In article <[email protected]>, R.H.
<[email protected]> wrote:
> >RH, how about a close up of the text? It looks like it says "2/5 de m/m
> >par haute", which is technically nonsensical, directly translating from
> >french to say "2/5 of m/m by high", but it looks like there's some
> >additional letter(s) at the end of 'haute'.
>
> I think the last letter is a "U", the closest shot of this text that I have
> was the link on my site, same as this one:
>
> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/Album%205/pic860b.jpg
>
>
> >I wonder if it originally had some sort of slider over the top of it
> >with a hairline that made a horizontal bar across the numbers. That
> >would allow someone to set the vertical scale at some value, then look
> >across to the horizontal scale (as determined by the pointer) to make
> >some sort of adjustment.
>
> >RH, closeups of the sides also, please? To see if there are any
> >scratches or wear marks?
>
> The slider idea sounds like a good possibility. I took the photos of this
> tool at an auction and didn't take any of the sides, just the front and
> back. It was in a box lot and they had no description of it. I've been
> doing some searching on it but haven't had any luck yet.
I wonder if the word isn't "hauteur"?
This link
<http://filaman.ifm-geomar.de/Glossary/Glossary.cfm?TermEnglish=hauteur%
2C%20profondeur> suggests a measurement of a fish's body height.
Perhaps it's some sort of gauge for determining whether a fish is legal
to keep.
"R.H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> This week's set has just been posted:
>
> http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/
>
>
861. "Hayhook" When hay is loaded onto a truck or trailer with pitchforks,
it lays flat. You shove this hayhook deep into the load and pull the two
short handles up inside of the frame. This locks a certain amount of hay in.
The hay is then hoisted with rope and pulleys to its desired position. This
was usually done with truck, tractor or even horses. A rope which is
connected to the two short levers is then yanked. The hay falls straight
down. The hay is then distributed to various locations to make the hay as
evenly distributed as possible in the loft. This helps prevent "hot spots".
The hayhook that we used in my youth was shaped a little differently. But
all parts are identical in terms of function and purpose. I wiped a little
sweat off my brow remembering those days.
Bill Marrs wrote:
> 861 "hay fork" used to put loose hay into the barn. Works with a rail at
> the roof peak
> that has a trolley running on it.
>
> 863 Stabilizer weight to keep the lines from whipping in the wind. Spoils
> the natural resonance of the span.
863 Actually, I believe those are to prevent ice freezing on the power
lines by causing them to twist a little in the wind. In regions with
less wind, they use larger, flat vanes. However, in windy regions, a
cylinder is sufficient.
862 I believe this is a cutter for making silage.
--riverman
Dave Baker wrote:
> "R.H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > This week's set has just been posted:
> >
> > http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> > Rob
>
> 860. From the inscription something to with height or altitude. Obviously it
> converts a reading from something into something else. Maybe barometric
> pressure into height above sea level.
>
Funny you would say that. My first thought was that it looked strangely
like the back of a Kane Dead Reckoning Computer my dad had when I was a
kid. Maybe this is some sort of elementary navigation device? Here is a
link to the Kane DR Computer, showing the back.
http://www.squarecirclez.com/blog/kane-dead-reckoning-computer/391
--riverman
Erik wrote:
> > 860. From the inscription something to with height or altitude. Obvious=
ly it
> > converts a reading from something into something else. Maybe barometric
> > pressure into height above sea level.
>
> Hmmm... looks to me like the left side of the 'front' table might be in
> =B0C (0 to 40=B0C =3D 32 to 104=B0F). The 'rear' table left side looks mo=
re like
> zoomed in comfort zone close up... ( equaling 42.8 to 81=B0F)
>
> The analog scale at the end seems to have something to do millimeters,
> as do the tops of both tables.
>
> I keep thinking something to do with adjusting control cable tension...
> but not sure.
>
> Can anyone translate what the analog end text says?
>
RH, how about a close up of the text? It looks like it says "2/5 de m/m
par haute", which is technically nonsensical, directly translating from
french to say "2/5 of m/m by high", but it looks like there's some
additional letter(s) at the end of 'haute'.
I wonder if it originally had some sort of slider over the top of it
with a hairline that made a horizontal bar across the numbers. That
would allow someone to set the vertical scale at some value, then look
across to the horizontal scale (as determined by the pointer) to make
some sort of adjustment.
RH, closeups of the sides also, please? To see if there are any
scratches or wear marks?
--riverman
Leon Fisk wrote:
> On 1 Jan 2007 11:16:41 -0800, "humunculus"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >Erik wrote:
> >> > 860. From the inscription something to with height or altitude. Obvi=
ously it
> >> > converts a reading from something into something else. Maybe baromet=
ric
> >> > pressure into height above sea level.
> >>
> >> Hmmm... looks to me like the left side of the 'front' table might be in
> >> =B0C (0 to 40=B0C =3D 32 to 104=B0F). The 'rear' table left side looks=
more like
> >> zoomed in comfort zone close up... ( equaling 42.8 to 81=B0F)
> >>
> >> The analog scale at the end seems to have something to do millimeters,
> >> as do the tops of both tables.
> >>
> >> I keep thinking something to do with adjusting control cable tension...
> >> but not sure.
> >>
> >> Can anyone translate what the analog end text says?
> >>
> >
> >RH, how about a close up of the text? It looks like it says "2/5 de m/m
> >par haute", which is technically nonsensical, directly translating from
> >french to say "2/5 of m/m by high", but it looks like there's some
> >additional letter(s) at the end of 'haute'.
> >
> >I wonder if it originally had some sort of slider over the top of it
> >with a hairline that made a horizontal bar across the numbers. That
> >would allow someone to set the vertical scale at some value, then look
> >across to the horizontal scale (as determined by the pointer) to make
> >some sort of adjustment.
> >
> >RH, closeups of the sides also, please? To see if there are any
> >scratches or wear marks?
> >
>
> Hi riverman,
>
> I'm no expert with the French language, but what you posted
> is more-or-less what I came up with too ("2/5 of m/m by
> high"). I messed around for a while searching on this with
> different combinations and came up with nothing. Here are
> the translations I came up with:
>
> de =3D of; from
> par =3D a; per; by
> haute =3D high; height
>
> The scales/grid are almost too simple to be of much use,
> unless you were suppose to lay something over top of them.
> It would be interesting to know if they are accurate to any
> common units like mm.
>
> I would be interested in seeing a side view of the slide too
> and to know how easy the slide moves (like will it stay put
> in one place once moved, or can it just as easily flop
> around). It didn't look like the slide lined up with the
> grid scale in any sort of way to the images.
>
> Another thought too, maybe the item came from a French
> speaking area of Canada? It kinda has a wood/logging scale
> tool look to me (shrug).
Hmm, another clue/observation: it looks like the distance that the
little side bar travels (from the bottom to the top of the chart) is
the same physical distance as the 'pointer' sweeps across the top of
the tool: I bet its just an L-shaped piece of metal, not something
geared.
I wonder if we are looking at it wrong: the little bar isn't the
handle...its a lever. And the pointer is the handle: when the 'pointer'
is furthest to the left ('10'), then 2/5 of 10 is 4, and the little
side bar is at the 40. If we read that as 4.0 rather than 40, then the
position of the side bar always corresponds to 2/5 of the position of
the 'pointer'.
