# Could you safely fall this tree?



## smokechase II (May 11, 2006)

Any thought on this one ?

Predictions on the outcome?


----------



## aggiewoodbutchr (May 11, 2006)

My prediction- when the tree gets 10+- degrees from vertical, it snaps where the hole is.

What happens next? The suspense is killing me!


----------



## turnkey4099 (May 11, 2006)

That's one where the sphincter goes waayyy tight!

Danger is that only part of the tree will begin to fall. I might consider chaining it but the guy doing the falling is obviously a pro and knows what he is doing.

I fell a similar one once back when I thought I knew what I was doing. Wouldn't do it again.

Harry K


----------



## smokechase II (May 11, 2006)

*goop points*

Aggie:
Good call. It didn't happen but that weaker spot about 15 feet up could easily have failed during the fall. This is of course a very big deal has the tree can jack knife at that point and that spot can go backwards, (if failure occurs early), and this portion can then go backwards over the stump or at an angle toward an escape route. This puts this tree in a barber chair level of danger class. 

I'm going to suggest, I wasn't there, that while this cutter looks very good from the photos that despite that this tree should have been dropped by a D-7 Cat or similar piece of falling equipment.

Note the collapse of the tree below the face. There was just too little wood there. No technique could make up for that.

My experience has been the only trees like this that one could argue are safe are the ones where the open area of the stump, (Cat Face) matches the lean and felling direction. You can then put in mini face cuts and book a flight out with the start of the fell at whatever point that is in the back-cut. 

An odd item that can get some use rarely is to cut a pry bar from something dead nearby and pop the thing while being say 10 feet away.


----------



## BlueRidgeMark (May 11, 2006)

"There are very few problems that cannot be solved by a suitable application of high explosives."

If I had that to deal with, I'd be very tempted to saw it down with some C-4!


----------



## smokechaser (May 11, 2006)

yeah
I think I could dump that tree.
If it REALLY needed to come down.


----------



## Newfie_1986 (May 11, 2006)

Yeah I could take it down no problem. First thing id need is a case of Courage (12 pack of coors light gives ya the courage to talk to the hottest women and take out the dangerous trees). After the about 8 bottles of courage I would take off my shirt put on my sandals, grunt like a gorrila and fire up the old 55 Rancher with muffler mods !!!!

Then id proceed to stagger to the tree and cut straight through like a real man "beer in one hand saw in the other"!

See boys thats how a real man cuts a tree like that!



lol just so you know im just messing with you all plz never mix beer and chainsaws, also keep the shirts on, and work boots as well and all of the other proper safety equipment.

Darryl


----------



## smokechase II (May 12, 2006)

*need*

FirstSmoke:
It was above a road. Apparently you come from a district that likes to leave hazard trees beside roads.
That would mean something if I was any better off. We may have 1,000 more dead trees than you guys along traveled roads, but yours are bigger and die from more bugs/fungi and are falling all over B&B as we speak. Ours are good for a couple months.

The tree does look like it needed to come down. Just methodology is the question.

With regard to explosives. Probably OK, but any falling technique that requires more concentration on ground level than above on a tree that hazardous is unacceptable. 
This applies to opening beverage containers also.
One nice part about a hollow tree with explosives. Placing the charge inside will gain some increased return deflection of the blast wave. This even with a pyramid stack is a positive. Just removal of the face area wood is all that would be necessary.

Heavy equipment, like a dozer, possibly with a choker cable, is usually a better option.


----------



## Full Skip (May 12, 2006)

Helllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll no. That's out of my league. I wouldn't even think about trying that one.

I'd stand way off and watch somebody do it, though.


----------



## BlueRidgeMark (May 12, 2006)

smokechase II said:


> With regard to explosives. Probably OK, but any falling technique that requires more concentration on ground level than above on a tree that hazardous is unacceptable.
> ...
> One nice part about a hollow tree with explosives. Placing the charge inside will gain some increased return deflection of the blast wave. This even with a pyramid stack is a positive. Just removal of the face area wood is all that would be necessary.




