a nice cut for hung trees

[Canal Navvy]

It's a great book, got mine from treesource. Love the understated American style:thumbup1:

[silky fox]

I want to learn about the Coos cut that Rich Rule was talking about....thanks for the info Ben:thumbup:

[silky fox]

Ok...found in @ Treesource...looks like a tree work bible and at £38 not expensive:thumbup:

[mistahbenn]

And Jerry is the tree god. Also highly recommended high climbers and timber fallers. (And anything by him really)

[Langur]

I want to learn about the Coos cut that Rich Rule was talking about....thanks for the info Ben:thumbup:

 

Coos bay , page 309of the Fundamentals.

 

A great read.

 

And surely easier for you :.......not even one of the best treebooks have been translated in italian yet..

 

And reading in english after a good day of treework...well...

[Spruce Pirate]

I want to learn about the Coos cut that Rich Rule was talking about....thanks for the info Ben:thumbup:

 

I think we should all learn as many different cuts as we can, the more you know the better equiped you are for different situations. Even, dare I say it, and flies slightly in the face of some of my earlier posts... spear cutting?

[agg221]

I have no wish to re-ignite the earlier nature of this thread, but I'm interested in approaches.

 

Hypothetically, if you were going to tackle a tree like the one in the original film without a winch, and assuming the top was securely wedged in a fork so no chance of it rolling out, I appreciate the difficulty in assessing tension/compression in the first cut but once the first cut is made (so it's free at the base) is there any reason not use a cut that looks like a felling cut in reverse (i.e notch the top, then undercut), taking sections of approx. 4ft long, working at waist height?

 

Alec

[Spruce Pirate]

Hypothetically, if you were going to tackle a tree like the one in the original film without a winch, and assuming the top was securely wedged in a fork so no chance of it rolling out, I appreciate the difficulty in assessing tension/compression in the first cut but once the first cut is made (so it's free at the base) is there any reason not use a cut that looks like a felling cut in reverse (i.e notch the top, then undercut), taking sections of approx. 4ft long, working at waist height?

 

No, no reason not to, ergonomically its better to cut at waist height than bending over, essentially all you are doing is cross cutting. BUT, if the top is that securely wedged to prevent rolling then all you will achieve is working up the stem until it either is sitting pretty near vertical, or see-saws out depending on the balance point. Both present their own issues.

[agg221]

No, no reason not to, ergonomically its better to cut at waist height than bending over, essentially all you are doing is cross cutting. BUT, if the top is that securely wedged to prevent rolling then all you will achieve is working up the stem until it either is sitting pretty near vertical, or see-saws out depending on the balance point. Both present their own issues.

 

Thanks for that and yes I do appreciate it sets up its own problems.

 

Alec

[dadio]

 

I think it would be impossible to perform any cut that not been done, the chain saw has been around for a good while now.

 

I was referring to this statement Steve..