I'm kind of new to this hammock thing. so when I got my new argon hammock from the famous Dutch, I tried to get the most comfortable hang. But as I tried to measure and implement the famous "30 degree off vertical" for the most comfortable hang, i found, perhaps, a better way to do it.
I guess the first assumption is that people want to lay flat in their hammocks. (This is why bed's aren't curved.) One way to get a flat hammock is simply to tie it that way, by eliminating any "sag". Of course, the problem with this is that doing it this way creates a lot of tension. You can get a flat hammock, but it becomes rigid and uncomfortable, the opposite of what you are looking for.
So the question then becomes: " how can I achieve a flat hammock without tension?"
Thinking this way, I imagined a rope connecting two trees. What would make it flat, without tension? First as a mind experiment, then in practice, I found that the more distance between the trees, the flatter the curve. ( kind of like the earth seems flat but actually is a very long curve.).
The problem encountered here is, as the distance between the trees grew longer, the hammock bottoms out against the ground.
Solution? Raise the point where you tie to the trees.
Conclusion: The flattest hammock with the least tension is achieved when the trees are far apart and tied high. The longer, and higher, the better. Obviously, there are practical limits to this, as carrying a lot of rope and straps is a negative, especially for backpacking. (And carrying a ladder out in the wild is not cool, even if it's made from carbon fiber.)
Another way of looking at it: wouldn't the flattest, most comfortable hang be achieved, in theory, by having trees miles apart, and high enough up so you don't bottom out? The "curve" would be imperceptible. ( a comfortable, stretchy hammock fabric probably helps too.)
I think this greatly simplifies how to best set up your hammock. Given your suspension system, you try to hang with trees as far apart as possible, avoiding bottoming out by having high attachment points.
So I say: be done with the silly, complicated, and incorrect 30 degree formula.
If anyone bothered reading this far.....comments?
Bookmarks