Removeable tie down stakes - recommendations

Maule,

thanks for posting the weight - I found that information missing
prominently from the AvCon article.

Why only one length of rope? Do they want you to cut it in threes?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" <borchert_thomas@m> wrote in message
news:VA.00005f18.002b2877@m...
> thanks for posting the weight - I found that information missing
> prominently from the AvCon article.
>
> Why only one length of rope? Do they want you to cut it in threes?

It seems so and that would be the smart way to do it (hi/lo wing,
taildragger). It is 18' in length. The same type I use already.

The weight is more than I would have expected and yet, I guess that is part
of what is required to have an effective system. Seems right.

Dave,

> I dispensed with the rope altogether and used manufactured webbing with
> hooks and a buckle (Home depot variety).
>

well, you might want to read Aviation Cinsumer's article on testing this
kind of stuff. Summarized best as: That kind of hardware is often the
weakest link by a huge margin.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Maule Driver" <MauleDriver@nc.> wrote in message news:LCjRa.238567$_w.9344487@twister.southeast.rr. com...

> Aviation Consumer tests resulted in the Claw failing in one case by pulling
> out a large plug of dirt (presumably funnel shaped). When pulled at an
> angle, it failed by breaking one of the arms. Failure occurred at 500lbs
> (straight up) and 475lbs (at unspecified angle). They stressed that tiedown
> strength varies significantly by soil type.

That's not a very good recommendation. 500 lbs is hardly enough.

Ron,

> That's not a very good recommendation. 500 lbs is hardly enough.
>

They specifically said the soil was not very good and the numbers not
comparable to their tests with other systems. However, the spiral type
things are worse in any case, according to AvCon.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Ron Natalie" <ron@sensor.com> wrote in message news:3f15d088$0$24566
> > Aviation Consumer tests resulted in ...failure occurred at 500lbs
> > (straight up) and 475lbs (at unspecified angle). They stressed that
tiedown
> > strength varies significantly by soil type.
>
> That's not a very good recommendation. 500 lbs is hardly enough.

I agree and so did AC. I think they said a tiedown should be worth 1600 or
2600lbs.

The big question is what can we get from the best 'temporary, installable,
removable' tiedowns? And who makes/designs the best?

Fortunately, I suspect that most pilots, most of the time, are not faced
with having to use temporary tiedowns. The big fly-ins being the big
exception.

OTOH, when I used to fly soaring competitions, there was the need to setup
temporary tiedowns at many airport locations for 5 to 10 days at a time. I
managed it by first, NEVER keeping the ship assembled overnight. Obviously
a glider-only option but one that not everyone exercised. The trailers they
were stored in were beautifully engineered and it was possible to roll them
over without damage to the a/c.

I justified the daily assembly work and the risk of mis-assembly by thinking
1) Any damage means losing the comp and 2) weather is not the only risk -
cars driving around darkened airports where 50' wingspan a/c are parked in
non-standard locations are another. How often do cars hit a/c at the big
fly-ins?

Once the glider is 'in the box' (covered trailer), the question then becomes
how to tiedown the trailer. I never did have a very effective tiedown
system and too often the trailer was vulnerable but there were other
options. Leaving it attached to a vehicle is one. Parking it next to a
building and tieing off there was another. Permanent tiedowns were
sometimes available.

Many of us felt pretty secure with the bird in the box. But I always
remember pics from a comp in Chester SC back in the 70s where a mini-tornado
or downburst of sorts tore thru the line. A half dozen glider, in and out
of trailers as I recall, were thrown around thru the woods. The rest of the
line was almost untouched.