Tie Down Straps - Help Needed

[Paul Remde]

Hi,

I am trying to provide a very high quality sailplane tie-down kit and I need
the help of this very knowledgeable group.

A customer of mine recommended that I buy and sell the tie-down system that
Cobra offers. I did some research and talked to Cobra about it. I came to
the conclusion that I liked their tie-down straps, but decided not to buy
their stakes but rather to use "The CLAW" anchoring system. I bought a
batch of the tie-down straps from Cobra and sold one set to the customer
that had started the process. The good news is that the straps are
extremely nice and rugged. They are a little over 15 feet long and have
very nice foam padding on about 5 feet of the strap. There is a very rugged
metal cam buckle at one end of the strap. They will work very nicely with
The CLAW system. When used with a pair of wing stands they will hold the
wings down very securely.

The bad news is that the straps are extremely expensive (in my opinion) for
what they are. To make a fair profit I will need to sell them for $50 each.
I can buy similar 1" straps at my local hardware store for much less, but
they wouldn't have the very nice padding found on the Cobra provided straps.

So, the reason for this post is to see if any of you have any suggestions on
sources for the straps - with metal buckles and padding. The straps have
the words "Sail & Fly By Sails Products" sewed into the strap. I have had
no luck finding the source or any reference to the straps using Google.
Does anyone know where they are made? The name implies that they are made
for both the sailing and aviation markets. I have no idea where in the
world they are made. My guess is that Cobra buys them and marks them up and
then I have to pay for the shipping for the heavy package all the way to my
office in Minnesota, USA.

My goal is to find a lower cost source so I can offer an very high quality
and reasonably priced system for glider pilots. For now, you can see the
very nice, but somewhat pricey option on my web site here:
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/misc.htm#Tie-Down_Equipment

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com

[brianDG303]

I always get tie down stuff from Mac's. They sell a nice strap for $5,
and check out this strap pad-

http://www.macscustomtiedowns.com/product/115/TieDowns


The CLAW- when I looked at this I decided to use flyties (
http://www.flyties.com/ ). The Claw looks like it will hold great as
long as the pulling force is directly up, but if the load moves around
it seems like the device itself would act as a lever with the near
arms prying the far stake up and out. In any case off center loads
will concentrate on individual stakes, perhaps.

Or maybe I just like the flyties better. The tool they give you to
pull the stakes out is really nice.

[Chris Reed[_2_]]

Google may be your friend. A search for "Sails Products" & Germany
reveal a company called Sails Products Sportartikel based in Baden
Wurttemberg. Contact details (snail mail only) via:

http://www.hotfrog.de/Firmen/SAILS-PRODUCTS-Sportartikel

The company doesn't appear to have a website, but you might find an
online phone directory for Germany and reach them that way.

Paul Remde wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to provide a very high quality sailplane tie-down kit and I need
> the help of this very knowledgeable group.
>
> A customer of mine recommended that I buy and sell the tie-down system that
> Cobra offers. I did some research and talked to Cobra about it. I came to
> the conclusion that I liked their tie-down straps, but decided not to buy
> their stakes but rather to use "The CLAW" anchoring system. I bought a
> batch of the tie-down straps from Cobra and sold one set to the customer
> that had started the process. The good news is that the straps are
> extremely nice and rugged. They are a little over 15 feet long and have
> very nice foam padding on about 5 feet of the strap. There is a very rugged
> metal cam buckle at one end of the strap. They will work very nicely with
> The CLAW system. When used with a pair of wing stands they will hold the
> wings down very securely.
>
> The bad news is that the straps are extremely expensive (in my opinion) for
> what they are. To make a fair profit I will need to sell them for $50 each.
> I can buy similar 1" straps at my local hardware store for much less, but
> they wouldn't have the very nice padding found on the Cobra provided straps.
>
> So, the reason for this post is to see if any of you have any suggestions on
> sources for the straps - with metal buckles and padding. The straps have
> the words "Sail & Fly By Sails Products" sewed into the strap. I have had
> no luck finding the source or any reference to the straps using Google.
> Does anyone know where they are made? The name implies that they are made
> for both the sailing and aviation markets. I have no idea where in the
> world they are made. My guess is that Cobra buys them and marks them up and
> then I have to pay for the shipping for the heavy package all the way to my
> office in Minnesota, USA.
>
> My goal is to find a lower cost source so I can offer an very high quality
> and reasonably priced system for glider pilots. For now, you can see the
> very nice, but somewhat pricey option on my web site here:
> http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/misc.htm#Tie-Down_Equipment
>
> Good Soaring,
>
> Paul Remde
> Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
> http://www.cumulus-soaring.com
>
>

[Bill Daniels]

"brianDG303" > wrote in message
...
>I always get tie down stuff from Mac's. They sell a nice strap for $5,
> and check out this strap pad-
>
> http://www.macscustomtiedowns.com/product/115/TieDowns
>
>
> The CLAW- when I looked at this I decided to use flyties (
> http://www.flyties.com/ ). The Claw looks like it will hold great as
> long as the pulling force is directly up, but if the load moves around
> it seems like the device itself would act as a lever with the near
> arms prying the far stake up and out. In any case off center loads
> will concentrate on individual stakes, perhaps.
>
> Or maybe I just like the flyties better. The tool they give you to
> pull the stakes out is really nice.
>

FWIW, I know of two gliders totaled as a result of the "claw" pulling out of
the ground. Gliders tend to repeatedly yank at their tiedowns in a storm.
This will weaken the hold of almost any stake system including the "Claw".

