Tie Down Straps - Help Needed

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

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

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

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?

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?

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