New Log Towing Hitch

[TMCD]

@75RR,
Yes, the Timber Hitch + Half Hitch were awesome during the construction phases of my recent pole barn. I tried the Timber Hitch by itself and it slid up the 6x6, actually coming all the way off because the post was wet and slippery. We simply retied a Timber Hitch AND added a Half Hitch, problem was immediately solved. These 14 and 16 foot treated 6x6's were VERY heavy and the tractor had to be used instead of manpower.

The OP's hitch would be impratical because number one, the Timber Hitch/Halfhitch works very well and number two, his presented hitch is overkill of the highest degree IMO. I'm not saying there's not an application where his hitch wouldn't be the go to knot, but I like to keep things simple, safe and profitable on my jobs and that hitch misses on at least two of those criteria.

I've seen many of these "overkill knots" since I've been a member of this forum and there's really nothing wrong with those because it just means people are getting creative. I do remember reading in ABOK and these knots take me back to that reading, where Ashley comments on the propensity of people to take extra turns, extra twists, extra anything, and he said very seldom do these extra's help in the world of knotting.

[X1]

The OP's hitch would be impractical because number one, the Timber Hitch +Half hitch works very well .

   Any bend is impractical because the Zeppelin bend works very well. Any woman is ugly because there is/was Monica Bellucci. 

   The timber hitch is the less clever hitch I know - and the series of the half hitches is the second one ! I guess that their combination can not go much further... It works very well, but what does this mean for every other hitch ? It may have been used "in the wild" by professionals at one or more points in space and time, but what does it mean for the knot itself ? There are brilliant things that are made by not so clever tools, and not so clever things that are made by brilliant tools.
   There is a great margin of efficiency in knots, we seldom use them at 100% - so even if a knot is 50% "worse" than another, it would probably work very well, still.
    The OP hitch tries to explore a clever idea, to secure a bight under some riding turns, and then pass the standing part through this bight. It is the same idea used by fishermen when they tie their hooks, and it is called "snell-ing" ( the Snell knot, in its many variations ). I believe that the great majority of the many hook knots use this idea, because it is structurally simple, sound, and efficient. There has been  a number of interesting suggestions that can help this same idea to be implemented better ( alas, without any pictures...), but this only proves that the idea itself is fertile. And we should not pay too much attention to the initial "purpose" of this hitch ! It is the hitch that matters, if it is OK, I am sure somebody will figure out a purpose for it sooner or later ...
   

[Dan_Lehman]

The OP's hitch would be impractical because number one, the Timber Hitch +Half hitch works very well .

   Any bend is impractical because the Zeppelin bend works very well. Any woman is ugly because there is/was Monica Bellucci. 

   The timber hitch is the less clever hitch I know - and the series of the half hitches is the second one ! I guess that their combination can not go much further... It works very well, but what does this mean for every other hitch ? It may have been used "in the wild" by professionals at one or more points in space and time, but what does it mean for the knot itself ?

It means that unless you can come up with something
"less clever" --which seems to mean "simply effected"--
to compete with this structure, don't make any noise.
Which is why the zeppelin bend is sitting idle so much,
as various "less clever" solutions meet the needs.
(Still, there are some who believe that they have
reached the absolute end of the knotting alphabet
with the Z --or its Z-enith.     )

The OP hitch tries to explore a clever idea :
to secure a bight under some riding turns,
and then pass the standing part through this bight.
It is the same idea used by fishermen when they tie their hooks, and it is called "snell-ing" ( the Snell knot, in its many variations ).

Well, it's unlike any effective snelling I've seen,
as the SPart here will pry out the wrapped bight
--it's backwards, in effect.

As for fence-post extraction, an concern might be that
pulling up from one side could be improved upon by
having a two-sided hoist, something akin to the old
barrel hitch (which in one form is an overhand knot
opened to have a barrel inserted down through its
"spine" onto its "belly".  Especially for pulling up some
smooth, metal posts, some sort of increased wrapping
as shown here might be necessary.