[Paul Remde]

Hi Bill,

That is a very strong accusation against the CLAW. Can you please give more
information about the circumstances of the 2 failures? Was the CLAW used
properly? It is designed for straight-up loads - not side-loads. I am
extremely impressed with the design of the CLAW. Until your post I have
heard only positive comments on it. It would seem to me (being a mechanical
engineer) that the CLAW is uniquely designed to grab hold more tightly when
a load is applied (from directly above).

The link to the flyties below does look interesting, but I don't agree that
it would be more robust than the CLAW.

Thanks,

Paul Remde

"Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
...
>
> "brianDG303" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I always get tie down stuff from Mac's. They sell a nice strap for $5,
>> and check out this strap pad-
>>
>> http://www.macscustomtiedowns.com/product/115/TieDowns
>>
>>
>> The CLAW- when I looked at this I decided to use flyties (
>> http://www.flyties.com/ ). The Claw looks like it will hold great as
>> long as the pulling force is directly up, but if the load moves around
>> it seems like the device itself would act as a lever with the near
>> arms prying the far stake up and out. In any case off center loads
>> will concentrate on individual stakes, perhaps.
>>
>> Or maybe I just like the flyties better. The tool they give you to
>> pull the stakes out is really nice.
>>
>
> FWIW, I know of two gliders totaled as a result of the "claw" pulling out
> of the ground. Gliders tend to repeatedly yank at their tiedowns in a
> storm. This will weaken the hold of almost any stake system including the
> "Claw".
>

[Bill Daniels]

I one of them was Paul Hansen's Sisu 1A in California the other was a
Schweizer in Texas - Houston I think. Anyway there are dozens more stories
of stakes pulling out leading to the distruction of gliders in the history
of gliding.

I don't think it's a matter of mechanical engineering, it's soil
engineering. Stakes will hold in turf or damp soil held together by strong
roots. The dry sand and gravel of western deserts just won't hold a stake
no matter how cleverly it's designed. Even half axle shafts driven in with
a sledge hammer have pulled out. The act of driving in the stake loosens
the soil enough to prevent the stake(s) from holding making the whole
exercise self-defeating.

Take a look at airport tiedowns where there's some liability involved.
These are usually 1/2 - 3/4" steel cable set in several hundred pounds of
concrete at multiple points. Anything less is a short term expediency used
under emergency conditions with no guarantees.

I spent some time working on the problem before giving up on stakes
altogether and working out the "bury the ditty bag" scheme. Even if a
dittybag does pull out of the ground, there's still several hundred pounds
of dirt tied to each wing. Ditty bags and a folding trenching tool weigh
less than stakes too. Why not find a good source of those to sell?

BTW, trenching tools have dug some pretty deep holes. I've been sold by
Marines that it's truly amazing how quick and deep you can dig when being
shot at.

"Paul Remde" > wrote in message
news:5sUAk.350834$yE1.314870@attbi_s21...
> Hi Bill,
>
> That is a very strong accusation against the CLAW. Can you please give
> more information about the circumstances of the 2 failures? Was the CLAW
> used properly? It is designed for straight-up loads - not side-loads. I
> am extremely impressed with the design of the CLAW. Until your post I
> have heard only positive comments on it. It would seem to me (being a
> mechanical engineer) that the CLAW is uniquely designed to grab hold more
> tightly when a load is applied (from directly above).
>
> The link to the flyties below does look interesting, but I don't agree
> that it would be more robust than the CLAW.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul Remde
>
> "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "brianDG303" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>I always get tie down stuff from Mac's. They sell a nice strap for $5,
>>> and check out this strap pad-
>>>
>>> http://www.macscustomtiedowns.com/product/115/TieDowns
>>>
>>>
>>> The CLAW- when I looked at this I decided to use flyties (
>>> http://www.flyties.com/ ). The Claw looks like it will hold great as
>>> long as the pulling force is directly up, but if the load moves around
>>> it seems like the device itself would act as a lever with the near
>>> arms prying the far stake up and out. In any case off center loads
>>> will concentrate on individual stakes, perhaps.
>>>
>>> Or maybe I just like the flyties better. The tool they give you to
>>> pull the stakes out is really nice.
>>>
>>
>> FWIW, I know of two gliders totaled as a result of the "claw" pulling out
>> of the ground. Gliders tend to repeatedly yank at their tiedowns in a
>> storm. This will weaken the hold of almost any stake system including the
>> "Claw".
>>
>
>

[Eric Greenwell]

Bill Daniels wrote:

> FWIW, I know of two gliders totaled as a result of the "claw" pulling out of
> the ground. Gliders tend to repeatedly yank at their tiedowns in a storm.
> This will weaken the hold of almost any stake system including the "Claw".

For tying down at the gliderport, putting a wing stand on each wing
would considerbly reduce the yanking. For landouts, when you don't have
the stands, I wonder if this could be avoided by using one or two Claws
tied to the main gear, and one other to hold a wing tip on the ground.
Tying to the gear would considerably reduce the repeated yanking.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

[5Z]

On Sep 19, 12:57*pm, brianDG303 > wrote:
> I decided to use flyties *(http://www.flyties.com/).

I've been using a similar product for over 20 years. Got it from
Australia.

The stakes are nylon and have held up amazingly well, sometimes
twisting a bit to get into rocky soil, but so far, never broke one. I
would guess I've used it 10 - 15 times, mostly for overnight tiedown
in benign conditions, but a few times I've had to secure the glider in
gusty conditions while waiting for my crew.

As for straps, I clicked on an ad for "CAM Buckle Straps":
http://www.kingroyusa.com/cargo-control-tie-down-c-2_7.html?gclid=CKnz8NWA6ZUCFQq4sgodLxW8ew

that showed up in my Google sidebar. Pretty nice bulk pricing at less
than $10 per strap & buckle.

