PDA

View Full Version : Right Time for Cockpit Safety Review?



Ratickle
04-28-2009, 02:50 PM
In the 12 boat thread, the discussion turned heavily to safety of design and overall driver protection. Is this the time to do a review?

In that thread, Steve David discussed at length the issues with Unlimited cockpit safety and invited some to visit their facilities.

John Cosker invited some to visit his facilities and is discussing improvements and changes with his teams.

Scotty talked about working with Dave Vilwock on safety with their Geico team.

Joe talked about the work their JBS team is doing with Mystic as well.

George Linder worked with the UIM teams and other on the lavin guidelines. Should we try to pull him into this and see if an overall review of his guidelines are warranted?

It seems to me, looking in from the outside, this is a very opportune time for this and it would be a fairly simple thing with email and fax's to accomplish. The loss of a couple people last year has bothered me since.

What do you guys think? Should we try?

Sean H
04-28-2009, 02:58 PM
at Biloxi OSS had a canopy meeting and a I believe a commitee was started. I would email Ron if you want to get the details on that.

I still think you are crazy for wanting a removeable canopy.:ack2:

Sean Stinson
04-28-2009, 03:25 PM
I agree the time is very oppurtune for a meeting of the minds as to what the future holds in store.....There is no value on human life, either you have it or you don't, the latter isn't the position any of us want to be in or, god forbid, put another person in!!! I think that a new standard needs to be set concerning boats that run over 100+ mph while in competition!! I can speak from experience that hitting the water at that speed isn't fun! It doesn't matter if it is from an ejection OR from it entering your boat from a stuff or failure of your equipment!!! I believe even the Lavin Standards probably need to be revisited and refined!!! 20 years ago if you would have told a Vee would run over 100mph I would have said "Yeah right!!! You need to quit smoking what your hauling" 10 years ago if you would have told me the boats would be racing competitively on shorter tighter courses at speeds approaching 200mph I would have had you committed!!!! With all that being said here we are and it is here to stay!!! So now is the time to have a meeting agree on a standard and strictly, and I mean STRICTLY ,enforce it before we lose another family member, friend, or fierce competitor!!!

Respectfully
Sean Stinson

Ratickle
04-28-2009, 03:27 PM
at Biloxi OSS had a canopy meeting and a I believe a commitee was started. I would email Ron if you want to get the details on that.

I still think you are crazy for wanting a removeable canopy.:ack2:

I may be. I just look at the F16's etc and knew they come off. And, no one has always said I'm the brightest.....:sifone:

Sean Stinson
04-28-2009, 03:51 PM
I may be. I just look at the F16's etc and knew they come off. And, no one has always said I'm the brightest.....:sifone:

The trouble with our canopy guidelines and what the aircraft sector use's is that when you factor the hydraulicing effect that water has into the equation things that aren't mounted securely are going to become quickly removed when you have water introduced into those areas at a high rate of speed!!!!

phragle
04-28-2009, 03:55 PM
1st place to start, is the establishment of 1 single entity that will research design and test, with all the org's onboard willing to fllow the regs. not 16 different ideas or one design legal in one org and not in another. one answer when a builder has a question, one set of guidelines used in prerace inspection. that entity should be funded by all the racing orgs.

BradH
04-29-2009, 01:18 AM
I want to be involved with the board or safety review group but still have not heard...anyone?

Dude! Sweet!
04-29-2009, 01:28 AM
Is there any thought/discussion around doing survival capsules like the drag boats do? It's funny that this came up. I was watching drag boats yesterday and it occurred to me that I wanted to ask why they don't run them in offshore boats...

phragle
04-29-2009, 02:04 AM
simple effects of kenetic energy..the bouncing that offshore boats take. the drag boats don't bounce that much, when they do, they come apart and the capsule breaks free. th only way I see it working offshore is for the capsule to be significantly stronger than the portion of boat surrounding it..so that the boat would 'break' away from it in a catastrophic accident.

Chris
04-29-2009, 06:36 AM
If you read the rulebooks of some racing organizations, they dedicate paragraph after paragraph to technical issues that the racers bicker about endlessly, but one sentence to boat safety- and at that it only "suggested".

Bottom line- this is how new racing organizations are started. If you impose safety, a big chunk of these guys will take their ball and go elsewhere. This isn't NASCAR where the organizers own the show. The racers make the rules and if you make ANY rules that require people to buy new boats or make large expenditures that impact their ability to race and win not one iota, you'll have massive backlash.

Ted
04-29-2009, 08:27 AM
Chris, while I agree that there may be some friction created from a new set of guidelines, at least there could be a look at them in a new light and factoring in new materials, etc. And when it was done at least there would be "guidelines" and the racers and organizations could use them as they see fit. The Lavin guidelines as I understand it were driven by the loss of a racer and a desire to prevent more catastrophic injuries of that nature. Since there have been some incidents over the past year and since technology has advanced so far so fast, at least a look by some of the most knowledgeable in the industry could be beneficial.

Sean Stinson
04-29-2009, 08:48 AM
Chris, while I agree that there may be some friction created from a new set of guidelines, at least there could be a look at them in a new light and factoring in new materials, etc. And when it was done at least there would be "guidelines" and the racers and organizations could use them as they see fit. The Lavin guidelines as I understand it were driven by the loss of a racer and a desire to prevent more catastrophic injuries of that nature. Since there have been some incidents over the past year and since technology has advanced so far so fast, at least a look by some of the most knowledgeable in the industry could be beneficial.

Yes they came from the loss of Mark Lavin..RIP....but they were to be incorporated into the boat even before his death it just happened that they raced Key West before the implementation of the canopy system to his boat which is even more of a gut check!!! It's hard to imagine the Catch 22 of the whole scenario.....that may not be the right phrase to use here but everyone sees the eye opening what ifs of it!!!!

MOBILEMERCMAN
04-29-2009, 09:22 AM
Here is my left field opinion. The boats are going too fast. Does anybody really believe you are safe at speeds over 150? Some guys want to be the fastest. The better racing is not in the extreme classes. If a 200 mph boat bottom fails what is going to happen when it lands on its light weight deck?

It is not yet been shown you can survive every accident at 100.

I think there is similarity in a comparison to boxing. You get it the ring, you battle away, sooner or later you get hit by the right shot and lights out.

T2x
04-29-2009, 10:00 AM
We all know that the best minds are available and willing. The data is available and the foundation is laid in the Lavin Guidelines. There is also a set of rules in the UIM which, while based originally on the Lavin guidelines, have been updated with strong financial backing by the Victory team and others. Fabio Buzzi has designed a working break away cockpit pod for offshore over 20 years ago. Bottom line, putting together a blue ribbon panel is easy and a no brainer.