--dl*
====

[X1]

unless you can come up with something
to compete with this structure, don't make any noise.

Knot tying is not any "competition" (with "winners" and "losers"), and an effort/attempt to devise a new knot, however successful that might be proved to be, in not any "noise".

[X1]

   So, I am logging timber in Oregon 100 years ago, and I like making noises - and I do not like people tell me which noises I should make... - and I want  a hitch very like the hitch presented in this thread - based on the same idea. Which noise/hitch would I make ? As photography is already invented 50 years ago, I can show my hitch to the fellow loggers... so here it is : ( See the attached picture )
   As I am not logging timber in Oregon 100 years ago, but still I like making noises, I will tie a Double Cow hitch, or two Double Cow hitches, and I will have an easy to remember and tie tight hitch, able to withstand a lengthwise pull even when tied around very slippery poles.

[James Petersen]

   So, I am logging timber in Oregon 100 years ago, and I like making noises - and I do not like people tell me which noises I should make... - and I want  a hitch very like the hitch presented in this thread - based on the same idea. Which noise/hitch would I make ? As photography is already invented 50 years ago, I can show my hitch to the fellow loggers... so here it is : ( See the attached picture )

Oh, those were the glory days. I suspect many knotters dream of wooden ships and the open seas. I do, too, I must admit. But I sometimes also dream of Oregon 100+ years ago when a fir tree 6 feet in diameter at the stump was considered normal to small. Photography, was in existence then -- I have pictures of my grandfather as a child taken in 1903. There are also photos to be found of the early days of logging and logging history.  http://www.vannattabros.com/histlog3.html

   As I am not logging timber in Oregon 100 years ago, but still I like making noises, I will tie a Double Cow hitch, or two Double Cow hitches, and I will have an easy to remember and tie tight hitch, able to withstand a lengthwise pull even when tied around very slippery poles.

  I would hate to work for a hypothetical logging company that used such hitches -- if I proportionally scaled the rope and line in your picture to fit a six foot log, I expect the line would be nearly a foot in diameter. And to think I would have to wind that line around the log eight times in order to form my employer's favorite (he likes to make noise about it) towing hitch -- why it's enough to make a grown man cry.   But since I remember seeing exhortations by someone that knots cannot be assumed to behave the same when tied in different sized lines, I would probably have a lot of vacation time while the hitch was scientifically tested in lines (and logs) of that size.

Seriously,  though, that is a nice looking hitch, and it looks like it would hold well on smooth/slippery poles. If I didn't have to continually tie and untie the hitch all day long moving logs  or poles I might consider it. But aesthetics aside, If I had to drag/pull/tow a lot of poles/lumber or timber with ropes, I'd still take a timber hitch with additional half hitches  when and if needed. I guess that makes me the least clever member of the forum.

[X1]

a fir tree 6 feet in diameter at the stump was considered normal to small.

!  And I can guess how old would be such a tree...I would have felt very sad if I had to cut the line of the life of such an old earth-fellow...

I would have to wind that line around the log eight times

I just tried to keep the knot and picture as resembling the original one shown in this thread, as possible. I do not understant why one should use more than one wrap...

I'd still take a timber hitch with additional half hitches  when and if needed.

   But why the " timber hitch " ? You want to form an eye, to pass the standing part through it - OK. Why do you have to secure the eye with the most dumb thing in Earth - twisting the one leg of a bight around the other many times ? Would you able to do it with your proporsionally scaled rope ?

[Luca]

Hi!

!  And I can guess how old would be such a tree...I would have felt very sad if I had to cut the line of the life of such an old earth-fellow...

+1 For you (even more so, that it is thanks to the glory days, which is now hard to find trees that are of a certain size;but this is the fault of everyone and no one:it is nice to enjoy the free ride as long as there is(I am not referring(only) to those who at that times physically have cutting and carrying those big trees),we are human!)

