whats the best "double" you have worked with and why

it did,nt say who it was for ,its on jobsrapido. just pissed off that our industry is going this way
 
PW said:
The people who make these decisions will be in league with OR directly employed by training establishments who sit on NASC committees and the like, they will be advising HSE and UKCG etc that the sector needs further training on this and that...F*ck me!!! Of course they will!! They can disguise it all they want along the lines of system training, Health & Safety etc etc etc...ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!!

I mean the rigmarole of getting a card these day is just too much.. I sat yesterday signing off our 3 Trainees Portfolios and getting them into some sort of shape for assessment (Which is no fault of our boys by the way, they collected all their evidence etc) and I sh*t you not it took me about 3 hours...and thats just my time, without all the courses and assessments the lads have to undertake, the cost of the courses, lads wages, NI contributions etc etc etc. I dont know if you are aware of the costs of sending a lad on a course but its not cheap!! People will say "It doesnt matter because the Company get a training grant" well we do but it doesnt cover it by a long way and in fact once our all mighty CITB have taken their levy its even less!!

I think we have gone too far, I mean Part 1a, assessment, Part 1b, assessment, final assessment etc and thats just the start of the process!! the lads tell me they are bored out of their skin most of the time because they KNOW the training provider is dragging it out, I remember doing my Part 1 at Bircham in 1986 (I know Im an old fart!!) which was a straight 2 weeks and I've got say we could have easily covered it in a week, I do appreicate you have to work to the pace of the least competent in the group but with that in mind I would still say a week would have covered it.

Im not for one moment suggesting nowadays a complete novice (Although in my day a complete novice could have a Trainee Card in 2 weeks!!??) to scaffolding should be given a qualification after only 1 weeks training but I think some common ground should reached along the lines of do the 2 weeks, gain some site experience, say 12 months then go and be assessed then move up, to Part 2 etc etc and do away with all this 1a-1b, assessment every f*cking week boll*cks.

I am in no way against training and those on here that know me and have read my previous posts know how I feel in regard to making sure our lads get the training they need and indeed deserve, but from a Company point of view we feel that the powers that be instigate these training procedures not for the good of the industry but to line their own pockets, to add a system qualification to a T&F Card Holder is yet again just another revenue stream :mad: that on the whole the (yet again) Scaffolding Companies will have to pick up if they want to work for certain contractors.

In South American Countries this situation is known as a CARTEL!!
Click to expand...

PW couldn't agree more, NASC lost our application last year, no apology, just said they would fast track our next application. Didn't bother yet as you can't have more than 25% agency under the guise that they are less likely to get trained, 'cobblers' we have put agency guys through pt1 and rescue from harness training, asbestos awareness, etc. they are just trying to control us without asking us for any input.

Jmark
It's probably because of the UKCG supervision requirments, ask if they accept the 2 day SSSTS, it's cheaper;)
 
Why have to pay for a course to erect this 5hite its a complete piece of pi55,you only need to look at the manufacturers guidelines if in doubt its f..cking idiot proof,another fine example of the pi55 being taken against us,as for cuplock a support job was on my advanced course a few years ago,maybe it shouldnt have been if the correct training was not given before erecting the structure,no course was needed then so why now,robbing b..tards:evil:The fat cats glass must be getting empty..
 
alright lads. i'm from the isle of man, and all scaffold companies over here use system scaffolds. ya might see abit of t&f getting knocked up on jobs that system can't handle. all us scaffs have to be sent to england, ireland or scotland to be trained in tube and fitting before our department of trade and industry can issue us with another card (thats costs £15) so we can bang pins in all day long. i think its wrong that tube and fitting trained scaffs have to take another course to erect system. you need the tube and fitting knowledge for system. i.e lacing beams, puncheons, slip loads etc
 
Hi Phil, welcome.
Phil mate our beef is with the CSCS/CISRS trying to drive that System wedge between the scaffolding community.

As is a general consensus, the providers, are just looking for more ways to fleece us, once again I.E. CITB, CISRS, NVQ and the contreversial H&S screen touch test, to mention a few.

What we are looking for, is a fully trained scaffolder, trained in all aspects of scaffolding, and from there specialise.

Why IMO, just train a System scaff on a Apprenticeship? Train the guys for the 2 year apprenticeship on T&F and then the 2 day system at a later date.

Money grabbing office/Government sh1thawks

Paddy
 
ya right about money grabbing. did an asbestos awareness course last year. thought this year would just be a refresher. had to sit the full course again. if it wasn't for some work coming off i wouldn't of bothered.
 
SK

Garry Adams said:
sibretiger

What ever happened to the Steve Knight ? fantastic fitting, replaced by the gravelock, in my view the SK is superior---has anyone used the under deck 2000 ?---was invented by Ricky Morgan a Scaff.we,v moved on a bit since using mill'iz P/Cz to long butts off the suffit of the steel beams :eek:
Click to expand...

SK was banned years ago because it snapped at the bolt a couple of times

Cheers

---------- Post added 13th March 2010 at 12:28 AM ---------- Previous post was 12th March 2010 at 11:47 PM ----------
Podger said:
Love B+P ? Then Cambridge is the place for you , 80% or more of the firms in Cambridge area use B+P , One firm (always put up a nice tidy Job) don't even use swivs they carry a load of 8" butts to fix braces using DHs. Proper old school :)
Click to expand...

Good to hear not many young scaffs know how to use Band and Plate never mind erect a full scaff with it.
I worked in Cambridge in 1980 Loved it.

Cheers
 
Best and Worst !

