Return-Path: X-Scanned-By: RAE MPP/Clamd http://raeinternet.com/mpp X-Scanned-By: This message was scanned by MPP Lite Edition (www.messagepartners.com)! X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.10) with PIPE id 25704955; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 03:02:52 -0800 X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2.10 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #598 Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 03:00:57 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on prxy.net X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00, SARE_MILLIONSOF autolearn=unavailable version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Level: X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4f2 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #598 1. Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware by Delbert Hall 2. Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware by Bill Sapsis 3. Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware by Delbert Hall 4. Controlling a Dove Dissolve Unit with something modern? by Gregg Carville 5. Happy Thanksgiving Everyone by Scott Parker 6. Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware by Bill Sapsis 7. Re: Happy Thanksgiving Everyone by Scott Parker 8. Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware by Bill Sapsis 9. Re: Got your 6 - Whole Nine Yards by Steve Larson 10. riggin cert. clarification by b Ricie 11. Re: riggin cert. clarification by Bill Sapsis 12. Re: The problem at hand by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 13. Re: Controlling a Dove Dissolve Unit with something modern? by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 14. Re: The problem at hand by Jerry Durand 15. Re: Walt Disney World Audio Visual Dept. by MissWisc [at] aol.com 16. Re: The problem at hand by "Paul Guncheon" 17. Re: Rigging Certification by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 18. Falling from a ladder by "Paul Guncheon" 19. Re: Ladder fall by "Paul Guncheon" 20. Re: Falling from a ladder by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 21. Re: Falling from a ladder by Charlie Richmond 22. Re: Falling from a ladder by Herrick Goldman 23. Re: Falling from a ladder by Charlie Richmond 24. Re: Falling from a ladder by Jerry Durand 25. Re: Falling from a ladder by Herrick Goldman 26. Re: Falling from a ladder by Charlie Richmond 27. Re: Controlling a Dove Dissolve Unit with something modern? by Gregg Carville 28. Fall Arrest Harnesses -- recommendations? by Mat Goebel 29. Re: Fall Arrest Harnesses -- recommendations? by Bill Sapsis 30. Re: Fall Arrest Harnesses -- recommendations? by Dale Farmer 31. Re: Rigging Certification by June Abernathy 32. Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware by Stuart Wheaton 33. Computerized sound player by Eric Lin 34. Re: Computerized sound player by "Chris Warner" *** Please update the subject line of your reply to use the subject *** line of the message you are replying to! Please only reply to *** one message subject in each reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 07:48:50 -0500 From: Delbert Hall Subject: Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware In-Reply-To: References:

On 11/23/05, Donald A Rowe wrote: > The lift line ends in a nicopress and thimble. in the thimble is a 1/4" > shackle (painted blue) pin up and the pin ziptied in. the chain is just > long enough to go around the pipe (about 6 links) and each end of the cha= in > is in the shackle. Also none of the "inspected" battens come in further > that 6" from the deck. So the question is... should I be glad that there= is > a 100% hard hat policy while working in the space??? Your trim chains are better than many, but they could still be better. Since both ends of the chain are attached to the same shackle, that shackle is holding 100% of the load. If one end of the trim chain was permanently attached to the thimble and the other attached back to the thimble via a shackle, then the shackle is only holding 50% of the load. Because your attachment shackle is holding twice the load it is more susceptible to failure. The chain and shackle are in a static condition (if we use Peter's defination), but that does not prevent them from occuring shockloads.=20 You not only have to look at the WLL of a material/item, but also how it behaves under a shockload (remember WLLs are based on static tensile loads). Since chain, shackles, quicklinks, etc, do not stretch as much as the cable, they have to have a higher WLL than the cable in order to allow for shockloads. There are a lot of shockload on trim chains and thir attachment hardware (read Jay's book). While trim chain failures are very rare, that is not an excuse for not rigging trim chains properly. This tiny error doubles the load on your hardware. While this mistake may not make a significant difference when the loads are small, it can make a big difference with large loads. We should get into the habit of always rigging things properly. You should be glad that your theatre has a 100% hard hat policy. It shows that they value the safety of the technicians who work there. -Delbert ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:42:20 -0500 Subject: Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Manufacturers do not like to publish breaking strengths because people tend to misinterpret them for WLL. For the most part I use a 7:1 design factor with the hardware I sell. So, the 1/4" proof coil chain, which has a WLL of 1,250 pounds, has a breaking strength of 8,750 pounds. Zat help? Bill S. www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile Join the Long Reach Long Riders on their 3rd annual cross country charity motorcycle ride. On 11/24/05 1:22 AM, "Brian Munroe" wrote: > What is the design factor on 1/4" proof coil chain? That is, if the > WLL is 1200#, what is the breaking strengtth? ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:50:02 -0500 From: Delbert Hall Subject: Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware In-Reply-To: References:

