There are new climbers reading these posts all the time, and when I have time, I try to add some perspective for them:
Even though I am primarily a friction hitch advocate, I own two Ropeman 1 devices. The first one I bought from a friend to test out. The second one, I paid for, brand new, not because I needed it, but only so that I could see exactly what came from the manufacturer in terms of written instructions. Summarizing, the diagram pictures a climber executing a no-slack ascent on a single rope using 2 Ropeman 1 devices. Supporting text was sparse. Still, it was my understanding though is that the manufacturer is ok with it for use in a non-slack climbing application, if used in pairs. However, we can't count on saddle hunters having no slack on their Tether or Lifeline. I drove across the state recently to head out to the test lab at Ape Canyon / RockNArbor to do some testing. One of the tests was on a Ropeman. I will let the video speak for itself.
To add a little more detail to the statement I made above, unless the climber is an expert at self rescue, I
don't recommend the use of a tether, in favor of a rappel-capable lifeline or climbing rope, which should be connected to us and the tree at all times, and on minimal slack. Once we have that in place, I recommend that we strive to have redundancy for any frictional points of attachment to the rope. If a friction hitch or mechanical device were to fail on our lifeline, ideally, we should have a backup in place. In all my years of saddle hunting, I was on a tether and a Ropeman (without a backup) only one time and it was to make this video (scenario 8) and show why not: if we lose our footing, self rescue is not straightforward and few are prepared for it. I don't like a Ropeman on a lifeline primarily because 1) it weakens the system drastically 2) its tough on the rope 3) it can't be broken under load for an emergency rappel.
Regarding the use of a
Ropeman on a Lineman's belt, as stated above, I am ok with it. Increasingly, I am pleased to see progress in the saddle hunting community with more and more saddle hunters realizing that a lineman's belt is primarily a positioning device. It applies tension horizontally and provides lateral stability and keeps us in place. In order for it to do its job, we have to be on solid footing. If we lose our footing (for whatever reason) and are NOT tied into the tree via our bridge to a secure connection above it, exactly what happens to us is unknown. The LB doesn't cinch to the tree and so we can expect it to slip as we fall, and it might get hung up on something and it might not. We might fall a small distance or a long distance. I have never seen any real testing on this (at height) and don't expect to, simply because it would be dangerous, and the results highly variable and the number of tests required to get statistically relevant data would be exorbitant. Bottom line: it doesn't matter how we climb, in order to be able to reliably escape injury if we lose our footing, we need to have an anchor in the tree and an LB doesn't do that. I have a couple of different load scales and attempted to do my own testing and measure how much force I could generate on a lineman's belt - in a proper usage scenario (while tied in and managing slack). I got tied in and got on a platform and bumped around as much as I could and the load on the LB was very, very low. We primarily LEAN on a LB and it is connected to us in two places, halving the load applied. I stepped off the platform and simulated falls and that did nothing at all, because i was tied in. And of course, if at any time, if my lineman's belt were to fail completely, that would not endanger my safety because I am tied in. Even if I was using (out of spec) 8mm rope and even if it slips at 400lb.... how can anybody generate that force when they are tied in? Unless somebody can produce evidence (like a video with a load scale on the LB) where the climber is tied in and a LB will receive an appreciable load, I have concluded it can't.