There are so many angles to talk about in rope rescue but for now, let’s focus on Low Angle vs. Steep Angle vs. High Angle rescue.

We hear these terms utilized often in the rescue community, but it is not always clear what each term defines. Each one comes with a degree of slope range, something like;

• 0-15 degree slope is flat terrain
• 15-29 degrees is considered low angle
• 30-50 degrees is steep angle
• anything above 50 degrees is high angle

You may have heard some different numbers associated with each and that’s ok because, in reality, they are just guidelines to help us make informed decisions about what kind of systems to use in a given scenario. If I’m being honest, I don’t really care what the angle is because I still haven’t carried around a protractor in my rescue kit to tell me what degree slope I am working on. I have my own internal protractor, my eyes, my experience, and my level of training. All I am really concerned about is the steeper the ground, the more difficult and the more technical the rescue becomes.

It is not just the degree of slope that tells me what I need to do, it is also the terrain and the condition of the terrain that makes a BIG difference. The terrain AND the slope are going to be major factors in deciding what rope systems to use as well as how many personnel are involved in the rescue. Some examples of terrain that may push you to utilize ropes in a rescue situation would include loose rock/scree, mud, snow, or any other debris that could cause bad footing and an unstable rescue for the patient. Ropes may have to be used to gain access to the victim, to support the team members and the patients during the rescue and remove them from the rescue site.

It is not just the degree of slope that tells me what I need to do,
it is also the terrain and the condition of the terrain that makes
a BIG difference.

So, our size-up goes something like this.

• Can rescuers move freely across the terrain without assistance and manage patient movement effectively and safely? Yes = no ropes
• Do rescuers need assistance to safely and/or more efficiently move themselves or the patient, but the ground is predominately supporting the load? Yes = 1 rope system
• Are rescuers and the patient fully supported by the system or a single rope failure would cause catastrophic results? Yes = 2 ropes.

Each one of these scenarios presents its own set of challenges and the systems used can vary greatly. The goal for all of us is to provide for the safety of our teams and the people we are there to help.

Additional Resources

• 11mm Rope and NFPA Requirements
• Rescue Compliance...Is Your Team Ready?
  
  
  

READER QUESTION: 
How often should I replace my rescue harness?

ROCO TECH PANEL ANSWER: 

We get many calls asking about the “life expectancy” of harnesses, rope, and other nylon products. Of course, many factors are involved, but a lot depends on how much you use your harness and how you use it.

First of all, NFPA 1858 10.1.2 states that “Software products shall be retired in accordance with 10.2.1 no more than 10 years from the date of manufacture.” Be sure to check the label of your harness, which should tell you when it was manufactured. If it’s beyond this 10-year service life, we recommend that it be taken out of service.

The frequency of use can have significant impact to the service life of a harness.

ASTM F1740-96 (2018) Guide for Inspection of Nylon/Kernmantle Rope also recommends a 10-year service life for rope, which can be applied to a nylon harness as well. Section 5.5.2 states, “Retire any rope which is greater than ten years old, regardless of history and usage.”

Here are a few examples based on industry use. The fall protection industry generally recommends 2 to 3 years as a service life for a harness or belt in regular use. The Climbing Sports Group of the Outdoor Recreation Coalition of America states that a climbing harness should last about 2 years under normal weekend use. The military uses 7 years as a service life for nylon products. Of course, hard use of any product would call for a shorter service life than would normally be expected. Also, the frequency of use can have significant impact to the service life of a harness. It is not only the continual wear and tear a harness receives during use, but the exposure to other factors that exacerbate the degradation of textile fibers such as UV, sweat, or potentially other airborne chemicals. Frequent and rigorous use of a harness could decrease the service life substantially.

Even how and where you store your gear is an important factor. In an industrial environment, for example, atmospheric exposures may be a key consideration for nylon products even while in storage. Storage conditions, heat, light, temperature, and other variables can all impact nylon. NFPA 1858 Section 9.2 references the storage of life safety rope and other nylon products, “Equipment shall be stored in such a manner as to prevent damage contact with other equipment and to prevent exposure to chemicals and atmospheres that can contribute to rust, corrosion, or oxidation.”

How and where you store your gear is also an important factor.

---

As with all of your rescue gear, it’s very important to account for each use and follow the manufacturer’s instructions for care, use and inspection. As with ropes, if your harness has been subjected to shock loads, fall loads, abuse other than normal use, or fails the inspection for any reason, it should be removed from service and destroyed.

Bottom line…Never take chances when there’s any doubt about the serviceability of a life safety product. It’s simply not worth the risk.

Additional Resources

• Service Life Guidelines for Rescue Equipment
• Guidelines for Permanent Marking of Rescue Hardware
  
  

Rescue Challenge 2022 finally returned after a two-year hiatus due to pandemic restrictions. The Roco Rescue Challenge has been an ongoing event since 1989. From inception, Rescue Challenge was meant to be far more than just a rescue “competition” that is all about trophies and bragging rights. It’s more about learning and sharing ideas. Rescue Challenge respects the risks—and yes, challenges—that are posed by the confined space environment. This year’s event had a great mix of industrial and municipal teams; and for many of the teams, it was their first Rescue Challenge.