BTW, a 1/4" galvanized carbon steel shackle has a WLL of 1103 lbs (according to McMaster-Carr) so this is the "weakest link" in the system. By having only one end of the trim chain attached to this shackle would would greatly reduce the load on this shackle (a good thing). Happy Thanksgiving everyone. -Delbert ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2c0e15160511240551n37075bm61524f85d8a61903 [at] mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:51:00 -0500 From: Gregg Carville Subject: Controlling a Dove Dissolve Unit with something modern? Hi All, Our ancient DOS based platform that ran a program that controlled our Dove Dissolve unit with two slide projectors for A Christmas Carol - has jumped out of the booth. So we are in the 11th hour with tech tomorrow and I thought I would ask if anyone knows of a modern program that might do the same. I will be searching the net today, and trying to enjoy the holiday too, and any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated. Here are the details: We do not have the budget to rent a digital projector (cause that would be too easy...) We are looking at doing cross fades, dissolves, etc with two projectors - it is fairly straightforward. We have the Dove unit (and I apologize for not knowing the exact spec) it has a 3 pin XLR input for the computer. Anyway - any help would be greatly appreciated. Meanwhile have a very enjoyable holiday (and for those not celebrating, have a good day!) thanks, Gregg ------------------------------ Message-ID: <90d9c9980511240556g1052de81r2fd552835a767a31 [at] mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:56:58 -0500 From: Scott Parker Subject: Happy Thanksgiving Everyone Good Morning All, Just a note to wish all a happy Thanksgiving. Before I get lost in the kitchen, I wanted to take a moment to thank everyone for taking the time to give me and others on the list their time and wisdom. This day is always a great reminder to take a moment and think about all the luck that has come to me personally. To that end, I also plan on sending a little cash; well, credit card cash to the Red Cross. http://www.redcross.org. I would like to publish a list of worthwhile and trusted organizations that help people in need. If you have personal experience with any, please send them along and I'll publish them on my websites. I hope you all have a great day. Gobble! -- Take care, Scott =09Scott C. Parker =09Professor/Technical Director =09Dept. of Performing Arts =09Dyson College of Arts and Sciences [at] Pace University =09Office/shipping: 41 Park Row, 1205F =09Mailing: 1 Pace Plaza =09New York, NY 10038 =09212-346-1423 Fax: 914-989-8425 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:01:16 -0500 Subject: Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: The WLL limit of 1/4" galvanized aircraft cable, according to almost every theatrical supplier in this country, is 1,000 pounds. That makes it the weakest link in that part of the system. To truly find and understand where the weakest link in the system is, you must inspect the entire system. You might be surprised at what you find when you look at ratings for loft blocks. Bill S. www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile Join the Long Reach Long Riders on their 3rd annual cross country charity motorcycle ride. On 11/24/05 8:50 AM, "Delbert Hall" wrote: > BTW, a 1/4" galvanized carbon steel shackle has a WLL of 1103 lbs > (according to McMaster-Carr) so this is the "weakest link" in the > system. By having only one end of the trim chain attached to this > shackle would would greatly reduce the load on this shackle (a good > thing). ------------------------------ Message-ID: <90d9c9980511240606v329606bbs56eb19b8616df773 [at] mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:06:20 -0500 From: Scott Parker Subject: Re: Happy Thanksgiving Everyone In-Reply-To: References: OK, my wife just came in and suggested City Harvest for this food day... It's also local to NY. You may have something similar.=20 http://www.cityharvest.org/index.html -- Take care, Scott =09Scott C. Parker =09Professor/Technical Director =09Dept. of Performing Arts =09Dyson College of Arts and Sciences [at] Pace University =09Office/shipping: 41 Park Row, 1205F =09Mailing: 1 Pace Plaza =09New York, NY 10038 =09212-346-1423 Fax: 914-989-8425 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:27:23 -0500 Subject: Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On 11/24/05 7:48 AM, "Delbert Hall" wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Your trim chains are better than many, but they could still be better. > Since both ends of the chain are attached to the same shackle, that > shackle is holding 100% of the load. If one end of the trim chain was > permanently attached to the thimble and the other attached back to the > thimble via a shackle, then the shackle is only holding 50% of the > load. Because your attachment shackle is holding twice the load it is > more susceptible to failure. Which is why you should use hardware that is rated for the application. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a shackle, which has a WLL of 1,000 pounds (as most 1/4" SPAS do) holding 1,000 pounds. > > The chain and shackle are in a static condition (if we use Peter's > defination), but that does not prevent them from occuring shockloads. > You not only have to look at the WLL of a material/item, but also how > it behaves under a shockload (remember WLLs are based on static > tensile loads). Since chain, shackles, quicklinks, etc, do not > stretch as much as the cable, they have to have a higher WLL than the > cable in order to allow for shockloads. There are a lot of shockload > on trim chains and thir attachment hardware (read Jay's book). The WLL is based on an arbitrary design factor. Most theatrical dealers use a 7:1 design factor meaning, the breaking strength is divided by 7 to determine the Working Load limit. In manually operated counterweight systems it is extremely difficult to apply a significant (more than 2 -3%) shockload to the system. Shockloads come into play when something goes wrong. A runaway, for example. The normal resonse to a shock load situation, regardless of the type of hardware being used, is to replace the hardware. Most manufacturers require this. > > While trim chain failures are very rare, that is not an excuse for not > rigging trim chains properly. This tiny error doubles the load on > your hardware. While this mistake may not make a significant > difference when the loads are small, it can make a big difference with > large loads. We should get into the habit of always rigging things > properly. I would have to argue that your "error of mistake" characterization of the trim chain application is misleading. Yes, putting the tail end of the trim chain back into the thimble is good. But that condition rarely happens. Many times, in order to insure that the batten is trim (hence the name trim chain) the end of the chain ends up in the standing part of the chain. What is important is making sure that all of the hardware you are using is rated for all of the possible applications. Your method of using a trim chain is certainly acceptable and even laudable, but it is not the only way to rig a trim chain. And lets not forget our friend the safety bolt. Common practice has required a safety bolt for at least 10 years now. This is a bolt that runs through internal links of the chain connecting the tail side with the standing side. It exists to back up the shackle should the shackle fail. In my experience shackles do not break under loads applied by counterweight systems. Shackles tend to fail because the pin hasn't been safetied and the pins simply untwists itself and falls out. > > You should be glad that your theatre has a 100% hard hat policy. It > shows that they value the safety of the technicians who work there. Occasionally I get hire to 'audit' a load-in somewhere, usually a college, to check and see if the proper safety policies are in place and are being enforced. So, on the appointed day I show up and everyone, and I do mean everyone, is wearing a hard hat. While watching people fidgeting with their adjustment straps and generally not having a good time, it becomes obvious that this is the first time they have worn them. They are wearing hard hats because I am there. So, after about an hour or two I go to the grid and wander around. Then I yell Heads! as loud as I can. Sounds irresponsible, yes? Maybe, but look at what happens when I do that. Without fail, when I yell Heads! the vast majority of the hard hats hit the floor. That's because instead of running out of harms way, the people look up! So much for the usefulness of the hard hat. Even when the chin strap is on and the hard hat doesn't fall off, it's not going to be much good if your turn your face upward to see what is going on. The moral of the story? Looking up is an instinctual response. I've talked to psychologists about this and they pretty much agree. To keep your head down and run away is a learned response. You have to practice it. It's not enough to simply tell someone "don't look up when someone yells heads!. Keep your head down and run away." They'll still look up the first couple of times. You need to practice it. And one more thing. You folks working on the grid. You need to practice not only yell Heads! But also you location. It takes only a split second to add "down stage right" to "heads!". It gives the people on the deck a chance to run away in the right direction. But it takes practice. Ya wanna know the real reason this post is so long? It's because I don't have to cook today!!!! All I have to do today is show up at my brothers house and eat!!! How cool is that? I hope you all have a safe and happy thanksgiving. And I would ask that you take a moment during your day today to remember the millions of people who are not as well off as we are. Most of the folks affected by Katrina/Rita are not having as good a day as we are. Maybe tomorrow we can find a place to donate some money or clothes or something to help out. Be well Bill S. www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile Join the Long Reach Long Riders on their 3rd annual cross country charity motorcycle ride. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:12:10 -0500 Subject: Re: Got your 6 - Whole Nine Yards From: Steve Larson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: I have purchased all kinds of fabrics for 4 decades and have never been limited by 9 yard bolts. Steve > From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com > Reply-To: "Stagecraft" > Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 18:28:23 EST > To: "Stagecraft" > Subject: Re: Got your 6 - Whole Nine Yards > > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > In a message dated 23/11/05 20:45:59 GMT Standard Time, psyd [at] cox.net writes: > >> ...and then there's the story of when kilts became the formal wear that >> they are now, instead of the cheap alternative to having someone make the >> cloth into pants (possibly the origin of the Scots being, ehm, 'thrifty'). >> The phrase, "The whole nine yards" is attributed to using the entirety of a >> nine yard piece of worsted wool (which is referred to as a great kilt) >> instead of the catholic schoolgirl, ehm, wee kilt. > > There may be truth in this. A kilt (feile beg) has a surprising mount of > material in it, due to the extensive pleating. What you have described is a > great > kilt (feile mor). This is a kilt and a plaid all-in-one. I will check with a > reference. > > > Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20051124151843.37132.qmail [at] web50606.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 07:18:43 -0800 (PST) From: b Ricie Subject: riggin cert. clarification In-Reply-To: Thanks UNKA BILL You did indeed clear up the "What counts as rigging" question. Without the Tin Lizzy we would not have the interstate highway system. As people who are used to dissecting all we do, down to it smallest components, in an effort to understand all we can about something, so we do now. The exam is a good thing, we all agree on that, but ignorance is never an excuse,and we are just trying to clear the gray area. Even the dullest knife can be sharpened. With that said, the Tin Lizzy is on the road, the test is outa the garage "We" just want to make sure the interstate it travels on is of sound pavement. That pavement can be laid by us, or them (them = government, clear channel, or any other big entity with a loud voice) Brian Rice 508-685-0716 b_ricie [at] yahoo.com "Blessed are the cracked: For it is they who let in the light." __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:16:21 -0500 Subject: Re: riggin cert. clarification From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: I understand. If I came off as a bit cranky before, I apologize. Sometimes it's hard to step away from something and take a completely objective look at it. Thanks Be well Bill S. www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile Join the Long Reach Long Riders on their 3rd annual cross country charity motorcycle ride. On 11/24/05 10:18 AM, "b Ricie" wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks UNKA BILL > You did indeed clear up the "What counts as rigging" > question. Without the Tin Lizzy we would not have the > interstate highway system. As people who are used to > dissecting all we do, down to it smallest components, > in an effort to understand all we can about something, > so we do now. The exam is a good thing, we all agree > on that, but ignorance is never an excuse,and we are > just trying to clear the gray area. Even the dullest > knife can be sharpened. With that said, the Tin Lizzy > is on the road, the test is outa the garage "We" just > want to make sure the interstate it travels on is of > sound pavement. That pavement can be laid by us, or > them (them = government, clear channel, or any other > big entity with a loud voice) > > Brian Rice > 508-685-0716 > b_ricie [at] yahoo.com > "Blessed are the cracked: For it is they who let in the > light." > > > > > __________________________________ > Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <195.4c407527.30b75e64 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:20:20 EST Subject: Re: The problem at hand In a message dated 24/11/05 02:47:31 GMT Standard Time, billn [at] peak.org writes: > Which is why neither hydraulics nor pneumatics are really suitable. They > tend to have problems with very small and slow movements. Remember your > physics lessons in static and dynamic friction. I don't know about that. Many industrial machine tools use hydraulics for their movements. These can vary from fast to very slow, and are always precise, as is the hydraulic power steering on my car. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <24a.207225d.30b76247 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:36:55 EST Subject: Re: Controlling a Dove Dissolve Unit with something modern? In a message dated 24/11/05 13:53:12 GMT Standard Time, gcarville [at] gmail.com writes: > So we are in the 11th hour with tech tomorrow and I thought I would > ask if anyone knows of a modern program that might do the same. Versions of Windows up to 98 actually contain DOS: later ones will simulate it. It is certainly an option under Winsows 98, at shut down, to do a "Restart in DOS mode". Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.0.20051124102710.0385aa98 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:36:42 -0800 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: The problem at hand In-Reply-To: References: At 10:20 AM 11/24/2005, you wrote: >I don't know about that. Many industrial machine tools use hydraulics for >their movements. These can vary from fast to very slow, and are >always precise, >as is the hydraulic power steering on my car. A common method to make pneumatics almost as stiff as hydraulics is to put the bleed valve on the exit side of the cylinder and put full pressure on the input side. That way there isn't any low-pressure air in either half of the cylinder. You can also stop them precisely this way. I spent a number of years working on/building electronics test/manufacturing equipment that used a LOT of pneumatics, mostly Clippard brand. I was always amazed at how much pressure we could run the urethane air lines at with no reinforcement (425psi burst). A floor installer found out the hard way when he was using a torch to soften some floor tiles near what looked like fish tank air hose. Made quite a bang, scared him silly. -- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ From: MissWisc [at] aol.com Message-ID: <21a.3b1e585.30b7638a [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:42:18 EST Subject: Re: Walt Disney World Audio Visual Dept. jason [at] tollefsondesigns.com writes: <> Where do they post their openings? If techs can be IA members, why aren't Business Agents of other locals told of the openings? Or are the openings because of poor working conditions? Kristi ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:08:15 -1000 From: "Paul Guncheon" Subject: Re: The problem at hand Message-id: <000f01c5f12a$6d043580$1e8aea48 [at] yourxhtr8hvc4p> References: <<- The audience wouldn't be "drawn in" by separating them from the action like that. If they felt like observers from outside the ship, they may be emotionally detached from the drama going on, and I like audiences to be drawn in as much as possible. Do any set designers out there agree with me on these points? This is my first design, and I've never received any formal training, although I've been building sets for various shows & companies (as an amateur hobbyist) for many years.>> I would love to believe that I, as a designer, have the great power to have a certain predicable effect on my audience... to manipulate them, to make them feel a particular emotion or involvement, but I can't be that arrogant. I simply put in stage what I think is appropriate to the production and what evokes the emotion in me. When I employ mechanicals in a design, I try to remove as much noise (mechanical and audible as well as visual) from the movement. Consider how the show would be accepted if the deck didn't tip at all. If you didn't have the capability to tip the deck, would you not do the show. Please be aware that I am not familiar with the show. I think that a lot of shows are scripted and blocked based on the ability of first venue, its budget, timetable, skill level, etc. I also think that scripted stage directions are only suggestions and not necessarily the best solution to the design problems presented by the script. As far as how to do it, I would suggest you go with pneumatics. There are lots of ways to do the gag you want to do, but as it seems you want to go with hydraulics and have staunchly defended their use, it would probably be self prophesying and then self defeating to use another system which you already believe to be inferior. 'Twer me, I would figure out the mechanical "how" which would then point at the force provider. I am assuming this is an "au vista" change, yes? if not, I would use some sort of purely mechanical device to lift one side of the unit. Laters, Paul "I don't believe in the Heimlich manoeuvre", Tom struck back. ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 21:50:47 GMT Subject: Re: Rigging Certification Message-Id: <20051124.135145.16402.17423 [at] webmail34.lax.untd.com> Dear Bill, I do not wish to rock the boat, but the very people that you referred to= , ie: the ones that made up the test, are the exact ones that I am curre= ntly willing to hire at a premium if the rigging is anything but plain v= anilla. I might prefer a Sapsis, a Foy, or a Hall, but all the SMEs who = worked hard to make this test and certification a reality get bonus poin= ts on my vendor bid list. Those persons who are certified by this progra= m occupy, at least temporarily, a second tier and the thus far not certi= fied, but safe, knowledgeable and talented riggers occupy a third tier u= ntil they get certified. And yes, I do think that it would make a differ= ence in court after an industrial accident if I was able to show that I = exclusively used certified welders, certified riggers, state licensed el= ectricians (until the ETCP certifies some), as well as have the state se= al of a structural engineer placed on the plans right next to the Design= er's IA 'bug'. /s/ Richard ______________________ We have discussed ad nauseum who is responsible for putting the test tog= ether. They are US! The people that you fear are going to require ever= yone be certified are the very people who understand that not everyone c= an or should be certified. = Bill S. