BMS Belay Spool

  • Thread starter Thread starter brendonv
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 27
  • Views Views 5K
brendonv

brendonv

Tree Hugger
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,152
Location
Oxford, Connecticut
Anyone have a BMS Belay Spool for self lowering?

How big is it? Heavy?

Belay_Spool_4ab78e6209f27.jpg
 
I bought one. That picture looks like it has a round barrel to it, rather than a square barrel with rounded (radiused) corners. Probably just a different picture.

Here is a picture that shows that important feature... http://www.bmsrescue.com/blayspl.html.
What matters is that when not under load, the rope moves much more freely than on a round tube, a la a POW.

Here's previous discussion... https://www.masterblasterhome.com/showthread.php?13704-BMS-Belay-Spool&highlight=belay+spool.

Use with a stretchy rope like Polydyne (what's the generic-ish name for Polydyne?) or TrueBlue can reduce your shockloading, as it has less rope in the system than a block up high and friction device down low system.

One way that its been useful is taking short logs off of a conifer (in my part of the world) adjacent to another tree, or one stem lowered off of another stem on a co-dominant. I can anchor the BS on the one lead and snap-cut short logs from the one being removed. At the top of the removal lead, the logs are lighter, where there is less rope in the system. As you work down the lead and the logs get heavier for the same length, there is more rope in the system, and your line angle improves (more directly overhead).

I haven't been able to get pictures or video of this, as I've been working with one groundman. This above description allows me to lower pieces by snap-cutting, hanging my saw, then breaking and lowering, while the groundman lands and process the logs.
 
I'm not sure if Jack on TH is SingleJack on TB. SingleJack bought one, too.

I've used midline attachment with knotless rigging for self-lowering. This has worked well.

A downside is the inability to really pretension a piece, but this is hard no matter what if you're working solo.
 
Its lighter than or as light as a mini-POW, I'd guess. Maybe two pounds. Its about 6" tall, by 3", by 3". For scale, imagine a 1/2" rope just fitting between the pins that separate the wraps.

Taking a wrap on one outside slot, skipping the middle, then wrapping over the other outside slot is a good way to go for a lot of pieces. If you're lowering something bigger, then wrap all the slots.

I wondered about using a 7/16" double braid rope, as may have been discussed by JoshuaTree/ Maui Palm and Tree Care on the TB thread. 1/2" worked, just thought little more room would make it feed easier when getting it ready to load. However, with the 1/2" rope, I'd often drop a piece on the BS, and let it run without holding it, get slightly repositioned quickly, then grab the rope to decelerate it.
 
I bought one last year. It has its uses, but it's not as simple as natural crotching by far. It's best utilized the way Singlejack (I think that's his username) does it. You tie an inline loop (he uses the alpine b'fly, I think), then attach your pieces with a loop runner and caribiner. Otherwise, you're having to haul the rest of the rope back and forth through the thing. His way, you attach a piece, lower it out, attach the next right where the other end is handy, then lower the next piece with that end, yo-yoing the rope back and forth. Not as simple as I like it. And in my experience, the rope doesn't exactly glide through the spool. You have to haul it through. As Sean mentioned, a 7/16" double braid might alleviate that problem. It's design is strong and it should be safer than a mini-porty, as the rope is trapped and cannot come loose OR wrap over and lock off. Just my .02.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
Thanks for the replies, it seems a bit bigger than I imagine. Probably won't go for it, as Scott mentioned I usually run natural crotch through multiple crotches or do wraps if I want to lower myself to the g-man.
 
SouthSoundTree said:
I'm not sure if Jack on TH is SingleJack on TB. SingleJack bought one, too.

I've used midline attachment with knotless rigging for self-lowering. This has worked well.

A downside is the inability to really pretension a piece, but this is hard no matter what if you're working solo.
Click to expand...

You can pretension ... got pix if there's any interest.
 
I'm interested. I meant that a person can't pretension it remotely, as a groundman typically would with a porty. If I'm mistaken, please inform.
 
brendonv said:
Thanks for the replies, it seems a bit bigger than I imagine. Probably won't go for it, as Scott mentioned I usually run natural crotch through multiple crotches or do wraps if I want to lower myself to the g-man.
Click to expand...