No sweat. A block or two of C-4 on the face would do the trick, and could be placed in much less time than it takes to cut, with MORE attention overhead. 

Less time in the danger zone, more ability to pay attention to overhead dangers (C-4 won't cut you!), and a big kaboom.

What's not to like? :biggrinbounce2: 


Okay, I agree - pulling would be safer.  

Spoilsport!


----------



## Treeman67 (May 12, 2006)

*how to fall small trunk tree*

i need some option from you all ,some info about how to fall small trunk base app 15'' to 20'' height tree is 25' to 50' tall. the trouble i had is by time i make face cut and back cutting it pinch my bar and i had no room put my wedges in becuz my chainsaw is in the way. the tree become unstable.once i decided to put wedges on the side and pounded in i may be lucky to get my chainsaw out and rewedges into center and still not going forward. i had few experience those tree felled backward and sideway. those lodgepole and Jack-pine are so unpredictable than any tree i ever felling, i am asking you if you know any method fell this kind safely. i do have rope rackets with 150 ' long rope and push-pole to pushed down but there time these option is not available
i appreciates if you can shared this info and experiences i can use to fall safely
Treeman67


----------



## sawn_penn (May 12, 2006)

... stack some smaller wood up against the base and set it on fire again!


----------



## romeo (May 12, 2006)

I would have fel it with a Mossberg.


----------



## smokechase II (May 13, 2006)

*hollow trees and wedges*

I would suggest that on trees where there is this little wood to work with, skip any wedging period. Ship any back-cutting prior to face cutting etc.
Drop with lean, and yes use a face cut. The tree needs a two stage release. The face provides the first part of the release and gives it an initial direction. The back-cut completes the release. Just back-cutting means you want lots of splitting action. Not good.
Don't think twice about boring on significantly hollow trees. Bad idea. Pinched bar and faller with funny look on his face wondering how to save saw.

Again, picture a choker cable going through the area below where the cutter put the face, (utilize the two holes). Pulling out that wood with no one around. That is the wood that is supporting the tree and there isn't enough wood in the rear to hold anything once it is gone. Of course, there would be plenty of splitting action with this technique or blasting. It’s just that no one has to be in the danger zone when stuff hits the fan.


----------



## Rigger (May 14, 2006)

H'mmmm,

Q: Can you SAFELY fall this?........NO,....Can you get it on the ground without getting hurt.....possibly.....are there better way's to deal with it.....Yes..... But I am there the saws topped up, sharp, running good, that's what makes us all individuals. 
Good one, you asked for thoughts and prediction of outcome.
That's not fair, we gotta see the whole tree. 

Well it's these that can get y'a, in my oppinion this guy knows what he's doing, he chose a good spot higher up (good move), it can't take of his nose if it barberchaired up, I doubt that it would going by the pics but you gotta minimize the risk, he chose the meateast spot (good move). He was smart enough to use a face cut and kept it small (good move). presuming he kept up this skill level up throughout the backcut I predict all when't well. Give the man TWO


----------



## smokechase II (May 14, 2006)

*photos*

Rigger:
The photos came to me and I did crop them for posting. But I didn't exclude any of the tree. Sorry I don't have any more of a whole tree picture or description. 
I thought aggie did very well as the first responder. What he suggested didn't happen obviously, but it was a solid legit concern.
The cutter looks skilled from what we can see in the photos. As you point out, he went above that one hole on the off-side to get more wood and less chance of a surprise. His face looks to be perfect for the situation. I know of no way to cut something like this without getting some type of collapse. {I'm ruling out cutting at the base}
Perhaps the lean is so substantial that the faller knew this was going to happen and that direction was assured because of the lean and with that he would be fine. 
Even with that, "I'm going to suggest, I wasn't there, that while this cutter looks very good from the photos that despite that this tree should have been dropped by a D-7 Cat or similar piece of falling equipment."
I think that it was just too close to a limit for any chain saw operation. 
Swan Penn’s burn it some more is done at times. Usually it is with a fire still going at the base, (I've not heard of a re-start - but that is possible), and a decent bit of stoking with a crew that expects it to come down in 15 minutes and it takes 2 hours.
Hitting it with another tree accurately and powerfully is what most fallers do, despite rules on that. Of course, that is problematic.