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:53:49 -1000 From: "Paul Guncheon" Subject: Falling from a ladder Message-id: <002c01c5f149$ef73d6a0$1e8aea48 [at] yourxhtr8hvc4p> References: I was just sent a video of a guy falling off an expandable ladder during a sort of QVC broadcast selling said ladder. Does not appear that the subject was seriously hurt but then how can one really tell. Looks like he stepped down and missed the next lower rung and as it appeared he was at a rather steep angle had nowhere to go but down. I don't know if it's on the web anywhere... (haven't done the Google thing), but I can probably forward it to anyone who would like to see it. It's an .asf file. Laters, Paul "I need something to help me with this constipation" said Tom fleetingly. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:12:08 -1000 From: "Paul Guncheon" Subject: Re: Ladder fall Message-id: <000b01c5f14c$7eaa84c0$1e8aea48 [at] yourxhtr8hvc4p> References: Should have done the Google first: http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/qvc.asp Laters, Paul ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <28c.60724c.30b7a794 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 18:32:36 EST Subject: Re: Falling from a ladder In a message dated 24/11/05 22:55:38 GMT Standard Time, paul.guncheon [at] verizon.net writes: > I was just sent a video of a guy falling off an expandable ladder during a > sort of QVC broadcast selling said ladder. Does not appear that the subject > was seriously hurt but then how can one really tell. Looks like he stepped > down and missed the next lower rung and as it appeared he was at a rather > steep angle had nowhere to go but down. It can be done. Two of my colleagues have been there, due to defective earthing on lanterns. The trick is apparantly to press yourself as close to the ladder as you can, to maximise the friction and so to slow your descent. A lot of things like this are about having prepeared a response, or being quick witted. The prepared answer is likely to be faster. As an example, I once had a stone through my windscren at 80mph on a motorway. I didn't hesitate, but just stuck my fist through it. That way I could see where I was going, although I got a few cut knuckles. But, I had the prepared response in my mind. Perhaps this is something that we should teach; how to react to hazards. What to do when an A-frame starts to go away, or a tallescope. Myself, I have plans for both. They may not be the best answers, but at least they are plausible, and I should rather implement one or the other than do nothing. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 23:53:46 +0000 (GMT) From: Charlie Richmond Subject: Re: Falling from a ladder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References:

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Paul Guncheon wrote: > I was just sent a video of a guy falling off an expandable ladder during a I'm only interested if it has a sound track by the Trans Siberian Orchestra. Charlie ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 19:05:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Falling from a ladder From: Herrick Goldman Message-ID: In-Reply-To: I know some of the principals and the guitarist as well as the LD for TSO. They are pretty slow in January. Maybe we can something out for you Charlie. On 11/24/05 6:53 PM, "Charlie Richmond" wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Paul Guncheon wrote: > >> I was just sent a video of a guy falling off an expandable ladder during a > > I'm only interested if it has a sound track by the Trans Siberian Orchestra. > > Charlie > -- Herrick Goldman Lighting Designer, NYC www.HGLightingDesign.com 917-797-3624 "To the scores of silent alchemists who wreak their joy in darkness and in light bringing magic to life, we bow most humbly. "-CDS ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:19:34 +0000 (GMT) From: Charlie Richmond Subject: Re: Falling from a ladder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Herrick Goldman wrote: > They are pretty slow in January. Maybe we can something out for you Charlie. That'll be fine - just don't out me... Charlie ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.0.20051124161518.03522150 [at] 192.168.0.13> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 16:18:55 -0800 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: Falling from a ladder In-Reply-To: References:

At 03:53 PM 11/24/2005, you wrote: >I'm only interested if it has a sound track by the Trans Siberian Orchestra. Mentioning that, we've had a "few" hits on that file (the blinky house). Guess you guys like it! :) This is of last midnight: #reqs %reqs Gbytes %bytes last access 2884 2.25% 2.49 24.39% Nov/23/05 10:11 PM And this is with our Internet connection being down a LOT yesterday. Seems to be fixed now. -- Jerry Durand Durand Interstellar, Inc. 219 Oak Wood Way Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 web: www.interstellar.