Rank: New forum user 
|
Not sure if this topic is done to 'death' but is there any development in self rescue from alutowers, especially if working platform about 4.5mtrs. Due to floor loadings and access issues, we cannot use MEWPS for works and nothing to attach a gotcha system to. The client is demanding a rescue plan. Any help would be gretly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi andrew65, I'm a bit perplexed as to why you would require a rescue plan for a tower. Perhaps a bit more info for context would be useful.
Other than climbing down a ladder, anything that incapacitates an individual would require a rather complex solution, which may make the job not economically viable. Are you really sure that there isn't an access solution out there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Andrew, I was asked a similar question by an over enthusiastic site manager a while back. The agreement we came to was that there would be no high level lone working and a that a first aider would always be in the vicinity. In the unlikely event that the person up the tower became incapacitated, the first aider would access the tower and perform first aid whilst the emergency services were called. They could then facilitate a rescue. In all honesty, the likelihood of this scenario ever playing out is remote and if it did, i'd much sooner make the casualty safe (at height) and then let the professionals deal with getting him down.
|
 1 user thanked Stern for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Planning for rescue and emergencies when employees work at height is a legal and moral responsibility for all employers. Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 obliges employers to ensure all work at height is properly planned, and Regulation 4(2) notes that "planning of work includes planning for emergencies and rescue".
However the gist of this mainly involves the resue of those hanging in a harness is at risk of suspension trauma; the blood drains from the top half of their body, depriving the brain of oxygen. The critical thing is to get them out of danger as soon as possible - any more than 10 minutes in suspension and the risk of irreparable damage increases rapidly. The only way you would have a resue plan for a Mobile Scaffold tower would be if you could safely move that person down to the ground and the only way would be to off load to a MEWP but you've already said thats impossible. I would agree with Sterns post make the casualty safe (at height) and then let the professionals deal with getting him down
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
It is a general rule that any emergency plan should not rely solely on the emergency services attendance. How that applies in practice could vary considerably according to the task and infrastructure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Could you not get hands free!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Originally Posted by: Invictus  Could you not get hands free!
Can we use mobile towers while driving or not?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Serious answer, I think the rescue plan put in place should be proportionate to the risk assessment that is first produced for the activity. It is a very uncommon thing to request in my opinion, think of the amount of normal scaffolding that is in place around the country, I don't think there is a rescue plan for all these activities. I would just bullet point down what you would do if the worker gets incapacitated at the top of the mobile tower. My inclination would be that if they were hurt to the extent that you could not get them down by normal means, you would not be wanting to move them regardless. As far as I am aware the main focus of any rescue plan is to take into account a "fall" emergency. I did happen to be on a site once where a poor chap stepped backwards off a ladder onto the blade of a petrol cutter which had been left in a stupid place, the solution was to load him into a boat skip at the nearest loading bay and bring him to the floor that way, so sometimes creative thinking can help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: RayRapp It is a general rule that any emergency plan should not rely solely on the emergency services attendance. How that applies in practice could vary considerably according to the task and infrastructure.
RayRapp, Whose rule is that out of interest? I've heard that a few times in the past but have never seen it formally documented anywhere.
In my opinion, a rescue plan should be designed to be as effective as possible and in this situation (unconscious casualty stuck several metres in the air on a flimsy tower) i would say that the emergency services are the ONLY option to get the guy down safely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: fhunter Serious answer, I think the rescue plan put in place should be proportionate to the risk assessment that is first produced for the activity. It is a very uncommon thing to request in my opinion, think of the amount of normal scaffolding that is in place around the country, I don't think there is a rescue plan for all these activities. I would just bullet point down what you would do if the worker gets incapacitated at the top of the mobile tower. My inclination would be that if they were hurt to the extent that you could not get them down by normal means, you would not be wanting to move them regardless. As far as I am aware the main focus of any rescue plan is to take into account a "fall" emergency. I did happen to be on a site once where a poor chap stepped backwards off a ladder onto the blade of a petrol cutter which had been left in a stupid place, the solution was to load him into a boat skip at the nearest loading bay and bring him to the floor that way, so sometimes creative thinking can help.