My guess is that there WAS some sort of cover that was connected to the
side bar. The user slid the 'pointer' to some position that
corresponded to something, and the side bar moved the cover (with a
crosshair?) to give a calibration of some sort.
Hmmm, I hate mysteries like this.
--riverman
R.H. wrote:
notice the dark dots in the graph and by the numbers, I don't
> think they're meaningful, but someone was asking about wear marks so I
> thought they might want to see the unaltered photos.
Could the scale on the side be a calibration chart, similar to that used
on RF components today?
http://www.torontosurplus.com/rfp/DATA1260.JPG
Kevin Gallimore
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"Dave Baker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Those Minds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > 865 Thermometer. Usually reads up to 600° f. has a laser light to aim
> where
> > you are reading the temp.
>
> It would be a curious thermometer that had "distance = spot x 12:1"
printed
> on the side of it.
> --
> Dave Baker
> Puma Race Engines
> www.pumaracing.co.uk
> Camp USA engineer minces about for high performance specialist (4,4,7)
>
>
But that is indeed what it is. Search for Mastercool.
"Ralph Henrichs" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> CBFalconer wrote:
>
> > "R.H." wrote:
> >
> >>> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
> >>>there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
> >>
> >>You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers
weren't
> >>common until at least the 1940's.
> >
> >
> > And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
> > there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
> > think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
> >
> Small square bales require too much manpower to move & store a ton of
> hay. The round things you see are called round bales. They can be
> different sizes and can weight over a ton. They can be handled by one
> man and tractor.
>
I can certainly vouch for the handling of good old fashioned
square bails. Long days for little pay. But, it was better than
one dollar for picking one hundred pounds of cotton by hand.
On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 02:27:22 GMT, "George E. Cawthon"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> And I don't know the actual size of the bales,
>the big square one are probably close to 4x4x8
>foot and the big round ones are probably 5 to 7
>foot in diameter and 8-10 foot long.
>
>I can't imagine anyone wrapping a bale in plastic
>for normal over the year storage. The quality of
>the hay depends on the water content when bailed.
> Too much water and it molds and starts fires,
>too little water and the food value decreases.
>Outside hay stacks are often covered with tarps
>to keep the rain/snow from injecting too much
>moisture but the sides are also usually open to
>aid air circulation.
>
>It is possible that bales could be wrapped in
>plastic for short term storage, transportation, or
>use.
they are wrapped after innoculation with something to make silage.
the mookers love the stuff.
Stealth Pilot
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:56:21 GMT, Gunner <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:42:51 -0600, Barbara Bailey <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:08:08 -0500, Doghouse
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>Gunner wrote:
>>>
>>>> Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
>>>> hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
>>>> would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
>>>> these days.
>>>>
>>>I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
>>>with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
>>>and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
>>>
>>>IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
>>>not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
>>>erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
>>>coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
>>>
>>>Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
>>
>>At abouut the same time, in northern Illinois, the hay wagons on my
>>uncles' farms, and other farms nearby, didn't have a front side. They
>>had slat-sides on the side-sides and at the rear, but nothing between
>>the baler and the catcher. The bales came out low, maybe a foot, a
>>foot and a half, above the bed of the wagon.
>
>http://www.hoelscherinc.com/testimony_balestacker.htm
>http://www.major-grasscare.com/agriculture/stacker.htm
>http://www.hayingmantis.com/
>
>etc etc
>
>Find a need..they will invent.....
>
My dad uses a smaller version of one of the following:
<http://www.newholland.com/h4/products/products_series_detail.asp?Reg=NA&RL=ENNA&NavID=000001277003&series=000005218311>
These were developed in the late 60's and make the use of smaller bales
remain attractive to smaller farmers. I was lucky, my granddad was getting
to where he couldn't help stack hay and I being a young sprout of about 10
years old was not deemed sufficiently "robust" to be able to help stack all
of the hay. So Dad invested in a New Holland bale wagon. Remarkably
clever design yet almost dead stupid in the relatively small number of
moving parts required to make this miracle of mechanical and hydraulic
engineering work.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
In article <[email protected]>, CBFalconer
<[email protected]> wrote:
> "R.H." wrote:
> >
> >> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
> >> there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
> >
> > You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers weren't
> > common until at least the 1940's.
>
> And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
> there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
> think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
Round and square bales are still very common here in western Canada.
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:08:08 -0500, Doghouse
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Gunner wrote:
>
>> Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
>> hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
>> would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
>> these days.
>>
>I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
>with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
>and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
>
>IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
>not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
>erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
>coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
>
>Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
At abouut the same time, in northern Illinois, the hay wagons on my
uncles' farms, and other farms nearby, didn't have a front side. They
had slat-sides on the side-sides and at the rear, but nothing between
the baler and the catcher. The bales came out low, maybe a foot, a
foot and a half, above the bed of the wagon.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
"R.H." wrote:
>
>> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
>> there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
>
> You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers weren't
> common until at least the 1940's.
And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
--
Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, Happy New Year
Joyeux Noel, Bonne Annee.
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Doghouse wrote:
>
... snip ...
>
> I remember one incident very well. I was on my motorcycle one
> morning, riding out to bring in 120 cows. The sun was in my face
> my faceplate was scratchy. By the time I saw the three strands of
> barbed wire across the road, it was too late to stop.
>
> They were the kind of barbs that dug in instead of merely
> scratching. To get loose I had to take the time to remove the
> barbs one by one from my flesh. I became aware that I was
> standing in a mud puddle and the fence was electrified, but one
> can't be rushed in performing surgery like that.
What sort of idiot put barbed wire across a road. I would have
taken him apart.
--
Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, Happy New Year
Joyeux Noel, Bonne Annee.
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
>RH, how about a close up of the text? It looks like it says "2/5 de m/m
>par haute", which is technically nonsensical, directly translating from
>french to say "2/5 of m/m by high", but it looks like there's some
>additional letter(s) at the end of 'haute'.
I think the last letter is a "U", the closest shot of this text that I have
was the link on my site, same as this one:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/Album%205/pic860b.jpg
>I wonder if it originally had some sort of slider over the top of it
>with a hairline that made a horizontal bar across the numbers. That
>would allow someone to set the vertical scale at some value, then look
>across to the horizontal scale (as determined by the pointer) to make
>some sort of adjustment.
>RH, closeups of the sides also, please? To see if there are any
>scratches or wear marks?
The slider idea sounds like a good possibility. I took the photos of this
tool at an auction and didn't take any of the sides, just the front and
back. It was in a box lot and they had no description of it. I've been
doing some searching on it but haven't had any luck yet.
Rob
> I wonder if the word isn't "hauteur"?
>
> This link
> <http://filaman.ifm-geomar.de/Glossary/Glossary.cfm?TermEnglish=hauteur%
> 2C%20profondeur> suggests a measurement of a fish's body height.
>
> Perhaps it's some sort of gauge for determining whether a fish is legal
> to keep.
Here is the largest photo that I have that shows the end of the word,
doesn't appear to be an R after the U, clicking on the image should make it
bigger:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/Album%205/pic860s.jpg
And a larger shot of the other side:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/Album%205/pic860t.jpg
The needle was spring returned to the zero position, and it took light
pressure on the small rod to move it. The photos that are on my site were
cleaned up, especially the front side; the pictures on the links above are
unmodified, notice the dark dots in the graph and by the numbers, I don't
think they're meaningful, but someone was asking about wear marks so I
thought they might want to see the unaltered photos.
