# Lock off a lineset with a method that can be released and locked quickly



## Terrence MacArthur (Feb 25, 2015)

Got a problem. I'm familiar with several ways to lock off a lineset, but I'm not sure how to do this one, because it requires the fly operator to be able to lock it off, release it, and lock it off very quickly, and an actor's safety is involved.

Start with a platform about 4 to 6 feet above stage level. A 200 pound actor actor ascends a stairway and steps onto the platform. This is the point, with the actor on it, that the thing needs to be weighted for, so until he is on it the lineset will be unbalanced, arbor heavy, and locked off. The fly operator must unlock it and lower the platform to the stage. While the actor is on it, the lineset will be balanced, and the weight shift during the movement to stage level can be handled by the fly operator. The actor will step off, move downstage, and perform a number. When he steps off, it's again arbor heavy and must be locked off. When finished with his number the actor returns to the platform, the lock must be released, and the platform raised to its original height. Then it must be locked off again because the actor will step off the platform and descend the stairway, leaving it again arbor heavy.

The lineset will be balanced for when the actor is on the platform, because that's the only point at which the fly operator will be raising or lowering the platform. The arbor will be weighted with the platform halfway between stage level and its raised level, with 200 pounds of weight (simulating the actor's presence) on it. This is because when the platform is being lowered and raised, with the actor on it, is when the potential for the worst damage if something lets go exists.

The lock must be something that can be removed and relocked quickly, so that we don't have a pause in the action onstage while the fly operator releases or relocks whatever he's locking the lineset with. It must also be safe and secure enough to trust an actor's safety with.

So I need a method to lock off the lineset, one which can be locked or released quickly, and which is safe and secure enough to trust with the actor's safety. I'd use an Uncle Buddy because it can be locked and released quickly, but I'm not sure I trust it to be safe enough when a person is involved. Or maybe I can, because it will only be locked, and holding things in place, when the actor isn't on the platform. does anyone have any experience with a situation likere this? I'll appreciate any advice anyone can give me.


----------



## venuetech (Feb 25, 2015)

Any time you have an out of balance lineset, you have an unsafe condition. If something "lets go" *Life and limb of all involved are in grave danger.* My advice would be not to do this without professional help. LIFE SAFETY is at RISK. I am not sure why you want to use the fly system for this effect, some other method should be used. Any way you cut it there are many safety issues to be worked out. Get some specialized help. Gravity bites hard.


----------



## DuckJordan (Feb 25, 2015)

This falls into flying people category .. No no no no no, get a company like zfx or foy involved they've got safe ways to do this and they should not be diyed or attempted on your own.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk


----------



## Footer (Feb 25, 2015)

NO. I'm not even going to ask how you are going to fly a platform on one lineset. The only way to do this is with a motor and that goes way past what I feel you should be doing unless you really know what you are doing.


----------



## BillConnerFASTC (Feb 25, 2015)

This is performer flying and counterweight rigging is not designed for this. Don't do it. Do something else or hire a qualified person. Forgive my bluntness, but you have demonstrated by considering this you are not qualified to do it.


----------



## BillConnerFASTC (Feb 25, 2015)

PS: rope locks are not intended to hold more than 50 pounds out of balance.


----------



## StradivariusBone (Feb 25, 2015)

Agreeing with all the "Nope" comments above, I'm not understanding what it is you're actually trying to do. Assuming for the moment that you are flying the platform correctly, once it lands on the deck it's still in balance. If you pull the lineset in more you will meet the resistance of the arbor, but it won't suddenly fly out since the arbor is countering that movement. If your actor steps onto the platform while it's on the deck, it's not out of balance in a way that would cause a runaway. It can't go in any more and certainly won't be going out with the added weight of your actor. There was a discussion about this a while back regarding Les Mis and someone wanting to fly a bridge if I'm not mistaken. 

Unless the plan is to move the platform with the actor on it... That would require a lot more than what you're describing here.


