Oak Tree in a pond

What was the weight on the limbs in the water and how much did that decrease once they were pulled into the air?
I have found submerged branches to be CRAZY hard to get ashore...even little ones.
WAY cool video man. Learned some stuff...thanks!
 
Great video! Also watched some of your other training video's, they are very well done.

Your editing couldn't have been better.
 
I don't know the difference on all the pics between what it took to get them out and what the suspended weight was. Once I get in a "flow" I rarely ask for weights.

However the final brush pic, the biggest of the day, took about 16,000 lbs to get it clear of the water, but weighed 12,000 fully suspended.

That was the main reason for the large crane, Plus I did not want to wade into that stink pond to make any cuts.

Thanks for the kind words from all,

Tony
 
Awsome video and great work! Your ground guys were probably mumbling under there breathe alittle though
wink.gif

Loved the communication
 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know the difference on all the pics between what it took to get them out and what the suspended weight was. Once I get in a "flow" I rarely ask for weights.

However the final brush pic, the biggest of the day, took about 16,000 lbs to get it clear of the water, but weighed 12,000 fully suspended.

That was the main reason for the large crane, Plus I did not want to wade into that stink pond to make any cuts.

Thanks for the kind words from all,

Tony

[/ QUOTE ]

To add to this, once the piece was set down we cut of all the limbs (4) and he repicked the wood to move it. The wood alone weight only 4500 lbs, if i remember right.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know the difference on all the pics between what it took to get them out and what the suspended weight was. Once I get in a "flow" I rarely ask for weights.

However the final brush pic, the biggest of the day, took about 16,000 lbs to get it clear of the water, but weighed 12,000 fully suspended.

That was the main reason for the large crane, Plus I did not want to wade into that stink pond to make any cuts.

Thanks for the kind words from all,
Tony

[/ QUOTE ]

If the line pull was at 16,000 lbs., the load line was '2 parted', right?
 
Norm,

Actually not. At that radius he was good for 12,000 on the chart. It took a bit for the piece to come free from the muck, so as I understand it the weight/pull fluctuated(peaking at 16,000) till it finally came clear and then it continued to drop as mud and slime fell off. He started to boom up after he reached 12,000 on the hoist so his chart weight gained as well.

All that being said, the operator was pushing the envelope with the weight on a single line. It is something we would never do on a critical lift or if the cutter was not so far out of the picture. Also there was a large margin of error. The pic could be cabled down and "dropped" at any point back into the water with no repercussions. The operator is very good and I trust him to work his crane. Keep in mind, I am not a crane operator so I am taking the word of the operator on his capabilities. Perhaps he was full of it, but I have no reason to believe so.

Plus, in those circumstances it can be fun to goof around a bit. We could have easily reduced the piece to two or even three pics if necessary, but decided to push it a bit, quite honestly because we could.

You see it is true: You teach 'em how to read, then you give 'em books and they still eat the f$%^ng teacher.


Tony
 
Tom,

I used the 200T a good bit it's just that those shots were repetitive. My theory on saw use is simple. The right tool for the job. When making a 12"-14" cut I like to use a 14" bar and so on. I don't mind switching saws to make different cuts, the same way I don't mind switching lowering lines as loads/needs change.

Also, when I am doing aerial lift work, I am more than likely to change up saws more often because it's simpler. I just swing down pick up the saw I need, leave the other and go at it. Furthermore, when in a lift and all the work is pretty much beneath me, as this job was, I will opt for the smallest saw necessary and my back thanks me for it!

Please don't think I am getting defensive, I appreciate the comment. I just figured somebody could learn something from my past experiences and decisions and perhaps save themselves a sore back.

Once again I am in a bit of awe about the comments to the video. I am glad you all enjoy watching the fruits of my "should-have-been-doing-something-more-productive-around-the-house-time." It makes me feel like I squandered the time less.
grin.gif



Tony
 
I agree completely about ergonomics, it just looked like the small saw was struggling with some of those cuts, probably because of the repetetive shots.

-Tom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom