Changing Big Red

Submitted: Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 21:53
ThreadID: 41869 Views:2626 Replies:6 FollowUps:11
This Thread has been Archived
Wayne's Big Red post from a few days ago got me searching the photo albums.
So below, are some big red photos from 1988, 2001 and 2002.
Strikes me all those vehicles haven't worn it down at all! But it certainly had more vegetation in 2001 than 2006. I can't convince myself that 1988 is much different to now.
!MPG:15!

!MPG:16!

!MPG:17!

I also have photos from 2004 and 2006, but for some reason they are not uploading. Might try them later.

Cheers
phil
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:00

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:00
OK got the others loaded, and on second thoughts, 2006 looks pretty bare!
!MPG:18!

!MPG:19!
AnswerID: 219099

Follow Up By: Member - John (Vic) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:43

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:43
Interesting pictures Phil, wonder what the annual rain fall was in the year leading up to each photo?
VKS737 - Mobile 6352 (Selcall 6352)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 479595

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:59

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:59
Hi John,
My recollection is that Lake Eyre was full in 1989 and 2000.
My recollection of the 1988 trip was that there were rabbit plagues everywhere and it was dry and dusty.
There was a heap of rain in June 2001 - we had to defer the trip to August, and the wildflowers were out.
I think we also had rain and wildflowers in 2002.
2004 was the year we first did the Madigan Line and again it was a good year for rain.
We did 2 trips in 2006, and as everyone knows it was dry and dusty.

Average rainfall for Birdsville is 168mm, but the variability is very high. I couldn't find the rainfall figures for those years.
0
FollowupID: 479603

Reply By: lifeisgood - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:31

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:31
Interesting comparison. 88 and 2006 seem to be pretty dry all right.
Agree the hill as viewed from the West appears to have remained fairly intact.
From the East my first impressions last year was that it was worn somewhat less steep. Anyway the sand seems to be recycling itself so theres no need for any greenies to be concerned. The lack of ground cover is a nature at work (drought)
and no plants were injured in the photo shoots LOL
AnswerID: 219109

Reply By: Footloose - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:44

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:44
Ahhh, do I see an FJ55V in one of those photos ? I crossed the Simpson in one in about 83...5mpg with a Holly and extractors :)))
AnswerID: 219113

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:04

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:04
Footy, you have a good eye. That FJ55V was my first LandCruiser - had a LandRover and 2wds before that. I cut the rust, resprayed it, and had a ball with it. 2F motor got about 17mpg on most trips. Loaded it with the family - 4 kids - they all wanted to be in the middle seat in the front! I'd love to have one again :-))
0
FollowupID: 479607

Follow Up By: Footloose - Friday, Feb 02, 2007 at 09:58

Friday, Feb 02, 2007 at 09:58
Phil, mine was bulletproof until the rust got to it. I did the engine mods to get over the dunes (I was pretty stupid even in those days :) It would go far too fast for the steering, brakes and suspension.
The guys I picked up along the way had a pix of me with 4wheels in the air...and I didnt realize that I'd been driving it that hard. Got to Birdsville with half a jerry of petrol left...thats why I didnt really pay much attention to Big Red ...up and over and how far is it to Birdsville LOL.
The bullbar had tyres and star pickets lashed to it. I ended up carrying a motor bike lashed upright (wheels off) in the back etc etc.
What a beast!
0
FollowupID: 479687

Reply By: Wayne (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:51

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 22:51
Phil,

A couple of other thins from the photos.

The 55 Series has no roof rack, skinny tyres and not a lot of gear in the back. No cargo barrier either.

Big Red had only one track over it as well and that is the way I would like to see it. One sand dune one track.

From 1988 up to 2006 Big Red has not been worn or blown away, but it would be interesting if it has moved either to or away from Birdsville.

The sand dunes on Stockton Beach are always on the move. They are moving further away from the beach and are burying the trees as it mover westward.

Wayne
AnswerID: 219118

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:15

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:15
Hi Wayne,
You'd be game to put a roofrack of a 55series - too much roof rust - it would fall off in no time. We pulled a 1960 model Treg trailer on that trip - came out from Birdsville to see what was out there. The caravan park back then was a dump (before Ruth and Ian transformed it), so we were camped on the Diamantina River.

Big Red had chicken tracks back in 1988. There was a huge lip on the top when we were there, so the chicken track was our only option. You can see the main one faintly off to the right. Multiple tracks over dunes doesn't bother me - at least they are there for the inexperienced/ overloaded/trailers. But like you, I always take the centre track - rain hail or shine.

The dunes are mightier than the vehicles - erosion is not a factor IMO.

Sand Dune movement is a natural phenomenon. Have you read Mark Shephards books on the Simpson and Great Victorian Deserts - they are a must read if you like to learn more scrience about the deserts.

Cheers
Phil
0
FollowupID: 479611

Follow Up By: geocacher (djcache) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:19

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:19
You'd find very little movement in even the sparsely vegetated dune on an annual basis.