----------



## Gypo Logger (May 14, 2006)

More importantly than the dynamics of falling yet "just another snag", is smokechase II's first picture. It is totaly awsome and looks like a limited edition print. If I were to walk into an art shop I would buy that pic in a heart beat. Just the way it is slightly over exposed in the foreground and the green in the background with the mist makes it a real gem and a once in a lifetime shot.
I saved it as by background although it comes up a wee bit distorted.
John


----------



## Gypo Logger (May 14, 2006)

BTW, with regard to felling that snag. This is where a fast saw and a sharp chain is an absolute must. No bigger danger than chewing away at it with a dull Muckaluck.
There is no doubt it could be approached with several methods, all of them successful, but you want to be prepared for any jackknife that may happen as it's mostly a cut and run affair. Not a tree to turn your back on.
One way would be to make a subtle undercut and cut all remaining wood as the back cut as fast as possible with as little attention to direction other than it's natural lean. No need to worry about holding wood on this one.
John


----------



## Husky372 (May 14, 2006)

Those are 2 differant trees aren't they? second has alot more meat to it than first.


----------



## smokechase II (May 14, 2006)

*uncropped photos*

I don't know who took the photos.
I would liked to have seen a movie of the drop to see just how the wood under the face buckled. But that is asking for a lot.
So I'll be quiet and thankful for what we have.

I think it's the same tree.


----------



## coveredinsap (May 26, 2006)

It looks to me like it fell 90 degrees to the right of where he meant it to fall. It sure didn't go with the hinge....it collapsed to the right side.

If that's where the guy was standing when it went down then he's dumber than he looks, and lucky that the base didn't break free, bounce, and spear him like a fish.

I don't think you can cut too many trees like this in a lifetime and live to tell about it.


----------



## Reddog (May 26, 2006)

Nope closed the face. Went the direction he had it aimed. And left some holding wood to keep it from ending up at the bottom of the hill. Chunk the top sections out and cut it free from the stump and your done. Fall a lot dead rotted crap that is just as bad. It just weeds out the wantabe know it alls thru natural selection.


----------



## smokechase II (May 27, 2006)

*fell in face direction*

Coveredinsap:

I don't see what you're seeing.
It looks to me like it went where it was faced or within 5 degrees of that.
Can't say for sure as we, (the photographer), are at basically a right angle to the face.
We can say it wasn't dropped at a right angle to the face as the cameraman wasn't hit.

Certainly a tree falling unpredictably with so little supporting wood is a major concern.


----------



## coveredinsap (May 27, 2006)

Look at the "sufficient undercut" photo.
Look at where the cut is in relationship to the gash in the tree....the undercut is directly opposite the gash.
(Notice the little strip of tree closest to you between the gash (or hole) and the undercut, as this is the piece that remains attached as the tree collapses on the right side of the undercut.)

Now look at the photo "escape route". Notice the part of the undercut still visible on the left side of the stump....90 degrees from the way the tree went. Notice where the gash (or hole) is now in relation to where the tree is laying...the gash is directly facing the camera. The direction that the tree _was supposed to fall_ was directly away from the camera in that photo.

The tree collapsed and fell on the right side of the undercut. It fell 90 degrees to the undercut...or 90 degrees (to the right) from the direction it was intended to go.


