[CQ-Contest] Tower safety

[Gerry Hull]

Ed,

I think you are applying your analysis from the wrong perspective.

In the W0AIH case, if Paul had been 100% attached to the tower, his winch
cable could have failed and he would have survived (this craziest) winching
approach.

In our local case, the tower base failure as a root cause is a red
herring:  It may have contributed.  However, it was a process error.   No
one should consider taking down a tower that was up for ANY length of time
without first fully inspecting the tower, the guying system, etc.   Had
these unfortunate gentlemen taken any time to survey and understand what
they were getting into, I believe this incident may have been avoided.

As K8MR points out, it does not matter how many 1000s of hours of
experience you have, or how much of a bodybuilder you are.   All it takes
is 1 second of distraction to end your life.

73, Gerry W1VE


On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 8:16 AM Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at sbelectronics.com>
wrote:

> I think that issue is that the discussion Jim had did not get to the true
> root cause analysis in all cases.  HE did speak about temporary guying
> below the work on  a tower and doing the "off the tower" movement of guys
> which clearly was a root cause of more than one known tower incident.
>
> I believe that a rusted base at the concrete exit point was a root cause
> and I am not sure I heard that mentioned.
>
> W0AIH's fatality was in no way due to not using the proper safety
> harness.  There are pictures of him using one.  I am not sure what failed
> in his arrest system.  But wearing the wrong harness is not what it was.
>
> To be truthful to the root cause analysis process, of which I do a lot if
> it at work, is there documented fatalities of wearing the lesser harness
> than what Jim was showing on the video?  If so, what happened, and how
> would it be mitigated by that ewquipment?
>
> If we REALLY want to improve safety, we should focus on what's killing
> people.  Not on what isn't killing people.
>
> Some of that occurred on Jim's talk.  Some of it did not.  And some of it
> is great advice but may have no direct impact on reducing what's killing
> people.
>
> Ed  N1UR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> rjairam at gmail.com
> Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2019 7:19 PM
> To: James Cain
> Cc: CQ-Contest Reflector
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Tower safety
>
> You got lucky.
>
> I prefer not to rely on luck, and it doesn’t take much time to get
> properly suited up at all.
>
> As for replacing the climbing apparatus, I wouldn’t trust it if it
> arrested a serious fall. Stress on that kind of apparatus is cumulative so
> there may be hidden danger.
>
> This is your life you’re gambling with and by all means I won’t tell you
> how to live it, but I prefer not to roll the dice.
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 3:22 PM James Cain <jamesdavidcain at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I did pretty serious tower work for more than 20 years and quit at age
> 44.
> > By the time I had got suited up in that equipment in the K1IR video it
> > would have been too dark to get any work done. And what's this about
> > "If you fall, (the manufacturer says) to throw away the climbing
> apparatus"?
> > And what? Buy another climbing apparatus from us?
> >
> > K1TN
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>