----------



## BillConnerFASTC (Feb 25, 2015)

StradivariusBone said:


> Agreeing with all the "Nope" comments above, I'm not understanding what it is you're actually trying to do. Assuming for the moment that you are flying the platform correctly, once it lands on the deck it's still in balance. If you pull the lineset in more you will meet the resistance of the arbor, but it won't suddenly fly out since the arbor is countering that movement. If your actor steps onto the platform while it's on the deck, it's not out of balance in a way that would cause a runaway. It can't go in any more and certainly won't be going out with the added weight of your actor. There was a discussion about this a while back regarding Les Mis and someone wanting to fly a bridge if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> Unless the plan is to move the platform with the actor on it... That would require a lot more than what you're describing here.



Strad - I think he specifically states that he wants to lower and raise the platform with the actor on it, and that is the issue. I thought the Les Mis bridge in the question was fully ground supported when performers were on it, which can be done safely, but I might be is-remembering that thread.


----------



## rsmentele (Feb 25, 2015)

Rent a Stage Lift/Elevator!


----------



## StradivariusBone (Feb 25, 2015)

BillConnerASTC said:


> Strad - I think he specifically states that he wants to lower and raise the platform with the actor on it, and that is the issue. I thought the Les Mis bridge in the question was fully ground supported when performers were on it, which can be done safely, but I might be is-remembering that thread.



That's where I wasn't sure by what he meant by "platform". If it's floating, that creates a whole swinging factor, not to mention the issues @Footer was talking about.


----------



## Terrence MacArthur (Feb 25, 2015)

I think what I'm herinf here is "OMG, flying an actor, use the safest thing possible. But not everyone has the ability to use the absolutely safest possible way (hire a company, use a motorized fly) OK. I needed to be more specific. In the first place, guys, motorized flys aren't everywhere, and news flash, people still get flown all over the country with counterweight systems. Fairly often at venues that don't have the money to hire a company to do it. People were flown before counterweights existed, they even did it in the days of the old hemp systems. (I'm from NY originally, I'm 64, and I've seen a couple of those - you'd never fly ME on one of them.) As a matter of fact, when we did Will Rogers Follies in the Spring of '13, Will's dad flew in from Heaven. We used a rope with loops for him to stand in and to hold on to, lifted him in the wings, moved the thing out over the stage, and lowered him. 

Second, more specific. The thing will be balanced with the platform halfway between stage level and its raised heiight, with 200 pounds of weight (standing in for the actor) on it. So when he's on it, it'll be just a little arbor heavy when he first steps onto it, and a little bit the opposite by the time he gets to stage level. At the point of halfway between stage level and raised level, with the actor on it, it would just stay where it was all by itself. The fly operator can handle the small weight shift between when he's on it when it's up and when it's down. There will be no reliance on some kind of line lock at any point when he's on it. The locking mechanism will only be holding an empty platform, with the lineset close to 200 pounds out of balance, when it's raised and empty and when it's down and empty, in both cases with NOBODY ON IT. The reason it isn't as dangerous as some seem to think is that if it goes flying, it's just an empty platform, and if it falls from the raised position, it'll still be an empty platform, one that nobody is ever going to be beneath. It'd look like He_l, and make a big noise, but nobody could get hurt.

Plus, the Les Miz bridge was a close guess. It's actually The Sound Of Music, and it's the apparent flat part of a bridge over a stream, with stairs up to it on either end, and it has been done, using a single purchase counterweight system. And I'm trying to figure out how the guy did it. I can't just ask him, 'cause when I did, he said, hey, do some digging and research and figure it out. And I forgot to ask him how high it was in the raised position, might have only been 3 feet, I'm going to ask him the next time I see him. With the thing balanced with the actor's weight, at the midpoint, the less vertical travel involved the easier for the operator to handle the weight shift between raised and lowered. I haven't even TRIED to do the math on that 'cause I already know it worked once. What I do need is a way to lock the line that can be quickly locked and unlocked, and that can be trusted to hold about a 200 pound imbalance, which is what it will be when the actor isn't on it.


----------



## BillConnerFASTC (Feb 25, 2015)

And I use to ride and arbor from the grid down, and I made "rocks" with asbestos furnace concrete, walked an A-frame across stage focusing, and used a lot of MEKs. I don't now and strongly recommend no one else does those things. The hardware device you are looking for isn't made because no manufacturer can accept the liability. The counterweight rigging manufacturers say don't use the gear for performer flying.