-Tom

[sisu1a]

On Sep 19, 2:47*pm, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:
> I one of them was Paul Hansen's Sisu 1A in California the other was a
> Schweizer in Texas - Houston I think. *Anyway there are dozens more stories
> of stakes pulling out leading to the distruction of gliders in the history
> of gliding.
>
> I don't think it's a matter of mechanical engineering, it's soil
> engineering. *Stakes will hold in turf or damp soil held together by strong
> roots. *The dry sand and gravel of western deserts just won't hold a stake
> no matter how cleverly it's designed. *Even half axle shafts driven in with
> a sledge hammer have pulled out. *The act of driving in the stake loosens
> the soil enough to prevent the stake(s) from holding making the whole
> exercise self-defeating.
>
My Sisu did indeed get pulled out when tied out with the Claw anchors,
but it was really my own fault and not a design flaw. They are
wonderful tiedowns, but like any portable solution they are NOT a
substitute for permanent anchors or proper ground handling. Mine were
in the ground for far too long prior to the big storm. I did have the
tail up on a bucket and the wings on stands, but this did not make up
for the compromised condition of the soil my anchors were in by the
time of the storm. There was an SGS 1-35 tied out right next to my
ship in the exact same manner. His tiedowns held. The difference? Mine
had been in for about 5 months. His only 2. There is no better
portable tiedown system out there, and I still use them today.

Recapping, they had no problem holding a 1-35 into the ground in a
sustained 60+mph headwind (gusting higher...), despite being in the
ground for 2 months, that was completely saturated, soft, and muddy by
the time of the storm. Hmmm, pretty impressive actually!

I have no details of the TX SGS, so I will not comment on that one.

With mine though, like any terrible incident in aviation there was a
chain of events that could have been broken at numerous links. Had I
simply pulled out my tiedowns and re-situated them in fresh earth, had
I opened my spoilers, had I added my second (then dormant) set, had I
de-regged and put it in the trailer...Any one of these solutions would
have made all the difference. Lesson learned : (

Bottom line though, those claw anchors are badd a$$, just use them as
they are supposed to be used. There are NO other portable spike/
dogscrew type anchors that come even close to competing with them for
holding power, ease of installation, and especially in ease of removal
(that I have heard of/seen tested anyways...).

-Paul

PS. I like the ditty bag idea, but there are many places out west
where you would have trouble getting even a full size spade shovel
into the ground let alone one of those army surplus portable shovels,
and you can't guarantee the prospect of finding loose rocks either.
The Claw anchors go in in about one minute apiece in hard ground, and
that is where they can develop their full 1200lb pull rating (they
take ~500lbs apiece to pull out of soft grass turf, close to double
the other styles tested by Sporty's [inc the spikes-through-a-hockey
puck type mentioned in a previous post here...]). The ditty bag
solution however IS light enough to have little excuse for not having
it on hand the ship just in case it may work though...

[[email protected]]

On Sep 19, 5:38*pm, sisu1a > wrote:
> On Sep 19, 2:47*pm, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:> I one of them was Paul Hansen's Sisu 1A in California the other was a
> > Schweizer in Texas - Houston I think. *Anyway there are dozens more stories
> > of stakes pulling out leading to the distruction of gliders in the history
> > of gliding.
>
> > I don't think it's a matter of mechanical engineering, it's soil
> > engineering. *Stakes will hold in turf or damp soil held together by strong
> > roots. *The dry sand and gravel of western deserts just won't hold a stake
> > no matter how cleverly it's designed. *Even half axle shafts driven in with
> > a sledge hammer have pulled out. *The act of driving in the stake loosens
> > the soil enough to prevent the stake(s) from holding making the whole

I agree with Bill. I did a test with the claw attached to my trailer
jack and the wheel on a scale. The claw pulled out of compacted
decomposed granite in my driveway at about 250 lbs, came completetly
out at 300, but this was aided by weed stop fabric under the DG. The
soil was damp to a great depth due the the Socal rains in January this
year, but not soggy. I doubt that dry, uncompacted sand would do
better.

I have the claw in my Cirrus as an emegency tie down only, I think it
is a good product for that application.

For permanent tie downs nothing like a tire buried with a chain around
it. One the sand is watered down, it is not goining anywhere.

Mike Malis.

[Darryl Ramm]

On Sep 19, 6:05*pm, wrote:
> On Sep 19, 5:38*pm, sisu1a > wrote:
>
> > On Sep 19, 2:47*pm, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:> I one of them was Paul Hansen's Sisu 1A in California the other was a
> > > Schweizer in Texas - Houston I think. *Anyway there are dozens more stories
> > > of stakes pulling out leading to the distruction of gliders in the history
> > > of gliding.
>
> > > I don't think it's a matter of mechanical engineering, it's soil
> > > engineering. *Stakes will hold in turf or damp soil held together by strong
> > > roots. *The dry sand and gravel of western deserts just won't hold a stake
> > > no matter how cleverly it's designed. *Even half axle shafts driven in with
> > > a sledge hammer have pulled out. *The act of driving in the stake loosens
> > > the soil enough to prevent the stake(s) from holding making the whole
>
> I agree with Bill. *I did a test with the claw attached to my trailer
> jack and the wheel on a scale. *The claw pulled out of compacted
> decomposed granite in my driveway at about 250 lbs, came completetly
> out at 300, but this was aided by weed stop fabric under the DG. *The
> soil was damp to a great depth due the the Socal rains in January this
> year, but not soggy. *I doubt that dry, uncompacted sand would do
> better.
>
> I have the claw in my Cirrus as an emegency tie down only, I think it
> is a good product for that application.
>
> For permanent tie downs nothing like a tire buried with a chain around
> it. *One the sand is watered down, it is not goining anywhere.
>
> Mike Malis.

