Flying Speakers and Rigging Lights

[djsam3000]

Now whenever someone asks a questions as to how to rig something or to fly something, everyone jumps up and says 'ohhh you should really get someone who knows what there doing, not you'

 

So where can I get some decent training and actually learn how to do it myself. I've seen the stage - electrics courses on equipment suspension but that's all I'm aware of.

 

Does anyone recommend the stage-electrics courses or can recommend something else. I am based in Essex so as close to home as possible would be nice.

 

Thanks

[kerry davies]

Try http://www.blue-room...showtopic=47729

 

I was going to say search for rigging courses but the function doesn't seem to work as it used to.

[brainwave-generator]

And as if by magic...

 

http://www.blue-room.org.uk/index.php?showtopic=55267

 

HOWEVER it is worth remembering that whilst this course will teach you some of the skills required to work as a rigger, it will not mean that you should carry out the rigging of speakers or lighting without supervision.

 

Under LOLER (Lifting Operations & Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998), which is a static regulation whether you work in the entertainment industry or any other industry requiring lifting (cranes, passenger lifts, warehouses with forklift trucks... they all come under it), lifting operations must be performed by competent people. You would not be considered a 'competent person' on the back of a 2-day training course alone. Competency comes from a mix of training and experience.

 

As such, there is not really a way to "learn how to do it yourself". You can learn to do rigging, you can then go out and do some rigging under the supervision of competent riggers... and eventually you will reach a stage where you could be considered a 'competent person' in order to carry out rigging operations without the supervision of others. Do not expect that process to take 2 days!

 

I know it seems expensive having to hire in a rigger every time you want to do something in your venue. But believe me it will work out a lot more expensive if you cause damage to the building or equipment; or injuries to persons, when your rigging operation goes wrong because you didn't know what you were doing to enough of an extent to spot the problem before it happened. Like I said - it's written in LOLER - so you may find your insurance company unwilling to pay out if it turns out that you were working in breach of LOLER during a lifting operation.

[kerry davies]

And as if by magic, my old mate Eric appears down below running a rigging course at Backstage Academy.

[paulears]

I've always wondered how individual people and their employers are expected to understand the difference between 'rig' used as a verb and legislation that seems to only refer to 'lifting'?

 

As an example - we did a magicians convention recently, and in the competition element there were very rigid rules - each act having 30 second warning lights for duration, then disqualification. One other rule was interesting. No 'flying' allowed. We were given a 40 Kilo box to raise of the ground for one act - which then opened electrically to show the magician in it had vanished. One of the crew called for others in the rehearsal - "can we fly the box?" "shssss" says the magician, don't say fly, can you say lift?"

 

If somebody in a venue wants to hang a loudspeaker from a bar - on one of those tilting frames, this isn't a LOLER task. However hanging the same loudspeaker from screw in rings on some cables through a ceiling tile to a beam is? It does seem to me that identifying a lifting operation is carried somewhat randomly, and then, somebody may want to make sure only competent people do it. If people have been doing it without incident for years, then presumably, that would be sufficient to prove competence, even though while gaining competence they were outside the system? Somebody after a two day generic course with plenty of 'talk-at' rather than 'do' seems on balance to be less worthy, but they have the stificate and proven competence. I personally work within my own competence quite happily, but there's no standard. I don't wish to be a rigger - as in climbing about up top, fixing motors and chains. I do wish to rig more modest items from other structures that I can get to - yet training seems to be to the stadium standard, which for me is maybe interesting, but pointless.

[indyld]

If somebody in a venue wants to hang a loudspeaker from a bar - on one of those tilting frames, this isn't a LOLER task. However hanging the same loudspeaker from screw in rings on some cables through a ceiling tile to a beam is?

 

Neither is as I'm sure has been discussed on here before, LOLER relates to "lifting operations" and "lifting equipment".

 

So, the method of getting the loudspeaker into position maybe a lifting operation but once it's there the kit holding it up permanently isn't lifting equipment. Then we are back to HASAWA, PUWER and no doubt plenty of other things relating to the design and modification of structures and other engineering-y things.

