# Runaway



## Footer (Dec 26, 2008)

Just got this sent to me from one of my friends who is out on tour with a large broadway show. Yes, it did happen while they were onstage, and yes the show did go on.


----------



## rochem (Dec 26, 2008)

*saving this photo to scare people who think you can hang anything without reweighting*

Wow, that's kinda scary. Do you know what caused the runaway? Since it's arbor heavy, I assume the loaders must have just been a little too eager to add weight or something during load-in. What was the show (if you're allowed to say)? Was anything damaged? And what did OSHA/IA/Equity think about continuing the show with that damage hanging overhead?


----------



## gafftapegreenia (Dec 27, 2008)

I would guess a very heavy object was flown in, object was taken off the batten, and a now very arbor heavy batten comes crashing to the rail.


----------



## photoatdv (Dec 27, 2008)

rochem said:


> *saving this photo to scare people who think you can hang anything without reweighting*
> 
> Wow, that's kinda scary. Do you know what caused the runaway? Since it's arbor heavy, I assume the loaders must have just been a little too eager to add weight or something during load-in. What was the show (if you're allowed to say)? Was anything damaged? And what did OSHA/IA/Equity think about continuing the show with that damage hanging overhead?



I should show this to my drama teacher who thinks reweighing is optional... no wait, we have one (not quite that bad, the arbors just slightly bent and the block look pretty much okay) in our auditorium... in fact he caused it. What was the bast was that nobody checked the pipe side of the system (which was hanging over our heads). Don't worry, I looked it it when I was up at the grid last year and it looks fine-- but the point is someone (preferably a rigger) should have looked it it when it happened. I fact I think we could use it the way it is if we took off the extra 300lbs of weight.

As far as the broadway show continuing, I'm sure they had experienced riggers/ flymen on the show that checked the system and secured anything that was an immediate danger. At least I hope so becuase I wouldn't trust the lines still being securely attached to that arbor, not to mention whatever happened to the pipe and grid. 

Actually, do you have a picture of the grid after that one?


----------



## Footer (Dec 27, 2008)

Nope, I won't say the show. It was supposed to be a pipe that married to an electic, and was weighted before the pipe was married.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Wolf (Dec 27, 2008)

Footer said:


> Nope, I won't say the show. It was supposed to be a pipe that married to an electic, and was weighted before the pipe was married.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



I'v heard this term before and I only have an idea of what exactly it means. Does it mean that the batten was going to used with the electric (as if cables were going to be going from the electric to this batten). If this is the case is that all it is?


----------



## Footer (Dec 28, 2008)

Wolf said:


> I'v heard this term before and I only have an idea of what exactly it means. Does it mean that the batten was going to used with the electric (as if cables were going to be going from the electric to this batten). If this is the case is that all it is?



No, its a weight thing. Most battens out there, in a single purchase system are weighted for under a 1000#, some double purchase systems can hold no more then 500# to 700#. Broadway style touring shows usually pull in all of their fixtures mounted on unistrut and cable with socapex mults. This weighs a lot, in some places more then a single batten can hold. Common practice is to "marry" two battens together by chaining them together and use two arbors to carry the weight. 

**THE ABOVE SHOULD ONLY BE DONE BY A QUALIFIED RIGGER**

What happened in this instance, is the flyman brought both pipes in. Unistrut was hung on the batten while the arbor was being loaded. Before the battens were married, they compltelty loaded the arbor of the "helper" pipe. The rope or the brake failed droping the arbor 60' to the deck, and taking the batten out at a high speed. The arbor crashed into the deck.


----------



## derekleffew (Dec 28, 2008)

Footer said:


> ... Common practice is to "marry" two battens together by chaining them together and use two arbors to carry the weight. ...


And this is the *wrong* approach, for many reasons.


Footer said:


> **THE ABOVE SHOULD ONLY BE DONE BY A QUALIFIED RIGGER**


A Qualified Rigger should/would do it differently.


----------



## bobgaggle (Dec 28, 2008)

Im pretty sure hes saying that you shouldn't marry and pipes together at anytime. An experienced rigger would figure out a way to hang the unistrut without cutting corners.

I don't see any problem with it as long as your arbors are married as well. Wouldn't be so good if you get on of the arbors traveling faster than the other


----------



## photoatdv (Dec 28, 2008)

Footer and Derek arguing... we need to put out a news flash!


----------



## theatretechguy (Dec 28, 2008)

It must have been a rope failure on the arbor, I can't see any experienced rigger thinking that the brake would support that much weight in ANY venue. Scary stuff. Glad nobody was hurt (or killed).


----------



## What Rigger? (Dec 28, 2008)

photoatdv said:


> Footer and Derek arguing... we need to put out a news flash!



Well...I'm certainly not gonna chime in. Not THIS time at least.


----------



## Van (Dec 28, 2008)

What Rigger? said:


> Well...I'm certainly not gonna chime in. Not THIS time at least.


 
Now _*THAT"S*_ worthy of a news flash !!!


----------



## Footer (Dec 28, 2008)

derekleffew said:


> And this is the *wrong* approach, for many reasons.
> 
> A Qualified Rigger should/would do it differently.



I don't think derek and I are arguing about this one. This was a mistake on a rather large scale with a well trained crew. It was merely a communication problem that should have been taken care of. Beyond that, it should not have been done to begin with. 

The battens were going to be married, and because of that, the arbor was loaded before the pipe were married, the rope or brake failed, and the arbor fell.


----------



## Sayen (Dec 31, 2008)

No pause in performance for an inspection? What did the audience do when that thing came crashing down?


----------



## gafftaper (Jan 7, 2009)

theatretechguy said:


> It must have been a rope failure on the arbor, I can't see any experienced rigger thinking that the brake would support that much weight in ANY venue. Scary stuff. Glad nobody was hurt (or killed).



We've had some good debates around here in the past about use of the word "brake" vs "lock". In the end the key to always remember is that brake doesn't prevent the arbor from moving. It's providing enough friction to help a properly weighted arbor resist movement... that's all. The only truly "locked" arbor is one that is chained down. Anything else is always subject to massive failure if it gets dramatically out of balance. 

Hey Footer the original picture is no longer in your post. Can you repost it?


----------