I've got a couple emails that I plan to send to some tool collectors in the
next day or two concerning this tool, hopefully one of them will recognize
it.
Rob
R.H. wrote:
> Four of them have been answered correctly this week, still not sure about
> the other two.
>
> Links, new photos, and an update from a few months ago have been posted on
> the answer page:
>
> http://pzphotosan150-3t.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob
>
>
861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 14:31:29 GMT, Jim Behning
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Mark & Juanita wrote:
... snip
>> My dad uses a smaller version of one of the following:
>>
>> <http://www.newholland.com/h4/products/products_series_detail.asp?Reg=NA&RL=ENNA&NavID=000001277003&series=000005218311>
>>
>> These were developed in the late 60's and make the use of smaller bales
>> remain attractive to smaller farmers. I was lucky, my granddad was getting
>> to where he couldn't help stack hay and I being a young sprout of about 10
>> years old was not deemed sufficiently "robust" to be able to help stack all
>> of the hay. So Dad invested in a New Holland bale wagon. Remarkably
>> clever design yet almost dead stupid in the relatively small number of
>> moving parts required to make this miracle of mechanical and hydraulic
>> engineering work.
>I was going to suggest that it is popular with any farmer that puts up
>more than a few hundred squares a year. I think they self propelled ones
>are over $100,000. My regular hay farmer bought a new one last year. It
Wow, had no idea they had gotten so expensive. Dad's is not
self-propelled, it is a 2-wide by 4-high per level, seven level (56 bales
per load) wagon. It was well over 35 years ago that he got it
>was about 20 years old or more and had been sitting in a barn with
>broken out windows. A little paint and sweeping out of the glass any he
>had a newer than his old one bale wagon. Under 10,000 for a good used
>machine with relatively low hours. The problem that the farmers have
>here is that the old barns were not built high enough to tip a full
>stack. Some guys have to skip the last row or two because they stack is
>too tall when tipped. Of course farmers that built barns in anticipation
>of the automatic bale wagon have no issues. They can also stack the
>round bales 3 bales tall inside the barn.
>
We never had to stack our hay in barns. Colorado is dry enough that
outside stacking is not an issue.
>The old farms on my mother's side did not have hay storage like that. I
>remember playing in the lofts tossing I guess Timothy squares about. It
>was eastern Indiana so it definitely was not Bermuda. My dad tells tales
>of helping gather hay when he was a kid so that was 70+ years ago. Pitch
>forks, hay wagon and people stomping on the stacks to get more on the
>wagon. Internal combustion powered machinery has definitely reduced a
>lot of human labor. Kind of like electricity in a wood shop.
That's a fact
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Mark & Juanita wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:56:21 GMT, Gunner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:42:51 -0600, Barbara Bailey <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:08:08 -0500, Doghouse
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gunner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
>>>>> hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
>>>>> would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
>>>>> these days.
>>>>>
>>>> I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
>>>> with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
>>>> and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
>>>>
>>>> IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
>>>> not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
>>>> erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
>>>> coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
>>> At abouut the same time, in northern Illinois, the hay wagons on my
>>> uncles' farms, and other farms nearby, didn't have a front side. They
>>> had slat-sides on the side-sides and at the rear, but nothing between
>>> the baler and the catcher. The bales came out low, maybe a foot, a
>>> foot and a half, above the bed of the wagon.
>> http://www.hoelscherinc.com/testimony_balestacker.htm
>> http://www.major-grasscare.com/agriculture/stacker.htm
>> http://www.hayingmantis.com/
>>
>> etc etc
>>
>> Find a need..they will invent.....
>>
>
> My dad uses a smaller version of one of the following:
>
> <http://www.newholland.com/h4/products/products_series_detail.asp?Reg=NA&RL=ENNA&NavID=000001277003&series=000005218311>
>
> These were developed in the late 60's and make the use of smaller bales
> remain attractive to smaller farmers. I was lucky, my granddad was getting
> to where he couldn't help stack hay and I being a young sprout of about 10
> years old was not deemed sufficiently "robust" to be able to help stack all
> of the hay. So Dad invested in a New Holland bale wagon. Remarkably
> clever design yet almost dead stupid in the relatively small number of
> moving parts required to make this miracle of mechanical and hydraulic
> engineering work.
>
>
>
> +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
> If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
>
> +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
I was going to suggest that it is popular with any farmer that puts up
more than a few hundred squares a year. I think they self propelled ones
are over $100,000. My regular hay farmer bought a new one last year. It
was about 20 years old or more and had been sitting in a barn with
broken out windows. A little paint and sweeping out of the glass any he
had a newer than his old one bale wagon. Under 10,000 for a good used
machine with relatively low hours. The problem that the farmers have
here is that the old barns were not built high enough to tip a full
stack. Some guys have to skip the last row or two because they stack is
too tall when tipped. Of course farmers that built barns in anticipation
of the automatic bale wagon have no issues. They can also stack the
round bales 3 bales tall inside the barn.
The old farms on my mother's side did not have hay storage like that. I
remember playing in the lofts tossing I guess Timothy squares about. It
was eastern Indiana so it definitely was not Bermuda. My dad tells tales
of helping gather hay when he was a kid so that was 70+ years ago. Pitch
forks, hay wagon and people stomping on the stacks to get more on the
wagon. Internal combustion powered machinery has definitely reduced a
lot of human labor. Kind of like electricity in a wood shop.
"RAM³" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Jerry Foster" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> >
> > "RAM³" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> CBFalconer <[email protected]> wrote in
> > news:[email protected]:
> >>
> >> > "R.H." wrote:
> >> >>
> > <snip>
> >
> >> "Round bales" were introduced by New Holland by the 1950s.
> >>
> > <snip>
> >
> > Not so. New Holland built square balers. The original round bale was
> > about the size of a square bale and the balers that made them were built
> > by Allis-Chalmers. Both had their advantages. The round bale was more
> > impervious to weather and cattle tended to waste less (not caring for
> > the sharp ends left by the knives of the square baler. The square bales
> > were much easier to handle. A wagon was generally pulled behind the
> > square baler and the bales loaded directly on it. The round baler
> > dropped its bales on the ground which had to be picked up later. Square
> > bales are far easier to stack. Etc.
> >
> > Another issue was that many of the early square balers, specifically
> > those built by John Deere, bound the bales with wire rather than twine.
> > And, while baling wire came in very handy for fixing things, broken bits
> > of it would end up in the hay and the cows would eat it. The result was
> > known as "hardware disease" and the "cure" was to feed them a magnet.
> >
> > Along with the rise of the very large round bales in the late 20th
> > century, square bales also got bigger. The two string bales, weighing
> > about 50 lbs, which one man could easily handle gave way in many places
> > to the much larger three string bales which were more suited to
> > mechanical handling. And so, today, the jumbo round bales are a common
> > sight on cattle farms where the farmer grows his own hay. But hay that
> > is grown to be trucked to feed lots and dairies many miles away tends to
> > be put up as square bales.
> >
> > Jerry, who observes that the expression, "haywire" seems to be vanishing
> > from our collective vocabulary...
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> In this area [Texas Gulf Coast] the round bales predominate - I haven't
> seen many trucks hauling square ones but LOTS of trucks hauling round ones
> - but I remember (well, if not fondly) walking beside trucks and heaving
3-
> tie square bales for a nickle a bale.
>
> Good exercise, I was told.
>
> The first round balers in this area were New Hollands that produced the
> large size currently in use.
>
> FWIW, baling twine (and baling wire, for that matter) are still stocked -
> and used for their original purpose - around here. <grin>
>
> I DO get a kick out of the people on RV newsgroups who simply wouldn't
> believe their eyes when being passed by a 1-ton dually pulling a
goose-neck
> flatbed trailer with 15-20 3/4-ton round bales on board. (It's a frequent
> sight around here.)
>
> As far as I can see, the single biggest advantage to the round bales is in
> ease of distribution: unroll it and feed many cattle at once.
>
As I recall, the big New Holland round baler came out sometime in the mid
'70s, about 30 years after the 1947 Allis Chalmers round baler...
Jerry
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:41:42 -0600, "Barry" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>"Ralph Henrichs" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>> CBFalconer wrote:
>>
>> > "R.H." wrote:
>> >
>> >>> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
>> >>>there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
>> >>
>> >>You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers
>weren't
>> >>common until at least the 1940's.
>> >
>> >
>> > And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
>> > there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
>> > think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
>> >
>> Small square bales require too much manpower to move & store a ton of
>> hay. The round things you see are called round bales. They can be
>> different sizes and can weight over a ton. They can be handled by one
>> man and tractor.
>>
>
>I can certainly vouch for the handling of good old fashioned
>square bails. Long days for little pay. But, it was better than
>one dollar for picking one hundred pounds of cotton by hand.
>
Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
these days.
Gunner
Political Correctness
A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical liberal minority and
rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible
to pick up a turd by the clean end.
"Dave Baker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Those Minds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> 865 Thermometer. Usually reads up to 600° f. has a laser light to aim
> where
>> you are reading the temp.
>
> It would be a curious thermometer that had "distance = spot x 12:1"
> printed
> on the side of it.
> --
> Dave Baker
> Puma Race Engines
> www.pumaracing.co.uk
> Camp USA engineer minces about for high performance specialist (4,4,7)
>
>
I use one all the time in checking temperature while curing the ink while
screen printing.
"Doghouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Gunner wrote:
>
> > Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
> > hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
> > would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
> > these days.
> >
> I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
> with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
> and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
>
> IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
> not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
> erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
> coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
>
> Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
Bales came out of the baler via a simple chute that was suspended at the
proper angle to clear the front of the wagon by a pair of chains. A man
riding the wagon stacked them as the baler shoved them out. In most cases,
a bale wagon had only a back, no sides or front.
Then, I believe it was John Deere that first came out with the idea of the
bale thrower. The bales were about half the length of a regular bale and
were commonly called "biscuit bales." (A full sized bale would break...)
The thrower was a pair of arms with barbs at the ends that would engage the
bale and the chute out of the baler was an appropriate segment of a circle.
When the bale had emerged to the proper point, the mechanism was tripped and
the arms swung about 75 degrees, lobbing the bale back into the wagon which
had a high back and sides.
International Harvester responded with a bale thrower of its own. It
consisted of a contrivance that had a pair of conveyor belts, top and
bottom, about four feet long and powered by a separate gas engine. It was
mounted on a pivot at the end of the bale box and a pair of ropes strung
forward to the tractor allowed the operator to swing it from side to side to
more uniformly load the wagon.
Jerry
George E. Cawthon wrote:
> CBFalconer wrote:
>> "R.H." wrote:
>>>> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
>>>> there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
>>> You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers
>>> weren't
>>> common until at least the 1940's.
>>
>> And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
>> there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
>> think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
>>
>
> Not disappearing where I drive a lot (Idaho, Oregon, Nevada).. You see
> regular bales (60-80 pounds), big round ones(no plastic)(probably 600+
> pounds) and the big square ones (probably 500+ pounds).
In Georgia we buy squares of Bermuda about 50# for a tight bale. Round
4x6 are about 1,000#. Some folks still use 5x5 balers at about the same
weight. Weight of course depends on how tight they roll same as the
square weight. I think some went to the 4x6 rollers so they would not
get hassled by the DOT for wide loads when hauling hay. I buy 4 rolls at
a time. I store them in the barn and move one with my little tractor.
The horses eat the roll with no waste or next to no waste. They sleep in
the hay as they pull it apart but our horses do not waste it. It helps
if all your summer grasses have gone dormant so if they want to eat they
better not poop in the hay. When we ran a boarding bard some of the
horses were a bit stupid in that regard. No hoops around the bales.
Small squares are $5 and the large rounds are $55. The rounds are
cheaper per ton. Last summers drought, diesel prices, army worms, and
increased fertilizer costs have driven up prices. Not long ago rounds
were $40 and squares could be bought for less than $3. Plus my regular
hay farmer has no spare rounds to sell.
I have seen a lot of the big 4x4x8 square bales driving west to
Colorado. I have never seen the big squares in Georgia. They may use it
somewhere but I have never seen them advertised for sale in the Market
Bulletin.
None of the half dozen farmers I have bought hay from bale in plastic
wraps. I suspect in humid Georgia you risk a lot of mold and maybe fires
wrapping in plastic. But I am not a hay farmer.
Doghouse <[email protected]> writes:
>Gunner wrote:
>
>> Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
>> hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
>> would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
>> these days.
>>
>I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
>with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
>and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
>
>IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
>not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
>erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
>coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
>
>Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
Massey-Ferguson rig, vintage 1969:
<http://www.lurndal.org/images/baler.jpg>
CBFalconer <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> "R.H." wrote:
>>
>>> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
>>> there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
>>
>> You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers weren't
>> common until at least the 1940's.
>
> And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
> there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
> think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
>
"Round bales" were introduced by New Holland by the 1950s.
"Square bales" dated back to horse-drawn equipment.
The "round bales" gained in popularity as worker availability fell: too big
to handle by 1 person, they could not be collected and stacked by a group of
cheap laborers the way that "square bales" could. With the passing of the
cheap labor supply [Welfare paid better] and shifts in Tax Laws, it became
cheaper to simply buy the added equipment to handle the "round bales".
While both are still available, "round bales" - due to their ease if
distribution as cattle feed (they're simply unrolled) and weather resistance
- have gained significantly in popularity.
Right now, I know quite a number of people who'd love to buy as much as they
can - even at the exorbitant price being charged for the stuff.
Ralph Henrichs <[email protected]> wrote in news:q1wlh.8$nk6.4
@newsfe03.lga:
> Small square bales require too much manpower to move & store a ton of
> hay. The round things you see are called round bales. They can be
> different sizes and can weight over a ton. They can be handled by one
> man and tractor.
>
>
In this area, they average 1500#.
Square bales weigh between 50# [Johnson Grass] and 85# [Alfalfa].
"Jerry Foster" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> "RAM³" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> CBFalconer <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>>
>> > "R.H." wrote:
>> >>
> <snip>
>
>> "Round bales" were introduced by New Holland by the 1950s.
>>
> <snip>
>
> Not so. New Holland built square balers. The original round bale was
> about the size of a square bale and the balers that made them were built
> by Allis-Chalmers. Both had their advantages. The round bale was more
> impervious to weather and cattle tended to waste less (not caring for
> the sharp ends left by the knives of the square baler. The square bales
> were much easier to handle. A wagon was generally pulled behind the
> square baler and the bales loaded directly on it. The round baler
> dropped its bales on the ground which had to be picked up later. Square
> bales are far easier to stack. Etc.