----------



## Terrence MacArthur (Feb 25, 2015)

venuetech said:


> Any time you have an out of balance lineset, you have an unsafe condition. If something "lets go" *Life and limb of all involved are in grave danger.* My advice would be not to do this without professional help. LIFE SAFETY is at RISK. I am not sure why you want to use the fly system for this effect, some other method should be used. Any way you cut it there are many safety issues to be worked out. Get some specialized help. Gravity bites hard.


While I'm as aware of this as you are, I think you missed the point. When the actor is on it, it will be in balance. When he's off it and it's arbor heavy, well, he isn't on it. And when it's raised and he's off and it's again arbor heavy, nobody will ever be under it. Plus the only way it could go is up. And people get flown using fly systems all the time.


----------



## Terrence MacArthur (Feb 25, 2015)

Terrence MacArthur said:


> I think what I'm herinf here is "OMG, flying an actor, use the safest thing possible. But not everyone has the ability to use the absolutely safest possible way (hire a company, use a motorized fly) OK. I needed to be more specific. In the first place, guys, motorized flys aren't everywhere, and news flash, people still get flown all over the country with counterweight systems. Fairly often at venues that don't have the money to hire a company to do it. People were flown before counterweights existed, they even did it in the days of the old hemp systems. (I'm from NY originally, I'm 64, and I've seen a couple of those - you'd never fly ME on one of them.) As a matter of fact, when we did Will Rogers Follies in the Spring of '13, Will's dad flew in from Heaven. We used a rope with loops for him to stand in and to hold on to, lifted him in the wings, moved the thing out over the stage, and lowered him.
> 
> Second, more specific. The thing will be balanced with the platform halfway between stage level and its raised heiight, with 200 pounds of weight (standing in for the actor) on it. So when he's on it, it'll be just a little arbor heavy when he first steps onto it, and a little bit the opposite by the time he gets to stage level. At the point of halfway between stage level and raised level, with the actor on it, it would just stay where it was all by itself. The fly operator can handle the small weight shift between when he's on it when it's up and when it's down. There will be no reliance on some kind of line lock at any point when he's on it. The locking mechanism will only be holding an empty platform, with the lineset close to 200 pounds out of balance, when it's raised and empty and when it's down and empty, in both cases with NOBODY ON IT. The reason it isn't as dangerous as some seem to think is that if it goes flying, it's just an empty platform, and if it falls from the raised position, it'll still be an empty platform, one that nobody is ever going to be beneath. It'd look like He_l, and make a big noise, but nobody could get hurt.
> 
> Plus, the Les Miz bridge was a close guess. It's actually The Sound Of Music, and it's the apparent flat part of a bridge over a stream, with stairs up to it on either end, and it has been done, using a single purchase counterweight system. And I'm trying to figure out how the guy did it. I can't just ask him, 'cause when I did, he said, hey, do some digging and research and figure it out. And I forgot to ask him how high it was in the raised position, might have only been 3 feet, I'm going to ask him the next time I see him. With the thing balanced with the actor's weight, at the midpoint, the less vertical travel involved the easier for the operator to handle the weight shift between raised and lowered. I haven't even TRIED to do the math on that 'cause I already know it worked once. What I do need is a way to lock the line that can be quickly locked and unlocked, and that can be trusted to hold about a 200 pound imbalance, which is what it will be when the actor isn't on it.



And I forgot to point out, when it's raised and locked, since it'll be arbor heavy when the actor isn't on it, the only way it might go is up. No danger to anyone under it even if someone WAS ever under it. And I'll deal with the sway after I figure out how to lock it when it's empty.


----------



## DuckJordan (Feb 25, 2015)

Now what happens when the lock fails and that 200lb arbor piece is heading towards the ceiling. it now hits the ceiling with 200lbs of force traveling at 8 M/S, assume best case scenario. Your pipe stays in the air but the grid and fly system are now damaged and you have to shut down the theater for the 3.5 million its going to take to fix it. Whats cheaper now? hiring a company in to do it correctly or red-necking it and hoping it doesn't fail.

The fact is you said yourself you can't afford to bring a company. That means you can't afford to do it. The reason they are so expensive isn't because they are gouging the market. Its because it takes a lot more training, thought, specialized gear, and risk assessments that most people can't provide. 