----------



## rbtree (May 27, 2006)

I don't think so, sap. I don't see any of the undercut left on the back side of the stump. Also, it looks like the tree peeled off, taking the entire undercut area with it, maybe with more wood on the right side, so perhaps it did fall a bit to the right. But the photos make it look like it fell within 20 degrees of where it was faced. 

Regardless of what happened, that scenario isn't something I'd have wanted to have to deal with. I've felled more than a few trees with major defects, many with the potential to damage structures if they fell wrong.

Maybe you should stick to forge-ry


----------



## coveredinsap (May 27, 2006)

rbtree said:


> I don't think so, sap. I don't see any of the undercut left on the back side of the stump. Also, it looks like the tree peeled off, taking the entire undercut area with it, maybe with more wood on the right side, so perhaps it did fall a bit to the right. But the photos make it look like it fell within 20 degrees of where it was faced.
> 
> Regardless of what happened, that scenario isn't something I'd have wanted to have to deal with. I've felled more than a few trees with major defects, many with the potential to damage structures if they fell wrong.
> 
> Maybe you should stick to forge-ry



LOL! Maybe you should stick to whatever it is you do....and hopefully it isn't trees, cause if you can't see by those photos that the tree collapsed 90 degrees to the undercut, then I sure would't advise hiring you for any tree work. Maybe you're better at trimming bushes and shrubbery though.


----------



## smokechase II (May 27, 2006)

*Look at the axe handle*

Sap:
The photographer was moving so we don't have an easy to visualize point of reference thing going for us.
But, look at the axe handle. The face cut is facing almost directly away from that handle and the tree appears to have been dropped almost directly with the face direction from this angle, utilizing the axe handle as a point of reference.
Granted, from behind it would be more clear as to how many degrees it varied, but it certainly isn't anywhere close to 90 degrees.
You can also see the undercut centered in the slab, also indicating that the face direction was the basic felling direction.

Although I'll stick to my thought process, that for the good of the arborsite order, this tree was really too dangerous to fall by chainsaw, that being related to insufficient wood and possible collapsing prior to a controlled fall.

Just because you get away with something, say the drunk driving I did in my youth, doesn't mean it was OK. Luck is no sub for skill and knowledge.


----------



## Lakeside53 (May 27, 2006)

coveredinsap said:


> LOL! Maybe you should stick to whatever it is you do....and hopefully it isn't trees, cause if you can't see by those photos that the tree collapsed 90 degrees to the undercut, then I sure would't advise hiring you for any tree work. Maybe you're better at trimming bushes and shrubbery though.





What are you doing in this forum SAp? Too many knives in the chainsaws forum for you?

O.k., so just how many trees have you felled? over 10 feet high that is, and 2 inches caliper!

Why don't you stick to things you have experience with... and do it on another site. Google is no subsitute for cutting wood.

I'm sure RB will respond approriately... the only thing you seem to stick to is being the resident expert big-mouth idiot.


----------



## Lakeside53 (May 27, 2006)

smokechase II said:


> Luck is no sub for skill and knowledge.




well said.. I'm living proof of that... getting better, but...


----------



## coveredinsap (May 27, 2006)

smokechase II said:


> Sap:
> The photographer was moving so we don't have an easy to visualize point of reference thing going for us.



Sure you do...look at the tree. It has a big gash in it for a reference. Then look at the undercut. Look at the undercut in relation to the gash...it is directly opposite. Finally, look at the photo with the tree down, and look for the gash again. Then look for the remains of the undercut. Loook at the direction that the tree went in relation to the gash, as confirmed by the remains of the undercut.

Do not look at anything other than the tree, as those things are changeable and are unreliable as a reference, and only serve to confuse the issue.
For all you know the guy could have ran back in and posed after the tree was down. Study the tree, not the inconsequential surrounding objects.


----------



## smokechase II (May 27, 2006)

*things match*

Look at the face and the slab down, look at the wood before and after.

Does anybody else see what Sap is seeing?

It looks incredibly clear to me that the tree went basically or almost exactly the face direction.