In the example you give it sounds like that was the best way to get the guy down but i'd be reluctant to put "stick the guy in a skip" in a rescue plan (although again, i'm sure it's effective!) You're right when you suggest that this is a disproportionate request but if they're insisting on something then in this particular situation its got to be emergency services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Originally Posted by: Stern Originally Posted by: RayRapp It is a general rule that any emergency plan should not rely solely on the emergency services attendance. How that applies in practice could vary considerably according to the task and infrastructure.
RayRapp, Whose rule is that out of interest? I've heard that a few times in the past but have never seen it formally documented anywhere.
In my opinion, a rescue plan should be designed to be as effective as possible and in this situation (unconscious casualty stuck several metres in the air on a flimsy tower) i would say that the emergency services are the ONLY option to get the guy down safely.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/faq-height.htm
|
1 user thanked chris42 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: chris42 Originally Posted by: Stern Originally Posted by: RayRapp It is a general rule that any emergency plan should not rely solely on the emergency services attendance. How that applies in practice could vary considerably according to the task and infrastructure.
RayRapp, Whose rule is that out of interest? I've heard that a few times in the past but have never seen it formally documented anywhere.
In my opinion, a rescue plan should be designed to be as effective as possible and in this situation (unconscious casualty stuck several metres in the air on a flimsy tower) i would say that the emergency services are the ONLY option to get the guy down safely.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/faq-height.htm
Cheers Chris. We've got some pretty detailed rescue plans in place for harnesses, MEWPs etc but in this instance i still think that the only feasible option is to let the professionals deal with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Firstly, apologies for the late response and thanks toall for thie comments. The general feeling from all is letting the emergency services deal with the issue, doesn't help with gerrysharp comments regarding WAH regs and planning for emergencies and rescue, goes against this rule.
I'm fortunate enough to work in an area with an on-site nurse and fire service team. Nurse is ok with WAH administering first aid where required, Fire service didn't really have a solution but 'would give it a go' if required!! what the fire service also said is that if they were on call elsewhere, they would expect us to get the person down and don't rely on them attending.
i feel a bit of a Heath Robinson moment coming on - using a genie hoist with hook attachment to attach the boat stretcher to and then lower to ground once tower is moved out of the way and only once patient is hoisted above the handrails, or construct a smaller lower tower (2mtr platform height) butted upto the first which , where the stretcher could be manhandled down in stages, then passed to the ground level. pasma.co.uk/faq/safety have a stock answer, where they don't recommend a rescue system apart from using emergency services. Most of the ops want to know that there is a rescue plan in place as we will be working of towers for the next few months. we'll practice the lowering to smaller tower next week to see if there are any issues. Andy
|
1 user thanked andrew65 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Andrew, Its a headbanger this one, Not that i've ever had to do a resue plan for anyone working on a Mobile Tower But how could the rescue be carried out ? perhaps the Emergency services could strapp them to a rescue board and lower them down with a Rope or something? But we must remember unless the person goes down the same way he goes up then simply lowering someone over the outside of a tower could cause issues with stability.
Again whislt this could be something that could happen, its more than likely not going to happen, we just need to use a bit of common sense. If a Rescue plan is required by the MC then i would be more in line to include that 1st aid will be administered on the tower and the person made stable and safe, and the rescue will be carried out members of the Fire Brigade, As it will be very unlikely that you will have anyone with suitable experiance or qualifications on site to effect a rescue like this. Consider it like any other resucue at Height i.e on a fixed scaffold, On Rooftops, In Deep Excavations etc.. Rescue Plans that i've been involved with are mainly to do with Full Body harnesses and the dangers of people being suspended in a harness for any lenght of time. Thats way i've never heard of anyone having to be rescued by people off tower scaffolds. Makes you wonder though
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: Stern Originally Posted by: RayRapp It is a general rule that any emergency plan should not rely solely on the emergency services attendance. How that applies in practice could vary considerably according to the task and infrastructure.
RayRapp, Whose rule is that out of interest? I've heard that a few times in the past but have never seen it formally documented anywhere.
In my opinion, a rescue plan should be designed to be as effective as possible and in this situation (unconscious casualty stuck several metres in the air on a flimsy tower) i would say that the emergency services are the ONLY option to get the guy down safely.
Stern
It is written in many documents as Chris has highlighted including fire and rescue guidance. That is not to say you cannot call the emergency services - just that your emergency plan should not soley rely on them. In practice if there was a serious incident which made rescue difficult it would be prudent to call the the blue light brigade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: RayRapp Originally Posted by: Stern Originally Posted by: RayRapp It is a general rule that any emergency plan should not rely solely on the emergency services attendance. How that applies in practice could vary considerably according to the task and infrastructure.
RayRapp, Whose rule is that out of interest? I've heard that a few times in the past but have never seen it formally documented anywhere.
In my opinion, a rescue plan should be designed to be as effective as possible and in this situation (unconscious casualty stuck several metres in the air on a flimsy tower) i would say that the emergency services are the ONLY option to get the guy down safely.
Stern
It is written in many documents as Chris has highlighted including fire and rescue guidance. That is not to say you cannot call the emergency services - just that your emergency plan should not soley rely on them. In practice if there was a serious incident which made rescue difficult it would be prudent to call the the blue light brigade.
For fire you could look at paragraph 2 of this governement guidance: 'such evacuation plan should not rely upon the intervention of the fire and rescue service to make it work' https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/422202/9446_Means_of_Escape_v2_.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Taking a sensible approach to this and taking into account that PASMA will not give any specific advice regarding mobile tower rescue as they say the conditions of use and type of tower are too varied to offer guidance, I believe the following would constitute the best approach: 1. Prioritise self-assistance: can the Injured Person (IP) descend from the tower without assistance? If Yes, they will descend the tower in the normal way and receive First aid treatment once on the ground. First AIder will be called as IP is descending. 2. If no, First aider will assess the IP in situ on the tower, the IP and First Aider will decide wether the IP can descend from the tower by normal means with support and assistance from others. 3. If assisted descent is not possible, then the IP will be treated in siut and the emergency services will be called. It is highly likely that in any event the IP cannot descend from the tower either by self-help or assiated descent, the injury will be of a nature that those on site giving emergency first will not be in a competent position to offer the medical care that is required and could cause more harm than good.
Beyond this, I don't see any need for more robust rescue plan for tower use, the nature of the towers use mean it is mobile. I would never suggest anyone going over the side of the tower as stated earlier, it would provide too much instability.
|
1 user thanked fhunter for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I would imagine in a case of someone sufering and illness or something on a tower calling the rescue service would be acceptable, even having this as part of the plan. I don't believe that all companies would need to employ people with mountain rescue skills to ba able to rig up a stretcher and lower it. The fire rescue service are best equiped for this type of rescue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Rather difficult to answer this IMO
Pre employment screening/ health surveillance and a positive culture were if somebody is feeling unwell they advise their supervisor accordingly thus ensuring the most able persons undertake tasks using such equipment.
Towers are adaptable and very economical (generally about £5 per rising meter to hire) and therefore are often the 'go to' for light maintenance/ PPM use.
A rescue plan would generally revolve around containment of a person in a safe manner whilst awaiting the emergency services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: fhunter Taking a sensible approach to this......
I would be happy to adopt fhunter's approach (and I think I will now review my own guidance :o)
fhunter's approach does not 'rely solely' on calling emergency services, but only where there would be a significant risk to the incapacitated person, e.g. if he may have had a neck/spine injury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Theres an easier solution to all of this.
Set the site rules such that they have to use a tower that has a stair unit instead of ladder access.
There are still some available - the stairs are intrisically safer than the ladders anyway and although it would be a bit cramped - you have much more chance of getting a casualty down a stair unit than down a ladder - unless you had a brand of tower strong enough to attach external stuff to - and there's only one on the market that I know of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.