I don't frankly give a rats @ss who or what happened in the old days with hemp systems, it was stupid and there is a damn good reason that we stopped doing those practices. People use to use lead paint, you don't see that anymore. People also use to resort to throw their poo and other garbage in the street without care. That doesn't happen anymore.

Heres the simple facts.

1. you can't afford to bring in a company.
2. You want to fly a person on a fly system.
3. The fly system is only in weight when the actor is standing on the platform. Which means its always out of weight in storage and over night. Producing 200lbs of force continuously on your rigging system and whatever locking device you use. 
4. You fail to recognize the risks associated with flying a person.

In my opinion and probably would be echoed by every single rigger I've ever met/ worked with you should not attempt this at all.


----------



## josh88 (Feb 25, 2015)

StradivariusBone said:


> There was a discussion about this a while back regarding Les Mis and someone wanting to fly a bridge if I'm not mistaken.




Terrence MacArthur said:


> Plus, the Les Miz bridge was a close guess. It's actually The Sound Of Music, and it's the apparent flat part of a bridge over a stream, with stairs up to it on either end, and it has been done, using a single purchase counterweight system. And I'm trying to figure out how the guy did it.



Actually no, he was referring to this thread http://www.controlbooth.com/threads/advice-on-rigging-bridge-for-les-mis.27616/


Terrence MacArthur said:


> I think you missed the point. When the actor is on it, it will be in balance. .... Plus the only way it could go is up. And people get flown using fly systems all the time.



I don't think he missed the point at all, I think you did. Yes people who can't afford the right companies try to do it on their own and sometimes safely accomplish it, should they? no. Especially not at this scale, what happens if the actor on the platform slips and falls while up there? Lots of good advice from people here. There's a reason the response was a resounding "don't do this"


----------



## StradivariusBone (Feb 25, 2015)

Terrence MacArthur said:


> And I forgot to point out, when it's raised and locked, since it'll be arbor heavy when the actor isn't on it, the only way it might go is up. No danger to anyone under it even if someone WAS ever under it. And I'll deal with the sway after I figure out how to lock it when it's empty.



Ignoring everything else- what happens if whatever your method of tying off fails and the arbor which is (200# heavy) falls to the bottom of the pit? It might break through the bottom stop and the batten will still continue flying up, past the high trim and into whatever is in its way (sprinklers, grid, etc). If the set piece breaks free, it's coming down too. If the arbor spills plates and goes light, the whole rig comes crashing down. Just because no one's under the set piece doesn't mean the rest of the stage is a safe zone. 

You came here asking for help, people gave you advice and warnings. Please calm down a bit and think this out, no one here is trying to be a jerk. The fact remains that what you are suggesting is not allowed for by whatever company engineered, built and designed your rigging system and if it fails, you will be liable as the rigger that assembled it.


----------



## BillConnerFASTC (Feb 25, 2015)

One point at which this is likely to fail is when the performer steps, set lets loose, platforms clobbers performer in the back of the head on the way out. Not so bad except it hits other pipes or grid, tears loos, and now the platform falls on that actor just knocked unconscious by it going out. Classic double whammy. Repeat at high trim when performer is getting on or off the platform and it runs away before their weighty is on it.

I've never seen this done nor has anyone ever told me they'd done this and I'm just one year younger than you a started doing tech when I was 12. I'm sure it's been done and will be again but I it's a "frequent event" "all over the country."

And by the way - you don't have to have all motorized rigging to do this, nor is all motorized rigging suitable by any means for performer flying. I'm pretty sure that all of the so called packaged hoists - Vortek, Powerlift, Prodigy - all say very plainly "Not for performer flying". The proper application of a motor designed for the purpose is simply one way to deal with the varying load. There are others, but out of balance counterweight and a fast rope lock is not one of them, an they all have backups and redundancy which seems just not possible with only counterweight.


----------



## Footer (Feb 25, 2015)

Your basically hanging a teeter totter here. When the actor steps on it it could easily flip and do all of the stuff Bill described. 200# is way more then any one flyman can control WHEN something goes wrong.

You came here asking for advice. You got the advice. If you don't like it, that is your issue. This really has nothing to do with flying a person, it has everything to do with how you want to do it.

Good luck on your show. Hope no one dies.


