention to work. Fall prevention prevents someone from falling off the edge.
If a fall prevention system allows the possibility of an individual wearing it to reach the edge and be able to fall off.
It is not fit for purpose.
Truthfully, My boats system. Is not fit for purpose, due to lack of appropriate anchor points.
Last edited:
Daydream believer
Well-Known Member
Actually you quoted before I had a chance to delete it after( see the timing !!) i realised i had it wrong. deleted now- 55 years since i was at school
lw395
Well-Known Member
No risk of upsetting me with that.
Prevention is better than cure.
If I ever work as a steeplejack, I won't be using my LJ harness or my trapeze harness.
thinwater
Well-Known Member
Yeah, that would about do it!
thinwater
Well-Known Member
I get it, and I wear a chest harness on deck as well. No offense and good lucid conversation.
The UK may be different, but in 1979 US OSHA (industrial safety) banned chest harnesses, because although they can be used for fall prevention (they called it "positioning"), people occasionally fell in them and died. And no matter what you jackline/tether policy, I'm willing to bet occasionally the tether is long enough to go over the side.
How great is the risk? How much would a better harness help? Is there something we would actually wear? I don't know. Mostly I like my chest harness, but sometimes it feels rather inadequate, when I look at the water smoking by.
prv
Well-Known Member
Coming late to this thread, but I don't buy the idea that a deck harness has much in common with a fall-arrest harness. Someone going over the side of a yacht is not falling vertically in free space, feet-first, jerking to a clean stop, and then hanging suspended in the leg-loops.
They're slipping sideways, tripping head-first over the guardrail, sliding under it, rolling down the foredeck, snagging on stanchions, grabbing things, letting go, washing along on their side... basically it's a big flailing mess landing any which way up, and one big crashing stop into the harness from terminal velocity is, I would imagine, fairly uncommon. Instead, all three of the people I know who had serious falls on yachts (one into the water, two snagged on things before getting that far) suffered arm and shoulder injuries (dislocation in one case) from the instinctive attempts to stop themselves.
That's not to say that some leg support could never be helpful, but drawing too many comparisons to a scaffolder taking a step backwards when he shouldn't is unhelpful, I think.
Pete
They're slipping sideways, tripping head-first over the guardrail, sliding under it, rolling down the foredeck, snagging on stanchions, grabbing things, letting go, washing along on their side... basically it's a big flailing mess landing any which way up, and one big crashing stop into the harness from terminal velocity is, I would imagine, fairly uncommon. Instead, all three of the people I know who had serious falls on yachts (one into the water, two snagged on things before getting that far) suffered arm and shoulder injuries (dislocation in one case) from the instinctive attempts to stop themselves.
That's not to say that some leg support could never be helpful, but drawing too many comparisons to a scaffolder taking a step backwards when he shouldn't is unhelpful, I think.
Pete
Last edited:
prv
Well-Known Member
Apart from the horizontal under-arm straps (the ones with the gear loops on, which I suspect don't really do much when hanging from it) that's the same layout as common industrial fall-arrest harnesses, at least on this side of the Atlantic. I was issued the industrial version when sailing on a square-rigger where, unlike on a yacht, a clean fall from height is a plausible risk. They had a D-ring between the shoulder-blades, but this was not normally used for our purposes (except occasionally to help secure the helmsman in place behind the wheel in rough weather). The tether for use aloft had a screw-gate carabiner connecting the two loops (grey in the Petzl picture) that close the front of the harness.
I did hang in (but not fall into) that harness once or twice, for fun. I wouldn't call it comfortable but it wasn't painful either, at least for a short period. The ship had a "rescue aloft" plan in the event someone fell on a long tether such that they were suspended out of reach of a piece of rigging to climb back onto. This involved abseiling down to them from a higher point, clipping onto their shoulder D-ring with a lanyard attached to the rescuer's descender (I'm not sure what type was used) and then cutting their original tether and descending together to the deck. The reason for using the shoulder ring was to come in from behind and above, and hopefully out of reach of, a potentially panicking casualty. The rescue aloft gear was kept ready in a grab-bag in a specific place and the permanent crew did conduct drills from time to time.
I do know of one person (on a different ship) who fell from a yard into her harness, while accidentally secured with the long (3 or 4 feet) tether instead of the short one she should have been using in that position. She told me she had some epic bruising around her thighs, but no permanent injury. She didn't need to be rescued by the means above; I'm not sure how she recovered, but possibly with the inevitable stretch in the system beside the tether length she was within reach of the yard below. I believe it was a royal or topgallant she was knocked from (by a poorly-controlled flogging sail) and things are smaller and hence closer together up there.
Pete
thinwater
Well-Known Member
Another possibility is a wider chest strap. This does not add nearly the same degree of impact capacity, but it should help a fair amount without any significant encumbrance. The current standard is 1.75 inches. I bet 3 inches would do something positive. There is no rule for the shoulder straps, which does relate to head first tumbles. The rule for those in other standards is also 1.75 inches, which sound reasonable. These improvements apply to the case of staying on the boat as well, having taken a few licks from tethers.
PRV. We understand what you are saying, but industrial falls are that way too, generally tripping over something followed by head first.
Remember that the purpose of the thread was "what would people wear?" I'm pretty sure I wouldn't actually wear many of the things I pointed out unless it was submarine duty at the bow or going in the water after somebody. Up the mast I use a climbing harness, but that's a whole different topic. But what I would wear is not the question. I was curious what other people would come up with.
Is there some way they could be improved that you would wear?
PRV. We understand what you are saying, but industrial falls are that way too, generally tripping over something followed by head first.
Remember that the purpose of the thread was "what would people wear?" I'm pretty sure I wouldn't actually wear many of the things I pointed out unless it was submarine duty at the bow or going in the water after somebody. Up the mast I use a climbing harness, but that's a whole different topic. But what I would wear is not the question. I was curious what other people would come up with.
Is there some way they could be improved that you would wear?
Last edited:
penberth3
Well-Known Member
Well said there. Someone has at last stated the obvious.