Ditto. I think the claw is a good option as an landout or similar
situation. I've tried a few screw in types and you just cant get them
into either the hard compacted dirt or rocky soils in many locations.
The best place for the glider to be is inside it's box or a hangar.
Otherwise get a real tie down installed, the claw and screw-ins are
all completely inappropriate for permanent tie downs. It is not that
hard to dig a hole, sink some anchors and fill with concrete.

Darryl

[Ralph Jones[_2_]]

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:47:09 -0600, "Bill Daniels"
<bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:
[snip]
>
>BTW, trenching tools have dug some pretty deep holes. I've been sold by
>Marines that it's truly amazing how quick and deep you can dig when being
>shot at.
>
And the dirt flying in the air tends to distract the enemy's aim...;-)

rj

[bumper]

"Paul Remde" > wrote in message
news:5sUAk.350834$yE1.314870@attbi_s21...
> Hi Bill,
>
> That is a very strong accusation against the CLAW. Can you please give
> more information about the circumstances of the 2 failures?

There was a Husky aircraft lost last year while tied out using the Claw. The
Claw's casting failed, IIRC. However, there was some question as to whether
a nearby aircraft's tie down failed first, hitting the Husky. Both aircraft
totaled.

bumper
zz
Minden

[Brian[_1_]]

I have to admit I have been pretty dubious about how effective the
Claw is as a tie down.
I did purchase a set this year and am still pretty suspect of them.
Soil type and condition greatly affect how effective they are. This
summer we drove one into some hard packed gravel. The next day we
pulled it out by hand. Probably less that 50lbs straight up. The 12"
stakes simply aren't enough in many conditions. I have fabricated some
24" stakes for them and feel much more comfortable with the longer
stakes. My stakes are mild steel which isn't the best as the do bend
in rocky soil but it takes a lot more effort to remove them. I will
probably look into finding a hardened steel for future stakes.

Brian
HP16T

[bumper]

If you do a Google search on <mobile home anchors>, you'll find a lot of
reasonably priced options like this:

http://www.randgsupply.com/Warehouse/SetUp/shedanchorkits.htm

There are also rods for anchoring in rocks etc. It's only when it's
advertised for aircraft that it gets expensive . . .

bumper
zz
Minden
"Brian" > wrote in message
...
>I have to admit I have been pretty dubious about how effective the
> Claw is as a tie down.
> I did purchase a set this year and am still pretty suspect of them.
> Soil type and condition greatly affect how effective they are. This
> summer we drove one into some hard packed gravel. The next day we
> pulled it out by hand. Probably less that 50lbs straight up. The 12"
> stakes simply aren't enough in many conditions. I have fabricated some
> 24" stakes for them and feel much more comfortable with the longer
> stakes. My stakes are mild steel which isn't the best as the do bend
> in rocky soil but it takes a lot more effort to remove them. I will
> probably look into finding a hardened steel for future stakes.
>
> Brian
> HP16T

[[email protected]]

A very cheap solution that I use is to buy 2 18" long 2x2 steel angle
iron. Cut 45 degree edges at one end to make a point (the metal
supplier that you buy the angle from can do this). Drill a 0.5" at the
other end. Drive the angles into the ground at a 45 degree angle with
a sledge hammer at a place where the tie down rope will be at right
angles to the stake. Total cost: $15-20, not including the sledge.

You need as much surface area as possible for maximum hold strength.
Consequently I don't favor any kind of tie-down that looks like a tent
stake or an over-sized nail. It is important that the tie-down rope be
at right angles, or as close to it as possible, to maximize this
surface area. I also got a couple of cheap, small plastic buckets to
put over the tie-down so I wouldn't stub my toes or drop a wing on
them.

If you want a permanent high-strength tie-down get 2 or 3 used tires,
some cable or chain, and a shovel. Attach the chain to each tire and
bury the tire as deep as you can. The tires are free, the chain about
$1 a foot, and you probably already have a shovel.

Tom Seim

[[email protected]]

On Sep 19, 8:31*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On Sep 19, 6:05*pm, wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 19, 5:38*pm, sisu1a > wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 19, 2:47*pm, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:> I one of them was Paul Hansen's Sisu 1A in California the other was a
> > > > Schweizer in Texas - Houston I think. *Anyway there are dozens more stories
> > > > of stakes pulling out leading to the distruction of gliders in the history
> > > > of gliding.
>
> > > > I don't think it's a matter of mechanical engineering, it's soil
> > > > engineering. *Stakes will hold in turf or damp soil held together by strong
> > > > roots. *The dry sand and gravel of western deserts just won't hold a stake
> > > > no matter how cleverly it's designed. *Even half axle shafts driven in with
> > > > a sledge hammer have pulled out. *The act of driving in the stake loosens
> > > > the soil enough to prevent the stake(s) from holding making the whole
>
> > I agree with Bill. *I did a test with the claw attached to my trailer
> > jack and the wheel on a scale. *The claw pulled out of compacted
> > decomposed granite in my driveway at about 250 lbs, came completetly
> > out at 300, but this was aided by weed stop fabric under the DG. *The
> > soil was damp to a great depth due the the Socal rains in January this
> > year, but not soggy. *I doubt that dry, uncompacted sand would do
> > better.
>
> > I have the claw in my Cirrus as an emegency tie down only, I think it
> > is a good product for that application.
>
> > For permanent tie downs nothing like a tire buried with a chain around
> > it. *One the sand is watered down, it is not goining anywhere.
>
> > Mike Malis.
>
> Ditto. I think the claw is a good option as an landout or similar
> situation. I've tried a few screw in types and you just cant get them
> into either the hard compacted dirt or rocky soils in many locations.
> The best place for the glider to be is inside it's box or a hangar.
> Otherwise get a real tie down installed, the claw and screw-ins are
> all completely inappropriate for permanent tie downs. It is not that
> hard to dig a hole, sink some anchors and fill with concrete.