What is interesting, and understandable, is the strong silence from the racing organizations on this issue. There is a school of thought that if you mandate a safety system and it fails, the racing organization could be liable. On the other hand if they do nothing it would seem they are at least as liable through negligence. It is, as has been stated earlier, a Catch 22. The other issue is the stubborness of both racers, and builders around cockpit "comfort" and "visibility" which has caused many to abandon the helmet "halo" minimums and to widen and, by doing so, weaken window openings or to use admittedly inferior materials like stretched acryllic.

So the challenge is twofold:

1. Put together a safety panel for the express purpose of updating the Lavin Guidelines.

2. Figure out how to mandate these into rules for and by the racing organizations.

Good luck with the latter.

T2x

MOBILEMERCMAN
04-29-2009, 10:06 AM
Rich , has safety technology ever caught up with the advances in speed in offshore at any point in time?

T2x
04-29-2009, 02:25 PM
Rich , has safety technology ever caught up with the advances in speed in offshore at any point in time?

Truthfully, yes.......... but only in Europe....where cockpit safety is mandated.

On the other hand the Unlimiteds have done a stellar job of saving the vast majority of lives during hellacious accidents.

A better question is:

Does the technology exist today to prevent fatalities like the ones in Patchogue and Biloxi (+/- 140 mph)? The answer to that is a very definite.... Yes!

Whether or not the technology exists to prevent fatalities at the uppermost turbine speed envelope is where the design standard updates are needed.

T2x

BRAD SCHOENWALD
04-29-2009, 03:06 PM
We have been working on this already for a few months. Of late I have had some time resource limitations and we are a bit behind.

Step one is to develop criterion

This is a complex problem and to be done properly will likely require academia. I have been in discussion with the Naval Academy NavArt program and have scheduled con calls with UofM NavArt Chairman.

The NavArts I have spoken to have all strongly suggested the use of FEA as principal due the complexity of the problem.

The work theory is to throw out any existing prescriptive basis and develop new goal based strategies.

Upon completion of the design review, test panels structures will be constructed and tested to verify the math and load calculations.

The implementation, enforcement etc will have to be done separately. I/we are working to develop the design for most appropriate structure possible.

T2x
04-29-2009, 03:50 PM
We have been working on this already for a few months.

Brad:

Who is "we"?

While I appreciate the government and academic involvement. There has already been a lot of testing and development done by the UIM class 1 guys, that should at least be considered, lest you expend great amounts of effort time and resources in re-inventing the wheel. If the Unlimiteds have taught us anything, there is as much need for real world data and experience as simulation models in developments of this type. On the other hand any data on fighter jet crashes into the ocean could be VERY helpful.

T2x

Pete B
04-29-2009, 05:25 PM
T2X,
Most fighter crashes at sea, aircraft are written off. aircraft are not recovered.
in many of those scenaio's the canopys have been ejected prior to crew ejection.
Depending on the aircraft each canopy and forward windscreen have different configurations.

The A/C I am most familiar with the forward windscreen was a total of 3 layers, two layers of biaxail stretch polybuteral (SP) sandwiching a glass panel with heating elements.
side panels were 2 layers of polybuteral.

Canopys are designed as windscreens, back in the 80's, I seen what a turkey buzzard did to a A-7 Corsair, besides the mess, not much left or bird or canopy.

Chris
04-29-2009, 05:26 PM
Chris, while I agree that there may be some friction created from a new set of guidelines, .

I guess to make the point a little less obliquely, the racers have to want it. I just don't believe it will be imposed upon them by any sanctioning body "requiring" compliance. Especially in a soft economy and in the face of low boat-counts at major races.

Sean Stinson
04-29-2009, 06:04 PM
I guess to make the point a little less obliquely, the racers have to want it. I just don't believe it will be imposed upon them by any sanctioning body "requiring" compliance. Especially in a soft economy and in the face of low boat-counts at major races.

After a few people journey to the next life I think the racers or orgs may tend to rethink the dire need for this implementation to be put into effect!!!!

SteveDavid
04-29-2009, 07:09 PM
UIM has a safety committee chaired by Bob Wartinger, himself a holder of over 55 world records. Put Bob, Rich Luhrs, George Linder, Ron Jones Sr. someone from the Victory program, Peter Hleden (Skater) Mystic, someone from APBA, OSS and OPA in a room for 2days and you'd come out with a universally adopted standard.
For those that say boat counts would drop, just keep on the way you are and we'll kill them off anyway.
We faced the same issues in 92 when I served as SR VP of APBA and later it's president. When we mandated safety cells and canopies in our hydo classes threats of abanondment were rampant. Now some 17 years later, every hydro class has uniform rules. God knows how many lives were saved, and boat counts are holding pretty well.
Besides crashing several times in Unlimiteds (in a safety cell and canopy (I blewover another 4 times in 1 Litre hydros, 2.5 hydros, and 7 Litre hydros at speed between 85 and 155 and rolled the Citgo Supergarrd at San Diego in 2000 at about 100 MPH (safety cell and canopy). All of the limited Hydro accidents were in open cockpits. Every morning I can't believe how stupid I was in an open cockpit. Getting out of bed is a couple of minutes process. I, like all racers would continue to be stupid until rules prevent us from being stupid. Death also has a way of stopping our stupidity.....
We don't need University studies, theoretical research etc. after 100 plus 180 MPH crashes in Unlimiteds we have the empirical evidence to prove what works and what doesn't. The Victory team and UIM has similar empirical and pragmatic evidence. The visibility issue has been reduced. (keep in mind in Unlimiteds we race against 6 others at a time 10 feet from each other and we've had few collisions that were not intentional... We're about 32 feet long, almost 15 feet wide and 6,800 lps +/-. The rescue concern of safety cell/canopy extraction in Offshore boats has been reduced by moving to reduced courses of 7 miles or so and private rescue helos and dive teams.
One meeting, two days, the right people, egos checked at the door, and this challenge would be resolved to the extent human minds can at this point in time.
Sean, Joey and others who've left messages, sorry I didn't get back to you, we're at the close of Florida's Legislative session and I'm in Tallahassee protecting some clients.....
Sean, dinner when you're in Davie sounds great.