The wood, the axe handle, the face, the background, the foreground. It is all there.
I think that your premise that the undercut is directly opposite the gash is where you got off on the wrong foot. Look at that again and you'll see your error.

All the Best


----------



## coveredinsap (May 27, 2006)

If it indeed went in the direction of the undercut as you say, then the hinge wouldn't be where it is...on the uncut surface of the tree to the side of the undercut.


----------



## smokechase II (May 27, 2006)

*face cut size*

Look at the size of the face.
The cutter clearly put in a small face.
Look at how far around the backside of the tree the back cut went before leaving a small hinge there.

The reason for this small face is obvious. Imminent collapse.

Not only do the photos show a small face in the same basic direction as the fell, but you couldn't have put in a large face as you wish to describe, (I.e. opposite the gash), as the tree would have could have come over without any back-cut or the bar would have pinched prior to completing the face.

An easy to use reference is that the photographer was at the same angle for both the "sufficient" and "escape" photos. Just picture how far that back cut is going from the escape photo onto the sufficient photo and you'll see that the face is clearly not opposite the gash.


----------



## rbtree (May 27, 2006)

smokechase, you need to check out a few of this idiot sap's other posts, and you'll see what the fool is on about.


Sap, you have gone and done it, you 100% imbecilic fool.... You are not worthy of cleaning the dirt off my shoes......

I step on insignificant crickets like you...

It's time for you to go away....


----------



## sawn_penn (May 27, 2006)

I'm sure that sap hasn't told us about his decades of experience as a faller on firegrounds.... 

The drop looked good to me.


----------



## Reddog (May 27, 2006)

SmokechaseII, It was a clean fall as I stated earlier.

This sap is an idiot running around the forums like a case of heartburn. I am sure in his next post he will list all his jobs doing pro falling and logging. Oh and he is surely a Certed fire liner also.


----------



## smokechase II (May 27, 2006)

*I feel better now*

Thanks guys:

Hey RB:
Whatever happened to the former Hotshot fire fighter in your Doug Fir photos?

Is it possible to get permission from you and him to use any of those photos on a non-profit but falling educational basis?

Thanks again.


----------



## rbtree (May 27, 2006)

wiley hasn't been returning my calls the last week or so. He has a bum back, but had he seen this thread, I'm sure he'd have complimented the faller, and chewed sap and even bigger azzhole than I did. 

I'm honored that you'd like to use some of my photos. So feel free, and thanks for asking.


----------



## coveredinsap (May 27, 2006)

rbtree said:


> smokechase, you need to check out a few of this idiot sap's other posts, and you'll see what the fool is on about.
> 
> 
> Sap, you have gone and done it, you 100% imbecilic fool.... You are not worthy of cleaning the dirt off my shoes......
> ...



LOL! I wouldn't hire you to _clean_ my shoes let alone work on my trees. (And judging by your comments, that's horse dung on your shoes..and you're full of it.)
Again, look at the tree, not the purported photographer "angle". The tree tells the story, not what your eye may think is the direction from where the photographer was standing. You guys talk about being 'pros' ...but I'm sorry, I don't see it here.

Again, if that tree fell in the direction of the face cut then the hinge wouldn't look like it does.


----------



## Husky372 (May 27, 2006)

Why does anyone bother responding to this idiot who is all covered in sap:jester: . He is obviously just some punk kid playing on the computer trying to get a rise out of people. The more he post the more the fool he is known to be.:notrolls2: The tree went where it was supposed to.


----------



## LarryTheCableGuy (May 27, 2006)

Right on David. Most of the things that he says is only because he feels safe hiding behind his keyboard. He also hides behind a private mailbox and offers absolutely no warranty on HIS products.

Also, I think that he wants to get banned so that he can be a victim and blame others.
.


----------



## rbtree (May 27, 2006)

Sap, you have been 100% refuted, all by pro tree guys....and yet you refuse to admit you are wrong...you who know relatively nothing about falling trees...and obviously can't even analyze several photos. 