>
> Another issue was that many of the early square balers, specifically
> those built by John Deere, bound the bales with wire rather than twine.
> And, while baling wire came in very handy for fixing things, broken bits
> of it would end up in the hay and the cows would eat it. The result was
> known as "hardware disease" and the "cure" was to feed them a magnet.
>
> Along with the rise of the very large round bales in the late 20th
> century, square bales also got bigger. The two string bales, weighing
> about 50 lbs, which one man could easily handle gave way in many places
> to the much larger three string bales which were more suited to
> mechanical handling. And so, today, the jumbo round bales are a common
> sight on cattle farms where the farmer grows his own hay. But hay that
> is grown to be trucked to feed lots and dairies many miles away tends to
> be put up as square bales.
>
> Jerry, who observes that the expression, "haywire" seems to be vanishing
> from our collective vocabulary...
>
>
>
In this area [Texas Gulf Coast] the round bales predominate - I haven't
seen many trucks hauling square ones but LOTS of trucks hauling round ones
- but I remember (well, if not fondly) walking beside trucks and heaving 3-
tie square bales for a nickle a bale.
Good exercise, I was told.
The first round balers in this area were New Hollands that produced the
large size currently in use.
FWIW, baling twine (and baling wire, for that matter) are still stocked -
and used for their original purpose - around here. <grin>
I DO get a kick out of the people on RV newsgroups who simply wouldn't
believe their eyes when being passed by a 1-ton dually pulling a goose-neck
flatbed trailer with 15-20 3/4-ton round bales on board. (It's a frequent
sight around here.)
As far as I can see, the single biggest advantage to the round bales is in
ease of distribution: unroll it and feed many cattle at once.
Leon Fisk <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Of course with the wet winter we've been having the cattle
> are up to their knees in mud after a short time, but that is
> another story...
Be thankful for the moisture - Oklahoma and Texas have been fighting
drought...
"Jerry Foster" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> "RAM³" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "Jerry Foster" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>> >
>> > "RAM³" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]...
>> >> CBFalconer <[email protected]> wrote in
>> > news:[email protected]:
>> >>
>> >> > "R.H." wrote:
>> >> >>
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> >> "Round bales" were introduced by New Holland by the 1950s.
>> >>
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> > Not so. New Holland built square balers. The original round bale
>> > was about the size of a square bale and the balers that made them
>> > were built by Allis-Chalmers. Both had their advantages. The round
>> > bale was more impervious to weather and cattle tended to waste less
>> > (not caring for the sharp ends left by the knives of the square
>> > baler. The square bales were much easier to handle. A wagon was
>> > generally pulled behind the square baler and the bales loaded
>> > directly on it. The round baler dropped its bales on the ground
>> > which had to be picked up later. Square bales are far easier to
>> > stack. Etc.
>> >
>> > Another issue was that many of the early square balers, specifically
>> > those built by John Deere, bound the bales with wire rather than
>> > twine. And, while baling wire came in very handy for fixing things,
>> > broken bits of it would end up in the hay and the cows would eat it.
>> > The result was known as "hardware disease" and the "cure" was to feed
>> > them a magnet.
>> >
>> > Along with the rise of the very large round bales in the late 20th
>> > century, square bales also got bigger. The two string bales,
>> > weighing about 50 lbs, which one man could easily handle gave way in
>> > many places to the much larger three string bales which were more
>> > suited to mechanical handling. And so, today, the jumbo round bales
>> > are a common sight on cattle farms where the farmer grows his own
>> > hay. But hay that is grown to be trucked to feed lots and dairies
>> > many miles away tends to be put up as square bales.
>> >
>> > Jerry, who observes that the expression, "haywire" seems to be
>> > vanishing from our collective vocabulary...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> In this area [Texas Gulf Coast] the round bales predominate - I haven't
>> seen many trucks hauling square ones but LOTS of trucks hauling round
>> ones - but I remember (well, if not fondly) walking beside trucks and
>> heaving
> 3-
>> tie square bales for a nickle a bale.
>>
>> Good exercise, I was told.
>>
>> The first round balers in this area were New Hollands that produced the
>> large size currently in use.
>>
>> FWIW, baling twine (and baling wire, for that matter) are still stocked
>> - and used for their original purpose - around here. <grin>
>>
>> I DO get a kick out of the people on RV newsgroups who simply wouldn't
>> believe their eyes when being passed by a 1-ton dually pulling a
> goose-neck
>> flatbed trailer with 15-20 3/4-ton round bales on board. (It's a
>> frequent sight around here.)
>>
>> As far as I can see, the single biggest advantage to the round bales is
>> in ease of distribution: unroll it and feed many cattle at once.
>>
> As I recall, the big New Holland round baler came out sometime in the
> mid '70s, about 30 years after the 1947 Allis Chalmers round baler...
>
> Jerry
>
>
The local tractor dealer didn't sell AC - only Ford and New Holland - and
the local farmers/ranchers were already debating the relative merits of
square vs. round in the '50s.
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 14:13:51 -0600, Barbara Bailey
<[email protected]> wrote:
<snip
>I lookied through an old photo album, and I have to take back part of
>what I said. Most of my uncles' hay wagons didn't have sides. Only
>slat-built backs.
Same here. The slat back was usually at a slight angle too,
leaning towards the back or away from the trailer. The
bailer had a long shoot and there was usually a slight
incline up to the trailer. The bales would be pushed along
at the same rate as bales were being made by the bailer.
Standing on the wagon, grab the bale, stack it on the
trailer and turn around, repeat... If you were good, you
could get the bales stacked on a trailer like this 6 to 7
tiers high and not have any fall off before reaching the
barn :)
--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
Remove no.spam for email
Stealth Pilot wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 02:27:22 GMT, "George E. Cawthon"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> And I don't know the actual size of the bales,
>> the big square one are probably close to 4x4x8
>> foot and the big round ones are probably 5 to 7
>> foot in diameter and 8-10 foot long.
>>
>> I can't imagine anyone wrapping a bale in plastic
>> for normal over the year storage. The quality of
>> the hay depends on the water content when bailed.
>> Too much water and it molds and starts fires,
>> too little water and the food value decreases.
>> Outside hay stacks are often covered with tarps
>> to keep the rain/snow from injecting too much
>> moisture but the sides are also usually open to
>> aid air circulation.
>>
>> It is possible that bales could be wrapped in
>> plastic for short term storage, transportation, or
>> use.
>
> they are wrapped after innoculation with something to make silage.
> the mookers love the stuff.
>
> Stealth Pilot
That's certainly not the way silage is made around
here!
Jim Behning wrote:
> George E. Cawthon wrote:
>> CBFalconer wrote:
>>> "R.H." wrote:
>>>>> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
>>>>> there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
>>>> You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers
>>>> weren't
>>>> common until at least the 1940's.
>>>
>>> And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
>>> there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
>>> think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
>>>
>>
>> Not disappearing where I drive a lot (Idaho, Oregon, Nevada).. You
>> see regular bales (60-80 pounds), big round ones(no plastic)(probably
>> 600+ pounds) and the big square ones (probably 500+ pounds).
> In Georgia we buy squares of Bermuda about 50# for a tight bale. Round
> 4x6 are about 1,000#. Some folks still use 5x5 balers at about the same
> weight. Weight of course depends on how tight they roll same as the
> square weight. I think some went to the 4x6 rollers so they would not
> get hassled by the DOT for wide loads when hauling hay. I buy 4 rolls at
> a time. I store them in the barn and move one with my little tractor.
