Skip to main content

more about hammock suspension systems

Many fine bushcraft experts suggest NOT using 550 paracord for hammock suspension. Many believe that while it's strong enough on it's own there is simply too much stretch.

paramax 1000 and 550 paracord


I tried paramax 1000 by itself and had a number of problems. It would have been a convenient solution but the knot on the tree side fused with the working end and took effort to remove. The rope stretched and was near impossible to get a consistent lay. Finally I added tubular webbing to protect the tree and that just made it bulky. One other attempt included doubling the cord and while that distributed the stretch it was heavier and bulkier. All that was important as I was planning to hammock over water in the everglades.


Good for guy lines but not much else. Black hard to see. Very think, and strong, could easily cut flesh.


Whoopie sling and soft shackle is just plain complicated and still requires something to go around the tree. All this joinery can be risky. The reflective material was chintzy.


I tried singular and tubular webbing. The singular webbing fused just like the paramax. The knots also slipped. The tubular webbing was heavy and bulky although it did not fuse. However, it was slippery and the knots did not hold.


The Yukon suspension system held up nicely. It was much less bulky than the ENO Atlas and the Yukon cinch (not pictured) was even better. Both held the suspension, did not slip and while the cinch version was easily adjustable the segment model was fast. I would recommend a Dutch Hardware webbing hook to prevent the material to material abrasion.


While the packed webbing looks like they might be the same size.  The Yukon version is lighter and actually smaller by volume.

One unrelated item is my rope and s-biner to hank my pack from a tree.


Popular posts from this blog

Prometheus vs Bosun

In conclusion... while Bosun(B) is still not the ideal monitoring system neither is Prometheus(P).

TL;DR;

I am running Bosun in a Docker container hosted on CoreOS. Fleet service/unit files keep it running. However in once case I have experienced at least one severe crash as a result of a disk full condition. That it is implemented as part golang, java and python is an annoyance. The MIT license is about the only good thing.

I am trying to integrate Prometheus into my pipeline but losing steam fast. The Prometheus design seems to desire that you integrate your own cache inside your application and then allow the server to scrape the data, however, if the interval between scrapes is shorter than the longest transient session of your application then you need a gateway. A place to shuttle your data that will be a little more persistent.

(1) storing the data in my application might get me started more quickly
(2) getting the server to pull the data might be more secure
(3) using a push g…

Entry level cost for CoreOS+Tectonic

CoreOS and Tectonic start their pricing at 10 servers. Managed CoreOS starts at $1000 per month for those first 10 servers and Tectonic is $5000 for the same 10 servers. Annualized that is $85K or at least one employee depending on your market. As a single employee company I'd rather hire the employee. Specially since I only have 3 servers.

The pricing is biased toward the largest servers with the largest capacities; my dual core 32GB i5 IntelNuc can never be mistaken for a 96-CPU dual or quad core DELL

If CoreOS does not figure out a different barrier of entry they are going to follow the Borland path to obscurity.

Weave vs Flannel

While Weave and Flannel have some features in common weave includes DNS for service discovery and a wrapper process for capturing that info. In order to get some parity you'd need to add a DNS service like SkyDNS and then write your own script to weave the two together.
In Weave your fleet file might have some of this:
[Service] . . . ExecStartPre=/opt/bin/weave run --net=host --name bob ncx/bob ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker attach bob
In sky + flannel it might look like:
[Service] . . . ExecStartPre=docker run -d --net=host --name bob ncx/bob ExecStartPre=etcdctl set /skydns/local/ncx/bob '{"host":"`docker inspect --format '{{ .NetworkSettings.IPAddress }}' bob`","port":8080}' ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker attach bob
I'd like it to look like this:
[Service] . . . ExecStartPre=skyrun --net=host --name bob ncx/bob ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker attach bob
That's the intent anyway. I'm not sure the exact commands will work and that's partly why we…