"DSK" wrote in message
| Capt. Mooron wrote:
| Although I agree with this... my argument was regarding the actual load
| capacity between the vang and the topping lift. My point is the topping
lift
| is able to handle much greater loads than the vang ever could.
|
| Well, if they're both engineered appropriately, why?

Because Doug... all things being equal and even when the maximum engineering
and materials are utilized... with the current location of the vang on a
boom
" .... the topping lift has the mechanical advantage over the vang."
Always will...

| If you mean "the topping lift is directly opposite the weight, while the
| solid vang has to support a multiple of the weight" then I agree. But
| that ignores the fact that modern materials and engineering are well
| equal to the task. OTOH if you're limited to Stone Age technology, then
| solid vangs are not going to work too well, no.

Don't try and worm your way out now Doug! ;-)
No new fangled materials or honeycombed booms will ever change the fact that
the load point at the end of the boom will be subject to mechanical
advantage. Since placing the of the vang to that point is not an acceptable
option... it will retain it's loss of mechanical advantage no matter what
materials are utilized. [caveat-all structures being equally engineered]

Stick that in your Field Book.... I may not be an Engineer... but I'm a
Technician ... and usually train you guys till you get out of diapers and
into a Ring! :-P

You don't scare me Man!

CM