> The horses eat the roll with no waste or next to no waste. They sleep in
> the hay as they pull it apart but our horses do not waste it. It helps
> if all your summer grasses have gone dormant so if they want to eat they
> better not poop in the hay. When we ran a boarding bard some of the
> horses were a bit stupid in that regard. No hoops around the bales.
>
> Small squares are $5 and the large rounds are $55. The rounds are
> cheaper per ton. Last summers drought, diesel prices, army worms, and
> increased fertilizer costs have driven up prices. Not long ago rounds
> were $40 and squares could be bought for less than $3. Plus my regular
> hay farmer has no spare rounds to sell.
>
> I have seen a lot of the big 4x4x8 square bales driving west to
> Colorado. I have never seen the big squares in Georgia. They may use it
> somewhere but I have never seen them advertised for sale in the Market
> Bulletin.
>
> None of the half dozen farmers I have bought hay from bale in plastic
> wraps. I suspect in humid Georgia you risk a lot of mold and maybe fires
> wrapping in plastic. But I am not a hay farmer.
I really don't know what the big bales weigh.
Looking back on my comment I should probably
revise my estimate of weight quite a ways upward.
And I don't know the actual size of the bales,
the big square one are probably close to 4x4x8
foot and the big round ones are probably 5 to 7
foot in diameter and 8-10 foot long.
I can't imagine anyone wrapping a bale in plastic
for normal over the year storage. The quality of
the hay depends on the water content when bailed.
Too much water and it molds and starts fires,
too little water and the food value decreases.
Outside hay stacks are often covered with tarps
to keep the rain/snow from injecting too much
moisture but the sides are also usually open to
aid air circulation.
It is possible that bales could be wrapped in
plastic for short term storage, transportation, or
use.
"R.H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> This week's set has just been posted:
>
> http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob
860. From the inscription something to with height or altitude. Obviously it
converts a reading from something into something else. Maybe barometric
pressure into height above sea level.
861. For hoisting hay bales into barns.
862. Can't quite see whether the things the arms move are paddles or
chopping blades. However I think they just push the wooden cover in the tub
down alternately onto whatever is filling it underneath. Maybe an early
clothes washing machine.
863. Looks like they might collect water running down the lines. Can't
imagine why though.
864. Looks like it times how long it takes something to move along the upper
scale. What though seeing as that's maybe not present. The scale reads down
to up so it seems the timer should rise. Does that mean something in the
base lifts up?
865. Laser distance meter.
--
Dave Baker
Puma Race Engines
www.pumaracing.co.uk
Camp USA engineer minces about for high performance specialist (4,4,7)
"Those Minds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 865 Thermometer. Usually reads up to 600° f. has a laser light to aim
where
> you are reading the temp.
It would be a curious thermometer that had "distance = spot x 12:1" printed
on the side of it.
--
Dave Baker
Puma Race Engines
www.pumaracing.co.uk
Camp USA engineer minces about for high performance specialist (4,4,7)
# 862-----A chopper for chopping cabbage to make sauerkraut.
R.H. wrote:
> This week's set has just been posted:
>
> http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob
>
>
--
Richard
Richard L. Rombold
WIZARD WOODWORKING
489 N. 32nd. St.
Springfield, Or .97478
Take a look at my mess and work.
http://www.PictureTrail.com/gallery/view?username=thewizz
"Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste
good with ketchup"
Dave Baker wrote:
> "Those Minds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> 865 Thermometer. Usually reads up to 600° f. has a laser light to aim
> where
>> you are reading the temp.
>
> It would be a curious thermometer that had "distance = spot x 12:1" printed
> on the side of it.
If I'm measuring the temperature of a certain part of an engine, I don't
want the "spot" to be so big it includes other parts. 12:1 tells me how
close I must hold the thermometer.
Gunner wrote:
> Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
> hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
> would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
> these days.
>
I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
Barbara Bailey wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:08:08 -0500, Doghouse
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Gunner wrote:
>>
>>> Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
>>> hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
>>> would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
>>> these days.
>>>
>> I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
>> with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
>> and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
>>
>> IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
>> not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
>> erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
>> coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
>>
>> Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
>
> At abouut the same time, in northern Illinois, the hay wagons on my
> uncles' farms, and other farms nearby, didn't have a front side. They
> had slat-sides on the side-sides and at the rear, but nothing between
> the baler and the catcher. The bales came out low, maybe a foot, a
> foot and a half, above the bed of the wagon.
>
>
That sounds right. I guess I was using what I could remember to
reconstruct what I couldn't remember. The part about throwing the bales
up would have been me throwing them up to the stacker.
I remember one incident very well. I was on my motorcycle one morning,
riding out to bring in 120 cows. The sun was in my face my faceplate
was scratchy. By the time I saw the three strands of barbed wire across
the road, it was too late to stop.
They were the kind of barbs that dug in instead of merely scratching.
To get loose I had to take the time to remove the barbs one by one from
my flesh. I became aware that I was standing in a mud puddle and the
fence was electrified, but one can't be rushed in performing surgery
like that.
CBFalconer wrote:
> Doghouse wrote:
> ... snip ...
>> I remember one incident very well. I was on my motorcycle one
>> morning, riding out to bring in 120 cows. The sun was in my face
>> my faceplate was scratchy. By the time I saw the three strands of
>> barbed wire across the road, it was too late to stop.
>>
>> They were the kind of barbs that dug in instead of merely
>> scratching. To get loose I had to take the time to remove the
>> barbs one by one from my flesh. I became aware that I was
>> standing in a mud puddle and the fence was electrified, but one
>> can't be rushed in performing surgery like that.
>
> What sort of idiot put barbed wire across a road. I would have
> taken him apart.
>
I didn't blame him. It was a one-lane dirt road for access to his
pastures. I hadn't been to that pasture before. He did not anticipate
anyone going so fast. The wire was conspicuous. I did not anticipate
the effect of the low sun on my scratchy visor.
R.H. wrote:
> This week's set has just been posted:
>
> http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob
>
>
864 looks like a toaster. The weighted bottom would be so an arm could
hold a piece of toast over a stove or a flask over a gas flame. The
lower thumbscrew would be to slide it to a working height. The upper
thumbscrew would be for small adjustments so that in one minute you
would get the required heating.
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 21:18:39 -0700, Mark & Juanita
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:56:21 GMT, Gunner <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:42:51 -0600, Barbara Bailey <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:08:08 -0500, Doghouse
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Gunner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
>>>>> hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
>>>>> would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
>>>>> these days.
>>>>>
>>>>I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
>>>>with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
>>>>and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
>>>>
>>>>IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
>>>>not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
>>>>erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
>>>>coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
>>>>
>>>>Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
>>>
>>>At abouut the same time, in northern Illinois, the hay wagons on my
>>>uncles' farms, and other farms nearby, didn't have a front side. They
>>>had slat-sides on the side-sides and at the rear, but nothing between
>>>the baler and the catcher. The bales came out low, maybe a foot, a
>>>foot and a half, above the bed of the wagon.
>>
>>http://www.hoelscherinc.com/testimony_balestacker.htm
>>http://www.major-grasscare.com/agriculture/stacker.htm
>>http://www.hayingmantis.com/
>>
>>etc etc
>>
>>Find a need..they will invent.....
