Looking for Soft Dutchman against the Lean Video

[northmanlogging]

It doesn't matter what wood you're working in, gravity is the same. I'll have take another couple of minutes out of my day and do another couple of sketches to prove it . I was waiting for you guys to show how with a diagram how it's possible but the lead paint levels must have been a bit higher over your way than here, I hoping they won't be too complex to understand, an engineer would grasp them easily.
Tanks

And there it is, yer an engineer, or at least claim to be, and a surveyor, so you deal in the hard set rules of bureaucracy. If its not taken out of the box and used to beat you with it your never going to understand.

Swingin trees is real life, not paper, not a computer sketch thought up by some college grad for a doctorate in theoretical timber falling...

4 days a week, soon to be 3 I'm a machinist, like the real kind, its my job to take some engineers pipe dream and make it a reality, and engineers have earned a reputation of having no basis in reality sorry but its true.

Does not matter if its dirt projects, aircraft or space craft, this **** they come up with is simply astounding in its ineffectiveness, overthought, over toleranced, and expensiveness. When if they just shut up about their college degree in whatever, and spend 15 minutes with the lowly grunts they could improve things 10 fold daily...

Rant over...

to reiterate, the first cut in the soft dutch, effectively changes the lean of the tree, from nearly 180, to closer to 150, the second to 100, the third if needed gets you in the 30 deg range notice how it exponentially increases. Think of each step of the soft dutch as another face cut, each one directing the tree more and more away from its natural lean.

In essence you say you can only fall them max 90 deg from the lean or C.O.G (lean is easier to type by the way...) but that first dutch is only 90 deg to the lean, or less, and if we where to then hypothetically make a face from that cut, the tree would then fallow that face yes? The steps are merely continuing that process around to where you want it to ultimately fall, its "final destination" if you will. By making the back cut you allow the tree to both pick up momentum, and turn into each new "face" or step, just like falling a tree 90 to its lean, but doing it 5 or so times in just a a few seconds.

Further more. By making steps, rather then full face cuts, we can stop the movement and then steer it towards the new direction, incrementally. (though stopping isn't really the right word... cause stopping movement sort of ruins a good step dutch swing, remember its about the momentum objects in motion or some bull **** hey another enginear...)

And honestly falling timber is dangerous, but this method is fairly safe in comparison to some others, the hold wood, the wood facing you, the "faller" never gets touched by the saw, unlike a conventional fall em with the lean method, where once the face has been cut up, all the support of the compression wood is gone and suddenly there is massive weight on the tension "back" wood, which is then weakened by sawing into it, sometimes causing a chair.

In other words go find yerself some annoying leaner out in the bushes somewheres and try it, give yerself a whole bunch of escape paths and bring some ass paper...

 

[Bwildered]

And there it is, yer an engineer, or at least claim to be, and a surveyor, so you deal in the hard set rules of bureaucracy. If its not taken out of the box and used to beat you with it your never going to understand.

Swingin trees is real life, not paper, not a computer sketch thought up by some college grad for a doctorate in theoretical timber falling...

4 days a week, soon to be 3 I'm a machinist, like the real kind, its my job to take some engineers pipe dream and make it a reality, and engineers have earned a reputation of having no basis in reality sorry but its true.

Does not matter if its dirt projects, aircraft or space craft, this **** they come up with is simply astounding in its ineffectiveness, overthought, over toleranced, and expensiveness. When if they just shut up about their college degree in whatever, and spend 15 minutes with the lowly grunts they could improve things 10 fold daily...

Rant over...

to reiterate, the first cut in the soft dutch, effectively changes the lean of the tree, from nearly 180, to closer to 150, the second to 100, the third if needed gets you in the 30 deg range notice how it exponentially increases. Think of each step of the soft dutch as another face cut, each one directing the tree more and more away from its natural lean.

In essence you say you can only fall them max 90 deg from the lean or C.O.G (lean is easier to type by the way...) but that first dutch is only 90 deg to the lean, or less, and if we where to then hypothetically make a face from that cut, the tree would then fallow that face yes? The steps are merely continuing that process around to where you want it to ultimately fall, its "final destination" if you will. By making the back cut you allow the tree to both pick up momentum, and turn into each new "face" or step, just like falling a tree 90 to its lean, but doing it 5 or so times in just a a few seconds.

Further more. By making steps, rather then full face cuts, we can stop the movement and then steer it towards the new direction, incrementally. (though stopping isn't really the right word... cause stopping movement sort of ruins a good step dutch swing, remember its about the momentum objects in motion or some bull **** hey another enginear...)