Same here. I keep a claw in each aircraft I fly (powered and glider)
because it's the best thing I've found out there. The kit is a bit
heavy, but that's fine by me because it' not cheap and will do the job
for a few days of tie-down.

Jeremy

[Paul Remde]

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the link, but I can't seem to find a simple strap with a metal
cam lock buckle on that page. I don't want any hooks or ratchets. Maybe
I'm not looking in the right part of the site.

Paul Remde

"5Z" > wrote in message
...
On Sep 19, 12:57 pm, brianDG303 > wrote:
> I decided to use flyties (http://www.flyties.com/).

I've been using a similar product for over 20 years. Got it from
Australia.

The stakes are nylon and have held up amazingly well, sometimes
twisting a bit to get into rocky soil, but so far, never broke one. I
would guess I've used it 10 - 15 times, mostly for overnight tiedown
in benign conditions, but a few times I've had to secure the glider in
gusty conditions while waiting for my crew.

As for straps, I clicked on an ad for "CAM Buckle Straps":
http://www.kingroyusa.com/cargo-control-tie-down-c-2_7.html?gclid=CKnz8NWA6ZUCFQq4sgodLxW8ew

that showed up in my Google sidebar. Pretty nice bulk pricing at less
than $10 per strap & buckle.

-Tom

[User]

Try http://www.screwits.com Small, light and they work !

The site has a comparison of all the tie downs available




wrote:
> A very cheap solution that I use is to buy 2 18" long 2x2 steel angle
> iron. Cut 45 degree edges at one end to make a point (the metal
> supplier that you buy the angle from can do this). Drill a 0.5" at the
> other end. Drive the angles into the ground at a 45 degree angle with
> a sledge hammer at a place where the tie down rope will be at right
> angles to the stake. Total cost: $15-20, not including the sledge.
>
> You need as much surface area as possible for maximum hold strength.
> Consequently I don't favor any kind of tie-down that looks like a tent
> stake or an over-sized nail. It is important that the tie-down rope be
> at right angles, or as close to it as possible, to maximize this
> surface area. I also got a couple of cheap, small plastic buckets to
> put over the tie-down so I wouldn't stub my toes or drop a wing on
> them.
>
> If you want a permanent high-strength tie-down get 2 or 3 used tires,
> some cable or chain, and a shovel. Attach the chain to each tire and
> bury the tire as deep as you can. The tires are free, the chain about
> $1 a foot, and you probably already have a shovel.
>
> Tom Seim

[sisu1a]

On Sep 23, 4:16*am, user > wrote:
> Tryhttp://www.screwits.com*Small, light and they work !
>
> The site has a comparison of all the tie downs available

Hmmm, that's some comparison! Glad they definitively settled that one.
According to their ultra scientific study (based on the risk of
accidentally striking your wing while installing...) they have
positively determined once and for all that their own system THEY sell
is indeed actually "The Ultimate Aircraft Tiedown System". Good thing
their team of crack scientists conducted such a thorough test of the
parameters that really matter to pilots...

Seriously, I wish I could find the photos Sporty's took of a large
backhoe fitted with a tensiometer actually testing all the major
available tiedowns to failure under the same conditions. The screw
type and hockey puck thingies that (cheap) pilots are trying
desperately to convince themselves can outperform the Claw (some of
which are just as expensive), failed miserably LONG before the Claw
anchors pulled out. Again, the Claw is substitute for permanent
anchors, however there simply is not a portable solution that
outperforms them for most situations (and by portable I mean no sledge
hammers, no pipe wrenches, no parts longer than a foot, >10lbs, ie
something you would actually carry in your ship) BTW, although they
have spikes, that is the only system that does not rely on friction in
the Z axis-hence the 10" long spikes. The forces are directed inwards
at ~45deg in an equidistant triangle that is gripping the earth
between the spikes. The harder you pull the harder they grab (until
failure of course). The only situation they suck in is in loose gravel/
sand, and that's where the dittybag deal really shines.

Actually I like when guys buy those screw types, as it is actually
quite entertaining to watch people STRUGGLE to get them in
(unfortunately they plane does not have to struggle much to pull them
back out). The Claw gos in incredibly easy and hold far more then the
competition. It's your plane though, so buy whatever you want. If your
plane is parked next to mine though, don't be offended if you awake
and see a Claw anchor or 2 added to your setup that almost let go in
the middle of the night (happened several times already...). It's also
nice not to have tripping hazards extending beyond the wing, not to
mention having nothing to impale your wing/tire protruding above the
ground, but to each their own.

I think that one should carry both the Claw AND the dittybag system
that Bill pioneered for a truly comprehensive and portable X/C set.
That way your bases are covered whether you land on very loose or very
hard ground, and one could use BOTH if really in trouble. (The Claw
goes in fast enough to secure it in the wind, which would buy the time
needed to fill the dittys)

BTW, getting back to the OP, I for one am not a big fan of cam straps.
The camstraps I have used in the past for securing loads on the road
required re-cinching all too often (all brands I tried...). I stick w/
the ratchet types if using straps, but for going light/portable I have
a little bit of 8mm spectra that fits the bill quite nicely. I trust
my knots FAR more than cam buckles, but maybe I am just biased on that
one. I don't like S-hooks either though, so I cut those off my straps
and replace them w/stainless screw type D-shackles.

