Tallescope accident statistics

[seanphillips]

Can anybody point me in the direction of annual accident figures for access equipment used in the entertainment industry?

 

 

Don't want to mention any manufacturers names, but also hoping to find data that covers wheeled - ladder type, scaff tower type and gas/electric/hydraulic mast type.

 

If, that is - such things exists that are accessible to the general public.....

 

 

 

Not interested in anything anecdotal nor a general discussion of the whys and why-nots of use!

 

I am interested - if possible - in the actual statistics.

 

Thanks in advance for your time.

 

sp

[Ken Coker]

You could start from here: http://www.hse.gov.uk/falls/statistics.htm

 

I'm a bit busy with some prep at the moment, but a brief look says that one can compose one's own table by sector/occupation......good luck.

 

KC

[seanphillips]

Thanks for that Ken - appreciate it.

 

 

I'd been fruitlessly stumbling round that site like a dancer in a black-out - good steer!

 

sp

[Brian]

You could also put in an FOI request to HSE.

[Junior8]

You could start from here: http://www.hse.gov.u.../statistics.htm

 

I'm a bit busy with some prep at the moment, but a brief look says that one can compose one's own table by sector/occupation......good luck.

 

KC

 

The tables by sector are easily accessed but I've never been able to get the tool to work easily beyond the first level. However the HSE are very good at responding to requests if you state cleealy enough what you want. Trouble is they don't always record data under industry/activity categories that make it obvious where to look. I'd start here

[kerry davies]

Any research into accidents/incidents at work is fated to be somewhat of a guesswork exercise. Statistics can only be published regarding "reported" incidents and very often only serious or lost-time incidents are properly reported.

 

The BR member Bertie Wooster may respond to an email request but tallescopes in particular have been such a constant topic of debate over recent years I doubt that many, if any, accidents have occurred in theatre as awareness has been extremely high. There have been incidents outside of our game with the same equipment which may need to be included in any statistical analysis. The EU also compile accident stats but they are even harder to navigate than those quoted above.

 

Good luck and please do report back with anything interesting.

[Ken Coker]

The tables by sector are easily accessed but I've never been able to get the tool to work easily beyond the first level. However the HSE are very good at responding to requests if you state cleealy enough what you want. Trouble is they don't always record data under industry/activity categories that make it obvious where to look. I'd start here

 

I started there originally and then found myself back on the Falls from Height page.....I'll have a dig around the stats over the weekend perhaps.

 

KC

[Junior8]

Right the only statistics I can get form the site https://handson.hse....imple.aspx?RID7 show that for cultural activities there were 2 fatalities 1 a slip and the other being trapped by something falling.

 

For the major injuries relevant to access equipment the stats are

 

Slip, trip or fall on same level 328 incidents

High fall over 2 metres 4 incidents

Low fall up to and including 2 metres 122 incidents

Height of fall not known 27 incidents

So by a process of elimination the maximum possible number of falls from any large access equipment is 31 but most likely it will be 4. If this is the case you'd need a very long data series to get any useful trends.

 

Which begs several other questions it seems to me

[ramdram]

Quite right J8, stats have to have context to be meaningful. For example, from the report on Tallescopes published a little while back the H&S folks found that accidents could happen simply by operator fatigue climbing the vertical access ladder up a Tallescope.

 

This fatigue could manifest itself (in an age related context if you will) in that the older blokes were more prone to things like respiratory probs and heart issues owing to the sheer physical effort of climbing a Tallescope...quite apart from the dangers of one toppling over, use on raked stages etc.

 

So, SP, it is not so easy to give a meaningful reply, you might have to define your parameters more precisely.

[HOT PHINGAZ]

Quite right J8, stats have to have context to be meaningful. For example, from the report on Tallescopes published a little while back the H&S folks found that accidents could happen simply by operator fatigue climbing the vertical access ladder up a Tallescope.

 

This fatigue could manifest itself (in an age related context if you will) in that the older blokes were more prone to things like respiratory probs and heart issues owing to the sheer physical effort of climbing a Tallescope...quite apart from the dangers of one toppling over, use on raked stages etc.

 

 

I thought this was the main issue in talle accidents and that HSE were already aware of this for some time, because its one of the key arguments in whether to allow movement or not? Ive been up and down a few thousand times, and my foot has slipped on a rung more than once..

 

http://www.abtt.org.uk/news-and-events/2011/6/new-rules-for-working-with-tallescopes-announced

 

ask the manufacturer for stats ** laughs out loud **? :blink:

[ramdram]

H&S bods are aware of the climbing problem, ie climbing vertical ladders is, apparently, much more taxing than climbing a raked ladder,for the older gent, particularly those who have existing health issues mentioned in an earlier post, dicky ticker and so on.

 

Whether that is the main cause of accidents is unclear from the recent report. If you did have the opportunity to read the latest report on Tallescopes you may have seen the H&S comment at the conclusion that they were happy to conduct some sort of biometric "experiments" on the climbing of vertical ladders, quite apart from the Tallescope issue.

 

Some theatres to which I have toured have vertical ladders to gain entry to their FOH positions, let alone access to "lighting galleries", say. You will not be surprised to learn that some vertical ladders are just that, with no safety cage or fall arrest kit. Some are "proper welded metal" affairs and some are cobbled up by the staff using 2"x 2" and 4" screws. (Would you class getting a huge wood splinter as an accident? If you fell off as a result say?)

 

So for the OP, again, getting meaningful stats may need further refinements to the question asked. Such kit mentioned above could be classed as access equipment in the most literal sense.

[TeeJay]

Hi,

 

regarding the climbing ladder fatigue problem:

 

I don't believe that there are any stats on multiple short-term ladder climbs - I'm sure I remember that from the various reports that have been published on the 'scope issue that the only ladder climbing data is on long single climbs, such as done by crane operators and hence the comment that ramdram refers to in his post.

 

Anecdotal knowledge on the subject is almost certainly much larger than documented study - and Bertie Wooster will correct me if I say this wrongly - but I believe that the ladder fatigue wasn't considered a factor as it was expected that multiple people could be involved in the use of 'scopes (such as during a focus)

[ramdram]

Au contraire TJ. My take on the report's conclusion was that the fatigue factor would be to be considered because of the cases where only one bod might be available to do the work.

 

H&S, being their normal thorough selves, mentioned that the biometrics experiments would be conducted at some point if asked. It may be said experiments have been conducted already? Perhaps BW might know?

 

The ladder climbing experiments were to be conducted to measure the effects on "a" person (using the H&S norm as I recall; the link to the report is earlier in the thread). The experiments were to be conducted to produce some form of stats. And, the fatigue factor per se was not the only aspect; it was the long term affect it may have on a person...a person who may not necessarily be in the very best of health.

[Seano]

And, the fatigue factor per se was not the only aspect; it was the long term affect it may have on a person...a person who may not necessarily be in the very best of health.

If someone "not necessarily in the very best of health" can manage any exercise without undue fatigue at the time, I'd have thought the most likely long term effect by far would be to improve their health - same as the long term effect of walking up stairs instead of taking the lift, but with the added benefit of a gentle upper-body workout. ;)

[ramdram]

Seano you would appear to be wrong in that respect.

 

Check out the report and read what was concluded on the health aspects. Nothing is ever that simple, plus one should not really believe all this guff about exercise being good for you.

 

That sort of nonsense is peddled by the owners of health spas, gyms, and personal trainers.