And honestly falling timber is dangerous, but this method is fairly safe in comparison to some others, the hold wood, the wood facing you, the "faller" never gets touched by the saw, unlike a conventional fall em with the lean method, where once the face has been cut up, all the support of the compression wood is gone and suddenly there is massive weight on the tension "back" wood, which is then weakened by sawing into it, sometimes causing a chair.

In other words go find yerself some annoying leaner out in the bushes somewheres and try it, give yerself a whole bunch of escape paths and bring some ass paper...

Alas no , I'm not an engineer or a surveyor, just a fairly qualified wannabe wood butcher, they teach you structural appreciation so you don't look like a complete idiot when an engineer explains a design to you & if something seems to be too far fetched to be possible you have the skills to double check the design basics, the surveying is just so we can set out accurately & make sure things are plumb so the don't have a tendency to fall over leaning too much,
but growing up on the land in the bush cutting down trees with hatchets & axes since the age of 5 , which is over 50 years ago, you get to know what trees can & can't do, I can see exactly what you guys are doing & have explaned it fairly thoroughly, as you have given no reasonable explanations or diagrams showing how the COG can possibly swing or pass around the stump 180' from the COG lean it can be taken that it's just heresay. Furthermore there is no reference from plumb to the lean in any of the vids, yours or anybody elses , so that's heresay that there is a lean in the said direction with no proof at all that a lean exists in that direction at all, if you want make it believable & provable all the information needs to be clearly presented, so far it hasn't so it's not really believable, also there is no mention of how much lean is present, is it 4", 1 ft or 4 ft?
as you can tell I'm not an easy person to convince, we have a saying down here which goes like " when something seems to be too good to be true, it usually is"
Saneski

 

[HuskStihl]

Here's a thought. Mr. Wildered is trolling y'all. Nothing wrong with that, I do it to my tinfoil hat wearing friends on the political forum from time to time. No matter what y'all post, Mr. Wildered will never admit you are right. He has quite skillfully manipulated the situation to where he is in an authority position, and y'all are playing right into his hands. The burden of proof has been assigned to y'all, and he is the self appointed judge of the validity of y'all's posts. I doubt Mr. Wildered really cares how much a tree can be turned from its lay.

 

[bnmc98]

Here's a thought. Mr. Wildered is trolling y'all. Nothing wrong with that, I do it to my tinfoil hat wearing friends on the political forum from time to time. No matter what y'all post, Mr. Wildered will never admit you are right. He has quite skillfully manipulated the situation to where he is in an authority position, and y'all are playing right into his hands. The burden of proof has been assigned to y'all, and he is the self appointed judge of the validity of y'all's posts. I doubt Mr. Wildered really cares how much a tree can be turned from its lay.

He's only in authority if we keep trying to prove to him what he doesn't want to see.
Whats real is real:
we can swing trees
he can't
with all his logic, he cant figure it out
he's bullheaded and prideful and ignorant about the situation.
he's caught up in semantics.
So outside of arguing, he really has no control.

All we have to do is walk away quietly and he will still be wrong.

 

[bitzer]

And there it is, yer an engineer, or at least claim to be, and a surveyor, so you deal in the hard set rules of bureaucracy. If its not taken out of the box and used to beat you with it your never going to understand.

Swingin trees is real life, not paper, not a computer sketch thought up by some college grad for a doctorate in theoretical timber falling...

4 days a week, soon to be 3 I'm a machinist, like the real kind, its my job to take some engineers pipe dream and make it a reality, and engineers have earned a reputation of having no basis in reality sorry but its true.

Does not matter if its dirt projects, aircraft or space craft, this **** they come up with is simply astounding in its ineffectiveness, overthought, over toleranced, and expensiveness. When if they just shut up about their college degree in whatever, and spend 15 minutes with the lowly grunts they could improve things 10 fold daily...

Rant over...

to reiterate, the first cut in the soft dutch, effectively changes the lean of the tree, from nearly 180, to closer to 150, the second to 100, the third if needed gets you in the 30 deg range notice how it exponentially increases. Think of each step of the soft dutch as another face cut, each one directing the tree more and more away from its natural lean.

In essence you say you can only fall them max 90 deg from the lean or C.O.G (lean is easier to type by the way...) but that first dutch is only 90 deg to the lean, or less, and if we where to then hypothetically make a face from that cut, the tree would then fallow that face yes? The steps are merely continuing that process around to where you want it to ultimately fall, its "final destination" if you will. By making the back cut you allow the tree to both pick up momentum, and turn into each new "face" or step, just like falling a tree 90 to its lean, but doing it 5 or so times in just a a few seconds.