-Paul

[User]

Hi Paul, i will find you the tests showing 2 Claws failed in the centre
bracket with just 150 pounds shock loads (it was done in a South African
magazine). They may be YOUR favourite but they are brittle and having
sold them before we have a few reports on low wing aircraft of holes in
the wings from the hammer (Obviously NOT the claws fault). Glad there
are choices out there for the public that way you can buy what suits
your needs, remembering these are NOT a replacement for a cable or
underground concrete block. Cheers

sisu1a wrote:
> On Sep 23, 4:16 am, user > wrote:
>> Tryhttp://www.screwits.com Small, light and they work !
>>
>> The site has a comparison of all the tie downs available
>
> Hmmm, that's some comparison! Glad they definitively settled that one.
> According to their ultra scientific study (based on the risk of
> accidentally striking your wing while installing...) they have
> positively determined once and for all that their own system THEY sell
> is indeed actually "The Ultimate Aircraft Tiedown System". Good thing
> their team of crack scientists conducted such a thorough test of the
> parameters that really matter to pilots...
>
> Seriously, I wish I could find the photos Sporty's took of a large
> backhoe fitted with a tensiometer actually testing all the major
> available tiedowns to failure under the same conditions. The screw
> type and hockey puck thingies that (cheap) pilots are trying
> desperately to convince themselves can outperform the Claw (some of
> which are just as expensive), failed miserably LONG before the Claw
> anchors pulled out. Again, the Claw is substitute for permanent
> anchors, however there simply is not a portable solution that
> outperforms them for most situations (and by portable I mean no sledge
> hammers, no pipe wrenches, no parts longer than a foot, >10lbs, ie
> something you would actually carry in your ship) BTW, although they
> have spikes, that is the only system that does not rely on friction in
> the Z axis-hence the 10" long spikes. The forces are directed inwards
> at ~45deg in an equidistant triangle that is gripping the earth
> between the spikes. The harder you pull the harder they grab (until
> failure of course). The only situation they suck in is in loose gravel/
> sand, and that's where the dittybag deal really shines.
>
> Actually I like when guys buy those screw types, as it is actually
> quite entertaining to watch people STRUGGLE to get them in
> (unfortunately they plane does not have to struggle much to pull them
> back out). The Claw gos in incredibly easy and hold far more then the
> competition. It's your plane though, so buy whatever you want. If your
> plane is parked next to mine though, don't be offended if you awake
> and see a Claw anchor or 2 added to your setup that almost let go in
> the middle of the night (happened several times already...). It's also
> nice not to have tripping hazards extending beyond the wing, not to
> mention having nothing to impale your wing/tire protruding above the
> ground, but to each their own.
>
> I think that one should carry both the Claw AND the dittybag system
> that Bill pioneered for a truly comprehensive and portable X/C set.
> That way your bases are covered whether you land on very loose or very
> hard ground, and one could use BOTH if really in trouble. (The Claw
> goes in fast enough to secure it in the wind, which would buy the time
> needed to fill the dittys)
>
> BTW, getting back to the OP, I for one am not a big fan of cam straps.
> The camstraps I have used in the past for securing loads on the road
> required re-cinching all too often (all brands I tried...). I stick w/
> the ratchet types if using straps, but for going light/portable I have
> a little bit of 8mm spectra that fits the bill quite nicely. I trust
> my knots FAR more than cam buckles, but maybe I am just biased on that
> one. I don't like S-hooks either though, so I cut those off my straps
> and replace them w/stainless screw type D-shackles.
>
> -Paul

[Paul Remde]

Hi,

I think that you are assuming incorrectly that the many extremely positive
reviews of the CLAW in this thread by "Paul" were written by me. I am not
the Paul that wrote those notes. I wrote the note that started this tread
and one or 2 others. I always include my last name in my posts.

Paul __________, Please include your last name or an alias in your posts so
people don't confuse your posts with mine. I don't disagree with your
posts, but you have done some passionate posts and I think people are
thinking it is me - pushing hard to sell products - which is not my style.

I do sell them and I do like them.