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 19:41:18 -0500 Subject: Re: Falling from a ladder From: Herrick Goldman Message-ID: In-Reply-To: CharlieR: closeted metalhead? Or CharlieR: closeted xmas caroler? On 11/24/05 7:19 PM, "Charlie Richmond" wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Herrick Goldman wrote: > >> They are pretty slow in January. Maybe we can something out for you Charlie. > > That'll be fine - just don't out me... > > Charlie > -- Herrick Goldman Lighting Designer, NYC www.HGLightingDesign.com 917-797-3624 "To the scores of silent alchemists who wreak their joy in darkness and in light bringing magic to life, we bow most humbly. "-CDS ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:57:40 +0000 (GMT) From: Charlie Richmond Subject: Re: Falling from a ladder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Herrick Goldman wrote: > CharlieR: closeted metalhead? > > Or > > CharlieR: closeted xmas caroler? LOL! hopefully you will never know... ;-) Charlie ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2c0e15160511241748r7cb94fb0p66a62b06b9d67731 [at] mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 20:48:21 -0500 From: Gregg Carville Subject: Re: Controlling a Dove Dissolve Unit with something modern? In-Reply-To: <43859B9A.16193.1EFE888A [at] localhost> References: <43859B9A.16193.1EFE888A [at] localhost> Thanks for the advice. I did some looking and found out that the Dove takes tones as a signal. I was able to hook up an output from our SFX system and that has worked out well. Now I am able to control the unit, do dissolves, etc. The only thing I would like to get is either a manual for the unit or perhaps a list of what different tones do. I am looking to go backwards on the carousel and to decipher things (right now it is sort of trial and error with the tones I have.) Anyway - problem solved for now. The issue with the DOS system is that we needed the program which only runs on a DOS machine that is dedicated to that (I believe - the documentation on this whole system is sparse) Anyway, thanks for the advice. -Gregg ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:59:13 -0800 From: Mat Goebel Subject: Fall Arrest Harnesses -- recommendations? Happy Thanksgiving all, The past couple days, I have participated in fall arrest, rescue, and aerial work platform training. I've decided to look in to buying my own harness for a variety of reasons. I know the important things to look for are ANSI/OSHA class III ratings, and NFPA compliance. I would like one that has (at the very least) both dorsal and waist attachment points. Are there any in particular anyone would recommend? Any advice / features to look for? Things to look out for? Thanks for any insight! -- Mat Goebel www.matgoebel.com Mobile: 510.693.1448 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 21:17:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Fall Arrest Harnesses -- recommendations? From: Bill Sapsis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Warning. Commercial Response! (and on a Holiday too. I've got no respect. <>) Harness are very much a personal choice. I think it unwise to rely too much on others opinions. As long as the device meets the regulations then it's acceptable. Comfort is in the eyes (or butt) of the beholder. You should know that Fall Arrest harnesses do not have to meet NFPA standards. Most do, but it's not a requirement. The OSHA requirement is the one that matters and OSHA requires that the harness meet ANSI standards and be labeled as such. You should know (here comes the commercial part) that all of the harnesses in my catalog (online at sapsis-rigging.com) meet the OSHA requirements and are labeled properly. You could take a look at them or give me a call to discuss. Zat help? Bill S. www.sapsis-rigging.com 800.727.7471 800.292.3851 fax 267.278.4561 mobile Join the Long Reach Long Riders on their 3rd annual cross country charity motorcycle ride. On 11/24/05 8:59 PM, "Mat Goebel" wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Happy Thanksgiving all, > > The past couple days, I have participated in fall arrest, rescue, and > aerial work platform training. I've decided to look in to buying my > own harness for a variety of reasons. I know the important things to > look for are ANSI/OSHA class III ratings, and NFPA compliance. I > would like one that has (at the very least) both dorsal and waist > attachment points. > > Are there any in particular anyone would recommend? Any advice / > features to look for? Things to look out for? > > Thanks for any insight! > -- > Mat Goebel > www.matgoebel.com > Mobile: 510.693.1448 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <43867E32.612A7288 [at] cybercom.net> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 22:00:02 -0500 From: Dale Farmer Organization: The fuzz in the back of the fridge. Subject: Re: Fall Arrest Harnesses -- recommendations? References: Bill Sapsis wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Warning. Commercial Response! > (and on a Holiday too. I've got no respect. <>) > > Harness are very much a personal choice. I think it unwise to rely too much > on others opinions. As long as the device meets the regulations then it's > acceptable. Comfort is in the eyes (or butt) of the beholder. > You should know that Fall Arrest harnesses do not have to meet NFPA > standards. Most do, but it's not a requirement. The OSHA requirement is > the one that matters and OSHA requires that the harness meet ANSI standards > and be labeled as such. > > You should know (here comes the commercial part) that all of the harnesses > in my catalog (online at sapsis-rigging.com) meet the OSHA requirements and > are labeled properly. You could take a look at them or give me a call to > discuss. > > Zat help? I finally bought one this past summer. I finally found one that was sized for a man of my girth. I suggest finding someplace local that you can try them on for size and comfort. Remember that you don't want to have a strap crossing over your cell phone/tool pouch or over the pocket you keep your keyring in. --Dale ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20051125043139.51319.qmail [at] web33104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 