13.06.2013
Suspended work at height
Spotted at the Trafford Retail Park in Manchester, UK, a reader has sent in a picture of a method of erecting signs using a loader crane that looks less than ideal.
The picture shows two men in what was reported by our reader as "a large plastic container" hanging from the hook of a loader crane with a set of chain slings. We have since been told that it was in fact made of steel and was Loler tested as a man basket.
The men are suspended approximately seven metres off the ground.
While it is not the worst attempt at creating a work platform we have ever seen, one has to wonder whether they had considered the capacity of the crate, given that it contains two grown men and possibly the fixings for a large sign.
Please register to see all images
A less than safe method of erecting signs using a loader crane
With such a wide range of purpose built access equipment readily available in the area, using what is widely considered to be a method of last resort would seem to be an unnecessary risk to take. One has to wonder if the managers of this retail Park approved it?
Please register to see all images
A closer look
As is often the case with the pictures we receive for our Death Wish series- the pair are donning safety helmets…but not using the safest form of access equipment. They probably have hi-viz vests on too?
Certainly one for our Death Wish series.
Vertikal Comment
We find it hard to believe that the managers of a retail park, such as this would have signed off on an access method that could not have passed a normal risk assessment - unless it was a dire emergency and nothing else was available.
Could it be one of these cases of accepting a low bid and then looking the other way? I guess we will never know.
UPDATE: We are told via a comment that this was definitely not the case, and it seems that the contractor did carry out a thorough risk assessment
We have argued on both sides of the debate over when and where to use a suspended man basket, this may well prove to be a good case study and part of a feature article on this subject that we are now planning for Cranes & Access magazine.
Stephen Groves
Gideon
I don't know where you are getting your information from but all cranes/hiabs in our fleet and I am almost certain throughout all uk cranes/hiabs have non return/check valves and failsafes built into the hydraulic system on them,can you just imagine lifting a 10,000 kgs load and there was a hydraulic/pipe failure this would cause the load to drop,which would definitely not be permitted,also you state that cranes are not man carry rated,you are wrong again cranes & any accessories ie man baskets/harness's etc have to be tested every 6 months whereas the normal test is 12 monthly,I assume you work in the access industry and are not a crane person
Gideon
The problem with this lift is not the man-basket, it is the use of a crane that isn't man carry rated. These cranes do not have locking valves on the hydraulic cylinders to prevent collapse if a hydraulic hose bursts. Use a proper man-lift!
vertikal editor
Your points are well taken and while we may not fully agree, as I have said before the aim was not to upset or harm as I hope you know and am sorry that it has done so. I think that this chain of comments has served its purpose, and as you know we have taken the feedback on board from the very start. And this comment facility will remain here clearly setting out your views and additional information. I will also contact you directly regarding the planned feature article on this subject that I mentioned earlier, especially as it is this job that has sparked it off.
Stephen Groves
Leigh I am sorry to have to keep going on about this situation but I feel compelled to respond when I read comments that I consider to be erroneous or misleading,firstly the man basket we were using complies fully in all aspects with BS EN-14502,with regards to overhead protection this is only required if there is a scenario where something could fall on basket from above which was not the case in this situation,secondly if you care to look at the picture closely you will see our vehicles names,also this was a high profile operation in a prime public viewing location and not limited to immediate parties as you stated(hence the originators first photographs and comments)Finally with regards to your comment "if the operation was flawless and suitable as suggested your article would not have been an issue"
Your article was an issue because you posted this as a "death wish" and then condoned it by adding your derogatory comments and if it was not for the fact that I saw your article and obviously responded our company would have been left defamed, which in my opinion makes you the judge and jury with a guilty verdict already decided,to summarise I have for years used man baskets for cranes alongside access platforms and scissor lifts and will continue to do so until the authorities tell me it is illegal
The Force
Well said fellas not getting off the subject but its about time someone stood up to these critics there all to keen to shoot from the hip me and my friend narrowly escaped death due to to "structual failure" of a large telescopic crane a few years ago only to read on this site some sarcastic comment to the effect "don't rule out the fact that it could of been operator error" only if they new! They need to do a little homework before they start printing, hence the saying A little knowlage can be dangerous !
vertikal editor
The comments by Zak whomever he is, are unnecessarily personal, not at all constructive.
In this case we have - as we always do - listened to the input received and taken on board those comments which have some merit. We have also been impressed by Stephen Grove's clear passion for what he does.
It is encouraging to hear that this job was carried out with much greater focus on safe working practices than was suggested by the photographs and eye witness report that we received.
However we still remain - at least for the moment - unconvinced that this was the safest and most suitable equipment for the job - although we do understand and accept the comment that there were parts of it that benefited from, or required the use of a suspended platform. We are still a little puzzled by the type of 'platform'used with its high solid sides and lack of overhead protection from two blocking.
Our article commented on the work being done in the photograph and that specific work could easily be reached with a purpose built work platform, whether that be an EN280 compliant platform on a loader crane or a specialist aerial work platform.
