As an equipment operator I can tell you from a productive standpoint (actual tasks achieved)the first example took a chunk out of that bridge and could have been achieved with an excavator with a long stick . Second example needed a bigger bucket. Third didn't achieve any meaningful task and the stunts could have been achieved with a track machine. And the last example didn't really need to climb the wall to do the small amount of grading that could have been done with a skidsteer.
At min 2:00 the machine broke the concrete of the bridge, damaging assets while operating is far from good!! You need to improve your design for safety and quality. Not recommended!
seems pretty impractical and inferior to a tracked machine to me. i mean it's a freaking excavator... it takes 2 minutes to build yourself a ledge to work from and 2 minutes to fill it back in when you're done.
The video emphasizes the site-work, but It's *getting to* the site that's a key advantage over tracked machines. The steep pitches and sideslopes these machines operate on would tip a tracked ex, even with the arm extended fully upslope to counterbalance. It's not time-effective, practical, or acceptable to build a series of ledges for 1/4 mile to access a work site, then tear them down on your way out. That's basically building a road so you can go dig a hole. Also, although the first operator does this no justice, it's possible to 'tiptoe' around (and between) infrastructure.
Typically used for railway embankment work over in the UK, love the tracked machines but sometimes there are angles you just can't work at safely, these machines are fantastic especially when kitted with tiltrotators.
I operate a kaiser spider and I'm telling you a tracked machine can not go were these machines do. Before this machine I was operating tracked machines for 17 years. Again tracked machines could never go were these go. Not in a million years
