About Our Fly...

[J.Spurlock]

Recently our school just bought a New fly system by SECOA. It works great, however... the arbours are too big. thus leading to the rails that support everything cannot reach the stage floor. In our recent play we had to change a back drop in a about five minutes due to the incorrect measurements. and to top it all off the fly could not be on the floor of the stage, however it is about 10 feet off the stage on a fly deck were we have about 1000 pounds of extra weight that the deck cannot hold. The deck can only hold me, and even then it wobbles because of extreme weight. Our school district is well aware of the problem and there solutions are these:

 

1. Make a scaffolding deck that covers the height that the fly cannot

2. Don't allow any girls on the crew.... and I am not kidding.

 

We are trying to get expert advice, we need to get it fixed and the district people are being no help at all because a previous teacher had approved all of the specs of the fly.

[paulears]

Hi Josh.

 

A few points. You don't say where you are at school, but I'm guessing it is not the UK. If it was, the people supplying it would have left all sorts of info. Basically inspection certificates that detail maximum loads, details of when it should be inspected and serviced etc - but somebody at the school will have signed it off as ok to pay, safe to use. If this person was a bit 'non-technical' then it is their fault. If the staff consider it dangerous, then the company should be called back in urgently. It is best for you to keep completely out of this.

 

As for the 'girls' thing - it isn't 'girls' it is obviously weight. I'm guessing you are in the States, as you talk in pounds - ours would be metric now.

 

The 'rails' - that you hang the kit off never reach the floor - they usually stop anything from 3 feet, to 6 feet off the stage floor (6 feet - is a real pain, but if the travel is limited, sometimes this just happens)

 

I'm not sure what this system is - I'll have a look in a mo, but what is the 1000 pounds of extra weight, and your mention of 'arbour' sounds suspiciously like a winch? This tallies with the 5 minute scene change.

 

You need to let us have some more info, and photos would be great. How many people are you trying to squeeze onto the platform? (and why) - it could have been designed for just 1? If it wobbles, don't use it - very simple, as something is not right. The company did provide some training, didn't they?

 

 

Edit

You are in America - but SECOA seem to be a well respected, trustworthy company - so you need to get the school, not you, to contact them urgently - you may simply have bought the wrong kit. If it is a winch system, then they are not really suitable to use during a show for scene changes, and the platform would be for a single person, working on their own, slowly - not a group of people winding away like mad.

[Ike]

Just for anyone who hasn't worked with any American fly people; Arbour = Counterweight cradle.

 

As Paulears says six foot off the deck isn't uncommon but ten really is pushing it, without knowing more details its impossible to say whether a double purchase system or a diversion etc would have been appropriate. Who knows, maybe a small adjustment could lower them far enough without affecting the maximum out dead position too badly.

 

Pictures would certainly be interesting,

 

Ike

[andy_s]

I've been in theatres in UK where a stepladder has been needed to hang a cyc on a CW bar - this is usually where for reasons best known to the architects or theatre consultants a single purchase set has been installed where the travel distance for the cradle (arbour) is shorter than the optimum travel distance for the bar (pipe). (I must say I thought I knew my US flying terms, but I've not heard "rail" used in this context - you'd normally find a rail on the flyfloor or as part of a timber frame, I would have thought.)

 

The size of the cradle I would think relates to the number of weights required to balance the specified maximum load of the flying set: a spec of 350lbs would need a larger cradle than a spec of 175lbs. A larger arbour will clearly affect the travel distance available. If the travel distance is restricted, the obvious answer is to install a double purchase set where the cradle moves half the distance of the load, but to "balance", requires twice the weight, and therefore a bigger arbour, and would normally be operated from a flyfloor half way (for the sake of argument) up the flytower wall. somewhere on the blue room there's a thread with some drawings explaining this. perhaps this is where the extra 1000lbs and concern over structural safety comes into play.

 

no doubt the arbours could be changed for smaller arbours at the cost of reduced capacity on the system; this would be worth discussing with the installers- and might not be that expensive: I would imagine they would rather have happy and safe clients than otherwise. This needs some analysis of the requirements; decisions about the weights you generally need to fly need to be made so that the system spec can be defined.

 

 

PS - I have a very vague memory of the upstage bars at Stratford Circus needing to be rigged from a stepladder, or have I remembered it wrong??

[J.Spurlock]

Hey Sorry Guys,

Yes I do live in the USA, I live in Salt Lake City, Utah and the schol where the system is installed is at Skyline High. Some things I lfet out sorry... Is that the rails although they dont reach the floor is that it is not 3 feet or clearence nor 6 but it is 8 feet.

 

About the girls thing, they are saying to not allow them to use the fly system, becasue they are too short. I will try to get some pictures for the fly, and sorry I left out a lot, but the system we have contacted the installers and they knows that it will work. pretty much to sum it up is that lets say that "andy s" has a size 5 shoe. he needs new shoes so I give him a size 17 and some news paper and tell him to work. hey soon I will get some pictures for you guys.

 

EDIT:

Also the fly deck is designed for about 5 poeple, but becasue there is so much extra weight on it for the counter weights, it can only hold one person.

[paulears]

I think I understand a bit better - you are storing spare counterweights on the platform? If this takes you over the load limits, then why not put them at ground level and only take them up when you need to load? It does seem a little odd that such a big company would install you a system with weight limits that mean only one person flys. I'm also wondering why you need 5 people up there? Few big commercial theatres have this many? What are you all doing?

 

Moderation: I have moderated myself - so a few posts after this one, that I sidetracked have also been removed - the posters are aware. While the comments are useful, they have taken the topic well off-track, and it was my fault - sorry folks.