It's about the size of my fist. And much better for lugging around in the tree with you, as it doesn't hang up on everything like the mini-porty does. It does yield impressive control, even with only one wrap. With its maximum of two wraps, you can control a big load. Downside is that it only has an eye on top, requiring a caribiner for attachment, not simply attaching with a whoopie/loopie/etc.
 
SouthSoundTree said:
I'm interested. I meant that a person can't pretension it remotely, as a groundman typically would with a porty. If I'm mistaken, please inform.
Click to expand...

With a g'man that can run my porty, the B'Spool's in the truck. The spool might be great for a climber rigging out a tree with unskilled help. But, you're right, Sean, it's no competition for a good groundie with a porty.

Anyway, FWIW: Pix
 
I think that with many/most applications total pretensioning allowing an overhead piece to "float" after the cut is unnecessary, and the BS can be set with enough of the slack pulled out so that if the rope is locked off and cut made, there is a very workable amount of drop on the piece.

Natural crotching works well, and I do it a lot, but for heavier pieces the BS has more control for lowering, while allowing an easy rope adjustment without load.
 
Jack said:
With a g'man that can run my porty, the B'Spool's in the truck. The spool might be great for a climber rigging out a tree with unskilled help. But, you're right, Sean, it's no competition for a good groundie with a porty.

Anyway, FWIW: Pix
Click to expand...


I'll use the BS with a skilled groundie, as he often needs to be able to land a piece in a tight spot, so can't work the POW at the same time, and I can't switch to holding the load with the POW below me. With the BS, he can catch the large load, then I can take the running end of the rope, still with the control afforded by the lowering device (BS), and he can have both hands free, and not drag the rope under the piece that he has to carry away from plumb under the rigging point (say its a 25' limb that needs to get laid down between a fence and house...as he's walking it out to land it, he'd have to have the rope from the POW, which would end up under the limb as it comes down. Hope that was clear.).
 
SouthSoundTree said:
I think that with many/most applications total pretensioning allowing an overhead piece to "float" after the cut is unnecessary, and the BS can be set with enough of the slack pulled out so that if the rope is locked off and cut made, there is a very workable amount of drop on the piece.

Natural crotching works well, and I do it a lot, but for heavier pieces the BS has more control for lowering, while allowing an easy rope adjustment without load.
Click to expand...

How have you been locking off the rope with the BS? I've been using a sling and a prusik on the rope (as in my pictures). It allows more control over the lowering. I'd like to see (hear) your technique.
 
I have not been locking it off.

I suppose that the running end could be wrapped back up to the working end and mule knot, with overhand back-up if desired, could be tied. It would be like tying off a figure 8. Mule knot is releasable under load.
 
SouthSoundTree said:
I'll use the BS with a skilled groundie, as he often needs to be able to land a piece in a tight spot, so can't work the POW at the same time, and I can't switch to holding the load with the POW below me. With the BS, he can catch the large load, then I can take the running end of the rope, still with the control afforded by the lowering device (BS), and he can have both hands free, and not drag the rope under the piece that he has to carry away from plumb under the rigging point (say its a 25' limb that needs to get laid down between a fence and house...as he's walking it out to land it, he'd have to have the rope from the POW, which would end up under the limb as it comes down. Hope that was clear.).
Click to expand...

Makes sense. I like it ... even an unskilled groundie might pull that off ... quicker than locking-off with a prusik ... but the prusik does come in handy sometimes.

BTW, that pretentioning trick is effective for lifting a limb with the BS when it can't be dropped straight down ... also good for pretentioning a spider-leg. I've even used it to swing a limb to the far side of a tree to run it down a speed line.
 
SouthSoundTree said:
I was having a hard time seeing the step-by-step in the video. Can you explain the sequence, please?
Click to expand...
Sorry 'bout that ... it's pays to play-it-safe and be a little cryptic with a public video!
... guess it was too cryptic.

Here's the long version of the sequence:
1) Rig any MA between both BS lines using Prusiks; pulls UP on the load line, DOWN on the hold line.
2) Rig an anchor Prusik between the BS hold line and the stem (or another limb).
3) Lift the load with the MA ... the line will run through the BS.
4) Capture the progress with the anchor Prusik.
5) Remove the MA.
6) Make the cut.
7) Lower the load by easing out the anchor Prusik.

... took longer to write than to do ... :)

I made a Micro-MA just for in-tree hauling ... gets the job done when it's needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top