Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

best machines for test excavation

  • 12-11-2007 1:43pm
    #1
    pog it
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭


    I know that toothless buckets are best practice anyway, but can anyone advise on the best type of machine that should be used for testing, or is there any difference?
    Cheers :)


Comments

  • #2
    boneless
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,487 ✭✭✭boneless


    pog it wrote: »
    I know that toothless buckets are best practice anyway, but can anyone advise on the best type of machine that should be used for testing, or is there any difference?
    Cheers :)

    To be quite honest, a shovel and a trowel would be the ideal tool, with a few pairs of arms!! :p

    Toothless buckets are the norm. The skill of the driver along with the experience of the archaeologist should be good enough. Depending on the nature of the site and indeed the area size, tracked Himacs or small JCB's are usually used. I have seen mini diggers being used on city centre sites too, where there was access problems for the bigger machines.


  • #3
    pog it
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭pog it


    Thanks Boneless. I'm just recently comparing that to what normally gets hauled into sites...

    On another related strand...I'm thinking of going back to digging and basically I want to pick up the best skills possible. i was thinking back and the English archaeologists were usually more skilled than the people trained in Ireland, and I know most of them are coming over here because the pay is a lot better, and well looking at Bajr and seeing 310 sterling a week I wouldn't blame them! But yea, would people recommend going to England and learning the trade there and then coming back to Ireland to dig?? It's just something I'm thinking about lately..


  • #4
    boneless
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,487 ✭✭✭boneless


    Skills over here have come on a long way in recent years, to be honest. £310 sterling compares to the average wage of a Site Assistant here though. It does depend on which firm you are working for though. General Operatives are usually on €9 an hour on average, rising to about €11 an hour for assistants.


  • #5
    Meathlass
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Meathlass


    boneless wrote: »
    Skills over here have come on a long way in recent years, to be honest. £310 sterling compares to the average wage of a Site Assistant here though. It does depend on which firm you are working for though. General Operatives are usually on €9 an hour on average, rising to about €11 an hour for assistants.


    Skills are definately comparable with Irish trained people these days. You just have to keep reminding the English people on site to dig 100% of the feature!


  • #6
    boneless
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,487 ✭✭✭boneless


    Meathlass wrote: »
    Skills are definately comparable with Irish trained people these days. You just have to keep reminding the English people on site to dig 100% of the feature!


    ;) Been there!!!


  • Advertisement
Advertisement