Steve

audacity
04-29-2009, 07:47 PM
You have a few inherent issues dealing with offshore race boats:
1. they are very expensive to build for the manufactures. safety testing is not built into the price.
2. when testing the canopy it needs to be done as a system and with water. this would be a massive cost no one(company or person) would be willing to cover.
3. surface area on a offshore boat is larger than any other race boat.
4. offshore powerboats are semi-designed to become pleasure boats after its days of racing are done.

what can be done that will help that no one can debate?
1. reduce surface area on the canopy! sounds easy enough right. John Cosker at Mystic has agreed to do this for us. our seat placement has to be established first then the canopy completed so our vision is not reduced. the closer you sit, the less the area has to be.
2. the interior must be built so that structure is not compromised.
3. there is no way a gauge, dash panel, or any electronic gear should be mounted so that water will have access to it if the hull is breached outside your cockpit. nothing like having your pressure gauge for your air tank(s) becoming a missile!

there are many things that i have seen over the years. they will all be incorporated in the new JBS Racing Mystic! any racer looking to add to solving our safety concerns please contact me directly.

audacity
04-30-2009, 03:58 AM
o, and never paint the cockpit black!! you cannot see $hit when sinking! vs. white, i thought how beautiful it was because it was so clear.

Sean Stinson
04-30-2009, 08:21 AM
You have a few inherent issues dealing with offshore race boats:
1. they are very expensive to build for the manufactures. safety testing is not built into the price.
2. when testing the canopy it needs to be done as a system and with water. this would be a massive cost no one(company or person) would be willing to cover.
3. surface area on a offshore boat is larger than any other race boat.
4. offshore powerboats are semi-designed to become pleasure boats after its days of racing are done.

what can be done that will help that no one can debate?
1. reduce surface area on the canopy! sounds easy enough right. John Cosker at Mystic has agreed to do this for us. our seat placement has to be established first then the canopy completed so our vision is not reduced. the closer you sit, the less the area has to be.
2. the interior must be built so that structure is not compromised.
3. there is no way a gauge, dash panel, or any electronic gear should be mounted so that water will have access to it if the hull is breached outside your cockpit. nothing like having your pressure gauge for your air tank(s) becoming a missile!

there are many things that i have seen over the years. they will all be incorporated in the new JBS Racing Mystic! any racer looking to add to solving our safety concerns please contact me directly.

You have some valid points Joe....I, however, disagree with one statement!! Although it's very true taking away from the integrity of a cockpit in the event it may become a pleasure boat one day is not something that needs to be practiced a race boat is meant to race and should be designed for a catastrophic accident to occur because usually the following statement will apply....."It isn't a matter of if it will happen, It's a matter of when it will happen!!!".......and if your racing career entitles you to remain a member of the dry club all the way through it....God Bless You!!!!

Sean Stinson
04-30-2009, 08:27 AM
Maybe the cockpit should use the Indy Car, Formula 1 model and have a seperate tub built and added to the boat so it is a sealed compartment that everything begins to break away from it leaving it to be it's own sealed entity the more catastrophic the accident becomes. Also energy will be dissipated through the hull breaking apart instead of the cockpit!!!!!

T2x
04-30-2009, 08:32 AM
The A/C I am most familiar with the forward windscreen was a total of 3 layers, two layers of biaxail stretch polybuteral (SP) sandwiching a glass panel with heating elements.
side panels were 2 layers of polybuteral.

Canopys are designed as windscreens, back in the 80's, I seen what a turkey buzzard did to a A-7 Corsair, besides the mess, not much left or bird or canopy.

A little update on that...and history lesson.

Following the bird strike results and disasters in planes of the Corsair's era, the military mandated that all canopies be constructed to resist a bird strike at 500+ mph. As a result the newer canopies are laminated with two thin outer layers of acryllic (for finish and clarity only) bonded to a thick middle layer of Polycarbonate (for strength and flexibility). These are the canopies (F-16 Fighter Jet) that started the race boat cockpit revolution. They were originally used by the Unlimited hydro guys (1985)and quickly migrated to Offshore (1987). In subsequent years much was learned about them by both the government and the racing community. As a result the mil spec increased in thickness from 5/8" to 3/4" and beyond in various applications. The canopies must also be mounted in a very specific way for boating applications. Roll bars have also been added to strengthen the very flexible single and double wide clear canopy installations.

Since then many canopy systems have been developed but the laminated Acryllic/Polycarbonate material is still considered the benchmark for strength and durability for either full canopies or as window inserts in the structural canopies. One more very important point...all of the current materials degrade over time as a result of exposure to UV and infrared rays (sunlight). Both strength and flexibility deteriorate from this...so old or used canopies in most cases are basically worthless and in some cases dangerous.

In recent years we have seen that mounting and support issues have become increasingly critical and the consequences of even simple miscues and omissions have been fatal in nature. At present we have a state of the art that seems to work up to 150 mph or so when all current technologies are acquired, utilized properly and strictly and in place. In addition the Unlimited hydros with admittedly lesser forces to deal with have sustained life repeatedly in 175-200 mph accident scenarios, yet they have treated this with continual development and attention year in and year out in spite of previous "successes". Offshore racers and pleasure boaters have acted in the opposite manner with hatches removed, open cockpits and even life jackets abandoned on bikini clad passengers at speeds at and above 150 mph. The comparison is so dramatic as to be painful to the practiced eye or to those who have buried too many friends and team mates following accidents at far lessor speeds. As a result, emotions are high and deeply personal on this topic, even though emotion has no place in creating the current solutions and future development of safety technology and rules.

I endorse the concept of an ongoing, blue ribbon panel or addition to Bob Wartinger's existing group. I suggest shat Steve David be involved with this group, and I also suggest that George Linder, Fabio Buzzi, Peter Hledin, and Fred Hauenstein( very experienced, lost a brother to a racing accident and is a long time US representative to the UIM) be appointed as members.

Respectfully

T2x

T2x
04-30-2009, 09:13 AM
o, and never paint the cockpit black!! you cannot see $hit when sinking! vs. white, i thought how beautiful it was because it was so clear.

Didn't your cockpit safety lighting system work? The cockpit standards since 1988 have mandated waterproof, automatic safety lighting because it is a well known fact among experienced racers and safety personnel, that internal visibility goes to near zero after a rollover, stuff, or submersion because of the radical change from bright daylight to underwater illumination. This "blindness" has caused panic and confusion among many survivors of accidents and has been addressed by most respected builders years ago.