But why the " timber hitch " ? You want to form an eye, to pass the standing part through it - OK. Why do you have to secure the eye with the most dumb thing in Earth - twisting the one leg of a bight around the other many times ?

"No+1"in my opinion;at least if i have a horse at my heels,that pulls here and there,and sniffs my bottom,I prefer to tie the old good Timber..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8PYcyNwSkQ

THIS is a lucky dude: lots of nature around him...+ a nice camera! Then I... much smog +...KnotMaker!(I love it)
In my opinion the wraps around the leg(s)of the Timber hitch's loop are optimal to hold the bark of a raw wood, also,they create a mechanism such that, by lifting the log, it is sufficient to pull the tail, so that the loop is being easily extended to allow an immediate extraction of the hitch from the log, leaving intact the knot so to be immediately reused.

                                                                                                           Bye!

[James Petersen]

 !  And I can guess how old would be such a tree...I would have felt very sad if I had to cut the line of the life of such an old earth-fellow...

At 16 to 20 grains to the inch: somewhere around 700 years old for a 6 footer. Yes it can be very sobering to think that both the East and the West Coasts of the continental US were covered with these giants a mere 300 years ago. Here's a picture of a larger one that was harvested in the area where I grew up: http://www.vannattabros.com/adospics/22fir.jpg. The site claims it was a 22 footer, but it looks more in the region of 12'-13' to me. At any rate, It was probably more than a sapling when Rome fell.

I would have to wind that line around the log eight times

I just tried to keep the knot and picture as resembling the original one shown in this thread, as possible. I do not understant why one should use more than one wrap...

I know. Just me being facetious.

I'd still take a timber hitch with additional half hitches  when and if needed.

   But why the " timber hitch " ? You want to form an eye, to pass the standing part through it - OK. Why do you have to secure the eye with the most dumb thing in Earth - twisting the one leg of a bight around the other many times ? Would you able to do it with your proposrtonally scaled rope ?

It might be ugly, it might be dumb, but it is quick, simple, and effective. That is its beauty. Maybe I am just lazy, but If I had to drag multiple poles with rope it is what I would use.As to logging beasts like mentioned above before the use of steel cables, I really don't know precisely how it was done. And I seriously doubt there are any clear records of this, either. The men who worked in those woods hundreds of years ago were likely mostly illiterate and passed their knowledge on by word of mouth and example. Hypotheticals can only get you so far.

[X1]

both the East and the West Coasts of the continental US were covered with these giants a mere 300 years ago.

  It becomes even more sobering the moment we realize that this will never happen again... and that this is the best case scenario - because, if it will happen, it would probably also mean that we would be not there to admire it... We are a species that has proved it can not live together with other species - and it even finds it difficult to live with other mumbers of the same species.[/quote]

Hypotheticals can only get you so far.

  I wonder if anybody knows where and when the "timber hitch" has been used for the first time... Structor, where are  you ?

[Dan_Lehman]

   So, I am logging timber in Oregon 100 years ago,
and I like making noises - and I do not like people tell me which noises I should make... -
and I want  a hitch very like the hitch presented in this thread -
... so here it is

   As I am not logging timber ...

Yes, your premise leads to your conclusion --you are NOT logging timber!

Only a fool would look twice at the gross consumption of rope
you wasted in your silly noisiness!

As for

Why do you have to secure the eye with the most dumb thing in Earth
--twisting the one leg of a bight around the other many times ?

..., it will be obvious in working with material instead of
drunken daydreaming that dogging the substantial sort
of rope used in the timber industry is much quicker to do
than even putting in a bowline to make that eye --and
easier to undo, as well.  (The force on the loaded line
will bend the bight tip of the hitch; but it will not be
for man to do such bending in knotting, and the simple
dogging of the tail doesn't require such bends.)


Or, did we miss learning why you "want" such a hitch?
I see three big Oregonians w/axes asking this in a way
suggesting that you need a good answer
--or can quickly get them each a big tankard of brew
(after which they too might have drunken views).   