Further more. By making steps, rather then full face cuts, we can stop the movement and then steer it towards the new direction, incrementally. (though stopping isn't really the right word... cause stopping movement sort of ruins a good step dutch swing, remember its about the momentum objects in motion or some bull **** hey another enginear...)

And honestly falling timber is dangerous, but this method is fairly safe in comparison to some others, the hold wood, the wood facing you, the "faller" never gets touched by the saw, unlike a conventional fall em with the lean method, where once the face has been cut up, all the support of the compression wood is gone and suddenly there is massive weight on the tension "back" wood, which is then weakened by sawing into it, sometimes causing a chair.

In other words go find yerself some annoying leaner out in the bushes somewheres and try it, give yerself a whole bunch of escape paths and bring some ass paper...

Great explanation Matt! That's dead on what's happening.

 

[Bwildered]

Here's a thought. Mr. Wildered is trolling y'all. Nothing wrong with that, I do it to my tinfoil hat wearing friends on the political forum from time to time. No matter what y'all post, Mr. Wildered will never admit you are right. He has quite skillfully manipulated the situation to where he is in an authority position, and y'all are playing right into his hands. The burden of proof has been assigned to y'all, and he is the self appointed judge of the validity of y'all's posts. I doubt Mr. Wildered really cares how much a tree can be turned from its lay.

If the soft Dutchman method of swinging a tree 180' from the COG lean happens to be proven right, it's right, there hasn't been enough of the crucial info provided to come anywhere near that conclusion yet. Bluster doesn't count nor concern me very much.
The burden of proof is against gravity not me.
Thanski

 

[rwoods]

I wish I lived closer to some of you for some hands on instruction. I appreciate the time many have spend trying to explain things to Bw, but as some have noted he is just having fun. I got sucked in more than once in the previous argument. It doesn't matter the logic there is always some supposed error.

As to an engineer's position from previous thread:

I thought I was done with the tree turning discussion, but I couldn't restrain myself from asking a registered structural engineer today if a tree with a slight natural lean could be felled 180 degrees from the natural lean using only incremental cuts. I told him I was asking due to an ongoing international dispute between loggers. FWIW He said, "Yes." And, if there is any lingering doubt, in both northern and southern hemispheres. However, for safety purposes, he said he would recommend mechanical assistance. I told him I was going to quote him on the internet. He was fine with that.

Ron

Carry on as you please.

Ron

 

[northmanlogging]

I already mentioned I'd done engineering & surveying units at university level & passed with credits, the principals of gravity are quite clear, I'm also a faller & started doing that professionally over 25 years ago, so if you think you're talking to some hairy ar*ed teenager you are sorely mistaken.
Fanks

And now yer just a ******* liar, so quietly please get ******.

 

[Bwildered]

I wish I lived closer to some of you for some hands on instruction. I appreciate the time many have spend trying to explain things to Bw, but as some have noted he is just having fun. I got sucked in more than once in the previous argument. It doesn't matter the logic there is always some supposed error.

As to an engineer's position from previous thread:



Carry on as you please.

Ron

Get him to do the sketch then showing how it's possible then , easy hey!
Or video him showing us how it's possible on a leaning dowel in a vice! No risk of losing him or saw, maybe a chipped nail at worst.
Thansk

 

[Bwildered]

And now yer just a ****ing liar, so quietly please get ****ed.

What I stated is absolutely correct, units of study make up the qualification in the field of study, 24 units make a degree,
I did units of engineering & surveying , but not to get a degree in engineering. Your exiting gotcha moment really wasn't a moment at all.
I learnt long ago to tell the truth, there is less to remember!
Thansk

 

[ArtB]

When the lean puts a few tons of wood on 3 feet on the far side of the outside of the trunk, I always use wire rope for a 180 degree fall.

Even then, sometimes the fall is only 170 degrees opposite the lean.
150ft + black cottonwood, few hundred feet of wire rope, couple of blocks, side rope, etc.
should have moved the backhoe <G>
copied from 'Ford fails FOP test' thread, but maybe appropriate for this thread?

I have seen no one post for how FAR a lean a Dutchman can rotate a tree 180 degrees. 1 degree? Not past edge of trunk? 45 degrees?

I would LOVE to se a video of CS felling a tree 180 deg to the lean with even a 30 degree lean!

