Bridge hammocks.

[validpages]

Anyone got any pics of someone actually laying flat ?

I've been looking for a while and I've yet to see one.

I'll grant they do appear flatter than the conventional hammock, but they are oft touted as absolutely flat, which is of course not true, at least from what I've seen.

On the subject, I have given some thought to the design and had a couple of ideas that might actually have a market. I don't wish to share too much as I want to protect my ideas, but I'd like to hear some responses from people about interest in a 'bridge' that actually would lay flat, but would require a bit more in the way of rigid paraphernalia.

The added rigid components would of course mean added weight to the working class, but I have some ideas on that too. And for the folks with more money than sense (no shortages there), easy peazy.

[egrant5329]

Bridge hammocks don't lay absolutely flat! Most bridge hammocks are ~80 inches long and then have ~36 in suspension triangles and then the whoopie sling. If you take something that long and then put 180lbs in the middle it is going to curve downward.

The flatness length wise is only one aspect. The other flatness concern is across the shoulders. This is also not completely flat, but can be (in my opinion) flatter than other hammock styles.

I can tell you right now, that there has been a lot of thought put into all of the hammock designs by very smart people and most things you will think of have already be tried or thought of.

If you add something rigid to the length, it will be heavy if it can support someones weight without flexing. If you add a pad or a bottom, you loose breathablity and add pressure points.

Have you slept in a brigde or a regular hammock? If not I would suggest making one and experiencing all the variables for yourself. Definately read Grizz's work and Then look at BER's posts on the cloud and cirrus hammocks he has made.

I would post your ideas, because I don't believe it is truely possible to protect your ideas. Every hammock design I have seen has been copied on this website by someone whether it be the Chrysalis, warbonnet blackbird, etc....

[burleyolebear]

My Jacks 'r better Bear Mountain bridge hammock is flat enough that I can sleep on my side without feeling any bend in my back or knees. Putting a pad in the pocket does reduce ventilation, but that's only a problem in July and August. I'm searching for pics of me in mine, but haven't seen one yet of me actually in sleeping position. I know that my shoulders hang lowest, then my hips, but my spine and hips are in alignment. I can feel this when I awake, feeling more rested then in my mattress at home.

[Stovemandan]

The first photos I saw of a bridge hammock is what made me want one.

I suspect the fabric used is the answer to the lay flat problem.

Here are the photos that I found on the net long ago and have saved them over quite a few years.

I want a bridge to lay flat like what we see in the photos.




I was lucky!!!!!

I found the original website that my photos came from. Whooooo!!!!

Even shows how. I think I'll start making them and share some as a vendor

http://www.shf.org.au/SpecEv/Hammock.html

.

[Jazilla]

So you have never actually laid in one. And you got ideas on making it heavier to sell to rich dummies. You got to lay in a bridge to appreciate the flatness of it.

[WV]

I agree with egrant:
1) A truly flat bed (like a cot) is not as comfortable as a hammock. In fact, a bed with a mattress in a house merely approximates the variable support you get from a hammock. That's what the mattress springs are for. However, everybody sleeps differently. It's great that you're working on improving your sleep system. Good luck finding a universal solution.
2) I started out thinking I would glean ideas from these pages and then come up with something startlingly new (and profitable) that I would keep a deep dark secret until I brought it to market. Gradually I came to realize that I would profit more by sharing ideas as they come up. It's sort of like open-source software. I now have a whole host of "research associates" on HF who have collaborated on a great many projects, by post and also at group hangs. (I was going to start listing familiar names here, but realized that the list would go on and on. Thanks to all - you know who you are.) This has accelerated the development of my "ideal hammock" exponentially, and I hope my small contributions have similarly assisted and stimulated others. Now, I'm not saying you should take this route, just noting that someday you may find that you have done so. Don't be surprised.

[BillyBob58]

Anyone got any pics of someone actually laying flat ?

I've been looking for a while and I've yet to see one.

I'll grant they do appear flatter than the conventional hammock, but they are oft touted as absolutely flat, which is of course not true, at least from what I've seen.

