openspaceman

Looks like @Khriss did too. No the belay for the climber would be a groundsman and only when he was shifting position after which his main line and a back up he attaches (strop or lanyard) becomes his safety attachment. Not that I'm particularly advocating anything just thinking it is a method that could be readily adopted without major changes in climbing kit or technique.

I'm sorry I was not referring to the Hobbs belay device, I actually used one of these for negative rigging a couple of weeks ago and I quite liked it. In rock climbing where the climber is climbing and being belayed by a man on the ground and the anchor point is somewhere at the top of the pitch I knew this as a hobbs belay. I am still awaiting clarification on this point but it could mean that the anchor point used for the lowering rope but, from what you say, not the lowering rope could be used in this manner as the climber moves to his next work position,

I would agree for the whole job but in this instance the top has already gone so David and his long day would leave little mess and no roots to get rid of.

Yes I liked mine, powerful and with a 28" bar capable without the trepidation I used to have when hauling out the 084 or 2100.

Oh dear, just when I thought we were getting on so well ?

I'll be watching out for comments but to me it is eminently practicable with little expense but at the cost of a groundman's time and less rope management by the climber than with two climbing ropes. I also see an eddy current fall arrest system using gravity for rope tension and a one way capstan as being a possibility but this would fail the 0.5 metre drop requirement as it would simply lower at a controlled rate. It may be an analogy of resistance to new legal requirements but it's a poor analogy otherwise as a seatbelt does not impede the function of driving a car in any way but managing additional rope systems clearly does affect a climber's working.

In UK the DNO does not have to have contractors in, they can pay the land owner to do the work. Obviously they have H&S concerns but routine coppicing when the tips are outside the vicinity zone of the lines should be little danger.

Yes if they are just jumbled into a container

I quite liked the idea of a Hobbs belay (wot rock climbers do) when the climber is moving, as long as it is fit under LOLER the lowering rope will be available then, or did I miss something? I only watched 55 minutes of the webinar so far and it;s all academic for me as last commercial climb was 8 years ago but I don't see the team I was last working with being willing or able to comply and one of them will be reading this.

Yes people do not appreciate that bugs are eating up dry matter all the time the wood is wet, so nearly always better to get it processed and under cover soonest. OTOH if it is all you've got get in there and retrieve what you can.

I wouldn't be surprised if split and stacked 12" hardwood worked out better than cordwood as some bends would be eliminated but generally the smaller you comminute something the lower the bulk density.

PM me and if I'm not working I'll pop over, work visit of course ?

Hey I would have come over to say Hello ?

I'd just do it in daylight and then deny all knowledge of it

Agreed but if they where mine I'd hook them out with the grapple loader so it comes down to price and who is local. 150 5" beech stumps is a bit much for a Hi lift ?. At 2 minutes a stump that's 5 hours without a break for a grinder

Do what?

The thing about coppicing is that the stool reacts by mobilising lots of adventitious shoots that then compete with each other for light, they grow tall and thin. These long slender shoots would be cut on a regular cycle because they lent themselves to being split and weaved for baskets, crates, wattle etc. Any left overs would be gathered into bundles to make firewood, faggots and bavins. So the yield of biomass from the stool is divided between the collection of sprouts. If you were to select one stem by cutting out the rest it would have a head start on further adventitious growth and more of the yield would be concentrated on that stem, this is called storing the coppice stool. it probably shortens the life of the stool for most species. The yield on any site will vary with species with willow, poplar and eucalyptus being higher yielders than hazel the victorian traditional shortish cycle (7 years) coppice species whereas hornbeam beech and oak would be cut on longer cycles of up to 35 years.

This must depend on the tenancy agreement, if it's a domestic dwelling with a field for a horse my guess is that the landlord will have reserved the right to the trees so they will be his responsibility. If the land is an agricultural holding and the it is an agricultural tenancy then the agreement would say but again if the landowner has reserved the right to timber... The thing is that if it is an agricultural tenancy that came into being by default it could have become the tenta's responsibility.

Yeah , retrieved a few before and after, drones nowadays I suspect. Gone up a hundred times for a new reproduction then.

Here we go OT again ? I never saw one of those but a chap used to park one by the school and then commute to london by train, about 63, it had a JAP Vee twin with valve gear all exposed, I imagine it was a bit of a handful.

Sounds like the stuff we put in model aeroplane engines. That formula the Cooper JAP was that the 500CC class that teams would buy Manx Nortons and rob the engines out, leaving the featherbed frames for people who wanted to upgrade their triumphs to Tritons?, Just a bit before my time.

Ordinary meths is ethanol with 10% methanol and a bitter compound added but I suspect the ethanol is 70% alcohol and 30% water. As such if you add it to petrol the water settles out at the bottom so would make matters worse, Anhydrous methanol is pure CH3OH is made from methane (natural gas) and mixes with petrol and absorbs water

I've experienced this in the past and as @Khriss says it might be from condensation build up. You can get anhydrous methanol for marine fuel tanks, a drop of which in the fuel should dissolve the water to save stripping down, which assumes of course that the diagnosis can be made without taking the carb apart.

This is much as mine, I have no other experience of these modern insulated firebox stoves than my Morso, when I did work with biomass boilers the smallest was 24kW and the biggest 1MW at an Ikea store. The thing is that even if the jets don't appear to do anything other than split the flame they are still functioning as intended. Sometimes you will see a brighter section of flame above and around the jet, showing it is adding needed air as well as turbulence. Also consider how the air paths see to swirl in these stoves, the airwash comes down the glass and hits the burning wood at the floor then runs back across the burning wood and up the back, then forward across the baffle then exits, a near circular motion. Those jets might not find any fuel gas left in the flames but still contribute hot excess air before it ventures up the flue.

Not to mention it tends to be acidic and contains Products of Incomplete Combustion, especially in diesels, and they contain known carcinogens, ref earlier discussions about wearing gloves when working on engines and not putting oily rags or hands in pockets.