 

I don't think that the concept of competence for a given task has changed much and surely nobody could argue that 2 days on ensuring shackles et al are safe for use and using them appropriately gives anyone competence in not rigging a fresnel upside down so the barndoors don't fall out. The problem is indeed the joint use of "rigging" as verb and noun and the confusion between the two of people that ask the question. Not that there is anything wrong with a rigging (noun) course for everyone that wants to improve their awareness in the subject, it's just not always for an appropriate competence as Paul mentions. I don't think that anyone would claim that NRC, for example, to be proof of awareness in anything other than what it proves at the moment; specific entertainment rigging (noun) skills.

[Seano]

The problem is indeed the joint use of "rigging" as verb and noun and the confusion between the two of people that ask the question. Not that there is anything wrong with a rigging (noun) course for everyone that wants to improve their awareness in the subject, it's just not always for an appropriate competence as Paul mentions. I don't think that anyone would claim that NRC, for example, to be proof of awareness in anything other than what it proves at the moment; specific entertainment rigging (noun) skills.

 

"Rigging" is one of those terms, like "engineering" perhaps, that means many different things to many different people. What LOLER requires of a lifting operation is that its competently planned, carried out and supervised, but arguably that's what's required of pretty much everything we do at work anyway. (Required by some bit of legislation or other - HSAW 1974 if nothing else catches it.)

 

Whether hanging a lantern on a counterweight bar is "rigging" or "lifting" is moot really, it clearly does need to be done (and/or supervised) competently.

Which precise bit of legislation requires that is something that would only get properly defined the process of investigation/inquest/prosecution in the aftermath of something horrible happening, its *so* much better to just never find out.

 

Obviously, there's no way someone with no experience can take a short training course and emerge as a "competent person" a couple of days later. But then again, its equally obvious that its difficult to become a competent person with no formal training whatsoever. The certificate of attendance at a course proves only that a person attended the course - but that doesn't mean its worthless, far from it, attending a course is a *good* thing. (Well, it is if it's a good course anyway. ;))

[djsam3000]

Thanks for the comments so far. I'm very much with paulears on this. As always with health and safety there seems to be an awful lot of legislation and people that like to tell you if you are or are not qualified, to do 1 thing. I too have absolutely no intention of rigging on a concert or large theater size. I simply want to put a speaker on a flying bracket and bolt it to the ceiling. Funnily enough I've gone of the idea and found an easier solution, but the point stands. Essentially, although quite arrogantly, if you can screw a shelf to a wall, then why can't I screw a speaker to one. Most times a shelf would even weigh more.

 

I'm done rambling but thanks for everyone's input and direction.

[Seano]

Essentially, although quite arrogantly, if you can screw a shelf to a wall, then why can't I screw a speaker to one. Most times a shelf would even weigh more.

 

No reason at all, because fixing a shelf to a wall is also something you need to be competent to do when you're working. (DIY is different, from a legal PoV, you can do that as badly as you like.)

 

If you put a shelf up in a shop which subsequently falls down and hurts somebody, you (and your employer, and the 'venue') are in pretty much the same situation as if a speaker or lantern fall in a theatre. Likewise if you hurt yourself in the process, fall off the ladder, drill through a cable and electrocute yourself, whatever.

 

Of course some jobs are easier than others to do right, some are even almost trivial. What you need to bring to *all* your work, rigging and otherwise, is judgement.

Unfortunately, judgement too is a kind of competence. Those who are the least competent also tend to be those who overestimate their own abilities. (The so-called "Dunning Kruger effect".)

[Brian]

What LOLER requires of a lifting operation is that its competently planned, carried out and supervised, but arguably that's what's required of pretty much everything we do at work anyway. (Required by some bit of legislation or other - HSAW 1974 if nothing else catches it.)

 

LOLER is a Regulation and as such needs to be made under an Act Of Parliament. In this case it's made under The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

 

Mess up and the HSWA will be the primary legislation that you are prosecuted under.

[Boggy]

(DIY is different, from a legal PoV, you can do that as badly as you like.)

 

I think DIY could have the same outcome. If a visitor to your home is injured by the falling shelf I think there would still be an unpleasant court case. The rules might be different but the outcome is probably the same.