There's the 64 million dollar question. Even if such wood exists today, the
owner is unlikely to be willing to allow it to be harvested.
It's worse than that actually.
A few years ago, one of the last "untouched" Oak groves in New England
had several trees in the 400 to 500 year age group toppled by high winds
during a Hurricane. The trees were, well to put it bluntly, dead. An
historical preservation group wanted to harvest the wood to do some
restoration work on a number of historic wooden vessels, the USS
Constitution in particular, needed old oak of the proper shape to make
new parts.
The Conservation group that owned the property, would hear nothing of
that, and, decided that the wood should be left to decay naturally...
There are a number of problems with this not the least of which is there
hasn't been a truly natural, untouched by the hand of man, forest in New
England for at least 5 thousand years.
The natives practicing slash and burn agriculture after all, and the
later settlers managing the forests for their own purposes after that.
In fact the demise of the Passenger Pigeon alone modified the
Northeastern forests so that they can no longer be returned to their
original state.
Yet, the wood rotted in the forest none the less.
On 4/21/2019 3:46 AM, mike wilson wrote:
There's the 64 million dollar question. Even if such wood exists today, the
owner is unlikely to be willing to allow it to be harvested.
ND is in an unusual (but not unique) position - it's a historical artefact that
can still function for its intended purpose. It therefore behoves us as its
temporary guardians to inflict as little change as possible. How that's going
to be done is the interesting question. Windsor castle showed that restoration
is possible on a smaller scale. Not least because this is unlikely to be the
only instance, larger scale work needs a game plan. Nelson planted a tree for
every one he harvested - that's the sort of forward thinking that needs to be
done right now. I'm not confident.
On 21 April 2019 at 00:30 John <jsessoms...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
In that case, where are they going to get the timbers they're going to need?
Seems to me the "wasn't done that way when ND was constructed" argument is going
to apply to anything they might be able to do today, which means they're left
trying to find the least historically incorrect way of rebuilding.
On 4/20/2019 02:28:20, mike wilson wrote:
Glulam falls down (possibly literally) in the jointing. The whole point of
using green oak is that the joints tighten up as the wood seasons in the
building, reducing to neglibility the need for joint maintenance. The system
works, as can be seen in the large number of buildings that are approaching a
millenium in age. In contrast, the oldest glulam building is not even 200
years old. The biggest argument against it, however, is that it wasn't done
that way when ND was constructed.
On 19 April 2019 at 04:49 John <jsessoms...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glued_laminated_timber
On 4/18/2019 03:46:33, Bob Pdml wrote:
I expect the oak will be replaced with some kind of engineered wood beams.
That would be the architectural equivalent of this:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19349921
On the other hand it was the French who gave us post-modernism and a love of
fragmentation and the simulacrum, so perhaps it's not a bad idea.
Apparently a US researcher recently laser-scanned the whole thing, so maybe we
could just 3D-print a new one, in resin made from harvested ocean plastic.
https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/future-of-notre-dame
B
On 18 Apr 2019, at 01:00, John <jsessoms...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
It took 182 years to build it the first time, so if it takes longer than 5
years for the repairs that's not such a big deal.
Carpenters can be trained. If it takes 40 years to rebuild it, that's a career.
The oak might be another problem, but I expect the oak will be replaced with
some kind of engineered wood beams. Nor will it surprise me if there's a lot of
international support for the reconstruction.
On 4/17/2019 13:52:11, Bob Pdml wrote:
French people are saying 'typical Macron, promising something when he has no
idea whether it is possible or not'. One article i read suggests that it will
take up to 40 years. The bishop has already said it will be closed for at least
5 or 6.
One of the problems is that there aren't enough oak trees or carpenters with
the right skills
On 17 Apr 2019, at 17:52, Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote:
Thanks to all who commented or had a look. In the hours since this tragedy it’s
become obvious that the cathedral can be restored. I will take year -- Macron
says 5 years — but it will be worth the wait.
On Apr 16, 2019, at 3:12 PM, Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote:
I’m catholic only by birth not by practice, but watching Notre Dame burn last
night was crushing. I immediately recalled how I was overwhelmed by the majesty
and history of this ancient cathedral when I visited it on a spring afternoon
in 2003. Extending a business trip by a day, I wandered the streets of Paris
with my Leica iiif RD and Summicron 50/2 Collapsible, alternately shooting
tribute-x and Portra 400. I had the color neg film loaded when I stopped in the
cathedral and captured a few images as best I could, given the faded mirror of
my Leica and the dim lighting. Yesterday, I wondered what had become of those
images. I found an envelope that contained the negatives and camera store
prints and scanned a few of the negatives. Today, I assembled a small gallery.
https://www.photo.net/gallery/1109648#//Sort-Newest/All-Categories/All-Time/Page-1
--
America wasn't founded so that we could all be better.
America was founded so we could all be anything we damn well please.
- P.J. O'Rourke
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
