AndrewS wrote:

Please don't use Jate Rings for off road recovery. Have a look to see what fixes a Jate Ring to the vehicle and you will see why they are not suitable.
They are simple lashing points.

This looks well lashed:

Supacat wrote:

AndrewS wrote:

Please don't use Jate Rings for off road recovery. Have a look to see what fixes a Jate Ring to the vehicle and you will see why they are not suitable.
They are simple lashing points.

This looks well lashed:

agentmulder wrote:

Edit: also, I can imagine recovery forces being more than the mass of the vehicle/4... and at more extreme angles...

Not saying yay or nay, just sayin...

agentmulder wrote:

The eventual solution:


Click image to enlarge

That does look smart I'm very tempted by one to replace my plow Also can be found on Fb, Ytube, Insta & Twitter @4WDSouthwest

Supacat wrote:

You have obviously never seen a chinook pilot use the full operating envelope whilst carrying an underslung load - the forces generated are more than the static load/mass of the vehicle.

I'm really puzzled as to why anyone would want to put more trust in an online seller of a lump of laser cut unidentified steel than a product that has been designed & tested for vehicle specific military applications where the outcome of a failed load is far more than a red face.

Maybe if they came in bright colours, was more sparkly or had more pub bragging rights; instead they just do the job, no fuss, no effort & not particularly expensive.

Well, Brendan 'identified' it and that was enough for me. Sometimes you just gotta trust things right?

... and like I said, the last time I saw JATE rings installed they appeared to clash with the mud guard brackets of the vehicle in question.

I did want it in high-vis, first responder livery so people would think I was a champ but they only had bulk/batch/discount-dark-grey available - otherwise known as 'tactical'  Solved the bowel problem, working on the consonants...

Devon-Rover wrote:

I'm very tempted by one to replace my plow

The drop plate is still a major plow when it's on! But it lives in a box in the rear now along with the shackle and billet/point so it's even less fussy  Solved the bowel problem, working on the consonants...

mikeh501 wrote:

agreed, the forces involved in recovery can be much much that just a straight pull.

Also, I doubt that landie under the chinook is using the same jate points under the vehicle. wouldnt be very stable!!

Apparently it is...this is the current (2015) version:

Click image to enlarge

Mash wrote:

The JATE rings are fitted to military Wolfs for the main reason of heli lifts as shown, new modifications have come out and a dual set of JATEDU rings with additional strength plates welded on the rear are now in place for vehicles that are carried by this method often. There was an article in LRO/LRM a while back

I've seen them fitted to the front of Vixens but can't find a photo of the rear arrangement:

Click image to enlarge

but the loading sheet for it shows that only one of the two Jate rings is used:


and again with the RWMIK Plus:

Click image to enlarge

Don't suppose you have the article still?

Searching through my documents, I've found the Modification Instruction for the double Jate rings and it states: "This instruction details the fitting of additional lashing eyes to the front bumper and to the rear chassis rail. This modification is only applicable to those units who would be considering transporting the equipment as internal load by Air."

Click image to enlarge