Topping Fail

[skyhuck]

You are correct, Skyhuck, moving the hinge back would make the centre of gravity easier to move over the hinge and therefore cause the section or tree to fall more easily. (An over centre gob is a good way to fell big wide monoliths.)

My point was and still is that a smaller gob would have allowed the cutter more time and control as he and his ground crew quite obviously haven't the skills of you and your crew.

 

In this instance I would not have used wedges, notwithstanding the rather tight slot into which he was attempting to get the section into and the narrow diameter of the stem.

You seem to me to be getting fixated by my mentioning wedges. I was using the example of wedges to demonstrate the leverage principle. If you didn't or don't understand this principle I apologise for not clarifying it in enough detail. I commonly use wedges on big and medium fells as I feel it gives a much more controlled operation. This is just my personal preference, possibly as a result of the huge amount of respect I had for the chap from Lantra who taught me some years ago.

Had you and your crew or, I dare say quite a few of the others on this site, cut such a gob as demonstrated in the video, I reckon the section would have fallen precisely where you wanted it. However, in the case in question, with the cutter and ground crew in question, I still maintain that the gob was too big and he was too greedy. If he'd cut a smaller gob he'd have had more time and more control.

 

I'm not "fixated" at all, just fail to see there relevance to this situation.

 

I fully understand the leverage principle, but again (as a pull line was installed) that has no relevance here.

 

I think we both agree that the hinge was too thin, you feel this was down to the gob size, I feel it has more to do with the back cut.

 

The bottom line is that the guy with the saw cocked up

[tommer9]

I'm not "fixated" at all, just fail to see there relevance to this situation.

 

I fully understand the leverage principle, but again (as a pull line was installed) that has no relevance here.

 

I think we both agree that the hinge was too thin, you feel this was down to the gob size, I feel it has more to do with the back cut.

 

The bottom line is that the guy with the saw cocked up

 

:biggrin:

[dadio]

You seem to have an excellent understanding of the effects of notch depth Good to see someone does...In light of that it makes no sense that you say "If he'd cut a smaller gob he'd have had more time and more control. " Absolutely no sense..

 

You are correct, Skyhuck, moving the hinge back would make the centre of gravity easier to move over the hinge and therefore cause the section or tree to fall more easily. (An over centre gob is a good way to fell big wide monoliths.)

My point was and still is that a smaller gob would have allowed the cutter more time and control as he and his ground crew quite obviously haven't the skills of you and your crew.

 

In this instance I would not have used wedges, notwithstanding the rather tight slot into which he was attempting to get the section into and the narrow diameter of the stem.

You seem to me to be getting fixated by my mentioning wedges. I was using the example of wedges to demonstrate the leverage principle. If you didn't or don't understand this principle I apologise for not clarifying it in enough detail. I commonly use wedges on big and medium fells as I feel it gives a much more controlled operation. This is just my personal preference, possibly as a result of the huge amount of respect I had for the chap from Lantra who taught me some years ago.

Had you and your crew or, I dare say quite a few of the others on this site, cut such a gob as demonstrated in the video, I reckon the section would have fallen precisely where you wanted it. However, in the case in question, with the cutter and ground crew in question, I still maintain that the gob was too big and he was too greedy. If he'd cut a smaller gob he'd have had more time and more control.

[geoff]

The cutter blew the hinge,simples.

With the side lean he should have bitten off smaller sections too.

[Paul Jenks]

Of course he would, (no pun intended). If he'd had a smaller gob he'd have had more wood to cut through making the back cut. QED he'd have had more time. Unless, of course you feel that he has the ability to cut through more wood in the same amount of time as less wood.

[Paul Smith]

When you say smaller gob do you mean a deeper or shallower cut?

 

If the faces met sooner it would put pressure on the hinge which as we have seen in this case too thin and gave way before an adequate moment was created in the desired direction.

[Pete Mctree]

Depth of sink cut has little influence on this. Dimensions of hinge & failure to reduce side weight are the pertinent points

[dadio]

Of course he would, (no pun intended). If he'd had a smaller gob he'd have had more wood to cut through making the back cut. QED he'd have had more time. Unless, of course you feel that he has the ability to cut through more wood in the same amount of time as less wood.

 

More wood to cut through doesn't give any more control.. this isn't a timed event.. That makes NO SENSE!!!

 

My 12 year old son can understand that the wider the hinge, the more control it will have in fighting side lean.. The widest possible hinge is going to be dead center.... So a deep notch, tapered hinge, with no stump shot would offer the most control of that side leaner.. combine that good cut with a high pull line, lots of pulling power, directionally offset to compensate for the side lean and he stood a good chance on that cut.

[skyhuck]

"Stump shot", not heard this before, what is it??

[Peter]

Stump shot is a higher back cut to leave a step to prevent the butt coming back over the stump.