T2x

audacity
04-30-2009, 09:33 AM
4. offshore powerboats are semi-designed to become pleasure boats after its days of racing are done.


if this was not true then the manufactures would have two molds and the canopy and cockpit would be much much less in the race version.

i would love to hear SD's input on what we are doing with the new mystic. the external surface area is MUCH less on the canopy. the inside cockpit area is drastically reduced and structure is heavily increased.

my .02:every race boat should have 6 pt harnesses and not 5pt. 5pt are not even legal for much slower competitive racing any longer as they will sheer your organs. i cannot even imagine using a seat without head restraints.

audacity
04-30-2009, 09:43 AM
Didn't your cockpit safety lighting system work? The cockpit standards since 1988 have mandated waterproof, automatic safety lighting because it is a well known fact among experienced racers and safety personnel, that internal visibility goes to near zero after a rollover, stuff, or submersion because of the radical change from bright daylight to underwater illumination. This "blindness" has caused panic and confusion among many survivors of accidents and has been addressed by most respected builders years ago.

T2x

never seen a lighting system in a race boat. a white race boat cockpit upside down in 20 feet of water had plenty of light. actually an amazing amount! a flat black cockpit with water in it right side you cannot see your feet. as for "panic and confusion"...you should not be. if you are you should be spending more time in the dunker. maybe a dive class or two.

audacity
04-30-2009, 09:45 AM
everything safety related inside the boat and out side has activated glow sticks on them...even when we test...we use cases of them!

T2x
04-30-2009, 09:49 AM
never seen a lighting system in a race boat.

Interesting...I've seen quite a few...in offshore race boats.

Who knows, maybe a little experience is worth something?

T2x

audacity
04-30-2009, 09:54 AM
Interesting...I've seen quite a few...in offshore race boats.

Who knows, maybe a little experience is worth something?

T2x

do you have a link for them? what current race boats are using them? how are they mounted? i take it they have their own power supply? it gets really old $hit hitting me in a race boat that we don't use!

MOBILEMERCMAN
04-30-2009, 10:06 AM
Yes, doing dunker tests regularly is a plus.

audacity
04-30-2009, 10:10 AM
t2x...thanks for the idea. i am now investigating incorporating a light into our helmets. we are mounting a PTT buttons on our helmets. it's a problem when you can only communicate in your seat with your helmet on.

like i said our boat is littered with glow sticks...even on the outside for safety crew. something i don't see too often.

audacity
04-30-2009, 10:28 AM
http://www.columbussupply.com/products/?productid=2237

Pop
04-30-2009, 10:35 AM
Some great points on this discussion, if we can be of any assistance let me know, we would be glad to help.

Pop

audacity
04-30-2009, 10:56 AM
thanks pop! please email me directly with your wish list. joey@jbsracing.com

just came up with an idea!!!! as some of you know i ice-climb and rock-climb...every year a book is published with all the documented accidents or close calls. the book is NOT thin! by reading it, you defiantly gain some experience.

T2x
04-30-2009, 11:09 AM
t2x...thanks for the idea. i am now investigating incorporating a light into our helmets. we are mounting a PTT buttons on our helmets. it's a problem when you can only communicate in your seat with your helmet on.

like i said our boat is littered with glow sticks...even on the outside for safety crew. something i don't see too often.

The most common systems I have seen are the type used in airliners for floor lighting in case of fire or darkness...this is a sealed tubular continuous string that can be affixed to the floor and around the roll cage. You can use water sensitive automatic switches, mercury switches, or simply keep them on continuously with separate water sealed battery power. Remember ....do not use your main boat batteries as they are the first to go when under water events occur.

T2x
04-30-2009, 11:19 AM
as for "panic and confusion"...you should not be. if you are you should be spending more time in the dunker. maybe a dive class or two.

Having survived, like Steve David, many accidents, you have no idea what shape you or your team mate will be in after a high g, ballistic impact event. You may be semi conscious or in a dream state or simply blinded and confused. Many of our more wealthy owner drivers are not exactly Michael Schumacher to begin with, and I know of at least one top notch throttleman with years of racing experience who wound up terrified in a darkened, overturned cockpit while stuck against the floor under the dash. At times like that your capsule training does not solve your problem but visibility can be very helpful.

One other point about ballistics and g forces. This past weekend a friends 280 lb football playing nephew was killed in a tragic accident. He was driving an SUV, lost control and rolled it over. He was pitched out of the rear seat window on the far side........ This occurred at 45 mph. Do the math.

T2x

audacity
04-30-2009, 11:40 AM
the more you crash the more at ease you are with it.
the more time you spend under water the more at ease you are with it.
i like the light idea. i will have that tactical helmet light next time i'm in the boat. i have never had a problem sinking. but, i have had some issues seeing inside the hull checking it's integrity as it is sinking. i am sure there would have been lighting issues in the black cockpit upside down and underwater though.

H2O Full Throttle
05-01-2009, 10:46 PM
the more you crash the more at ease you are with it.
the more time you spend under water the more at ease you are with it. - Sounds like Steve Curtis's motto :ack2:

Seriously, I just got back from Doha, Qatar for the opening round of the Class 1 series and the safety aspect is something that IS NOT open for discussion, obviously because of the speeds involved. It doesnt matter if you have all the money like Victory or Qatar or the lower budget teams like Giorgio they want to come home at the end of the race. A classic example of the safety aspect was the crash of Qatar 96 with Sheikh Hassan and Curtis in Doha last year. This was a BIG off and they walked away from it. Hassan said that had safety not been a priority for the Class 1 teams then they prob wouldnt be here now.

All the rules from what I gather come under WPPA and their technical team as they run Class 1 and X Cat for IOTA. Rory Power who is their technical director would be a good one to include on any such panel regarding safety. I like what Randy and Gary have done with the MTI cockpits as well as what John has done with the Mystics. I will try and get some shots of the inside of the Class 1 boats and post them here. Maybe members here could post their thoughts on what they see, and what could be improved.

I saw someones post about the F-16 cockpits and their safety, well from someone who lost a good friend over the Avon Range in central Florida in an F-16 to a birdstrike I beg to differ. Yes they are designed to take a small bird but my good friend Sammy De'Angelis was low level and hit a big bird, smahsed the canopy and killed him instantly.

Safety is also starting to gain a good foothold in the smaller boats, especially in X Cat. One of their guys is still in hospital in Dubai and not in a good way, dont even know if he will make it, because of an accident there. Ryan will know who I am referring to, it was the boat from Abu Dhabi. As someone suggested why not have an offshore racing safety summit, combined with one of the Class 1 races where everyone who wanted to be part of a working party or have an input could attend.

I have seen what Haggin does to look after Scotty and Marc and what he has spent on their safety you could feed a small country, but you know what who cares, life is too short and too precious to lose because someone used 1/8th inch thick whatever instead of 1/4 inch think whatever.

Anyway I think this is a great thread and worthy of a sticky to keep it at the top. I have posted the Qatar 96 sequence for food for thought and will try and collect pics of cockpits and safety areas of the boats for discussion here.

Cheer

Ned

H2O Full Throttle
05-01-2009, 10:47 PM
Rest of sequence.