--dl*
====

[X1]

you are NOT logging timber!

   You should not be sooo clever to deduce it , should you ?    I have only to warn you that, as statistics tell us,  logging timber is MUCH more dangerous than bicycling... Beware, great logger, things are falling down from time immemorial, but it makes some difference if those things are us, or even heavier things on us.

Only a fool would look twice at the gross consumption of rope you wasted in your silly noisiness!

Indeed. However, an insane and clever fellow would read my lips :

I just tried to keep the knot and picture as resembling the original one shown in this thread, as possible. I do not understand why one should use more than one wrap...

Before we jump into any conclusions, we have to be sure you have read this...
And before you jump into similar conclusions, you have to read, and tie the knot with one wrap per side, and compare it with the OP s knot. That was the purpose of this picture. I was not presenting a new knot, I was trying to improve the knot presented by 75RR.
I take is as a compliment that you do not say anything about 99% of the knots I publish, but wait patiently to find a knot that is only meant to be a comment on another members knot, and it is tied with the way the other member has presented his knot...to comment on it. Thank you, great logger. You have made another one very loud and sooo wise/serious ( antonym to "silly" ) noise !

it will be obvious in working with material instead of drunken daydreaming

I have never drank a drop of alcohol in the past 40 years of my life, during either the day or the night. However, I excuse you of being drunk during Christmas and writing what ... you write - they say it helps loneliness.

[X1]

...your silly noisiness!
...with material instead of drunken daydreaming

   What can I do ?  I have to prove that I am not an extra-terrestrial, as a human I can not do but make noises, "silly" or wise ones ( are there any "wise" noises, I wonder...), that I work with real material, not unicorns, and that I do not drink and dream during the day !

   I have tried to modify the hitch presented in this thread, in two ways :
   1. The standing part, the segment of the rope before the wrappings around the long object, should not needed/used during the tying too much. Its end should be considered inaccessible, of course.
   2. So, I had only added two loops on it, which work as nipping loops ( both their ends are loaded ).

   I have shown this modification, keeping the symmetry and the general appearance of the original hitch as much as possible . So, I had shown the modified hitch tied with three wraps, just because the original hitch was tied with three wraps. However, it was obvious, and I had explicitly said that this was the only reason for this, and that I do not understand why one should add more wraps ( perhaps because he fears the surface of the object could harm the rope, and more wraps would "spread" this danger ? ). James Peterson have seen and acknowledged it, but Dan Lehman, influenced by the "spirit" of the days, did not. Why ? Hypotheses non fingo ! 

   So it seems I have to present this hitch tied with one wrap - which was not my initial purpose. For a tight hitch around slippery objects, able to withstand a lenthwise pull, the only thing I know something about, I had suggested the tightest hitch we have, the TackleClamp hitch, or the much simpler and "familiar" Double Cow hitch. ( Which, of course, dL have has not seen or does not wish to know, because he thinks they are too "silly" to his high standarts, I suppose )( I have not met a single logger in my life, neither such a huge tree as the trees shown by J.P. - in my country, the old trees have been cut to build ships 2500 years ago...and any tree that tries to grow up, the poor creature, has a similar fate ever since...)
   One starts by forming two loops on the standing part, alongside the length of the long object. Then, he/she wraps them two times, one time at each side. I have named those two loops "dL s glasses" ( since the word "glasses", as well as the word "spirit", can have different meanings, I leave the proper interpretations to the reader... )
  Those two nipping loops bear the most of the load, which is then spread, through them, to the two (or more) wraps around the body of the long object. Those were my 2 pence in this thread, and I believe they were not worth even one drop of spirit... falling into my body from a bottle, or from anywhere/anybody else. Who is the "silly" and who is not, and who works with materials ( materials : the things we can take pictures of, and are not described only by words - blah blah), it is knot me to decide !