Rupe

Add the 20 minute phone call to the bill at the same rate!

Their insurance wont ever pay up if its down to someone elses instruction, even if they ignore the instruction! Did he sign a risk assessment that states that he will definatly not fell the tree in a oner? No? Thats beside the point. There should not be a BT bill to pay. BT will repair the fault free of charge as long as you get the affected customer to report the "fault". As far as the cutter is concerned, he didn't do what the person writing the cheques asked for, so that needs sorting out the old fashioned way. No pay and no more work ever, good bye! And if that don't work then there is the real old fashioned method!!

I thought we used work positioning systems?

They are both subject to Loler though. I don't get your point? I think insurance would be the key problem, yes shackles and slings are all the same if you can identify them, but PI insurance to cover you for Loler test on arb equipment won't cover you for loler test on unrelated industry gear.

Thats me off the hook then, thanks Tim.

Ah, interesting, I was wondering which factory actually made it, and I assumed it would be one familiar with this kind of thing.

One serious stick and lots of cameras!! Sorry, cynical head on again Mark, I'll have a look at some soon before winging, but correct me if I'm wrong but that video was for a pulley for cutting trees down, right? They do look nice though!

There was already a pulley in the states with two eyes for attachment, before the HC came out. Can't remember who made it but its called the mickey mouse. Looks very similiar to this stein one. Interesting comment about DMM and ISC pulleys, considering the historical links between the two companies, it seems to me that ISC make industrial type components and bring them to the market place, but DMM have are a larger company and more used to making refined items for the leisure climbing fraternity, so they are therefore equipped to "polish the edges" so to speak and re create designs to please the eye for the gear junkies among us. I'm still unsure where Stein, as a brand fit, into all this. Where petzl, ISC, and DMM have pretty much everything covered in terms of climbing hardware, maybe Stein are looking to the company purchases, if I were an employer wanting to kit out 6 climbers with pulleys etc which one would I choose...........??

Its crazy that in a 4 day course a person can be taught to climb AND rescue someone, yet still not know anything, but be "qualified". There should be a climbing course, and then 6 months experience required before doing a rescue course and then, maybe then, a chainsaw in tree course. New climbers would have to work with rescuers on the ground instead of newly qualified Cs 38/39's going out as qualified rescuers for existing climbers.

No, you are a "loler inspector for arb equipment", it kind of explains it all for you right there. Part of the qualification is being able to recognise all bits of equipment or at least being able to look up what it is, SWL etc. Maybe you could do cranes next week? Thats meant in a friendly advice kind of way....

we drive on the left cos thats the way they did jousting !! Do you know where you are going to be based yet? Maybe see you at the show on friday?

Can't help, but did you keep it as a two handed control or did you make some alterations? Mines one handed now and its sooo much better. No more lending it to clients though!!

Yes, it wasn't a critisism of what your doing, just a point that the "back to the boundary" rule is pointless unless its the homeowner cuttign stuff back. As proffessionals we should be engaging both parties and finding the correct solution for all including the tree. If I get asked to cut back to boundaries because its a law that it can be done, I usually tell them that the law is for them to cut the trees back, if they want me to do it it will be done my way regardless of the law, i,e. with planning permsision (if required) with tree/land owners consent and correctly for the species of tree.

If cutting back to the boundary line is going to leave stubs then you are carryign out improper tree work. "lopping" I think its called. If the tree is in a conservation area then you still need permision for crown lift/thin/reduction etc and work to be carried out to BS etc. So cutting to an imaginary line is not ideal. A good solution, if you can, is to remove branches beyond the boundary line, either to a suitable growth point or back to main stem. For this you do need permision from tree/land owner but it should then be a permanent solution to the problem, and a good sales persion should be able to obtain this, unless the owners are mentalists which is so often the case!! Keeping everyone happy, especially the tree, shoudl be the main aim, not merely carrying ones rights to hack back to boundaries.

Thats cool, didn't resize it at all! AT did it all, easy, will do some more later. Food first!!

Lets see if this works

Even a zoomed in one needs resizing! This is narcacism at its best!

Yep!! Most saw will do that in beech trees though, unless you can sharpen them perfect, which I can't. As long as its EEC approved bananas its ok. These photos look so much better on the photographers Apple fance better then HD res screen thing!

Arb talk will do it down to 400x 600 I think but only if they go in small enough, so I normally don't need to bother. I've not fully decided on the quickest method yet, but I have paint shop pro that will reduce them either by a percentage (and let AT do the rest) or directly to the required size.

Ok, the second one got resized by arbtalk ok, so less need for me to do it. But actually the original file for this one was not too big, it seems only some are huge files. I'll put some more up one day, but there are 1600 of them so it will take me while to choose half a dozen ok ones, some are awsome though and might not appear on this site just yet. Nearly 200 of them are of the dog!!

And another size

I finally got hold of some proffesional pictures taken in December, lucky I wasn't paying for them!! This is just a test to see how they look resized on here, they are 20M pixels to start with and 13Mb so need to be reduced wuite a bit.

Good stuff Jerry! I'd have him do stunt fells for me all day long!

Yes that would help a bit, but more importantly if it goes down the back, over larger and larger branches, this could stop you from ripping the tope of the tree clean off!! i.e. in a fail, the lower branches would take up the load until eventually the tree stops breaking. Useful if you are tied in above the TIP. We use this quite often, havign the lowering rope run up the back of a weak tree so that in the case of failure the climbers journey to the ground would at least be slower!

Tims diagram make sense to me, but I sure that more force is required at the base to get the same tension in the rope, so the force now applied at the new angle (red line) is higher than what would have been applied in the first diagram. Taking it further, franks method would work (in reducing sideways pull) but the resulting downward force on the tree would be immense far greater than from simply lowerign a load, so the tree could fail due to the compression force