[andy_s]

My serious point is that the "solution" offered by the installers (or is it the school powers that be "making the best of it"?)to the deficiencies in the flying system is not an acceptable one. If compromises in the system need to be made, there are better solutions available. health and safety issues should at this point be paramount, and a platform functioning apparently so close to it's design limits is frankly a very bad thing.

[fredb]

A few comments/questions:

 

What you are calling the "rail" is commonly called the "Batten" or "Pipe".

 

8 feet does seem a bit high... but it can happen. How tall is the arbor, anyway? (measured between the top and bottom plates)

 

Does the arbor come all the way down to the floor block when the batten is fully flown out? If not, then the lines to the batten are too short.

 

When you say fly deck, I assume that that is where the lock rail is located? If so, this can actually be a good thing, as it limits access, and provides more wing space. However, you should not have 1000 lbs of counterweights on there! I hope that you have a loading floor, which is where all the extra counterweights should be stored. If you don't, then there are other potential problems.

 

As for girls running the fly system, I have two words: Title IX. If they are insisting on this, I'd be happy to put you in touch with the appropriate federal agency... Utah is not exempt from Title IX (though some there may think that they are.)

(For the benefit of those outside the US, this is the law that prohibits discrimination based on sex, in an educational environment)

 

There is no reason that a shorter person (of either gender) can't run a fly system; this is just plain silly. Being able to reach a pipe when it's flown has nothing to do with operating the fly system.

 

Lastly, SOCOA is one of the major US Suppliers; if the system was designed/engineered by them, you shouldn't be having problems. However, it is possible that a local company designed it, and just bought parts from SOCOA. If it was engineered by SOCOA, you might want to contact them directly, and explain that you aren't getting a good response from the local installer. There should be drawings specifying the pipe travel, see if you can get a copy.

 

-Fred

[andy_s]

A few comments/questions:

 

As for girls running the fly system, I have two words: Title IX. If they are insisting on this, I'd be happy to put you in touch with the appropriate federal agency... Utah is not exempt from Title IX (though some there may think that they are.)

(For the benefit of those outside the US, this is the law that prohibits discrimination based on sex, in an educational environment)

 

There is no reason that a shorter person (of either gender) can't run a fly system; this is just plain silly. Being able to reach a pipe when it's flown has nothing to do with operating the fly system.

 

-Fred

hear hear.

 

In the UK I've met several highly competent female flypeople of varying heights (from 5'0" to 6'), some male flypeople 5'6" or under, at least 1 one-legged flyman and a one-armed multi-tasking technician whose duties included rigging and flying, though that was a venue without a counterweight system - a mixture of hempsets and winches.

 

I'd just like to say that we do store counterweights on our operating gallery as well as the loading gallery - it can be useful to have an intermediate loading position available to adjust the balance once the piece is fully flying - at which point the cradle / arbour may be too low to be safely reached from the loading gallery. 1000lbs seems a bit excessive though - iff the piece is more than a couple of weights out of balance, one would expect the problem to be spotted while the cradle was still accessible from the loading gallery.

[J.Spurlock]

So here is the scoop, today my boss is having a meeting with the SECOA president, the guy who installed it, and two other people who approved the specs. I will tell you guys about the meeting tomorrow, and I will get some pictures and measurements for you all. Also a small update, the girls thing has been out ruled now becasue as "Fredb" said it is being sexist and I belive they got that message. For the record, I do stage crew as a class at our high school, so I am kinda learning all the vocab around the place, so sorry for the wrong word usage.

[J.Spurlock]

Sorry, The fly that I am talking about is at my High School, and we just got back from summer A week ago. I can send Pictures if anyone is still wondering about the dangerous fly system. Oh and I forgot to mention, during an assembly we had the previous week, one of the baton fell of the fly and almost hit a patron.

 

 

Josh Spurlock

[Adam L]

Sorry, The fly that I am talking about is at my High School, and we just got back from summer A week ago. I can send Pictures if anyone is still wondering about the dangerous fly system. Oh and I forgot to mention, during an assembly we had the previous week, one of the baton fell of the fly and almost hit a patron.

 

 

Josh Spurlock

 

I find it funny how they're still letting you use this equipment if it isn't safe.

 

Edit: it's not the funny as in "haha"

[mark_s]

I doubt it'll be in use much longer once they have a dead patron. Out of curiosity, what was done after that happened? I'd imagine that having something like that happen would result in something being done to make it safer/less likely to kill someone?

[Ike]

I think we need to be careful what conclusions we jump to or at least at what point. It could be that space and financial limitations made it unpractical to install a system where the bars could be brought any further in and the fly floor could be operating well within its design specification. Remember the main limiting factors in the amount of give in normal floors are the potential for damage to surface finish which isn't really applicable for most fly floors and not wishing to cause distress to the user; if you're designing it purely for structural function then a lot more movement is usually acceptable. The assumption that the accident occurred due to operator error seems just as reasonable at this stage as the one that it occurred due to poor design.

 

While I think the comment about girls not being able to use the system is ridiculous I don't see anything wrong with one requiring a certain amount of physical fitness. I'm not suggesting all flymen should be bodybuilders but in a system requiring the repetitive lifting of heavy counterweights at odd angles the suggestion that anyone can do it would seem to fly in the face of manual handling guidelines.

 

As a final note I'd like to point out that I'm not taking sides at this point and would be very interested to see some photos. It does however seem odd that if we criticised a tour in such a way a large number of the regulars would be up in arms yet when it's a rigging company nobody bats an eyelid.

[AndyJones]

Does the space have a stage? If not then maybe it was originally intended for one? hence the high in deads?