----------



## Terrence MacArthur (Feb 27, 2015)

SEMI-practical because he wouldn't have done it if it was a real world, we're going to do this kind of a situation. Talking about something about a show he'd done,he mentioned something kind of off-topic in passing that had to do with a platform that got flown out after a single scene. I asked how he's flown it, he said using the fly system. so I asked how he did that other stuff, he said why don't you figure it out. It ended up being a bet, with a cup of coffee as the stakes.

He knows that I learned tech stuff in the late '60s and early '70s, when equipment was different and people did things nobody would do now, then after a while was away from theatre for decades until just a few years ago. Plus I've always been a lighting guy, not a rigging guy. And he knows he can catch me up with that sometimes, and he did just that. He let me think he did the whole scene using just the flys, I couldn't think of a way to really do that, and so I asked on here, and got told it can't be done. Which probably had something to do with why I couldn't think of a way. When I finally got convinced it can't be done with just the flys, I told him so today. And he finally told me the only thing he used the flys for was to fly the platform out after the scene, and that I could assume that budget for equipment wasn't a problem. When I asked him why he didn't tell me that to start he said because I didn't ask.

So here's the problem. Keep in mind that it has been done but isn't a "real" problem because I don't actually have to do it, but I do have to somehow find out how it can be done. And since one hint he did give me was to find someone who has done it, or knows how, I'm hoping someone here knows.

There's a platform, say 8x4, that's moved vertically using a counterweight fly system that's weighted for that platform. For the scene, it's brought in so it's 6 feet above stage level. Two sets of stairs are brought in from stage left and stage right and married up to that platform, one on either end, turning the whole thing into a bridge. The scene opens, the actor ascends one of the stairs, and stands in the middle of the platform. It's lowered to stage level, he steps off, goes a few feet downstage, and performs a number. When he finishes he walks back to the platform, it and he are raised back up so it's part of the bridge again, he walks off it and down the stairs, and it's done. The platform is flown out, the stairs moved back into the wings.

So the fly system is handling that platform, but only when it's empty. Once it becomes part of the bridge, and until the end of the scene, something else is needed. There's going to be an actor on it for a good part of that time. There seems to be some form of weight transfer needed here, and a way to move that platform to stage level, keep it there during the actor's number, then back up, with the actor on it, to become part of that bridge again. And I suppose that while it's actually part of the bridge stagehands hidden behind the stairs could operate a mechanism that locked it into those stairs, maybe steel rods, but it's only going to be there for such a short time I doubt it'd be worth bothering with. So we have is a platform that goes in and out vertically, and that has to become part of a system that performs a vertical dead lift of a 200 pound actor.

So does anyone out there know how to do this? The solution can include buying or renting gear (which I'm sure it will), but not to just go hire a rigging company, which is actually what I'd do if I had to actually do that same scene and there was a budget, because that'd be, in his words, "a cop out, the deal is you find out how it could be done."


----------



## gafftaper (Feb 27, 2015)

I'm sorry @Terrence MacArthur but we simply do not allow the discussion of any sort of rigging which involves human flight or any heavy overhead lifting on this website. If we did, you would get speculation from people who think they know what they are doing, but you wouldn't get the advice of any real rigging experts. I have several friends here on CB who are highly skilled riggers who work in cool exotic locations. I assure you they have read your posts, they know how to do what you want to do safely, but have chosen not to answer. The reason they have not answered is pro riggers consider it incredibly dangerous to give out advice about anything related to human flight or heavy overhead lifting on the internet. They have no idea about your space, the quality of your gear, your skills, your budget... there's an endless list of unknowns. 

Furthermore, consider this. You may be a great tech and have good rigging skills. All you need is a little advice to do this. So let's say one of our rigging experts did answer your question and you were able to follow the given advice perfectly and had a great safe show. The problem is that advice would now be sitting here on the internet for everyone else who may not have your skills or discretion. That's terribly dangerous. You may find other places on the internet which do allow the discussion of human flying rigging. But the "experts" who are willing to post that information are not the kind of riggers I would want to listen to. 

So for all these reasons, the leadership of our site has followed the advice of our rigging expert members and does not allow the discussion of human flight or any sort of heavy overhead lifting.


----------

