AMF canopy upgrade?

[skaterdave]

Marc can you explain how that "upgrade" works, safety wise?

[Scotty B]

Its a lot more than can be explained on a post. Gary Stray with the help of Lockheed Martin have come up with a design to not only strengthen the cockpit from the exterior, but the interior as well. Its better explained verbally so give Marc a buzz

[skaterdave]

ahh don't wanna bother marc. just thought you guys could give a quick explanation of what your doing?

It was cool reading about how Doug Wright was modifing the Fury boat and the changes they were making following the new Class 1 and X-cat canopy rule changes. Just wondering if you guys are following the same guidelines, since it seems like none of the US orgs (opa,oss,sbi or propa/apba) have done anything to update the safety of these boats?

[Chris]

It looks like the boat is wearing one of those latex "gimp" hoods.
;)

[Maximus]

Dave,

There are many facet's the the upgrades we are employing on Miss Geico and Talki-n -Trash. Remember these are retrofit upgrades . The proper way to do this is a full redesign of the entire safety cell (which we are doing). One hard lesson we have learned in Offshore Racing is that when you think your safe ...your not. Never stop looking for ways to enhance your safety program.
I applaud Vinny and Jimmy for looking at ways to enhance their cockpit and hope my fellow racers follow in their footsteps. I hope we have more bring their boats for an evaluation before the season starts.

We have employed considerable resources to understand the "dynamic"forces we are dealing with. I can assure you that VERY few people truly understand dynamic water forces and their characteristics. Every step forward seems to open another set of challenges. Many builders simply look the other way so as not to admit that their cockpits are out dated and dangerous, considering the evolution of speed and tight turning courses this is another tragedy in the making. . One key point that we have uncovered utilizing information from various military programs is that for several milliseconds water is an immovable force. We cannot simply rely on a canopy that gives to pressure as the intrusion of water then becomes the the killer. The best way to grasp this concept is to slap your hand as hard as you can against the water next time you are in the pool. While a crude analogy it will help reinforce the concept of strength and dispersal of pressure. What you can clearly see from the high strength carbon mask are several pressure dispersing rails. Highpoint that will break the pressure line first. We strive to keep water from entering the cockpit. We are utilizing shapes to optimize our safety envelope and overcome the massive dynamic forces we face.

Another lesson we have learned from the Unlimited Hydro Racers is to utilize similar pressure diffusing diversion modules surrounding the cockpit (under the deck). Feel free to contact Dave Villwock to inquire what happens when these are not employed. Simple fixes and lessons already learned that seem to be overlooked by most of todays builders. The modules divert high pressure water flow away from the pilots underneath the deck. They should surround the cockpit.

As I mentioned keeping all water out of the cockpit is optimal and in my opinion what every builder should be striving for. Any water incursion can kill and simple engineering can raise the current offshore fleet's water repellent level two fold. Cutting holes that are not water tight in the liner of cockpit cell is a big problem and should be avoided , the slow fill is could be just as dangerous as the quick one if your unconscious.

Most any fire fighter or EMT will be able to discuss and probably firmly state that the secondary acceleration is the most deadly in a high impact crash (your body hitting the seatbelt or cockpit roof). Employing the latest NASCAR/GT circuit safety restraints properly set up Hans devices and DRAGBOAT helmet air systems and ratcheting belts is where we are at this point. Stabilizing your legs so they are not broken should they hit the dash. Remember a super cat is doing 150 mph a turbine cat 180+. Take your car out to a flat road and run it up to this speed if you need a reminder of the velocity we are talking about.

Jerry Gilbreath pounded this into my head.. "Ultimately You and only You are responsible for the safety systems operational on your boat. Never take anyones word" , check it yourself.

Our hatches are now made to the same specs as the bottom of our boat and pinned on all four sides creating a system that builds strength back into the shape of the canopy and ensuring no corners raise when the boat twists. Those parts made from aeronautical grade matériels by an FAA rated shop.

There is more if you want to stick around next time you stop by the shop.

One last thing. The marine/offshore racing industry has a habit of gossiping and trashing everyone and anyone that does, try or innovates. I expect to hear the windbags run their mouths about what will work and what won't . When asked what they are doing different... I bet it is the same old story. As many of you know Gary Stray , Scotty B and myself are fathers and take the safety of our boat as serious as the performance, Haggin as given us a mandate to make the boat as safe as we possibly can. So we are we digging deep with every new concept, watching videos and reviewing most of the old crash photos. Any racer is welcome to stop by our race shop to discuss their safety program and ways to enhance what they have. Most upgrades can be done for less than a set of props. We are always open to brainstorming, new matériels and new ideas.