I would also note that we never mentioned Mr Groves name, or company in the article, so I am not quite sure how we can be blamed for ruining a reputation. Surely any discussion and knowledge of who was involved would have been limited to the immediate parties concerned? and if the method was as flawless and suitable as suggested then surely our article would not have been such an issue as is suggested?
We will as promised be following this up with a feature on the use of man baskets suspended from crane hooks. And will be happy to obtain more detailed information on the challenges involved with this particular lift.
Finally I would like to say that our accident reports and Death Wish series are used the world over by training companies, hopefully to the benefit of those taking those courses where they are used. Our aim has always, above all else, been to promote good working practices and safety at work as anyone who uses this site regularly knows, including Mr Groves as he points out in an earlier comment.
Everything we do is done with the very best of intentions in mind and not intended to offend or upset for the sake of it.
Zak
Steve. You will never get an apology from this website or its people. They are too busy attending reunions and making false accusations.
I would love the people who run vertikal to actually post what qualifications in lifting operations they hold which allows them to even be allowed an opinion. My guessing is that they actually don't hold any!
This is what is wrong with crane hire everyone is more interested in what everyone else is doing instead of concentrating on their own business.
Armquest industrial services and Steve Groves are one of the most experienced and professional companies involved in lifting operations so go and read their website instead of the Drabble that is written by Mr Sparrow and his staff
Stephen Groves
I assume removing certain sections of your report and stating it will be a good topic for debate for a future article is the nearest our company is going to get to an apology,we have gone from a death wish to a subject for debate in 5 days,what I don't think you realise is that this could have potentially damaged my companies previous good and untarnished reputation,I suggest in future that you carry out a little bit of investigative work before you class an item as a death wish,which is a very serious allegation,on a lighter note the person who first reported this must be cringing and cowering in a corner, perhaps he should have gone to Specsavers if he cannot tell the difference between a plastic crate and a man basket,but as an editor it is your duty to check these facts out before allowing potentially defamative comments to be posted,I appreciate you are trying to improve the industry by posting these howlers,but I think you will 100% agree that this does not apply to our organisation,I would also like to thank the numerous clients and other hire companies who have contacted me in the last few days and via their comments to show their support for our company
Scott McCall
Having called onto the job myself thinking why don't they use a platform, and as somebody with 16 years experience of both cranes and access equipment, I completely agree that Armquest provided a suitable piece of equipment for the job.
I do not believe there is a platform that could complete the job exclusively, it would have required a platform to be combined with climbing / scaffold to access the inside of the sign column.
It is more dangerous to use a platform for a job it is not designed for, compromising safety, than to plan a detailed contract lift.
The site was extremely well managed and fenced off with minimum disruption to the public, probably the most dangerous activity on site was me eating a years worth of cholesterol from KFC next door!
Scott McCall
Having called onto the job myself thinking why don't they use a platform, and as somebody with 16 years experience of both cranes and access equipment, I completely agree that Armquest provided a suitable piece of equipment for the job.
I do not believe there is a platform that could complete the job exclusively, it would have required a platform to be combined with climbing / scaffold to access the inside of the sign column.
It is more dangerous to use a platform for a job it is not designed for, compromising safety, than to plan a detailed contract lift.
The site was extremely well managed and fenced off with minimum disruption to the public, probably the most dangerous activity on site was me eating a years worth of cholesterol from KFC next door!
Zak
No problem Steve , authorities should look at websites like this, I'm pretty sure it is illegal to make comments without knowing the facts but they seem to think they can just not be touched.
Maybe they should have a picture of a nude women everyday and a story about labelled alien abducted my mother , you usually find these in the Daily Sport as well.
These stories when in true can damage good companies reputations and these can sometimes be unrepairable. It's about time somebody taught these web sites a lesson
Stephen Groves
Thanks for your support Zak I think you have just said what I was thinking but did not like to say,to clarify matters we are not anti access platform organisation and use Lifterz on a regular basis,as stated previously we firstly considered an access platform,but unless you have one with a boom that bends round corners and can also lower people 6 metres down into the middle of a structure then a crane/suspended lift was the only safe/viable option,when this was decided we assessed the risks and managed them out by putting appropriate safety measures in place ie persons in basket wearing harness's & rescue procedure etc,when this was done and then approved we carried out the work in a safe and professional manner as stated in my previous comments
Zak
This article is clearly wrote and commented on by somebody who has a vested interest for Ipaf companies. I have known Steve Groves and armquest for over. 20 years and to even suggest that a guy with over 35 years of safe lifting from hiab cranes to 1000 tonne telescopics would ever do anything dangerous or contravening HSE rules embarrassing for a website that continues to pretend to be unbiased when it clearly only supports its friends from Ipaf.
Maybe they would be better concentrating on the access platform companies because I see more access platforms being tipped over than cranes. Oh but that's not their fault as they do a 5 minute handover and its the client responsibility. Lol
Keep up the good work Steve don't let the people who have say a one day crane appreciation course and know everything get you down, you can't teach experience
Gordon Leicester
Like I said earlier, the queen was on one of those duck boats last year, I'm sure her ontarage read the risk assessment then..
