Brian Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 From the HSE... Genie Z135/70 Mobile Elevated Work Platform (MEWP) Safety Alert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
top-cat Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I have a lot of experience on these machines and with other similarly large machines. I have often wondered whether they should go on a separate ticket - the way that telehandler licenses are also split into different lengths of boom. I had to tell somebody to come down once, he had got his IPAF on a 40-foot machine and had not had much experience since, and the company had sent him out to work on a 135-footer. He was not at all confident and was generally not having a very pleasant time (as well as the job moving extremely slowly). The Z-135 is a large articulated boom picker and thus a very different beast to the simple and much smaller straight boom he'd trained on. Obviously I don't know whether additional training for large machines would have prevented this incident, but it's something which IMO should be considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerry davies Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 These are not licences and in no way suggest that the holders are competent. Neither IPAF nor Fork Lift tickets mean a thing if it came to a court case other than you have received one third of the requirement to prove competence. Training, skills and practice of those skills leads to competence. Each element is essential. Fork lifts and platforms are extremely dangerous machines and for me a ticket means no more than the right for someone to demonstrate their competence. A road vehicle driving licence is a licence and even then when I passed my test the examiner said; "You have passed but that does not mean you are now safe. Go out and become a safe driver by practising what you have shown me today." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the kid Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 It is however one thing to use a 12m lift and another to use a 100m lift, I might be wrong but IPAF have introduced a one I would call "super massive stupid size" ticket for wind turbine booms. In all honesty though each boom has its own traits, some have that bit more flex and until you are acclimatised to it things can go slow. My training was on a smaller one and I was fine after 5 mins, someone else was really unhappy for about 20 mins. But this is also nothing to do with the specific issue in hand that it was mechanically unsafe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seano Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I have a lot of experience on these machines and with other similarly large machines. Obviously I don't know whether additional training for large machines would have prevented this incident. I do: no, it would not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
top-cat Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I have a lot of experience on these machines and with other similarly large machines. Obviously I don't know whether additional training for large machines would have prevented this incident. I do: no, it would not. Then why does the construction industry see it necessary for so many other types of machines? Cranes - different size, different license.Forklit - different size, different license.Tele - different size, different license List goes on. Take the concrete slab off the end of the boom, put yourself on it... Yes no problem that your training was on a 30-foot toy in some warehouse in Essex, jump right in this 135-foot diesel picker and take it up to the top, you'll be alright. Really? These are not licences and in no way suggest that the holders are competent. Neither IPAF nor Fork Lift tickets mean a thing if it came to a court case other than you have received one third of the requirement to prove competence. Training, skills and practice of those skills leads to competence. Each element is essential. Fork lifts and platforms are extremely dangerous machines and for me a ticket means no more than the right for someone to demonstrate their competence. A road vehicle driving licence is a licence and even then when I passed my test the examiner said; "You have passed but that does not mean you are now safe. Go out and become a safe driver by practising what you have shown me today." Kerry, I agree with your sentiment. IPAF tickets and forklift tickets are nigh on meaningless, they're practically impossible to fail and you do not gain any experience in a day's training between 4 people. HOWEVER, with sites insisting on such tickets to allow you to use machinery, do you think it would be beneficial to split machine classes down further, so that when site managers etc are insisting on seeing that you have received some training on the machine that you wish to use, that at least you can prove you have experience on the relevant size of machine, rather than one generic class. My opinion would be that there are considerations on large machines that do not exist on smaller ones. I don't think separate classes are merely down to profiteering. The ideal situation would be that you could get your IPAF card and that would entitle you to drive under supervision and there would be a more in depth test for experienced operators. However this would need to be government / HSE supported so is probably a long way off for the moment. But I do find it a bit odd that the thoroughness of a driving test you have to take to drive your 1 litre clio involves probably months of lessons and experience, whilst jumping in a 135-foot picker and using it to it's full extent requires only 1 day of basic training on a machine a fraction of the size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerry davies Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Please, TC, let it go. Seano is right on two counts. This incident has nothing to do with training but the safety procedures for a specific machine and MI's. Secondly, platform training is about principles of safety and using MI's correctly, it is not about being competent in any way on any specific machine. This is the safety forum and we need to keep this on topic. You may be right but please discuss that in another forum, like training or crew room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
top-cat Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Please, TC, let it go. Seano is right on two counts. This incident has nothing to do with training but the safety procedures for a specific machine and MI's. Secondly, platform training is about principles of safety and using MI's correctly, it is not about being competent in any way on any specific machine. This is the safety forum and we need to keep this on topic. You may be right but please discuss that in another forum, like training or crew room. I am not sure that it is right to assume that just because a mechanical fault was to blame, that better training would not have led to the mechanical fault being recognised by the operator before the situation became critical. The answer to that question, we will never know. But better training will not do any harm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.