H2O Full Throttle
05-01-2009, 10:49 PM
Last Ones.

audacity
05-01-2009, 11:31 PM
blowing over scrubs a TON of speed. Class 1 seems to have this more than the type of crashing we have here...be it super cat L to super cat.

the more ideas the better when it come to safety.

Sean H
05-01-2009, 11:48 PM
Class 1 does a lot right, but not crazy about the hatch latching mechanism though...

Offshore Ginger
05-02-2009, 07:16 PM
In the 12 boat thread, the discussion turned heavily to safety of design and overall driver protection. Is this the time to do a review?

In that thread, Steve David discussed at length the issues with Unlimited cockpit safety and invited some to visit their facilities.

John Cosker invited some to visit his facilities and is discussing improvements and changes with his teams.

Scotty talked about working with Dave Vilwock on safety with their Geico team.

Joe talked about the work their JBS team is doing with Mystic as well.

George Linder worked with the UIM teams and other on the lavin guidelines. Should we try to pull him into this and see if an overall review of his guidelines are warranted?

It seems to me, looking in from the outside, this is a very opportune time for this and it would be a fairly simple thing with email and fax's to accomplish. The loss of a couple people last year has bothered me since.

What do you guys think? Should we try? Racing is racing and there will always be a risk no matter what . Ratickle , have you ever been out to Skater , just curious ?

audacity
05-02-2009, 07:27 PM
Once again on the road for the next 24 hours. Be back at mystic soon! Anyone can call me on my cell 7341635-1697 willing to help me make the sport safer. I got nothing but time right now! And you can post what we talk about. I am all over the road using my iPhone! Cheers

Sean Stinson
05-02-2009, 08:47 PM
Once again on the road for the next 24 hours. Be back at mystic soon! Anyone can call me on my cell 7341635-1697 willing to help me make the sport safer. I got nothing but time right now! And you can post what we talk about. I am all over the road using my iPhone! Cheers

Mad Max the Road Warrior....I am going to sneek into Mystic and sticker that on your side of the boat!!!!:26::26::26::sifone::sifone:

H2O Full Throttle
05-03-2009, 01:54 AM
hey guys, just had a thought and not even sure it is possible. Is there anyway to put any sort of deflecters on the deck of the boat just in front of the windscreen so that if you go under or major water comes over the deck of the boat it can be sort of deflected before it hits the windscreen, therefore reducing the force of it hitting the windscreen.

Just a thought.

Ned

audacity
05-03-2009, 02:06 AM
a deflector one way becomes a funnel in the other direction.

reducing the surface area is the number one answer...how to go about that; there is many!

SS...sneak on in to mystic. i am done driving for the day; fog and rain suck at night. there is a $hit load of huge road kill that is obliterated on the e-ways around here. mad max indeed!

H2O Full Throttle
05-03-2009, 02:13 AM
Joey - Was thinking about something like a triangle shaped device mounted onto the deck, not so much a funnel.

With regards to surface area is there anyway to further reduce this than what Mystic and MTI have done so far. Looking at the Victory and Qatar boats there doesnt seem to be a lot of difference between what they have and the US built boats. Would lessening it anymore reduce visability to dangerous levels. Wadda ya think.

Ned

audacity
05-03-2009, 04:24 AM
you angle would be so large it would create another set of problems. if the canopy is laid in 100% structure(no bolts/no mask/no bra) then cut only to your eyesight. seats mounted first and start with a small cut then increase. vis only drops as u come away from the canopy on the inside. a boat canopy is built so a 5' or a 6' guy can see out without mods.
race boats do not need near as much vis as a poker run boat.

phragle
05-03-2009, 05:30 AM
Joe correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds to me as if he is talking about a stuff. Unless something is built way wrong, the rounded lines of modern canopies will allow the water to flow over and around even at incredibly high speeds. the only failure there would be if the window material was not seal/fastened properly allowing water in to wedge stuff apart. The real problem I see is the major wipeout that rips the boat apart or slams the boat canopy first on the water. The other problem I have seen looking and climbing in several of the boats is lack of padding. There is some, but with my experience in vehicle crashes both on hiway and racing offroad there is not enough. It doesn't matter if you have the strength of a steriod infused ball player.. A 150+ mph hit your arms and legs will fly around like rag doll. I have seen people violently flip offroad cars at as little as 50mph and recieve compound fractures. and this is with heavy firesuits. you guys often wear shorts and t-shirts. a broken arm or leg may not seem like much, but with a compound fracture you are opening the inside of the body to the outside world. after a big crash there will be fuel and oil in the water. there is bacteria in the water and it is now entering your body thru the lacerations. That can easily cause a major infection than can easily cost you the affected limb. Having an arm or leg pointed in the wrong direction from a fracture and the associated pain will also make it much more difficult for you to extract yourself or for a diver to extract you. It's not just the big structures that need to be made of unbreakium and unobtainium that need to be focused on. $100 worth of foam and vinyl can be a very good investment. I have some piks of the inside of one of the boats I can share with you in private to illustrate my point if you would like, but I really don't want to post them publicly and put a team on the spot...

H2O Full Throttle
05-03-2009, 06:07 AM
What are the rules when talking about drivers/T-men suits. In Class 1 as well as here in NZ you have to wear a fire proof suit and this is not open to discussion. Helmets in Class 1 are also two sorts, majority of the guys use open faced helmets but Tom and Pal from Maritimo both use full faced Bell helmets. According to Tom it is to protect their face from any flying debris should anything happen and also provides better radio comms as less interference.

Now I have seen the helmets and oxygen masks that Scott and Marc wear in Miss Geico and this has some great merits. Obviously if you end up knocked out you can still breathe until the divers get there. Now should this become mandatory for all boats over 100mph or what.

Joey - What do you run in your boat and is Miss Geico the only one running this type of system.

Ned

Sean Stinson
05-03-2009, 09:36 AM
a deflector one way becomes a funnel in the other direction.

reducing the surface area is the number one answer...how to go about that; there is many!

SS...sneak on in to mystic. i am done driving for the day; fog and rain suck at night. there is a $hit load of huge road kill that is obliterated on the e-ways around here. mad max indeed!