On the subject, I have given some thought to the design and had a couple of ideas that might actually have a market. I don't wish to share too much as I want to protect my ideas, but I'd like to hear some responses from people about interest in a 'bridge' that actually would lay flat, but would require a bit more in the way of rigid paraphernalia.

The added rigid components would of course mean added weight to the working class, but I have some ideas on that too. And for the folks with more money than sense (no shortages there), easy peazy.

I always refer to a bridge as flat as a board, but this is of course not quite true, though I don't quite understand the whys of it all. But what I should say is " for all practical purposes flat as a board, at least length wise".

If viewed from the side when occupied, it does not appear flat, except maybe relatively when compared to non-bridge hammocks. And neither would my bed or couch, if it was not too thick to be able to tell. Because various pressure points, a little or a lot, sink into the soft bed.

But, if I lay a yard stick across the top of my legs or body, it is going to pretty much contact all or most of my body, as opposed to some greater amount of "banana" shape. Same in a bridge hammock.

This is easily observed by any one ( far as I have heard) who tries a bridge after being used to a non-bridge, though the difference definitely varies depending on which hammocks are being compared. Because no matter how much my butt sags down into my JRB bridge when viewed from the side, my legs are straight enough that I am not aware of any knee hyper-extension whatsoever, as well as no center ridge calf pressure whatsoever, not ever. And just as important, if I switch to my side there is no so called side "torque", and in all cases without having to hunt around for a sweet spot.

So, that seems "flat" enough for all practical purposes. And is indeed plenty flat viewed across the top of my body. I'm not sure there would be any comfort advantage to being any flatter. For example, my floor does not have any of that pressure point sag and is literally flat as a board. As is the ground at some camp site tent pads. But they are quite uncomfortable unless you add a thick pad, which allows some flex and sinking of pressure points, which gets away from the perfect flatness. At least on the bottom surface.

Where a bridge hammock is absolutely NOT flat is from side to side. Here there is a pronounced curve from the bottom of the hammock to the spreader bars. This can result in a lack of shoulder room with some bridges that bothers some people. It also limits how much you can pull your knees up for a fetal position. Although, after several years of on and off use of a JRB bridge, I have got to where neither is an issue for me- just doesn't bother me. Still, more shoulder room and more ability to get fetal would no doubt be a plus. But, if it was perfectly flat side to side, falling out of the hammock might be an issue for some. Which could be quite unpleasant if rocks or roots were under you, or even just hard ground.

[JerryW]

Gradually I came to realize that I would profit more by sharing ideas as they come up. It's sort of like open-source software. I now have a whole host of "research associates" on HF who have collaborated on a great many projects, by post and also at group hangs.

Yea! Public forums should be for sharing, not for soliciting help for your own profit.

To the OP - The best way to find out what works is to build a bridge or two and try them. It's not that easy to re-invent the wheel.


Jerry

[BillyBob58]

I don't think I have any pictures of me laying in my old faithful BMBH, back or side. But notice in this picture from JRB, his top surface is essentially flat. To the point where he needs to support his head for comfort, not unlike in a bed or on the floor. I'm pretty sure that if this was viewed from the side, with the hammock contouring to his back side, it would appear less flat. But for all practical and comfort related purposes, he does not need to be any flatter:

http://www.jacksrbetter.com/images/D...flat-weblg.jpg

[GrizzlyAdams]

"Flat" is relative. But flat enough to be lay on your stomach.

I doubt very much you'll get a ground-swell of reaction of HF people here who have just been waiting for that hammock which is "perfectly flat".
Those that have tried a bridge and then decided against it more typically do so because of the sense of the hammock wrapping around their shoulders, so-called shoulder squeeze. A long spreader bar over fabric that doesn't dip very much is the only known solution at this point. If you wanted to commercialize a "new" bridge hammock idea, that is where I would start. The second feature most likely to keep someone who is interested in a bridge hammock away is weight. The only commercially available bridge style hammocks tend to weigh more than the lighter end of gathered end hammocks. There are DIY solutions to that, have been publicized here, perhaps someday we'll see cottage industry vendors pick up on that.

If you are serious about trying to create and market something you thought of, then your time is best spent searching the patent data base. I see 16,800 hits searching on "hammock", so you've got some reading to do.