20:31:39 -0800 (PST) From: June Abernathy Subject: Re: Rigging Certification I like Bill's list of what constitutes rigging experience. I've never seen it spelled out before, either here or in ESTA documentation. OTOH, most of my supervisors and employers of the last many years would not agree that a large portion of that list counts as rigging. So, if I think it does, and I tell ESTA that I have the required points, and they make any attempt to verify it, I'm probably busted. But it's a chance I would probably take if I were interested and qualified. A chance I'm assuming most of the 200 people in that test did take. (OTOH, I have $200 to blow now and again). I also think, and I will definately e-mail to ESTA as well, that they need to get a form letter together. One that explains that the ESTA Rigging Certification was never intended to certify all riggers, and that it would not make sense for to require certified riggers for all rigging jobs at all times. That while ESTA would, of course, like to see as many people as possible certified, that ESTA's goal with the certification process was to reach a point where maybe one or two "certified" riggers would be on a call in a supervisory capacity. That should not consider uncertified riggers to be dangerous or unsatisfactory based on that alone. Because I think it's going to come up. Alot. My e-mail to ESTA will, of course, reiterate my previously posted thoughts that the committee should reconsider it's decision not to create lower level forms of rigging certification. I think if they have to send enough form letters, the need may become obvious. And part of my .02 to the electrical certification committee will DEFINATELY be that they should consider different levels of certification, and consider carefully what those are called. I would also suggest that they start "certification" testing from the bottom up, rather than the top down as they did in Rigging, which will, I think, mitigate some of the immediate problems of venues or insurers requiring certification, or paying the uncertified less than they get now. Why not let anyone who wants to take the test take it? Because you don't want them to be frustrated and disapointed? If a $600 price tag and a list of sample questions don't dampen their enthusiasm, then I think they should be able to give it a shot. Because you don't want someone to be able to just memorize a bunch of facts and figures and pass the test? Well, a more legitimate concern, I guess, although I'd be impressed if someone could pull it off. Maybe modifying the qualifications to a more generic "X number of years working as a stagehand" might be better. Because proving anything else is problematic. I really don't know the answer there. Sorry for the length. My last post on the topic, I promise. I'll be good and e-mail ESTA instead. June Abernathy IATSE #321 (Tampa, FL) FOH Electrician The Lion King National Tour (Gazelle) __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4386A890.5090909 [at] fuse.net> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 01:00:48 -0500 From: Stuart Wheaton Subject: Re: "Not for Lifting" ratings on hardware References: In-Reply-To: Bill Sapsis wrote: > Manufacturers do not like to publish breaking strengths because people tend > to misinterpret them for WLL. For the most part I use a 7:1 design factor > with the hardware I sell. So, the 1/4" proof coil chain, which has a WLL of > 1,250 pounds, has a breaking strength of 8,750 pounds. If you use a chain (or whatever) within it's rated WLL, but ignore the "Not for lifting" on the package, In the event of failure, where does liability fall? Seems like the 'Not for lifting' disclaimer might be trump card here. Are chains micro-engraved or something? How best do you prove or disprove that you used so and so's chain? Keeping as much distance between you and the liability judgement sounds like the best reason to get and pay for the stuff rated for overhead lifting. Stuart ------------------------------ Message-ID: <914532060511242350k7e8af670id573c1f9e80af795 [at] mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 02:50:11 -0500 From: Eric Lin Subject: Computerized sound player Does anyone know of a computerized sound player that runs off cues? Just looking for the ability to run music and sound effects off a laptop, preferably with cues Thanks Eric ------------------------------ From: "Chris Warner" Subject: RE: Computerized sound player Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:08:18 -0800 Message-ID: <023c01c5f197$64b29cb0$6401a8c0 [at] chris> In-Reply-To: There are a number of them, Sound Cue System is the least expensive I have seen, but there is SFX, and Cricket as well. Cheers! Chris > -----Original Message----- > From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Eric Lin > Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 11:50 PM > To: Stagecraft > Subject: Computerized sound player > > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Does anyone know of a computerized sound player that runs off cues? > > Just looking for the ability to run music and sound effects off a > laptop, preferably with cues > > Thanks > Eric > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.7/182 - Release Date: 11/24/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.7/182 - Release Date: 11/24/2005 ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #598 *****************************