Has to be the Mills speedthread 7/16th.
The worst has to be the old Mills 1/2inch. You had to tighten them and then hit them with your spanner to see if they were going to spring loose !
 
Well I prefer the presco doubles especially the new ones very easy to work with it all depends on the job your doing If its a big bad boy hanger over the north sea i,ll put my money on the sticky willy
 
I have read all of these comments with great interest......especially the ones regarding all the red tape bullshight that we are now being subjected to. Most of us got into this game (well, years ago) because we had a maverick attitude to the establishment and enjoyed the freedom Scaffolding could bring us.

Streetwork was fun and you worked on your own initiative. Those that could do it, did it. Those that couldn't went on to find another way of earning a living. That is Natural selection...... the Strongest survive. But now the Nanny State that we live in has bombarded us with so much new legislation that we need to fill out a Risk Assessment before we tie our Bootlaces!

Anyway, back to the question: "Best Double?"

For most things it has to be the Burton's Little Giant.....the original 1/2 inch Whitworth ...... because the bolt is the same size; the nut was reduced to 7/16 th to save steel....so there is a greater leverage on the 1/2 inch nut. Also, as has been said before, they are great for tying to the steel. Some blokes these days even refer to them as Tying Doubles.

The Band & Plate, another great fitting (did you know it was first patented in 1918 and called the 'Scaffixer'?). The B&P wasn't so great for Hangers, though. I remember sliding down Droppers and standing on a 'Chinky Set'..... must have been mad! Mind you, there was more room for your foot on a sideways Set than when you went down and just stood on a Double (with the bolt over the cup, of course).

Mills 90's can be good too. I have done Hangers with both the 1/2 inch and 7/16th.....the technique being the same for either........you make up your droppers first with ledger and transom fittings at right angles to each other, making sure that the top 90's for the transom in each pair of droppers are on opposite sides. You then slide down the dropper and stand on the top 90 while putting the ledger into the bottom fitting (that really sorts you out first thing in the morning when you have gone in with a hangover and you are dropping down off the 200ft level). Strangely enough, although they were basically shight, the 1/2 inch 90 was easier to use for this technique because the bolt was on the top.

No.....we didn't use checks.....and there were never any problems with the integrity of the scaffold. You couldn't do it that way these days, of course, but then, when was the last time you ever saw a Slung Scaffold with Wire Bonds? Wire Bonds are a great Double too, particularly with wooden poles. Are there any old Cradle Hands on here?

That reminds me of the worst Double I ever used. I had the Cradle Gang for a firm called BB&EA in London and they used Doubles that had no Nut...and no Bolt! All that held the cup around the tube was a small wedge that was knocked through the cup thus tightening it. They weren't too bad for a Laydown, but they had a slip load of about 0. It wasn't all bad though; for their Tubular jobs they used used the infamous Boulton Sticky. ....hahahaha
 
mac said:
mills for me every time keeps square and tight
Click to expand...

Yeh I think Mills 90's for me as well.

I do remember when I first joined mills under the fitting bench there was a load of very old 4" tubes and massive 4" mills fittings. Can you imagine using them.

Or and I did like the little giant doubles, these fittings would clamp to steel :amazed: as well as SK's, but you couldn't get away with that now a days....
 
TAC said:
Yeh I think Mills 90's for me as well.

I do remember when I first joined mills under the fitting bench there was a load of very old 4" tubes and massive 4" mills fittings. Can you imagine using them.

Or and I did like the little giant doubles, these fittings would clamp to steel :amazed: as well as SK's, but you couldn't get away with that now a days....
Click to expand...

The massive Mills tubes and fittings you refer to were actually 3 inches diameter and we used them mixed with the regular 2 inch tubes.......therefore the 90 was referred to as a '3 and 2'......... in general the 3" was used for the Standards and the 2" for Ledgers and Braces......Hemping with the 3" required an additional technique, you had to fix a 90 about 2 feet from the bottom of the tube to use as a handhold for your bottom hand with your top hand in the normal position......fortunately the longest length of of 3" tube was only a 16'.

Regarding tying to the steel with a Little Giant; I have done this in the last few months........still works great and no problems at all ;)
 
Charlie said:
The massive Mills tubes and fittings you refer to were actually 3 inches diameter and we used them mixed with the regular 2 inch tubes.......therefore the 90 was referred to as a '3 and 2'......... in general the 3" was used for the Standards and the 2" for Ledgers and Braces......Hemping with the 3" required an additional technique, you had to fix a 90 about 2 feet from the bottom of the tube to use as a handhold for your bottom hand with your top hand in the normal position......fortunately the longest length of of 3" tube was only a 16'.

Regarding tying to the steel with a Little Giant; I have done this in the last few months........still works great and no problems at all ;)
Click to expand...

Charlie, you must be over 106 years old :blink1: if you can remember using them....is your avatar a photo of you...:laugh: :D
 
Charlie said:
The massive Mills tubes and fittings you refer to were actually 3 inches diameter and we used them mixed with the regular 2 inch tubes.......therefore the 90 was referred to as a '3 and 2'......... in general the 3" was used for the Standards and the 2" for Ledgers and Braces......Hemping with the 3" required an additional technique, you had to fix a 90 about 2 feet from the bottom of the tube to use as a handhold for your bottom hand with your top hand in the normal position......fortunately the longest length of of 3" tube was only a 16'.

Regarding tying to the steel with a Little Giant; I have done this in the last few months........still works great and no problems at all ;)
Click to expand...

Charlie,

The 3" - 2" fittings, are them the same as prop couplers which you still can get.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom