Flying risk assessment

[PAL lighting]

Hi all,

 

Please ignore my ignorance on this matter, I am a lampie and have been asked to write the risk assessments for flying peter pan this xmas.

 

My problem is where to start, any ideas???

 

 

Pete

[Brian]

Ooh, an easy one...

 

020 8236 0234

or

0161 224 6082

[PAL lighting]

Ooh, an easy one...

 

020 8236 0234

or

0161 224 6082

 

 

Thanks Brian,

 

Who are these numbers for??

[w/robe]

Who are these numbers for??

 

Is there a prize if you get them right because I know.

 

Pete, have a read of the other threads on flying, hanging, suspending people as all the comments will be the same.

'If you have to ask you shouldn't do it and if you don't have to ask that is only because you already know you shouldn't do it.'

[librarian28]

I won't be a great help but...if you are using a reputable flying company to install the gear, they will provide such and if there are any further site-specific matters will liaise with you to sort that. If you are planning to do the flying yourself, you need to start by identifying the risks........

[paulears]

I'm sure I could dig up some old ones, if you need something. PM me with an email address if you like. (this would be a foys one). I may have the daily, bi-weekly and weekly check sheets somewhere too.

 

EDIT

scrub that

Risk Assessment form for performer flying - word doc

[DrummerJonny]

I think the question you need to ask is, are you the right person to be doing this Risk Assessment?

 

when flying anything, especially a person, there is a chance of death if it is not done correctly. obviously a death is not something you want on your hands (I would hope anyway!) therefore, do not be ashamed or embarrased to say "I can't do this" to whoever has tasked you with it. better to inconvenience them now with having to hire professionals than to inconvinience them later when theres a dead actor on the stage, eh?

 

and when they hire in the pros, watch and learn! that way you will have an idea of how to do this, and may feel more confident to do this in the future.

 

as an aside, just to note I would not fly anyone with my current level of experience, the advice I have given you is what I would do if faced with this situation.

[paulears]

If you are doing Peter Pan, then you will have already done a deal with the two main players - everyone does - nobody would be stupid enough to even contemplate doing this with expert assistance.

 

I can only speak for Foys, but I know Hi-Fli have a similar system.

 

If you are a new client, then they may well insist on delivering the equipment to you, installing it, testing it and then training a select few people. These people have their names taken and entered into their system. Nobody else is allowed to operate the kit. Nobody is allowed to make any alterations to it, and the performers permitted to fly are also limited. Once the names are done, then any changes to personel must be approved. They may, depending on your experience, allow you to train a replacement, but then this becomes your responsibility. Somebody will also be nominated as the person who must perform checks. This will include things like checking stitching on harnesses, isnpecting the crimp connections on the flying wires, and also checking things like ratchet straps used to prevent lateral movement of the track, and the strops put on the counterweight cradles to prevent them moving. None of these activities can be the responsibility of any house crew - it's not something they want to, or need to take on. You'll generate a list of daily/twice weekly and weekly checks. They may also give somebody some spares - and allow you to fit them if they are needed - or they may not.

 

Flying people, even when you have done the obvious is not something everyone can do effectively. there are lots of tips and techniques for doing dead stops, that kind of involve a flick of the travel rope - but I can't explain it in words.

 

To be honest, the risk assessment I put up is pretty detailed, but doesn't cover everything - the suppliers paperwork has much more practical items on it - but until you've seen what you have to assess, the form won't really mean much.

 

The suppliers are really great at working out how things should be done. You listen to them, and do exactly what they say - nothing more. Production companies fly people worth a lot of money - the fact that nobody has ever had a major accident says an awful lot!

[Ynot]

Please ignore my ignorance on this matter, I am a lampie and have been asked to write the risk assessments for flying peter pan

 

I'm going to echo the sentiment that you aren't really the person to write this RA.

 

In fact, as a lampie, I'd go further and suggest that you're undoubtedly NOT the person who should be anywhere near an RA for a stage task!

 

Nothing against you yourself, but this is a stage manager's job, or even the stage director's...

[PAL lighting]

Thanks everyone.

 

We will be using a pro company to come in and install/tran etc.

 

My line manager wants us to write an RA as well as the one provided by the company.

 

Thanks again for the comments

 

Pete

[mac.calder]

The issue with you writing your own risk assessment is that you cannot write a proper assesment unless you know exactly what you are doing. A little information is a dangerous thing, because you don't know just how much you don't know.

 

Fly by Foy, XFZ, HighWire etc all do this on a day to day basis. Their risk assessment is based over years of experiance with flying people. They RA EVERYTHING and no RA you do will be even close to their result.

[librarian28]

The issue with you writing your own risk assessment is.....

Actually, of course, Pete's line manager is correct. they do have to prepare their own RA.

Purely as a hobby, you understand, I enjoy making fantasy RAs:

A friend had to RA a family fun day on the beach for a local council. (The following is just for fun):

Having prepared the RA, a councillor asked "What about any hazard to kids paddling in the sea from jellyfish?" John admits he hadn't thought of that and checks with the local coastguard - they say "No great problem". After the event, it turns out "everybody knows" that weaver fish (with the nasty spines) collect during June. Did John ask the wrong person? Did he ask the right question? Should he have gone higher up (to, I don't know, the Natural History Museum?)

 

Or, you are checking a stage before a show opens. Loose cables in the wings? Gaffa them down. Sorted.

Hazard from a french flat crashing out of the grid? Check the correct components have been selected? Check the cable grips have been tightened to the manufacturer's recommended torque? Sorted. Conclusion; "There are no risks associated with this project".

 

Of course, as Pete knows, all the cables would have been taped down well before the RA started. That's because there had been a Method Statement prepared in advance. I'm steering towards the concept that (possibly) a full RA can only be done in-situ at the time and a Method Statement may be what's needed now. "All stray cables to be taped down". "The technical department to liaise closely with the flying contractors regarding their requirements. Adequate time to be allowed during installation for them to explain the system. With special emphasis on discussing with them any risks or hazards associated with their equipment or the procedures that they have implemented".

[Roderick]

I'm steering towards the concept that (possibly) a full RA can only be done in-situ at the time and a Method Statement may be what's needed now.

I believe there may be some confusing about terminology and sequence.

A Risk Assessment in-situ is usually a bit late, I find that 90% of serious risks occur during construction or dismantle of the production.

Normally, you would start with a Risk Assessment well before anything is anywhere near a stage. Each and every identified risk is assessed and rated based on likelihood and consequence.

Based on this assessment you start preparing your Work Method Statement, addressing all unacceptable risks and implementing controls.

Finally you would conduct a Safety Inspection in-situ to make sure all identified risks are addressed and control measures are in place.

 

Anyway, that's how we do things in the colonies B-)

[librarian28]

Anyway, that's how we do things in the colonies B-)

Well obviously in Australia everything is topsy-turvey compared to up here! I'm sure that for this production they will organise some paperwork for the get-in and fit-up (hard hats, maybe) and for all I know, the scenery workshop did similar during the making of the french flat (face masks). And no doubt, the timber yard that supplied the wood did ditto (fork lift trucks). But Pete's problem refers to that gaping blank page in his folder entitled "Flying System". Though, if I stick with the french flat, there would be matters relating to carrying it into the theatre, screwing it together and counter-weighting the flying bar - which (in my mind) I sometimes think of as procedural hazards. But then there is the physical hazard posed by its very existence on the stage and I was just proposing that (maybe) it could left until your in-situ Safety Inspection to identify those risks (if any), address them and introduce control measures.

[flypig]

Well obviously in Australia everything is topsy-turvey compared to up here!

 

Isn't this misconception about Australia rather ignorant in this day and age?

 

Roderick is right, there's nothing 'topsy-turvy' about it at all. It's simple logic. Assess the risk then work out the method of removing it altogether or dealing with it safely.

 

It's a bit late to do it in situ, perhaps the great English adage about locking the stable door after the horse has bolted rings a bell?

 

H