We will presenting these basic upgrades to Smitty so he can begin implementing them with OPA in the form of suggestions then ultimately rules.


The bottom line is we are tired of losing friends from the same mistakes over and over again and we are doing something about it.

[BOJOE2]

Marc thats great news thanks for the update

[FunHome]

I got a e-mail from Tiger Performance about a new type of canopy/safety cell that they are building... I'm sure you have seen it, but the others that haven't ought to check it out...

[Ratickle]

Thanks for the update Marc. Appreciate it.

[Offshore Ginger]

I got a e-mail from Tiger Performance about a new type of canopy/safety cell that they are building... I'm sure you have seen it, but the others that haven't ought to check it out...Just by chance do they have a web site and maximus in you opinion who are the manufacturers who are failing to meet all saftey guidelines and standards if there are any . Hey guys , not that it means anything in the world of offshore racing but did you know that all drag boat capsule drivers are required to have full face shield helment's with air supply and i gotta say that Skater / Douglas marine builds one hell of a canopy .

[boostbros]

scotty you really need to get the facts out on here many guys love speed but have no idea of the increadable forces involved we really need to show how much force is really involved for example water pressure in a water pickup tube is almost 500 psi at 180 thats why hoses come off or blow. its an absolute must at this point to wire up a boat remote control mythbusters style and flip it at over 180 and measure g loads on the test dummys its really easy to get that speed with any cat hull with a couple of timed out jets using thrust to get to speed the old ones are cheap too (they suck as a snow blower they turn the snow black) the sport really needs to prove a few new designs before we end up with a undamaged hull with pumps running but the crew dead g loads are a very slippery slope thats why russian ejection seats were so dangerious my buddy disables his in the migs because the g loads are often not survivable

[Maximus]

Offshore ginger, You've been around a while and seen too many tragedies. many basic lessons in the The Lavin guidelines have been dismissed or forgotten. Look at the comment as a challenge to all builders to re-evaluate their current cockpit. This was not a slam against any builder in particular because we can take most any cockpit on the market and find significant areas for improvement - In OUR opinion. Only ego's and short memories prevent them from taking the next step. The ones that are actively seeking ways to protect their customers will sleep well at night.


As I mentioned above we are moving to the Drag boat full face system in the Miss GEICO.

[Offshore Ginger]

Offshore ginger, Youv'e been around a while and seen too many tradgidies. many basic lessons in the The Lavin guidlines have been dismissed or forgotten. Look at the comment as a as a challenge to all builders to re-evaluate their current cockpit. This was not a slam against any builder in particular because we can take most any cockpit on he market and find significant areas of improvment - In OUR opinion. Only ego's and short memories prevent them from taking the next step. The ones that are activly seeking ways to protect their customers will sleep well at night.


As I mentioned above we are moving to the Drag boat full face system in the Miss GEICO. Funny thing , that this thread was started about this topic and the reason is .................we just might have something in common on this subject because the last drag boat person i talked with from another site stated the same thing to me about being able to sleep at nite knowing that everybody went home safe and sound after the day is over .:seeya: Maximus , i did not feel that you were trying to slam any builder in particular just asking questions .

[Maximus]

One other thing the builders that strive for the above will avoid and that is the Three Phone Calls All of which will ruin their year.


# 1 Theres been an Accident

# 2 My Loved one is gone, How could you ...

# 3 Hello , This is Mike Allweiss

I've recieved several calls about cockpit safety reviews from this thread already so we've already 'done good'

[kvschoolboard]

there are several company's now who are designing these new safety cocoon capsules, we have also worked with engineers on our design, these new designs will in fact save lives

[Offshore Ginger]

One other thing the builders that strive for the above will avoid and that is the Three Phone Calls All of which will ruin their year.


# 1 Theres been an Accident

# 2 My Loved one is gone, How could you ...

# 3 Hello , This is Mike Allweiss

I've recieved several calls about cockpit safety reviews from this thread already so we've already 'done good'Excuse me , people have questions and just because you have recieved several phone calls your going to call it quits , i beg your pardon and racing is racing and with that in mind why did you bother to go in length about this subject in all of your posts if you are going to call it ....quits ? Sorry....... if i seem rude and please remember that people ask questions because they would like answers or just want to know .

[skaterdave]

Marc, I think it's a good move to make these types of improvements but from what I saw first hand was a concentration on the mask and the "above the deck-line" canopy structure. After seeing the damage to this same boat last year my concerns are that the rest of the cockpit structure is still being neglected.