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com

"user" > wrote in message
...
> Hi Paul, i will find you the tests showing 2 Claws failed in the centre
> bracket with just 150 pounds shock loads (it was done in a South African
> magazine). They may be YOUR favourite but they are brittle and having sold
> them before we have a few reports on low wing aircraft of holes in the
> wings from the hammer (Obviously NOT the claws fault). Glad there are
> choices out there for the public that way you can buy what suits your
> needs, remembering these are NOT a replacement for a cable or underground
> concrete block. Cheers
>
> sisu1a wrote:
>> On Sep 23, 4:16 am, user > wrote:
>>> Tryhttp://www.screwits.com Small, light and they work !
>>>
>>> The site has a comparison of all the tie downs available
>>
>> Hmmm, that's some comparison! Glad they definitively settled that one.
>> According to their ultra scientific study (based on the risk of
>> accidentally striking your wing while installing...) they have
>> positively determined once and for all that their own system THEY sell
>> is indeed actually "The Ultimate Aircraft Tiedown System". Good thing
>> their team of crack scientists conducted such a thorough test of the
>> parameters that really matter to pilots...
>>
>> Seriously, I wish I could find the photos Sporty's took of a large
>> backhoe fitted with a tensiometer actually testing all the major
>> available tiedowns to failure under the same conditions. The screw
>> type and hockey puck thingies that (cheap) pilots are trying
>> desperately to convince themselves can outperform the Claw (some of
>> which are just as expensive), failed miserably LONG before the Claw
>> anchors pulled out. Again, the Claw is substitute for permanent
>> anchors, however there simply is not a portable solution that
>> outperforms them for most situations (and by portable I mean no sledge
>> hammers, no pipe wrenches, no parts longer than a foot, >10lbs, ie
>> something you would actually carry in your ship) BTW, although they
>> have spikes, that is the only system that does not rely on friction in
>> the Z axis-hence the 10" long spikes. The forces are directed inwards
>> at ~45deg in an equidistant triangle that is gripping the earth
>> between the spikes. The harder you pull the harder they grab (until
>> failure of course). The only situation they suck in is in loose gravel/
>> sand, and that's where the dittybag deal really shines.
>>
>> Actually I like when guys buy those screw types, as it is actually
>> quite entertaining to watch people STRUGGLE to get them in
>> (unfortunately they plane does not have to struggle much to pull them
>> back out). The Claw gos in incredibly easy and hold far more then the
>> competition. It's your plane though, so buy whatever you want. If your
>> plane is parked next to mine though, don't be offended if you awake
>> and see a Claw anchor or 2 added to your setup that almost let go in
>> the middle of the night (happened several times already...). It's also
>> nice not to have tripping hazards extending beyond the wing, not to
>> mention having nothing to impale your wing/tire protruding above the
>> ground, but to each their own.
>>
>> I think that one should carry both the Claw AND the dittybag system
>> that Bill pioneered for a truly comprehensive and portable X/C set.
>> That way your bases are covered whether you land on very loose or very
>> hard ground, and one could use BOTH if really in trouble. (The Claw
>> goes in fast enough to secure it in the wind, which would buy the time
>> needed to fill the dittys)
>>
>> BTW, getting back to the OP, I for one am not a big fan of cam straps.
>> The camstraps I have used in the past for securing loads on the road
>> required re-cinching all too often (all brands I tried...). I stick w/
>> the ratchet types if using straps, but for going light/portable I have
>> a little bit of 8mm spectra that fits the bill quite nicely. I trust
>> my knots FAR more than cam buckles, but maybe I am just biased on that
>> one. I don't like S-hooks either though, so I cut those off my straps
>> and replace them w/stainless screw type D-shackles.
>>
>> -Paul

[Paul Remde]

Hi,

I like the CLAW and recommend them and sell them. But I agree (and state on
my web site) that they are a temporary solution. I agree that an underground
concrete block is a much better long term solution.

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com

"user" > wrote in message
...
> Hi Paul, i will find you the tests showing 2 Claws failed in the centre
> bracket with just 150 pounds shock loads (it was done in a South African
> magazine). They may be YOUR favourite but they are brittle and having sold
> them before we have a few reports on low wing aircraft of holes in the
> wings from the hammer (Obviously NOT the claws fault). Glad there are
> choices out there for the public that way you can buy what suits your
> needs, remembering these are NOT a replacement for a cable or underground
> concrete block. Cheers
>
> sisu1a wrote:
>> On Sep 23, 4:16 am, user > wrote:
>>> Tryhttp://www.screwits.com Small, light and they work !
>>>
>>> The site has a comparison of all the tie downs available
>>
>> Hmmm, that's some comparison! Glad they definitively settled that one.
>> According to their ultra scientific study (based on the risk of
>> accidentally striking your wing while installing...) they have
>> positively determined once and for all that their own system THEY sell
>> is indeed actually "The Ultimate Aircraft Tiedown System". Good thing
>> their team of crack scientists conducted such a thorough test of the
>> parameters that really matter to pilots...
>>
>> Seriously, I wish I could find the photos Sporty's took of a large
>> backhoe fitted with a tensiometer actually testing all the major
>> available tiedowns to failure under the same conditions. The screw
>> type and hockey puck thingies that (cheap) pilots are trying
>> desperately to convince themselves can outperform the Claw (some of
>> which are just as expensive), failed miserably LONG before the Claw
>> anchors pulled out. Again, the Claw is substitute for permanent
>> anchors, however there simply is not a portable solution that
>> outperforms them for most situations (and by portable I mean no sledge
>> hammers, no pipe wrenches, no parts longer than a foot, >10lbs, ie
>> something you would actually carry in your ship) BTW, although they
>> have spikes, that is the only system that does not rely on friction in
>> the Z axis-hence the 10" long spikes. The forces are directed inwards
>> at ~45deg in an equidistant triangle that is gripping the earth
>> between the spikes. The harder you pull the harder they grab (until
>> failure of course). The only situation they suck in is in loose gravel/
>> sand, and that's where the dittybag deal really shines.
>>
>> Actually I like when guys buy those screw types, as it is actually
>> quite entertaining to watch people STRUGGLE to get them in
>> (unfortunately they plane does not have to struggle much to pull them
>> back out). The Claw gos in incredibly easy and hold far more then the
>> competition. It's your plane though, so buy whatever you want. If your
>> plane is parked next to mine though, don't be offended if you awake
>> and see a Claw anchor or 2 added to your setup that almost let go in
>> the middle of the night (happened several times already...). It's also
>> nice not to have tripping hazards extending beyond the wing, not to
>> mention having nothing to impale your wing/tire protruding above the
>> ground, but to each their own.
>>
>> I think that one should carry both the Claw AND the dittybag system
>> that Bill pioneered for a truly comprehensive and portable X/C set.
>> That way your bases are covered whether you land on very loose or very
>> hard ground, and one could use BOTH if really in trouble. (The Claw
>> goes in fast enough to secure it in the wind, which would buy the time
>> needed to fill the dittys)
>>
>> BTW, getting back to the OP, I for one am not a big fan of cam straps.
>> The camstraps I have used in the past for securing loads on the road
>> required re-cinching all too often (all brands I tried...). I stick w/
>> the ratchet types if using straps, but for going light/portable I have
>> a little bit of 8mm spectra that fits the bill quite nicely. I trust
>> my knots FAR more than cam buckles, but maybe I am just biased on that
>> one. I don't like S-hooks either though, so I cut those off my straps
>> and replace them w/stainless screw type D-shackles.
>>
>> -Paul