I will catch up with you soon.....How long are you there for?????

audacity
05-03-2009, 10:19 AM
think about the distance the water flows over the bottom of a step...not much!

adding something that chance direction of water flow will change the flow of air as will. even at speeds of 150mph, let alone 200, up are disturbing the air above the boat 50' high.

last year i started wearing a fire suit with the highest ratting. i have not seen one other person to wear one since i have. there are MANY reason for it. i should be MANDATED by the org. even if your racing a dux boat w/a 50hp(i have done that too).

us, geico, and aqua mania are all about the same safety systems...till now. we r changing things in this new boat a lot.

i am not worried about stuffing a boat...if those are the conditions; then we are not running 150-200mph...

have a very diverse 20 years of testing and development behind me...i can tell you we only have been and will continue to do so; make the best educated decisions for the direction of offshore safety. unless you are testing as system it is very difficult to root cause...

many of the canopy failures i have see have been from roll overs and there was a lot of hull damage as well. some, even have the deck breached and pulling the canopy up. if there is one screw in your lexan/poly you have created a stress-riser. i feel many of the failures are due to extreme flexing of the hull in multiple axis as the canopy receives a massive dynamic and continuous load.

audacity
05-03-2009, 10:22 AM
well, back on the road again. feel free to call anytime.

audacity
05-03-2009, 10:24 AM
phragle, love to hear or see what u have.! thanks for your input. all is welcome!

MarylandMark
05-03-2009, 11:22 AM
Having survived,.... T2x

Just to let you know; I'm glad you are still with us Sir.


even if your racing a dux boat w/a 50hp(i have done that too).

I'm looking hard in to those right now- In my budget and looks like a blast! I can have as much (really more!) fun on a scooter than a 1300cc sport bike! JBS looking to sponsor a dux? :biggrinjester:



i am not worried about stuffing a boat...if those are the conditions; then we are not running 150-200mph...

200MPH and rudder failure, hook and a stuff? I really, really hope you never, ever, ever prove me wrong but it could be flat and a mechanical failure could happen.


well, back on the road again.

Have a safe trip!!

ps- I met you in KW when you were helping patch up your boat. You explained what went on, what was happening and so on. Thanks for being cool to a fan even when chit was hitting the fan!

audacity
05-03-2009, 09:05 PM
dux:
i ran a caesar (dux style) boat...fun! but u have to have someone willing to ride upfront in the suicide seat. everyone is willing to give it a shot,,,once! you'll be lucky to get them back in again. 2 foot slop you will annihilate any jet ski, jet boat, or small offshore. you can ride wheelies alone but you will not be able to run hard alone. buy one, they are fun as hell. ps...i have crashed those hard too:)...the cops were freaking out when they saw the boat cartwheeling with an exposed propeller...anytime we took it out we had problems with the man. something about a guy hanging off the front holding onto a rope laying down ripping it up.

the bald man still has the boat. he'll sell it at a song i would bet. it just sits there. it needs rubber work, but the engine is fresh and strong.

loose a rudder at speed on any boat you will be more of a danger to others than yourself. $hit happens all the time!

thanks for checking us out in KW! i always look forward to placing faces with names.

Sean Stinson
05-04-2009, 09:24 AM
I was just surfing the net looking at safety equipment and things incorporated into boats to promote safety.....

One thing that has intrigued me for awhile now is the following:

S.B. SYSTEM
RETARDED FLOATING SYSTEM
MOD. 413 R

DAC, Burgess, Seebold, and others all have this incorporated into the top of the cockpit of their tunnel boats!!! I know an offshore cat is much larger and in a rolled over situation this alone isn't going to suffice, HOWEVER, if it could be scaled up to a larger version and go to a breakaway capsule scenario we might be going down a path that has some merit to it!!!!

Lets face it a high speed crash is going to scramble your brains and you are going to be disoriented for a period of time how long depends on the severity of the crash but with this thing floating your dumb ass in a position that will make rescue and recovery more accessible now we are talking critical time saved!!!!

Just a thought!!!!

Sean Stinson
05-04-2009, 09:26 AM
Here's a link to the tunnel boat version!!!!

http://www.sportcentric.com/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4916-178055-195273-111103-0-file,00.pdf

Sean Stinson
05-04-2009, 02:39 PM
Another link maybe repetitive

http://www.f1boat.com/technic/catalogairbag.htm

T2x
05-04-2009, 03:17 PM
Just to let you know; I'm glad you are still with us Sir.

I heartily concur......

audacity
05-04-2009, 07:27 PM
"a breakaway capsule"?

for offshore?...you could not engineer something to "breakaway" in a crash; in something that sustains larger impacts and stresses while racing in offshore conditions.
the boat materials are and the engineering cost are very expensive in the current boats. this massive expense is also without any testing and development. and then you have the fact that the boats we race are also sold as "pleasure boats" too. "breakaway capsule" from what i see is done in boats where the hull is NOT the major expense.

Sean Stinson
05-05-2009, 08:20 AM
"a breakaway capsule"?

for offshore?...you could not engineer something to "breakaway" in a crash; in something that sustains larger impacts and stresses while racing in offshore conditions.
the boat materials are and the engineering cost are very expensive in the current boats. this massive expense is also without any testing and development. and then you have the fact that the boats we race are also sold as "pleasure boats" too. "breakaway capsule" from what i see is done in boats where the hull is NOT the major expense.

I didn't say a break away capsule in an indy car the TUB is the boat!!!! So using that analogy the attached components are made to absorb energy as it goes through the crash...So what is attached that could be used to absorb energy, if anything at all?? I am just saying maybe something could be incorporated to absorb the energy of the crash.....The floating balloon thing may just right the boat if it is large enough or float it out of the water to get the occupants out of the capsule in a quicker manner!!! I don't care what anyone says the more you crash it really doesn't get any easier to do.....it just happens!!!! So the more you do it and the easier it gets, the faster you're going to go and the harder you're going to crash!!!! An accident is nothing more than force and energy being displaced in an uncontrolled manner!!!!! With that being said just maybe there is a way to control the uncontrolled to a point....now if you're really confused let me tell you about.......:sifone::sifone:

phragle
05-05-2009, 08:33 AM
Racing by it's very nature is man's attempt to control something beyond his limits to control. Think of it as a marraige... I don't care how great of a husband you are..sooner or later she IS going to get pizzed and go off on your azz...

same thing with a race boat...

Sean Stinson
05-05-2009, 08:44 AM
Maybe that's why I have TWO ex-wives because you just contol them they are all psychotic or maybe they just can't control an butthole like me!!!!