What good is 1" of solid carbon fiber and 3/4" winshield over your head if its glassed to a cockpit liner that consists of 1" foam core material with about an 1/8" of glass on each side. This is what puzzles me? In regards to Talkintrash, from what i was told there was no talk of strenghting the front and rear bulkheads and the sides that make up the liner.

With the unfortunate Victory accident, the boat entered the water ass-first and upside down and it appears to me the water pressure peeled the canopy off and pushed the rear bulkhead forward. And at at speeds far below what your doing. I'm glad to hear you guys are addressing the "rigging" holes and cutouts finally, since this also seems to be a point of water entry.

Next, what your saying is that your "military" consultants are designing these changes, are they giving you actual structural draws and laminate schedules to follow? It's good to get outside sources but are these people giving you their theories or are you actually using real life test data when making these modifications. Have you guys make test panels and had them tested to see if these will actually hold up for what they're going to built for?

The Mask idea is good but how come your not vacuum bagging. Plus it seems like its removable and not glassed and bagged directly to the existing canopy? Coscker (Mystic) and Doug Wright seem to be vacuum bagging the masks on to the canopy and there by not having any lips or edges for the water to get a hold of.

Like a few others here have pointed out, I'm suprised that with the amount of money some of these guys are worth that a two-man canopy/pod hasn't been designed, tested and mandated uniformally across the board. it seems the drag and hydro guys are much farther along safety wise.

[Offshore Ginger]

Dave :iagree:

[Maximus]

Marc, I think it's a good move to make these types of improvements but from what I saw first hand was a concentration on the mask and the "above the deck-line" canopy structure. After seeing the damage to this same boat last year my concerns are that the rest of the cockpit structure is still being neglected.

What good is 1" of solid carbon fiber and 3/4" windshield over your head if its glassed to a cockpit liner that consists of 1" foam core material with about an 1/8" of glass on each side. This is what puzzles me? In regards to Talkintrash, from what i was told there was no talk of strengthen the front and rear bulkheads and the sides that make up the liner.

With the unfortunate Victory accident, the boat entered the water ass-first and upside down and it appears to me the water pressure peeled the canopy off and pushed the rear bulkhead forward. And at at speeds far below what your doing. I'm glad to hear you guys are addressing the "rigging" holes and cutouts finally, since this also seems to be a point of water entry.

Next, what your saying is that your "military" consultants are designing these changes, are they giving you actual structural draws and laminate schedules to follow? It's good to get outside sources but are these people giving you their theories or are you actually using real life test data when making these modifications. Have you guys make test panels and had them tested to see if these will actually hold up for what they're going to built for?

The Mask idea is good but how come your not vacuum bagging. Plus it seems like its removable and not glassed and bagged directly to the existing canopy? Coscker (Mystic) and Doug Wright seem to be vacuum bagging the masks on to the canopy and there by not having any lips or edges for the water to get a hold of.

Like a few others here have pointed out, I'm surprised that with the amount of money some of these guys are worth that a two-man canopy/pod hasn't been designed, tested and mandated uniformally across the board. it seems the drag and hydro guys are much farther along safety wise.

Dave,

Jimmy and Vinny's project is very detailed and thought out. You were at the shop on Tuesday this past week and the opportunity to discuss the project with Gary Stray. You are welcome to come in at any time. . What you saw "first hand" was the beginning of the project. You are not informed on the scope of the entire project. Please contact Jimmy or Vinny to talk about what they may be doing specifically

As for Skater's existing cockpit schedule and design you can weigh in personally with J&V and Peter and make the appropriate changes when they build their next boat.


Our Lockheed Martin team consists of PhD' MIT grads that have run programs within the F-22 fighter jet program to Deep submergence vehicles capable of handling 3000-10,000 ft of water pressure as well as High speed water landing craft. Not only are we discussing laminate schedules but verifying design and velocities. We have spent countless hours discussing these variables and best case solutions to these challenges when working on a retrofit. We work with the Hydro teams and other high speed crash experts. As I said Yes we are working on a safety pod.


I 'm not sure where your going with this but I'm not interested in entertaining you on a public forum.

You know what to do if your serious about being part of the solution to make TnT safer.

[imco offshore]

I understand the US NAVY in some of their covert operations push large boats out of the back of those big cargo planes,,,,,Is their any results and info that might help everyone in the marine industry available to the public.??

[ILMORdude]

one of my favorite sayings is "lets be pro-active, not reactive" I give the whole AMF crew huge praise for taking every step neccesary for a safer series for all.