[sisu1a]

> I think that you are assuming incorrectly that the many extremely positive
> reviews of the CLAW in this thread by "Paul" were written by me. *I am not
> the Paul that wrote those notes. *I wrote the note that started this tread
> and one or 2 others. *I always include my last name in my posts.
>
> Paul __________, Please include your last name or an alias in your posts so
> people don't confuse your posts with mine. *I don't disagree with your
> posts, but you have done some passionate posts and I think people are
> thinking it is me - pushing hard to sell products - which is not my style..
>
> I do sell them and I do like them.
>
> Paul Remde


Paul (Remde),
My postings all say sisu1a at the top as well as in the Author column
on the newsgroup page.... Early in this post (which I was going to
stay out of...) I was mentioned by first and last name (misspelled
Hansen) in reference to my Sisu getting flipped in a storm while tied
out with the Claw, so I felt the need to add my personal feelings on
the subject so my misuse of such a fine product was not used as ammo
to dismiss it since there were relevant details to the scenario that I
felt worth mentioning.

I apologize for any issues this has caused for you with my ambiguous
signature, although I'm not sure why you are convinced they have their
Paul's confused...

-Paul HANSON

PS. I think we should coordinate an independent test on all the
commonly available portable tiedowns out there using Bob Kuykendal's
"Breakotron" in different ground types so we may all draw our own
conclusions...I'll put up one or more of my Claws for the experiment,
does anyone else have any tiedowns they are willing to destroy to make
a point we can all benefit from? Bob, ya' listening?

[sisu1a]

> I think that you are assuming incorrectly that the many extremely positive
> reviews of the CLAW in this thread by "Paul" were written by me. *I am not
> the Paul that wrote those notes. *I wrote the note that started this tread
> and one or 2 others. *I always include my last name in my posts.
>
> Paul __________, Please include your last name or an alias in your posts so
> people don't confuse your posts with mine. *I don't disagree with your
> posts, but you have done some passionate posts and I think people are
> thinking it is me - pushing hard to sell products - which is not my style..
>
> I do sell them and I do like them.
>
> Paul Remde
> Cumulus Soaring, Inc.http://www.cumulus-soaring.com


Paul (Remde),
At the top of all my posts it says sisu1a, as well as in the Author
column on the newsgroup site...Early in this thread (which I was going
to stay out of...) I was called out by first and last name
(misspelled) in reference to my Sisu getting flipped in a storm while
tied down with the Claw so I felt the need to add my personal
testimony so that my misuse of such a fine product was not used as
ammo to dismiss it since the extenuating circumstances were/are quite
relevant.

I apologize for my ambiguous signature causing any confusion, although
I'm not sure why your so convinced they have their Pauls' confused.

-Paul HANSON

PS. I think we should coordinate an independent test of all the
commonly available tiedowns in different ground types using Bob
Kuykendal's "Break-O-Tron" so that everyone may draw their own
conclusions based on real data. I'm willing to put up a Claw or two up
for the experiment, does anyone else have any tiedowns they are
willing to destroy to prove a point that we may all benefit from? Bob,
ya listening?

[bumper]

I purchased 3 sets of "Screwits". They are made in Australia, and shipping
to the USA doubles the cost for one set. My thinking, by buying 3, was to
save on shipping and re-distribute them to friends locally.

The Screwits website erroneously claims they have an anodized finish. Since
all of the screw-in type anchors I've ever seen are made of steel (including
the "Screwits" as it turns out) I was thinking the Screwits must be made of
some super tough aluminum alloy - - as anodizing is an aluminum (and alloys)
surface treatment, not done to steel.

The "Screwits" look to be cadmium plated steel. The screw portion of the
anchor is relatively small and the shaft is also thin compared to other
screw anchors I have. This saves weight, but detracts from holding power.
The weight savings and smaller size, would make it possible to pack the
Screwits into many gliders.

Bottom line, there's no way I would trust Screwits to hold my glider down in
a "blow". There are many other screw-in anchors available in this country
that less expensive and more robust (though at a slight weight penalty). On
the flip side, the Screwits are nicely made, they come in kit w/ handle to
turn in or remove the anchors, and they will do the job in some soil types.
If they are in your glider, they'll work a lot better than heavier ones you
left in the trailer.

bumper


"user" > wrote in message
...
> Try http://www.screwits.com Small, light and they work !
>
> The site has a comparison of all the tie downs available
>
>
>
>
> wrote:
>> A very cheap solution that I use is to buy 2 18" long 2x2 steel angle
>> iron. Cut 45 degree edges at one end to make a point (the metal
>> supplier that you buy the angle from can do this). Drill a 0.5" at the
>> other end. Drive the angles into the ground at a 45 degree angle with
>> a sledge hammer at a place where the tie down rope will be at right
>> angles to the stake. Total cost: $15-20, not including the sledge.
>>
>> You need as much surface area as possible for maximum hold strength.
>> Consequently I don't favor any kind of tie-down that looks like a tent
>> stake or an over-sized nail. It is important that the tie-down rope be
>> at right angles, or as close to it as possible, to maximize this
>> surface area. I also got a couple of cheap, small plastic buckets to
>> put over the tie-down so I wouldn't stub my toes or drop a wing on
>> them.
>>
>> If you want a permanent high-strength tie-down get 2 or 3 used tires,
>> some cable or chain, and a shovel. Attach the chain to each tire and
>> bury the tire as deep as you can. The tires are free, the chain about
>> $1 a foot, and you probably already have a shovel.
>>
>> Tom Seim