Pete B
05-05-2009, 10:01 AM
tubing the entire cockpit would be a good start, Dont think $$ are into a breakaway capsule. Look at various aviation designs, one that comes to mind A-10, pilot sits in a titanum tub, not fool proof but quite the design.

phragle
05-05-2009, 10:31 AM
that was one of my thoughts... you cant make it "pop out" like the drag boats.. but if you mae the tub STRONG.. much stronger than the rest of the boat...the boat breaks up..the tub is intact

Ted
05-05-2009, 11:33 AM
I have thought of this too. Basically an "egg" if you will around the cockpit that has a lip on the top all the way around. It is placed into the hull, then the deck comes down over the hull and the "egg" to hold it in place. The idea is to keep a sponson or hull failure from compromising the passenger compartment. And in a horrific crash where the sponsons are ripped apart they will expend most of the energy, hopefully cushioning the forces on the "egg". I use the egg analogy because the shape is very strong and hydrodynamically smooth too.

audacity
05-05-2009, 12:55 PM
now someone just needs to come up with a million dollars and over a year to complete. to just get 'er rolling.

again, the big 3: mystic, skater, and mti...ask yourself why they have not done what is being talked about???

i am looking for realistic ideas/input that can be implemented right now, in our current build, for little or NO money that will increase the safety of team jbs racing. as well as ideas that will allow teams to upgrade their personal safety as well.

thanks!

phragle
05-05-2009, 01:03 PM
simple effects of kenetic energy..the bouncing that offshore boats take. the drag boats don't bounce that much, when they do, they come apart and the capsule breaks free. th only way I see it working offshore is for the capsule to be significantly stronger than the portion of boat surrounding it..so that the boat would 'break' away from it in a catastrophic accident.

EGGzactly.....

Sean Stinson
05-05-2009, 01:14 PM
now someone just needs to come up with a million dollars and over a year to complete. to just get 'er rolling.

again, the big 3: mystic, skater, and mti...ask yourself why they have not done what is being talked about???

i am looking for realistic ideas/input that can be implemented right now, in our current build, for little or NO money that will increase the safety of team jbs racing. as well as ideas that will allow teams to upgrade their personal safety as well.

thanks!

Get your panties out of a twist there pal!!!:sifone::sifone: The flotation could be implemented for very little cost.... I am saying that if the boat goes upside down (Gentry's crash comes to mind) the flotation could bring the cockpit up to a postion that could be out of water and be easily accessible...forget all the rest right now make the thing float as a solid unit if it goes over placement of the flotation device could in fact bring the cockpit up and out of the water!!!!! Now wouldn't that be better especially if your brains are scrambled after doing some 200mph acrobatics in a 10,000 lb boat!!!

audacity
05-05-2009, 01:36 PM
the major problem i see in a flotation device large enough to impact a 50 foot offshore cat would be huge. flotation would have to occur at the CG and be close enough to the hull. if ANYTHING was off and or a puncture(debris or heat) in the floatation system occurred; it would then act as a massive bag...kinda like jumping on a swimming pool cover.

we have escape hatches on the bottom in the even of a roll. if that does not open(often they do not!) i want a clear path out of the bottom and right to the top. if the hatch is underwater, and your cockpit is not filled yet, your not going to open that hatch either.

Sean Stinson
05-05-2009, 01:55 PM
I will debate this with you....This is what I am saying after a 200mph bobble you ain't going to be doing much of anything except trying to unscramble your thoughts.....so the more things you have in palce to make a systematic series of events begin to take place immediately after your stunning display of acrobats, the better off you are and the easier it will be for the safety crews to extract you!!!!! Thats all I am saying!!!! I think it is worth exploring!!!!

Sean Stinson
05-05-2009, 01:55 PM
BTW drinks are on me when we get together in the very near future!!!!

Sean Stinson
05-05-2009, 01:56 PM
Actually I am taking that back....You're part of the big show now so it's on you my friend!!!! Call me when you have a free minute!!!!

audacity
05-05-2009, 02:08 PM
i need a drink...and don't drink alone!

Sean Stinson
05-05-2009, 02:39 PM
Well give me a call pal and lets coordinate!!!!

audacity
05-05-2009, 03:55 PM
call me in a few...all the numbers that i have save recently got smoked.

Sean Stinson
05-05-2009, 04:11 PM
Just left you a message!!!!

T2x
05-26-2009, 03:42 PM
I was just surfing the net looking at safety equipment and things incorporated into boats to promote safety.....

One thing that has intrigued me for awhile now is the following:

S.B. SYSTEM
RETARDED FLOATING SYSTEM
MOD. 413 R

DAC, Burgess, Seebold, and others all have this incorporated into the top of the cockpit of their tunnel boats!!! I know an offshore cat is much larger and in a rolled over situation this alone isn't going to suffice, HOWEVER, if it could be scaled up to a larger version and go to a breakaway capsule scenario we might be going down a path that has some merit to it!!!!

Lets face it a high speed crash is going to scramble your brains and you are going to be disoriented for a period of time how long depends on the severity of the crash but with this thing floating your dumb ass in a position that will make rescue and recovery more accessible now we are talking critical time saved!!!!

Just a thought!!!!

For the record...Fabio Buzzi created a "breakaway" self contained, four man, floating cockpit for his 4 engine cat in 1989. It debuted at the Atlantic City Worlds. At that time it was thought to be "too expensive" and "restricting". Since then at least a few dozen people have been killed who would have been alive today had the technology been given a chance to develop.

Funny...it probably cost less than a current custom paint job.

This old wine in new bottles stuff has to stop. Pretty soon somebody will be inventing the non step monohull...for safer turning.

T2x

Sean Stinson
05-26-2009, 05:14 PM
For the record...Fabio Buzzi created a "breakaway" self contained, four man, floating cockpit for his 4 engine cat in 1989. It debuted at the Atlantic City Worlds. At that time it was thought to be "too expensive" and "restricting". Since then at least a few dozen people have been killed who would have been alive today had the technology been given a chance to develop.

Funny...it probably cost less than a current custom paint job.

This old wine in new bottles stuff has to stop. Pretty soon somebody will be inventing the non step monohull...for safer turning.

T2x

And they told me it didn't exist and that I was nuts and crazy as well

Ratickle
06-03-2009, 03:56 PM
Pretty soon somebody will be inventing the non step monohull...for safer turning.

T2x

Sounds like a good idea. But when they're done can they invent the step for straightaway speed?:)

phragle
06-03-2009, 09:12 PM
THE HYDRALIC STEP! button in cockpit. push it and the the back half of the bottom raises creating a step., push it again, buttom lowers to a non step

Ratickle
06-03-2009, 09:28 PM
THE HYDRALIC STEP! button in cockpit. push it and the the back half of the bottom raises creating a step., push it again, buttom lowers to a non step

They tried that on an aluminum offshore hull I think....

phragle
06-03-2009, 09:57 PM
damn... and I was gonna grow my hair out to look like Reggie too.. :(

T2x
06-04-2009, 12:24 PM
Actually the only steps on a monohull that are worth a damn... help you to climb into the cockpit.