>>
>
> My dad uses a smaller version of one of the following:
>
><http://www.newholland.com/h4/products/products_series_detail.asp?Reg=NA&RL=ENNA&NavID=000001277003&series=000005218311>
>
> These were developed in the late 60's and make the use of smaller bales
>remain attractive to smaller farmers. I was lucky, my granddad was getting
>to where he couldn't help stack hay and I being a young sprout of about 10
>years old was not deemed sufficiently "robust" to be able to help stack all
>of the hay. So Dad invested in a New Holland bale wagon. Remarkably
>clever design yet almost dead stupid in the relatively small number of
>moving parts required to make this miracle of mechanical and hydraulic
>engineering work.
Very very common here in my area. A treat to use.
Gunner
>
>
>
>+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
> If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
>
>+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Political Correctness
A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical liberal minority and
rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible
to pick up a turd by the clean end.
"R.H." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> This week's set has just been posted:
>
> http://puzzlephotos.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob
>
861 Hay hook
863 Weights to keep the power lines steady in the wind.
865 Thermometer. Usually reads up to 600° f. has a laser light to aim where
you are reading the temp.
"Ralph Henrichs" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> R.H. wrote:
> > Four of them have been answered correctly this week, still not sure
about
> > the other two.
> >
> > Links, new photos, and an update from a few months ago have been posted
on
> > the answer page:
> >
> > http://pzphotosan150-3t.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> > Rob
> >
> >
> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
> there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
>
Hay balers were certainly around c.1885. A fine example of a horse-powered
one is on display at the Heidrich Museum in Woodland, CA (a place very much
worth a stop if you get into the Sacramento area). In those days, hay was
put into the barn loose using a fork very much like the one pictured. But,
if a farmer wished to sell hay, he generally baled it. Loading loose hay
into a boxcar would be a real PITA...
OTOH, the fork pictured didn't work the best for bales, mainly because it
could only handle a couple at a time. The Grapple Fork, designed in the
early 20th century, worked much better. It could also take a much bigger
load of loose hay...
Jerry
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 16:12:40 GMT, "RAM³"
<[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
>While both are still available, "round bales" - due to their ease if
>distribution as cattle feed (they're simply unrolled) and weather resistance
>- have gained significantly in popularity.
<snip>
There were small round bales a long time ago (~50's?) that
only weighed ~60 lbs. They didn't stack well and thus
weren't easy to wagon and move like similar square bales.
The farmer down the road from me doesn't even move these
large round bales to feed them. They were place in rows
about 8 feet equidistant with around 6 to a row. Large round
gate type hoops* are placed over them (a row at a time) and
a light electric fence is erected to prevent the cattle from
getting to the remaining bales. Small x for bales, big X for
bales with hoops. Little c are cattle.
Fence
|
--------------------------------------
x x x x x x x | X c c c
| c c c
x x x x x x x | X
| c c
x x x x x x x | X
| c c
x x x x x x x | X c c
--------------------------------------
Use a fixed-pitch font for best display. Every few days they
just reset the fence around new bales and move the hoops.
Of course with the wet winter we've been having the cattle
are up to their knees in mud after a short time, but that is
another story...
* The hoops used look similar to these:
http://hihog.com/feeders_panels/page11.html
--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
Remove no.spam for email
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 14:35:33 -0500, Doghouse
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Barbara Bailey wrote:
>> On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:08:08 -0500, Doghouse
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Gunner wrote:
>>>
>>>> Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
>>>> hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
>>>> would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
>>>> these days.
>>>>
>>> I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
>>> with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
>>> and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
>>>
>>> IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
>>> not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
>>> erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
>>> coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
>>>
>>> Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
>>
>> At abouut the same time, in northern Illinois, the hay wagons on my
>> uncles' farms, and other farms nearby, didn't have a front side. They
>> had slat-sides on the side-sides and at the rear, but nothing between
>> the baler and the catcher. The bales came out low, maybe a foot, a
>> foot and a half, above the bed of the wagon.
>>
>>
>That sounds right. I guess I was using what I could remember to
>reconstruct what I couldn't remember. The part about throwing the bales
> up would have been me throwing them up to the stacker.
>
>I remember one incident very well. I was on my motorcycle one morning,
>riding out to bring in 120 cows. The sun was in my face my faceplate
>was scratchy. By the time I saw the three strands of barbed wire across
>the road, it was too late to stop.
>
>They were the kind of barbs that dug in instead of merely scratching.
>To get loose I had to take the time to remove the barbs one by one from
>my flesh. I became aware that I was standing in a mud puddle and the
>fence was electrified, but one can't be rushed in performing surgery
>like that.
Oooh. Ouch.
I lookied through an old photo album, and I have to take back part of
what I said. Most of my uncles' hay wagons didn't have sides. Only
slat-built backs.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:42:51 -0600, Barbara Bailey <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:08:08 -0500, Doghouse
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Gunner wrote:
>>
>>> Last time I picked up bales from the ground..I was driving a tractor
>>> hauling a bail loader. As long as the bale went into the chute...it
>>> would stack em nice and neat on the trailer. Most modern farms do that
>>> these days.
>>>
>>I worked on a dairy farm in 1969. Two of us stacked bales in a wagon
>>with eight-foot sides towed behind a baler. I'd grab the ejected bale
>>and toss it to the guy who was stacking.
>>
>>IIRC, the baler tossed bales over the front side of the wagon. Now I'm
>>not sure about it. Bales tossed that high would probably have been
>>erratic. One of them could have broken my neck if I didn't see it
>>coming. A lot of them would probably have broken on impact.
>>
>>Does anyone remember how balers tossed bales into towed wagons?
>
>At abouut the same time, in northern Illinois, the hay wagons on my
>uncles' farms, and other farms nearby, didn't have a front side. They
>had slat-sides on the side-sides and at the rear, but nothing between
>the baler and the catcher. The bales came out low, maybe a foot, a
>foot and a half, above the bed of the wagon.
http://www.hoelscherinc.com/testimony_balestacker.htm
http://www.major-grasscare.com/agriculture/stacker.htm
http://www.hayingmantis.com/
etc etc
Find a need..they will invent.....
Gunner
Political Correctness
A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical liberal minority and
rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,
which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible
to pick up a turd by the clean end.
> 860. From the inscription something to with height or altitude. Obviously it
> converts a reading from something into something else. Maybe barometric
> pressure into height above sea level.
Hmmm... looks to me like the left side of the 'front' table might be in
°C (0 to 40°C = 32 to 104°F). The 'rear' table left side looks more like
zoomed in comfort zone close up... ( equaling 42.8 to 81°F)
The analog scale at the end seems to have something to do millimeters,
as do the tops of both tables.
I keep thinking something to do with adjusting control cable tension...
but not sure.
Can anyone translate what the analog end text says?
Erik
CBFalconer wrote:
> "R.H." wrote:
>
>>> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
>>>there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
>>
>>You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers weren't
>>common until at least the 1940's.
>
>
> And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
> there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
> think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
>
Small square bales require too much manpower to move & store a ton of
hay. The round things you see are called round bales. They can be
different sizes and can weight over a ton. They can be handled by one
man and tractor.
On 1 Jan 2007 11:16:41 -0800, "humunculus"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Erik wrote:
>> > 860. From the inscription something to with height or altitude. Obviously it
>> > converts a reading from something into something else. Maybe barometric
>> > pressure into height above sea level.