 

[rwoods]

Get him to do the sketch then showing how it's possible then , easy hey!
Or video him showing us how it's possible on a leaning dowel in a vice! No risk of losing him or saw, maybe a chipped nail at worst.
Thansk

Bw, re-read post 78 of this thread. If necessary, also re-read post 850 of the previous thread. Or send me $1500 USD and I'll ask him for your unnecessary sketches. It has been over a year now, how are you coming on the "to scale" chainsaw for Jon to cut your dowel. Don't forget the precise instruments to measure the lean so we don't argue over the lean. If you can see it on your short dowel without any instruments then too much lean has been dialed. Ron

 

[Gologit]

Here's a thought. Mr. Wildered is trolling y'all. Nothing wrong with that, I do it to my tinfoil hat wearing friends on the political forum from time to time. No matter what y'all post, Mr. Wildered will never admit you are right. He has quite skillfully manipulated the situation to where he is in an authority position, and y'all are playing right into his hands. The burden of proof has been assigned to y'all, and he is the self appointed judge of the validity of y'all's posts. I doubt Mr. Wildered really cares how much a tree can be turned from its lay.

Exactly right.

 

[madhatte]

Here's a thought. Mr. Wildered is trolling y'all.

I repeat:

I think perhaps it is fun for you to pretend to not understand what we're saying.

 

[Bwildered]

I repeat:

I have been persistently asking for specifics & not fluffing up my feathers in denial of gravity or ganging up hoping the bluff or bluster would pass as evidence against it. It just seems it's too hard a task for the believers go the distance needed to seal the deal on what appears to be the totally impossible.
Thanski

 

[rwoods]

Everyone here including Bw knows that trees are felled everyday with just a chainsaw in a direction different than their standing COG would dictate if no other forces were involved. Just how much lean can be overcome or just how far a tree will turn is open to a debate that can't be resolved in any laboratory setting as the variables are too many. If any can't deal with that fact then too bad. Life is short enough without getting bent out of shape arguing over this. If you enjoy arguing for the sake of argument then carry on. Same if you are trying to educate the masses. If neither, then you are just wasting time trying to win this one.

Ron

 

[bitzer]

I like the fact that everyone is talking again. This thread even pulled Ted out of seclusion.

The facts have been presented. The plumb Bob argument is null because there are kerfs to read. Everything has been given for a conclusion to be made. it will not work with a dowel or broomstick there is no leverage there. Now it is time for Reggie to try for himself on some real trees. Unfortunately this conversation ends here until Reggie has actually tried to swing a tree. Any more talk is only speculation on his part. For it is he that is on trial now. Not those who have succeeded but those that have failed to attempt.

 

[Bwildered]

I like the fact that everyone is talking again. This thread even pulled Ted out of seclusion.

The facts have been presented. The plumb Bob argument is null because there are kerfs to read. Everything has been given for a conclusion to be made. it will not work with a dowel or broomstick there is no leverage there. Now it is time for Reggie to try for himself on some real trees. Unfortunately this conversation ends here until Reggie has actually tried to swing a tree. Any more talk is only speculation on his part. For it is he that is on trial now. Not those who have succeeded but those that have failed to attempt.

I'll use my axe as a plumb bob on any trees that look a bit deceiving in the lean direction , I've been caught out & lost a bit of gear not reading the lean.
From the sketch I gave before, where would I make the cuts to get it to swing a lowly 90', from my experience a tree with that much lean would be lucky to get anymore than 45' in our hardwoods, it would start falling at around 75' to the lean, but it would tear the hinge out on the way down & swing back to around 45'.
Thansk

 

[madhatte]

from my experience a tree with that much lean would be lucky to get anymore than 45' in our hardwoods, it would start falling at around 75' to the lean, but it would tear the hinge out on the way down & swing back to around 45'.

OK, now, that was a useful statement. You are thinking "but I can't do that with our wood" rather than "you can't do that". Fact is, shorter fibers, weaker fibers, or more brittle fibers won't hold as well and will break earlier. I figured this out when I bounced a big sycamore off of a building cleaning up after an ice storm. See, we don't have sycamore here, and this was a planted landscape tree, and I didn't know what to expect from it because I'd never cut sycamore before, but I tried to swing it about 45 degrees anyway. It was having none of that, and a lesson was learned. The building was also unharmed, due to being all-concrete construction, so it was a cheap lesson for me. My point is that you are now acknowledging that understanding what the tree is capable of is a big part of what you can do with it while cutting it.

 

[bitzer]

It's all over, for the, unknown soldier...