T2x

Sean H
06-04-2009, 12:43 PM
T2x, any thoughts on the latest canopy incident?

T2x
06-04-2009, 02:31 PM
T2x, any thoughts on the latest canopy incident?

I have seen very detailed pictures and discussed the incident with George Linder and Joe Imprescia. I am reserving opinion until I get a chance to talk to Vinnie Rifice and Peter Hledin.

I will say that this incident is taking us in a somewhat different direction than previous scenarios, and my take on it is very different from others I have heard. The variable nature of this accident makes the need for a high level study team even more necessary IMHO. We are definitely dealing with a serious and deadly moving target and a simple "one size fits all" solution will not work. This is another example where the "devil is in the details".

I thank God that the outcome was not more serious for both men. Vinnie is a good friend and I am thrilled that he is still with us.

T2x

Ratickle
06-04-2009, 05:25 PM
I have seen very detailed pictures and discussed the incident with George Linder and Joe Imprescia. I am reserving opinion until I get a chance to talk to Vinnie Rifice and Peter Hledin.

I will say that this incident is taking us in a somewhat different direction than previous scenarios, and my take on it is very different from others I have heard. The variable nature of this accident makes the need for a high level study team even more necessary IMHO. We are definitely dealing with a serious and deadly moving target and a simple "one size fits all" solution will not work. This is another example where the "devil is in the details".

I thank God that the outcome was not more serious for both men. Vinnie is a good friend and I am thrilled that he is still with us.

T2x

I just hope everyone one continues to discuss improvements. These guys are very important to all of us. I can't think of a better group to discuss improvements than those participating on this thread and those mentioned in this thread.

glassdave
06-04-2009, 10:23 PM
I have seen very detailed pictures and discussed the incident with George Linder and Joe Imprescia. I am reserving opinion until I get a chance to talk to Vinnie Rifice and Peter Hledin.

I will say that this incident is taking us in a somewhat different direction than previous scenarios, and my take on it is very different from others I have heard. The variable nature of this accident makes the need for a high level study team even more necessary IMHO. We are definitely dealing with a serious and deadly moving target and a simple "one size fits all" solution will not work. This is another example where the "devil is in the details".

I thank God that the outcome was not more serious for both men. Vinnie is a good friend and I am thrilled that he is still with us.

T2x

My heart stopped when i saw the boat get towed in and the lexan was out of it as well as the hatch. Glad those guys walked away i consider them friends as well.

Rich can you explain this method for mounting lexan? I have seen it in the past as well as in the Linder guidlines. I am having trouble understanding the concept. It looks to me that when you recess the hole for the first step of the insert you also take away half of the actual materiel as well as the smallest hole at the base is large enough to let the head of the screw pull through if the cup shears. You only have a small shear area at the base of the cup where the head of the screw fits in. Is this method being superseded in favor of a wide flange and mask?

This is from an F-16 canopy on a Skater i have in my shop.

T2x
06-05-2009, 08:30 AM
Rich can you explain this method for mounting lexan?.

1. No I cannot. The newest guidelines call for countersinking to allow a grommet and a larger washer to recess into the material to avoid cracking the surface layer upon impact. But, more importantly, the Texstar/Milspec calls for fasteners to be mounted on 2" centers (no more than 3" will work properly).... On the other hand is this an older race boat or a pleasure boat with quarter canopies? Many things have changed over the years and the quarter canopies were never intended as safety devices....or shouldn't be.

2. It is not Lexan..it is Polycarbonate...big difference

One BIG point to remember........ The canopy material flexes during impact......so.......if a major blow hits the center of a windscreen it will become concave and pull all of the edges inward. If the mounting lips are not wide enough or the fasteners too widely spaced the material can easily break away from its anchors and slip inside the frame during this action. The remedy is minimum 3" wide flanges made of at least 1" thickness of structural glass (I believe these should be on the inside and outside surfaces...but that's just silly ol' me)...... and fasteners on 2-3" centers.... to avoid any movement during impact. The material is strong enough to withstand amazing forces, but its very flexibility makes it somewhat like jello to control....you have to hem it in on all sides.

and again...the smaller the window the lower the forces exerted on the surface.......

There is also a completely different dynamic to consider...the build up of pressure behind the windows if the cockpit is breached........ This is a VERY important and little understood issue that requires some form of a "popoff" mechanism lest the occupants become exposed to massive internal organ and head pressures.

T2x

glassdave
06-05-2009, 10:40 AM
Thanks Rich i have always been curious of that fastener and yes this is an old race boat. Its the Snakeman racing triple outboard 36, got any history on it? Its in great shape, i am painting it and doing some glass work for the new owner.

I have seen the wide washer type on some of the newer boats but noticed Peter still uses these and wondered if there was some reason.

I thought it was polycarbonate it was just easier to type lexan :D

Sean Stinson
06-05-2009, 10:44 AM
Until something is put in place...IE a team...The potential for a catastrophic failure is imminent!!!! It's not if it will but when it will happen!!!!

T2x
06-05-2009, 10:46 AM
Thanks Rich i have always been curious of that fastener and yes this is an old race boat. Its the Snakeman racing triple outboard 36, got any history on it? Its in great shape, i am painting it and doing some glass work for the new owner.

I have seen the wide washer type on some of the newer boats but noticed Peter still uses these and wondered if there was some reason.

I thought it was polycarbonate it was just easier to type lexan :D

Those fasteners are the Texstar/Milspec grommets and they work perfectly on an F-16. Lately, George has been recommending a washer (rubber backed if possible) to spread the loads over a larger surface, but the 2"-3" bolt centers standard have not changed since 1985. The simple fact is that each additional fastener set adds weight and costs money to purchase and install. If that becomes a consideration over safety the owner needs to re assess his or her values. IMHO.

T2x

glassdave
06-05-2009, 10:57 AM
nope, racing days are done for this boat. The new owner is going to enjoy it for what it is. I wasnt aware they actually used these on the F-16 (the fastener that is). I actually thought it was developed by Textar for using the canopys on other things. Like i said i have always just been curious about it. thanks

skaterdave
06-05-2009, 10:44 PM
i am looking for realistic ideas/input that can be implemented right now, in our current build, for little or NO money that will increase the safety of team jbs racing. as well as ideas that will allow teams to upgrade their personal safety as well.

thanks![/QUOTE]

yea this makes sense

so hows that putting safety first?????

audacity
06-05-2009, 11:24 PM
yes, it does make sense! we have increased safety without spending money. cosker at mystic has come up with some great ideas that cost zero. all of the ingredients have been the same forever! how you use/build them in a system is the key.