Dave
0
FollowupID: 479615

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:28

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:28
The skinny tyres were very common back then. They were the best option for me - I had little money - the tyres I had were michelins bought 2nd hand for $100 for 4. Must have averaged about 5 punctures a trip back then. Cargo barriers were just being invented as well, but we put the heavy stuff in the trailer. Had canvas water bags on the bullbar, and a 20litre Finch 3 way fridge for some of the essentials. Took it out and ran it on gas every night - no 2nd battery back then. Camping is luxury now :-))
0
FollowupID: 479618

Follow Up By: geocacher (djcache) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:48

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:48
Luxury! Reminds me of a Python sketch. Young people don't know how good they've got it camping nowadays....

Dave

FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Aye, very passable, that, very passable bit of risotto.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
Nothing like a good glass of Château de Chasselas, eh, Josiah?
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
You're right there, Obadiah.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Who'd have thought thirty year ago we'd all be sittin' here drinking Château de Chasselas, eh?
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
In them days we was glad to have the price of a cup o' tea.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
A cup o' cold tea.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Without milk or sugar.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Or tea.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
In a cracked cup, an' all.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Oh, we never had a cup. We used to have to drink out of a rolled up newspaper.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
The best we could manage was to suck on a piece of damp cloth.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
But you know, we were happy in those days, though we were poor.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Because we were poor. My old Dad used to say to me, "Money doesn't buy you happiness, son".
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Aye, 'e was right.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Aye, 'e was.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
I was happier then and I had nothin'. We used to live in this tiny old house with great big holes in the roof.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
House! You were lucky to live in a house! We used to live in one room, all twenty-six of us, no furniture, 'alf the floor was missing, and we were all 'uddled together in one corner for fear of falling.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Eh, you were lucky to have a room! We used to have to live in t' corridor!
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Oh, we used to dream of livin' in a corridor! Would ha' been a palace to us. We used to live in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woke up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! House? Huh.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Well, when I say 'house' it was only a hole in the ground covered by a sheet of tarpaulin, but it was a house to us.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
We were evicted from our 'ole in the ground; we 'ad to go and live in a lake.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
You were lucky to have a lake! There were a hundred and fifty of us living in t' shoebox in t' middle o' road.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Cardboard box?
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Aye.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down t' mill, fourteen hours a day, week-in week-out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home our Dad would thrash us to sleep wi' his belt.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of 'ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky!
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Well, of course, we had it tough. We used to 'ave to get up out of shoebox at twelve o'clock at night and lick road clean wit' tongue. We had two bits of cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at mill for sixpence every four years, and when we got home our Dad would slice us in two wit' bread knife.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us and dance about on our graves singing Hallelujah.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
And you try and tell the young people of today that ..... they won't believe you.
ALL:
They won't!
0
FollowupID: 479628

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Friday, Feb 02, 2007 at 08:59

Friday, Feb 02, 2007 at 08:59
dave,
I reckon I know almost every line of that sketch - its a classic
0
FollowupID: 479667

Follow Up By: geocacher (djcache) - Friday, Feb 02, 2007 at 09:22

Friday, Feb 02, 2007 at 09:22
Hi Phil,

I tend to agree about the Python sketch. Timeless humour.

On the topic of dune movement here is a response I got when I asked the question about rate of dune movement of a lecturer on the topic.

Dr. Giles Wiggs is a university lecturer in geomorphology specialising in the computational analysis of the physical processes and controls on aeolian sediment transport and landform dynamics. His site bio on Oxford Universities web site lists his current research as "Giles Wiggs' research focuses on field sites in the Middle East (Oman and Kuwait), southern Africa (South Africa, Botswana and Namibia), former Soviet Central Asia (Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan) and Australia."

Dave

His response to my email asking about rate of dune movement in vegetated dune systems:

Hi Dave,

There hasn't been much work on the Australian dunefield dynamics so its hard for me to refer you to a sensible paper. However, from experience I can say that they are similar in many respects (the Simpson at least) to the southern African examples of vegetated dune systems and so they are essentially fixed with very little net movement. It would be hard to notice any great change in dune form over a period of several years. This isn't true where the vegetation cover has been reduced to below about 15% areal cover (around vehicle tracks, boreholes, cattle stations etc). Here the dunes will be active and will shift ... but this tends to be only very localised. Of course, with potential changes in climate and possible reductions in rainfall the vegetation distribution may change...and then parts of the dunefields will probably re-activate.

I'm not sure this is really the answer you wanted... Enjoy the dunes!

Best wishes, Giles
0
FollowupID: 479675

Reply By: Trekkie (Member - WA) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:44

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:44
Just to fill in one of the missing years, here are two of Big Red in July 2005 - One from the top looking West
AnswerID: 219127

Follow Up By: Trekkie (Member - WA) - Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:46

Thursday, Feb 01, 2007 at 23:46
Durrh - helps if you include the photo

!MPG:14!

!MPG:13!
0
FollowupID: 479627

Reply By: Shawsie (Bris) - Friday, Feb 02, 2007 at 17:05

Friday, Feb 02, 2007 at 17:05
Looks just like I remember it in July 2006 :o)
AnswerID: 219290

Sponsored Links