|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 6/30/2003 Posts: 4,918 Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
Another set of images from another forum, this time posted by 'zeppi-cat' over on LKW-Stefan's ForumI really don't understand this set of pictures? You would think that the rear of this machine would far outweigh that bucket load? Obviously not. Rowan. 1:25th scale CAT 375L excavator
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 12/23/2007 Posts: 346 Location: New Jersey
|
Maybe I am going out on a limb, here, but I am thinking they were screwing around and possibly drove the 993 down the pile directly behind him, which caused the machine to machine to lean forward like that. Does not appear that bucket load could have done this one.
John
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 1/29/2009 Posts: 101 Location: Perth, Western Australia
|
by the looks of how high the bucket would have been in the air at the point before liftoff, and the way he is artic'd im guessing that he is sidecasting dirt from one source to another pile. in saying that though, 993k's are very very (and i cant stress this enough) light in the rear. we have 3 of them at our site ( 2 short booms and 1 long boom), and if u have a decent bucket of dirt tramming in second gear as u would be, the rear end lifts up if u go over the slightest bump or touch the impellar clutch. i have no idea why cat moved the fuel tank from the rear of the machine to the side of it, but its made a big big difference. u can load a 992g/k up with over 30t in the bucket and it doesnt even have the slightest feel that its getting light in the rear end.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 6/1/2006 Posts: 4,065 Location: Dublin Ireland
|
looks to me like he was reversing,by the way the dirt has fallen from the bucket,Quincy would soon solve this one
Why is "phonetically" spelt with a "ph"? ... It's better to be silent and thought a fool, then to speak up and remove all doubt The complex of Newgrange was originally built between c. 3100 and 2900 BC,[2] meaning that it's aproximately 5,000 years old. According to Carbon-14 dates,[3] it is more than 500 years older than the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, and predates Stonehenge by about 1,000 years.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 3/21/2006 Posts: 5,046 Location: B-town
|
Butler your explanation sounds right-on, though what would I know anyway.
But it would be a great resource for Norscot.
They could use these photos to see what the inside of the front and perhaps the rear wheels look like. Plus they could see what the wheel and tire as a whole look like and how they are in proportion to the machine.....just a wishful bit of thinking.
Chris
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 7/21/2007 Posts: 1,765 Location: Derbyshire,UK
|
Maybe he was driving down the heap with the bucket raised and it became front heavy?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 2/8/2008 Posts: 4,167 Location: Anchorage, AK
|
Interesting stuff.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 10/7/2005 Posts: 2,495 Location: Shetland
|
Would the weight of the arms, bucket and load really be enough to topple her forward like that?. If so, wow, that's kinda unsafe in my book But if Ulf Contruction had anything to do with it then who knows what happened, infact we'll probably never know....
Scania V8. The best sounding truck in the world.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 2/8/2008 Posts: 4,167 Location: Anchorage, AK
|
^^^I'm pretty sure the results wouldn't be so benign...
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 12/27/2003 Posts: 1,628 Location: Australia
|
I am sure a few of you remember that small Cat loader on youtube that drives along balancing on his front wheels and while i am sure this guy was not trying to emulate him it shows that it can be done quite easily when you try and probably just as easy when you don,t!!
I was told this material is quite heavy they were moving and to tip it up like that and have the bucket/lift arms at that height i am suggesting the operator did not move them from the time things started to go wrong. I would say a combination of heavy breaking going forward with the bucket high in the air whilst articulated did the trick.
If the engine could run and still have oil pressure on that angle i would be surprised but even lowering the boom in that pos would have brought the back down untill it went over centre and it would have slammed down so the dirt at the rear should catch it when they elevate the front.
OK Tedi mine presents plenty of challenges!!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 9/30/2008 Posts: 762 Location: Northeast, PA
|
I think a 993K handstand = required change of pants for the operator.
-Dave
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 12/15/2005 Posts: 1,010 Location: U.S.A.
|
I've looked at these for a considerable period of time, and have come to the conclusion that the photos are staged. It just doesn't look "natural". Here's my reasoning; 1) Although it's a wet site; the first and third photos show tracks in the mud so it is an active area, so why are there no tire marks fore or aft the the front axle of the loader? They wouldn't just leave it there like that I hope. 2) The pile of material in front of the loader and what's still in the bucket. While the pile in front of the machine looks tapered in a way that would have happened with the bucket slamming down. Why is this material pile a few feet away from the bucket? 3) Relating to point #2; if the loader had tipped over like this and the operator reversed the machine, the bucket would have dug into the ground like a plough with that much weight on it (and left a mark), not to mention no tire marks. I'm open to conflicting opinions and points of view, and actually enjoy them. What do you guys (and girls) think? Please use this before clicking "post"??? You may be surprised with what you see!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 9/8/2003 Posts: 733 Location: In The Pit
|
Photos stagged? You think that mines let you get away with stuff like that for s&*ts and giggles???
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 6/1/2006 Posts: 4,065 Location: Dublin Ireland
|
i still think he had a bucket full and at full height,he reversed back up onto the pile of stone a bit then she tipped forward,that ground looks like that hard pack stone or rock,almost like the hardcore thats layed before a roadbed
Why is "phonetically" spelt with a "ph"?
... It's better to be silent and thought a fool, then to speak up and remove all doubt
The complex of Newgrange was originally built between c. 3100 and 2900 BC,[2] meaning that it's aproximately 5,000 years old. According to Carbon-14 dates,[3] it is more than 500 years older than the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, and predates Stonehenge by about 1,000 years.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 6/27/2007 Posts: 2,647 Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta
|
Shovelman wrote: I've looked at these for a considerable period of time, and have come to the conclusion that the photos are staged. It just doesn't look "natural".
Here's my reasoning;
1) Although it's a wet site; the first and third photos show tracks in the mud so it is an active area, so why are there no tire marks fore or aft the the front axle of the loader? They wouldn't just leave it there like that I hope.
2) The pile of material in front of the loader and what's still in the bucket. While the pile in front of the machine looks tapered in a way that would have happened with the bucket slamming down. Why is this material pile a few feet away from the bucket?
3) Relating to point #2; if the loader had tipped over like this and the operator reversed the machine, the bucket would have dug into the ground like a plough with that much weight on it (and left a mark), not to mention no tire marks.
I'm open to conflicting opinions and points of view, and actually enjoy them. What do you guys (and girls) think?
I don't believe the pictures are staged. Hard ground doesn't tend to leave large tire tracks, but if you look closely in front of the front tires in all of the pics, you can see a faint imprint on the ground where the tire track is. You can also see the drag marks from where the bucket was dragged backwards across the ground and away form the dirt pile on the ground. There is no reason that the bucket would dig into the ground like a plow, since the wear materials on the bottom of the bucket are meant to act like a shoe to wear evenly against the ground. Add to this that the pictures are not sufficiently clear to allow us to see any real detail on the ground, and I think you have the reasoning that it doesn't look natural to all who see it.. Brian
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 6/27/2007 Posts: 2,647 Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta
|
Ace797 wrote:Photos stagged? You think that mines let you get away with stuff like that for s&*ts and giggles??? Hey, you're still alive!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 6/21/2003 Posts: 728
|
Interesting ... Maybe the guy backed onto the pile due to Visability issues? And maybe the pictures are staggered .. Might have been sitting there for days .. Any one ever watch the Gong show?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 12/19/2006 Posts: 2,474 Location: Minnesota
|
These make me smile every time I see them. I am 99.9% sure that these are definitely not staged. A full angle turn with a full bucket at full height and running over a rock pile on the left side (with a light rear end like was stated above)...timber! That poor guy though... "I am going to kill that camera guy..." - Chris
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 1/28/2009 Posts: 303 Location: california
|
i wonder how the guy got off? and why did he just leave it there instead of putting it back down?
-Brett
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Member
Joined: 7/15/2006 Posts: 340 Location: charlotte, nc
|
I don't think they are staged, as said the tracks and bucket scrape mark are in the right place. Two more points:
1. If you look closely in picture 2 you can see the operator with his legs propped up on the right side of the cab to support himself as he awaits rescue. Smart enough not to slam down a multi-million dollar loader at least.
2. In picture 3 you can see quite an oil slick where the extreme tilt angle drained some of the engine oil.
Edit: Chris posted his pic while I was writing this, Guess you don't have to look REAL close to see the operator!
Mike
|
|
Guest |