This year teams were tasked with six confined space and high angle rescue scenarios found in industrial and urban settings. Teams also faced off head-to-head in the Team Performance Evaluation (TPE). Finally, team members showed off their skills in the Individual Performance Evaluation (IPE). All Challenge scenarios are designed to have teaching goals that require different rescue and rigging skills. They included simulated IDLH rescue entries with the use of SAR and SCBA equipment. Also included were single-person and multi-casualty scenarios with a mix of manikins and live victims as patients.

Challenge 2022 Participants:

Baton Rouge Fire Department Team 1 – Baton Rouge, LA


Baton Rouge Fire Department Team 2 – Baton Rouge, LA


Bossier City Fire Department – Bossier City, LA


CF Industries – Donaldsonville, LA


CHS McPherson Refinery – McPherson, KS

Exxon BRPO – Baton Rouge, LA

Some of the exceptional performances this year included:
CF Industries: “Top Team” Overall Highest Average for All Scenarios.
Baton Rouge Fire Department Team 1: 1^st Place Individual Performance Evaluation Station.
Bossier City Fire Department: 1^st Place Team Performance Evaluation Station.

To see more highlights from this years event click here.

If you missed this year’s Rescue Challenge, join us next year on October 18-19, 2023, at the Roco Training Center in Baton Rouge. Every year our instructors devise new surprise obstacles to challenge teams with hurdles they’ve never tackled before.

Is your team “Rescue Challenge ready?”

QUESTION: 

ROCO ANSWER: 

Yes! We’ve been using the Mini-Tripod for many years in our tactical training, and it’s been in the Pararescue inventory since 2009 thanks to the Guardian Angel Technical Recovery Program. Every PJ team in the world has these tripods, and we were wondering whether there were any useful applications in industry. In response to this question, we commonly hear, “Why would I use that tiny tripod that requires special techniques to get a litter patient out of a hole if I can just bring the full-size version?” Valid point…until you work in a tray column.

Roco Rescue’s Devin Payne evaluates the Skedco/Roco Mini-Tripod inside a tray column. This training prop has engineered anchors and a top portal, but many tray columns have neither.

Configurations vary, and some of these spaces do have interior high points or topside openings. However, many do not. Maneuvering a patient up through the trays and out a side portal, can be a significant challenge without a high-point anchor. In fact, we practiced this exact scenario last month during a 4-day in-house workshop. We had nine of our experienced personnel from our Training, CSRT, and Tactical divisions perform multiple iterations of the scenario, with and without high points. Afterwards, we introduced the Mini-Tripod to the equipment cache – and, boy, was it a hit!

The Mini-Tripod is small enough to fit inside the tray column on the top tray. No other rescue tripod on the market has this capability. Our CSRT Director immediately reserved the tactical program’s tripod and assigned it to a tray column job starting the following week! The Mini-Tripod weighs 35 pounds and the height is 54”. (This is the measurement to the bottom of the head when fully extended where you clip a carabiner, not the top.) These handy little tools will soon become standard on these jobs.

Additional Resources

• Artificial High Points (tripod) article

• What size rope do I need?

• Can my rope haul 1,000 pounds?

Companies with active safety and health programs that train workers to identify hazardous conditions and use required protective measures can prevent serious and fatal injuries.

In Centre County, PA, three family members died in a grain silo incident. A father, age 47, and his sons ages 14 and 19 all died after becoming trapped inside a silo. The family members reportedly died from asphyxiation due to gasses in the silo. Neighbors said it was a ripple effect with one going in to help the next when they all eventually succumbed to the hazardous atmosphere inside the space.

Tankers Can Be Death Traps

A 48-year-old worker entered a tanker-tailer in Lemont, IL, to inspect it as part of an annual U.S. Department of Transportation requirement and was overcome by exposure to bleach and chlorine gas. The worker was found unconscious in the tanker-trailer; however, he later died of his injuries.

An OSHA investigation determined that the worker’s employer had failed to:

1. identify and evaluate atmospheric hazards in the confined space,
2. train workers on the confined space program, and
3. ensure employees filled out a confined space permit before entry into a confined space.

OSHA also found that the employer failed to equip the worker rescuing the unconscious employee with a retrieval system, implement its own procedures for summoning rescue and emergency services and numerous other violations of its permit-required confined space regulations.

The company was also cited for failing to provide fall protection to an employee working on top of tanker trailers and providing training on fall hazards, respirators, and hazard communication.

The Chicago regional office established a Regional Emphasis Program in 2021 due to the dangers involved in inspecting tanker-trailers. The program is designed to reduce the risks tank cleaning workers face.

“In recent years, OSHA has investigated instances in which workers suffered tragic injuries because employers failed to follow appropriate procedures for ensuring healthy atmospheric conditions inside a confined space and use of adequate respiratory protection before allowing workers to enter tanks,” explained the OSHA Area Director.

Additional Resources

• Attendant Safety Requirements Poster (pictured here)
• Confined Space Entry Checklist
• Common Causes of Confined Space Fatalities