IMHO if you were cutting trees that were leaners or hollow witout a
chain and you were taught that way you sure had a lousy teacher that
is pretty enept in safety. There is probably ore folks killed or hurt
cutting those type trees than you can imagine. I saw one fellow who
cut a leaner, and it split open, jumped up and back down, and in the
process it caught him in the split. He had a safety path cleared, but
he was on the opposite side and had to go around the back side of the
tree to get to it.



On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:56:07 -0600, zxcvbob
wrote:

===Stephen M. Henning wrote:
=== zxcvbob wrote:
===
===
===Stephen M. Henning wrote:
===
===One of the most dangerous times in using a chair saw is when starting a
===gasoline saw.
===
===No it's not. The chain doesn't start moving until the motor is reved high
===enough to engage the clutch. A modern saw will have a chain brake, and if
===it's engaged the blade will not turn even if you rev it up. And they don't
===rev very fast when first starting. It is possible to cut yourself when
===starting a saw without the chain brake set, but there are lots of cutting
===situations that are *much* more dangerous (like felling a big sycamore tree
===or a leaning tree without first wrapping a logging chain around the trunk
===to keep it from splitting, or trimming limbs while standing on a ladder.)
===
===
=== Bob, the first thing the logger that trained me to use woods tools
=== including chain saws taught me was:
===
=== "What would happen if what you thought was going to happen didn't
=== happen?"
===
=== In this case if you start a saw in such a way that you are depending
=== upon a safety brake working, you are not operating safely. The reason
=== the safety brake was put on saws was to protect inept operators. A
=== properly trained operator doesn't assume that such features are going to
=== save his life.
===
=== You mentioned a couple more of the most dangerous times a person uses a
=== chain saw. In the years I worked in the woods, I saw more injuries
=== happen when not actually cutting trees.
===
=== By the way, when I worked on a Forest Service crew we didn't carry
=== logging chains or ladders with us. We had ropes, spotters and escape
=== paths.
===
===
===I'm sure if you search for it you can find someone who cut his foot off
==="drop-starting" a saw, but you can probably also find someone who
===drowned by drinking a glass of milk if you search hard enough.
===
===Saws don't kickback when you start them. And it takes a second for them
===to rev up from zero to fast enough to engage the centrifugal clutch.
===Starting a saw -- chain brake or not -- is not particularly dangerous
===unless you are up a ladder or in a tree when you're doing it.
===
===You can get a nasty cut from a freshly sharpened chain when the saw is
===not even running.
===
===My big saw has no chain brake, and IIRC it has a symetrical bar. I used
===to climb ladders with it when I was young and stupid. Now, I only use
===it on the ground. I have a tiny saw (Echo CS3000) I can climb with. If
===I need a big saw up in a tree, I'll hire a professional to do it.
===
===I don't believe you worked for the Forest Service without a chain or
===cable to wrap around the trunk of leaning or hollow trees when you
===felled them. The danger here is that the tree trunk will split suddenly
===without warning and come crashing straight down on top of you, or the
===back side of the split flies up and hits you in the chin and takes your
===head off. An escape path doesn't help very much.
===
===Best regards,
===Bob

Visit my website: http://www.frugalmachinist.com
Opinions expressed are those of my wifes,
I had no input whatsoever.
Remove "nospam" from email addy.

(Roy) wrote:

He had a safety path cleared, but
he was on the opposite side and had to go around the back side of the
tree to get to it.

That is not a safety path, that is just a path. A safety path never
goes behind a tree. That is the area a person is intent on getting away
from.

--
Pardon my spam deterrent; send email to
http://home.earthlink.net/~rhodyman

Did not say it was behind the tree. I said he cut it to one side, but
wound up on the opposite side and would have had to go back behind
the tree to get to his cleared safety path............


On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:39:30 GMT, "Stephen M. Henning"
wrote:

(Roy) wrote:
===
=== He had a safety path cleared, but
=== he was on the opposite side and had to go around the back side of the
=== tree to get to it.
===
===That is not a safety path, that is just a path. A safety path never
===goes behind a tree. That is the area a person is intent on getting away
===from.

Visit my website: http://www.frugalmachinist.com
Opinions expressed are those of my wifes,
I had no input whatsoever.
Remove "nospam" from email addy.

Did not say it was behind the tree. I said he cut it to one side, but
wound up on the opposite side and would have had to go back behind
the tree to get to his cleared safety path............


On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:39:30 GMT, "Stephen M. Henning"
wrote:

(Roy) wrote:
===
=== He had a safety path cleared, but
=== he was on the opposite side and had to go around the back side of the
=== tree to get to it.
===
===That is not a safety path, that is just a path. A safety path never
===goes behind a tree. That is the area a person is intent on getting away
===from.

Visit my website: http://www.frugalmachinist.com
Opinions expressed are those of my wifes,
I had no input whatsoever.
Remove "nospam" from email addy.

(Roy) wrote:

Did not say it was behind the tree. I said he cut it to one side, but
wound up on the opposite side and would have had to go back behind
the tree to get to his cleared safety path............

Obviously if you are going to work both sides of a tree, you have two
safety paths. The path on the other side of the tree is not a safety
path, never ever. Only the path on the side a person is on is a safety
path. The other is a death path as you verified.

They have an award for people who do things like this. It is usually
awarded posthumously.

--
Pardon my spam deterrent; send email to
http://home.earthlink.net/~rhodyman

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 02:33:29 GMT, (Roy) wrote:

So you got bit by a pole saw also. I did too. Never even come close to
having an accident with a chainsaw while in a tree but a pole saw made
one heck of a nasty cut on my left arm. I liked to have not ever
gotten back out of that tree.

I like the Corona brand or the tri cut blades. They cut fast, but if
you do get a pole saw or a pruning saw get a scabbord to go withit.
Its often just tossed in a box or a traielr etc and it seems so
unlikely to hurt anyone just laying there, but when they bite its
usually a bad bite.
Absolutely--plus, the blade gets dull much faster kicking around losse
like that.

If you ever get a few extra bucks, buy a Silky brand saw (I have a
silky hand saw, but rarely use my pole so it is more generic). The
cuts are cleaner, faster, and smoother. The blades are thick enough
to resist buckling in a tight kerf. The saw handle is thick, coated
with rubber (or something like it)--feels very nice in the hand. My
hand saw, with plastic scabbard, was about $60. A new Fanno tri-cut
and a leather or belted scabbard will run about $45 or $50. I think
it's well worth the extra money, though it was tough getting over the
hump since I already had a scabbard when I bought it. Replacement
blades are pretty high, too, but again I think it's worth it.

Keith


For more info about the International Society of Arboriculture, please visit http://www.isa-arbor.com/home.asp.
For consumer info about tree care, visit http://www.treesaregood.com/