I think I want some Crows with kam-locks. The question for those with Crows is whether its easier to pull up to tighten the lap belts or down. My Hookers use the pull up adjusters and have never been easy to adjust.
I would appreciate any advice anyone may have.
Thanks,
Steve to make Hookers adjust easier remove those squarish hookup springs at the adjusting points.
How often are you going to adjust the belts after they are set?
Rocky,
We met once. My hangar is in front of Chucks. Which way do your lap belts pull to adjust?
Congrats on the new license!
Plus +1. Sounds like I have same Hooker setup as you. As far as adjustment, once adjusted I don't touch them.Love my Hookers! Just had to stick up for them!
I have the pull up belt and pull down harnesses. Pull down belt seems like there is a lot in the way to be doing that well. I have the 'old' latch and link but that is what I am used to. Never had them come undone inadvertently. Like 'em! I have the pads for both the harnesses and belt. The crotch strap is adjustable as well. Can't imagine a set that isn't. Snug those suckers DOWN! Especially when flying through Wyoming........
I have absolutely no doubt that in a crash, deceleration forces sufficient to cause the either brand’s harness system to fail will kill the occupant first. The weak spot is going to be either the point where the harness is secured to the airplane, or the fragility of the human that is being restrained. I’d be far more inclined to pick my restraints on far more subjective criteria…comfort and convenience.To the OP i However as another posters said: "Crow belts are not as robust as the Hookers, in particular the hardware is lighter and the straps are much thinner."
How often are you going to adjust the belts after they are set?
I have the pull down to tighten option on the shoulder harnesses, and the pull up to tighten option on the lap belts (and of course the crotch strap is adjustable). Granted, the lap belts can be somewhat resistant to adjustment, but I think pulling UP to snug them is way better than trying to fiddle around and twist sideways and whatnot to do that.
I generally have to adjust, or help adjust, the belts and harness *every time* I take a passenger. Especially going from one of my lard-butt buddies to some little slip of a girl, or vice-versa. And they need to be able to adjust them themselves, so I think harness-down and belt-up is the easiest for non-pilots to work.
I find that passengers will want to adjust the harness but don't do much with the belt itself once they are snugged into place.
But the throw over latch is like hammer simple, has a job and does it. Can you catch the lever on the throw over? Yes but it is in detent. If you are worried you can Velcro over it, but that would degrade the emergency quick release operation.
True. I knew that Crow did that with velcro. I don't feel the need on the Hookers. The detent on the Hooker belt latch is so positive it takes a serious tug to unkatch. The hardware between the two brands are different. Nice Pics! Thank you for sharing.My Crow belts came with velcro on the underside of the red fabric tab connected to the latch, and velcro on the top of the seatbelt under the red fabric tab. This minimizes the chance of inadvertently snagging and opening the latch release handle.
If you don't want it velcroed down, you can place the seatbelt pull strap under the red fabric tab. The red fabric tab itself reduces the chance of inadvertently snagging and opening the latch release handle, whether it's velcroed down or not.
Well aren't you the party pooper. Ha ha. I'm just kidding. Very good point. I'm a structure stress kind of guy; we can analyze how much load those attachments can take. However to your point the seat belts themselves are not likely to fail under crash loads, but the airplane around you and what belts are attached to may fail. I'll stop there, because we'll go down a wormhole of what is survivable, G load vectors , vertical, fwd/aft, magnitude. Aircraft small and large, seats and attachments can and do fail. They are designed for 9 G's, static*. However it does not accout for structural deformation, etc. A stall spin produces extream vertical loads. Belts don't help. The new state of the art in commercial Aviation crash-worthiness and survivability are energy absorbing seats.I have absolutely no doubt that in a crash, deceleration forces sufficient to cause the either brand’s harness system to fail will kill the occupant first. The weak spot is going to be either the point where the harness is secured to the airplane, or the fragility of the human that is being restrained. I’d be far more inclined to pick my restraints on far more subjective criteria…comfort and convenience.
Well aren't you the party pooper. Ha ha. I'm just kidding. Very good point. I'm a structure stress kind of guy; we can analyze how much load those attachments can take. However to your point the seat belts themselves are not likely to fail under crash loads, but the airplane around you and what belts are attached to may fail. I'll stop there, because we'll go down a wormhole of what is survivable, G load vectors , vertical, fwd/aft, magnitude. Aircraft small and large, seats and attachments can and do fail. They are designed for 9 G's, static*. However it does not accout for structural deformation, etc. A stall spin produces extream vertical loads. Belts don't help. The new state of the art in commercial Aviation crash-worthiness and survivability are energy absorbing seats.
My Hooker cam locks do the same as mentioned above and if rotated too far and over-center from normal position and have to be reset to engage the buckles again.