The fact of the matter is that what you did, hanging your staff off a crane, might technically be ok on the day, but there is a safer option nowadays which is proven to be much safer.
Mr Groves, I used to do things like this years ago and assured myself it was totally safe at the time.
We live in 2013 not 1987..
Have a search on here to find the fatalities, accidents, using man baskets from cranes and I'm sure you will find there is a far higher risk hanging from a crane rather than being in control yourself.
Stephen Groves
Gordon in response to your comments,I presume you are the Gordon Leicester who is MD of Facelift an access platform company,just to correct you on your comment what were we "caught in the act" doing,we were carrying out a perfectly safe operation that did not break any health & safety or HSE regulations, this is my companies reputation you are criticising and I am sure if comments like this were aimed at your company if I am correct in my assumptions that you are Facelift MD you would be none to pleased,the thing that has upset me is to be classed with the dozens of idiots that are quite rightly highlighted on the Vertikal news pages,what any other items ie the Liverpool duck have got to do with our safely completed lift I do not know,we do not as you state hide behind paperwork but work to our companies and our clients stringent health & safety regulations,I think if you told our operatives who carried out the work they had a suicidal urge to put themselves in dangerous situations(death wish) they would be none to pleased
Gordon Leicester
Risk assessment, risk assessment, risk assessment.
I call it hiding behind paperwork..
I'm sure they had a full "risk assessment" done on the Liverpool duck boat before it sank!!!
I believe the queen was on one last year..
Wrong machine for the job and caught in the act!
vertikal editor
We take Mr Groves' comments on board, and appreciate him commenting on this article. Our aim is not to upset or cause anger as our regular readers will know.
We still do not understand how,if a large loader crane was able to gain access and reach the lift, a truck mounted lift could not? Alternatively if only a loader crane could reach then why not one built for the job with an EN280 integrated platform?
We are also surprised that the CPA would make such a sweeping statement regarding a report over the use of a crane suspended platform, that did not name the contractor, or sub-contractor.
Perhaps this article and comments, might serve as a positive catalyst to re-open debate on when and when not to use suspended man platforms, which could help all concerned.
Ed
Stephen Groves
Now I have calmed down a little I can inform you of some of the facts with regards to your death wish article,firstly the lift was being carried out as a full CPA contract lift to whom we are members,the scope of works involved dismantling the sign in its entirety with a mobile crane to lift down in 2 sections and using the man basket for personnel access,as it was in the way of the new M60 slip road,the RAMS to which this work was being carried out under were approved by our safety dept & also our client who is a major UK civil engineering company,I posted my first comment on your story and after my comment you are still referring to this as a death wish example,I have sought legal advice from the CPA who have advised me that at minimum this whole article is completely and totally misleading and at worst case slanderous,I have informed our client of your article and they are considering taking legal advice,our client actually on completion of this successful operation took the time to contact us and thank us for carrying out the work professionally and safely as we always do and not "accepting a low bid and turning the other way" as you stated,incidently we used the man basket for accessing all 4 corners of the sign to unbolt at the midway point and secure the crane chains at the top for lifting which it was not feasible to do with an access platform or a scissor lift due to site constraints,I would also like to point out that I have 36 years of experience planning crane lifts and have never seen anything like this article in all those years
vertikal editor
We are delighted to hear that this operation was carried out with a full risk assessment and that the basket reported as plastic was in fact a steel one with a Loler certificate. We still believe that it falls short of international standards for man baskets in terms of guardrail dimensions and overhead protection etc...
We would still question why this method was used when the HSE, FEM and other bodies all stipulate that such man baskets on cranes should only ever be used when other methods, such as aerial work platforms are not suitable. This usually only leaves work at exceptional heights or outreach.
As in all cases we will check over the wording we have used. However we still wonder why this method would be agreed to when other methods that carry significantly lower risks, are readily available.
On a positive note it is certainly a great deal safer that many of our Death Wish examples.
Ed
Stephen Groves
I am the MD of Armquest who were carrying out this operation and to put it mildly I am absolutely fuming about your "death wish" article,this operation of dismantling the sign was carried out under an approved method statement and risk assessments,the "plastic crate" you are referring to was a 2 person man basket made out of steel with a valid test cert & insurance inspection(less than 6 months)as was the long reach hiab that was doing the lifting,the 2 persons inside were also secured to the hiab hook wearing harness's & inertia reels as per LOLER regs,all our lifting operations are carried out to the highest standard that our clients have come to expect,may I suggest the person who posted this gets his facts right and you as an organisation do not make derogatory comments without checking the facts,I will await a full verbaland also a written apology from both parties
REDVIKING
This is not the "high profile" Trafford Centre that the article implies but is one of those generic type retail parks that are all over the UK , this particular one is on the other side of the motorway (M60). Nonetheless very unsafe.