I wonder, have you ever in your life, not stuck your nose in where it does not belong, and, have you ever admitted when you were wrong, and, have you ever laughed......?

Give it up, fool, you have been PWNED.... :blob5: 

Darin, methinx you should erase this idiot's posts from what was a very good thread, till it got stunk up to high heaven.


----------



## 04ultra (May 27, 2006)

RB I trust your opinion on cutting trees down and really like the info you provide to this site ..For you to have someone piss on your shoes is down right wrong.. The writing is on the wall ..


----------



## rbtree (May 27, 2006)

Thanks, ultra....I haven't felled a tree or dropped a top on a house....



...


..yet...







course I've only cut a few little fellas in the last 32 odd years...boy some of em have been odd....


----------



## clearance (May 27, 2006)

All bow down to Sap, the old west coast faller, been falling spruces and cedars that are 10'-14' at the butt, over 200' tall. Master of the dutchman, domino king, bull bucker now showing the men how its done. Wrote the manual on big wood falling, authority beyond compare, I am so unworthy to even replace the caulks in his boots.


----------



## SpookHollow (Jun 3, 2006)

*Hollow Tree*

I just registered at this site. The first thing I see is a hollow tree being felled and questions about safety or procedure. I have to say, where I come from, a logger will cut at least one a day. Sometimes is worse condition than that one. Usually, when there are no obstructions or risks in the immediate area, I simply take a good look at the tree before deciding how to get it down. It appears the sawyer has plenty of places to go. A good logger will take it down even if it can't be used for pulp because it is a danger to everything else within reach and at any second it could fall on it's own. Preferably I'd use a skidder or other nearby tree to get it on the ground. If all by the saw, just take time and do it as safe as possible. Also I did notice the road and it sure looked like the tree could reach. 
Where is Soren Ericson when ya need him? HA!


----------



## smokechase II (Jun 4, 2006)

*same guy?*

Did you mean Soren Erikkson? GOL guy.

The equipment or other tree choices are the most common in the NW also.


----------



## Ekka (Jun 4, 2006)

Dont know how I missed this thread.

I cross examined the pics, pasted one ontop of the other and wella, great fell job is my conclusion.

I would say it went pretty much right on the money.


----------



## SpookHollow (Jun 4, 2006)

*Yeah that's the guy!*

Smokechase, you got me. I always hear the name when I am in certain CE logging courses. I never gave any thought to the way his name was spelled. I do use some of the techniques he teaches when needed though! Thanks for the correct spelling.


----------



## smokechase II (Jun 4, 2006)

*give credit*

I'll see if I can dig up the name of the cutter.
Give a little credit where it is due.


----------



## smokechase II (Jun 4, 2006)

*logging course*

You refer to a "CE" logging course.
That a Tennessee area thing?
What does it entail?


----------



## tazz001 (Jun 20, 2006)

romeo said:


> I would have fel it with a Mossberg.



muwahahaha!!

I would rather have hubby do it with the 10 gauge browning with a load of #4 for turkey!!


----------



## ArtB (Jul 17, 2006)

Interesting thread as a smaller but similar tree nearly killed me 30+ years ago.

I'm not a pro but have dropped a few like this on my own land (then and since). Nowadays do not have any time or profit pressures and can take my time and have machinery available. Positive control desired esp when there is a building or three nearby. . 

Typically wrap the base a couple of feet above the cut with 3/8 chain to prevent barberpoles, Couple of more cables at 90 degree separation to positively control fall angle, and pull with crawler or winch . 

Nobody could make any money doing it the multiple cable way, but after spending 2 weeks in a hospital in 1974 after dropping a tree on myself allways use at least twice as many and 50% longer than 'needed' cables for problem trees.....


----------



## smokechase II (Jul 18, 2006)

*an example*

A simple way to get a leaner down.


----------