>>
>> Hmmm... looks to me like the left side of the 'front' table might be in
>> °C (0 to 40°C = 32 to 104°F). The 'rear' table left side looks more like
>> zoomed in comfort zone close up... ( equaling 42.8 to 81°F)
>>
>> The analog scale at the end seems to have something to do millimeters,
>> as do the tops of both tables.
>>
>> I keep thinking something to do with adjusting control cable tension...
>> but not sure.
>>
>> Can anyone translate what the analog end text says?
>>
>
>RH, how about a close up of the text? It looks like it says "2/5 de m/m
>par haute", which is technically nonsensical, directly translating from
>french to say "2/5 of m/m by high", but it looks like there's some
>additional letter(s) at the end of 'haute'.
>
>I wonder if it originally had some sort of slider over the top of it
>with a hairline that made a horizontal bar across the numbers. That
>would allow someone to set the vertical scale at some value, then look
>across to the horizontal scale (as determined by the pointer) to make
>some sort of adjustment.
>
>RH, closeups of the sides also, please? To see if there are any
>scratches or wear marks?
>
Hi riverman,
I'm no expert with the French language, but what you posted
is more-or-less what I came up with too ("2/5 of m/m by
high"). I messed around for a while searching on this with
different combinations and came up with nothing. Here are
the translations I came up with:
de = of; from
par = a; per; by
haute = high; height
The scales/grid are almost too simple to be of much use,
unless you were suppose to lay something over top of them.
It would be interesting to know if they are accurate to any
common units like mm.
I would be interested in seeing a side view of the slide too
and to know how easy the slide moves (like will it stay put
in one place once moved, or can it just as easily flop
around). It didn't look like the slide lined up with the
grid scale in any sort of way to the images.
Another thought too, maybe the item came from a French
speaking area of Canada? It kinda has a wood/logging scale
tool look to me (shrug).
--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
Remove no.spam for email
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:36:58 GMT, "RAM³"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Leon Fisk <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> Of course with the wet winter we've been having the cattle
>> are up to their knees in mud after a short time, but that is
>> another story...
>
>
>
>Be thankful for the moisture - Oklahoma and Texas have been fighting
>drought...
The summer was hot and dry. The rains hit just as the
farmers were trying to harvest/salvage what little grew...
The ground should be partial frozen and snow covered right
now. Nothing is frozen, no snow, just rain and mud.
--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
Remove no.spam for email
"RAM³" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> CBFalconer <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> > "R.H." wrote:
> >>
<snip>
> "Round bales" were introduced by New Holland by the 1950s.
>
<snip>
Not so. New Holland built square balers. The original round bale was about
the size of a square bale and the balers that made them were built by
Allis-Chalmers. Both had their advantages. The round bale was more
impervious to weather and cattle tended to waste less (not caring for the
sharp ends left by the knives of the square baler. The square bales were
much easier to handle. A wagon was generally pulled behind the square baler
and the bales loaded directly on it. The round baler dropped its bales on
the ground which had to be picked up later. Square bales are far easier to
stack. Etc.
Another issue was that many of the early square balers, specifically those
built by John Deere, bound the bales with wire rather than twine. And,
while baling wire came in very handy for fixing things, broken bits of it
would end up in the hay and the cows would eat it. The result was known as
"hardware disease" and the "cure" was to feed them a magnet.
Along with the rise of the very large round bales in the late 20th century,
square bales also got bigger. The two string bales, weighing about 50 lbs,
which one man could easily handle gave way in many places to the much larger
three string bales which were more suited to mechanical handling. And so,
today, the jumbo round bales are a common sight on cattle farms where the
farmer grows his own hay. But hay that is grown to be trucked to feed lots
and dairies many miles away tends to be put up as square bales.
Jerry, who observes that the expression, "haywire" seems to be vanishing
from our collective vocabulary...
On Mon, 1 Jan 2007 16:10:05 -0500, "R.H."
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>RH, how about a close up of the text? It looks like it says "2/5 de m/m
>>par haute", which is technically nonsensical, directly translating from
>>french to say "2/5 of m/m by high", but it looks like there's some
>>additional letter(s) at the end of 'haute'.
>
>I think the last letter is a "U", the closest shot of this text that I have
>was the link on my site, same as this one:
>
>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/Album%205/pic860b.jpg
>
>
>>I wonder if it originally had some sort of slider over the top of it
>>with a hairline that made a horizontal bar across the numbers. That
>>would allow someone to set the vertical scale at some value, then look
>>across to the horizontal scale (as determined by the pointer) to make
>>some sort of adjustment.
>
>>RH, closeups of the sides also, please? To see if there are any
>>scratches or wear marks?
>
>The slider idea sounds like a good possibility. I took the photos of this
>tool at an auction and didn't take any of the sides, just the front and
>back. It was in a box lot and they had no description of it. I've been
>doing some searching on it but haven't had any luck yet.
Hi Rob,
I suspected that was your only pictures at this time. Thanks
for updating us on that.
I searched for anything related to scaling lumber that might
look like this and didn't find anything of interest. Of
course I've played out a bunch of other ideas too :)
It looks/feels like something from around 1900 or maybe even
earlier, but I have no basis for that.
I kinda like Riverman's idea that there was something that
slid over the top of the scale/grid area and this engaged
with the slide on the side. The scale on the back side
though has a slight angle to the horizontal lines. Not sure
if that is significant or not.
"m/m" is also an abbreviation for "by mass," used in
chemistry and pharmacology to describe the concentration of
a substance in a mixture or solution. 2% m/m means that the
mass of the substance is 2% of the total mass of the
solution or mixture.
Maybe that bit of trivia will help somebody else and maybe
not...
--
Leon Fisk
Grand Rapids MI/Zone 5b
Remove no.spam for email
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 09:59:18 -0600, Ralph Henrichs
<[email protected]> wrote:
>,;
>,;
>,;CBFalconer wrote:
>,;
>,;> "R.H." wrote:
>,;>
>,;>>> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
>,;>>>there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
>,;>>
>,;>>You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers weren't
>,;>>common until at least the 1940's.
>,;>
>,;>
>,;> And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
>,;> there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
>,;> think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
>,;>
>,;Small square bales require too much manpower to move & store a ton of
>,;hay. The round things you see are called round bales. They can be
>,;different sizes and can weight over a ton. They can be handled by one
>,;man and tractor.
The move to large bales sure spoiled a bunch of fun for the kids. When
the crew was storing bales for the winter a few of us kids would stand
around watching. As soon as the crew left for another load we went to
work creating tunnels and secret caverns in the pile. A lookout warned
us when the next load was returning and we quickly covered the exit
hole and watched them add to the pile. This process was repeated and
at the end of the day the pile of bales was a lot bigger than it
should have been and we had a wonderful secret playground for the
winter.
Those huge round bales ruined that activity.
CBFalconer wrote:
> "R.H." wrote:
>>> 861 This hay fork was for loose hay , not for bales. I do not think
>>> there were many (if any) hay balers around in 1885
>> You're right, I removed the word bale from my answer. Hay balers weren't
>> common until at least the 1940's.
>
> And are disappearing now. You don't see haybales anymore, instead
> there are some sort of cylindrical things wrapped in plastic (I
> think). Probably improves immunity to rain.
>
Not disappearing where I drive a lot (Idaho,
Oregon, Nevada).. You see regular bales (60-80
pounds), big round ones(no plastic)(probably 600+
pounds) and the big square ones (probably 500+
pounds).