So the ridges on the outer canopy is how it will look when finished then?

[skaterdave]

no need to entertain me, I look at it more like education for myself so I could possible make better decisions in the future regarding my own boating. If your not comfortable describing the details then ok. Does it really make sense for everyone with a canopy boat to call you. Wouldn't it be easier to just highlight the weak points and generalize how your improving them? I thought it was interesting to read about the new Class 1 rules and how Team Fury was adapting their boat to those rules. Pictures, details and a reason for the changes. Your original post was interesting but it was more about discussions and stories and lacked defined facts and descriptions of the changes.

As for being at the shop the other day, I was there "working" for Jimmy and unless asked, its not my place to question your work for him. I merely was asking whats going on after you comments about Jayboats pic of Talkintrash at your shop, here on this website.

Is it really that hard to describe. One would think you'd be posting pics and sayng heres the mask, its going to be 1/2" thick carbon. We took a sample and launched a bowling ball at 200 mph and it passed. Next heres a pic of the new bulkhead, we applied 100 ton of force and it passed. Ect, ect, ect..........

If your not comfortable talking about the changes and showing how its going to work, then how are racers supposed to learn what works and what doesn't?

[stainless]

Dave,

There are many facet's the the upgrades we are employing on Miss Geico and Talki-n -Trash. Remember these are retrofit upgrades . The proper way to do this is a full redesign of the entire safety cell (which we are doing). One hard lesson we have learned in Offshore Racing is that when you think your safe ...your not. Never stop looking for ways to enhance your safety program.
I applaud Vinny and Jimmy for looking at ways to enhance their cockpit and hope my fellow racers follow in their footsteps. I hope we have more bring their boats for an evaluation before the season starts.

We have employed considerable resources to understand the "dynamic"forces we are dealing with. I can assure you that VERY few people truly understand dynamic water forces and their characteristics. Every step forward seems to open another set of challenges. Many builders simply look the other way so as not to admit that their cockpits are out dated and dangerous, considering the evolution of speed and tight turning courses this is another tragedy in the making. . One key point that we have uncovered utilizing information from various military programs is that for several milliseconds water is an immovable force. We cannot simply rely on a canopy that gives to pressure as the intrusion of water then becomes the the killer. The best way to grasp this concept is to slap your hand as hard as you can against the water next time you are in the pool. While a crude analogy it will help reinforce the concept of strength and dispersal of pressure. What you can clearly see from the high strength carbon mask are several pressure dispersing rails. Highpoint that will break the pressure line first. We strive to keep water from entering the cockpit. We are utilizing shapes to optimize our safety envelope and overcome the massive dynamic forces we face.

Another lesson we have learned from the Unlimited Hydro Racers is to utilize similar pressure diffusing diversion modules surrounding the cockpit (under the deck). Feel free to contact Dave Villwock to inquire what happens when these are not employed. Simple fixes and lessons already learned that seem to be overlooked by most of todays builders. The modules divert high pressure water flow away from the pilots underneath the deck. They should surround the cockpit.

As I mentioned keeping all water out of the cockpit is optimal and in my opinion what every builder should be striving for. Any water incursion can kill and simple engineering can raise the current offshore fleet's water repellent level two fold. Cutting holes that are not water tight in the liner of cockpit cell is a big problem and should be avoided , the slow fill is could be just as dangerous as the quick one if your unconscious.

Most any fire fighter or EMT will be able to discuss and probably firmly state that the secondary acceleration is the most deadly in a high impact crash (your body hitting the seatbelt or cockpit roof). Employing the latest NASCAR/GT circuit safety restraints properly set up Hans devices and DRAGBOAT helmet air systems and ratcheting belts is where we are at this point. Stabilizing your legs so they are not broken should they hit the dash. Remember a super cat is doing 150 mph a turbine cat 180+. Take your car out to a flat road and run it up to this speed if you need a reminder of the velocity we are talking about.

Jerry Gilbreath pounded this into my head.. "Ultimately You and only You are responsible for the safety systems operational on your boat. Never take anyones word" , check it yourself.

Our hatches are now made to the same specs as the bottom of our boat and pinned on all four sides creating a system that builds strength back into the shape of the canopy and ensuring no corners raise when the boat twists. Those parts made from aeronautical grade matériels by an FAA rated shop.

There is more if you want to stick around next time you stop by the shop.

One last thing. The marine/offshore racing industry has a habit of gossiping and trashing everyone and anyone that does, try or innovates. I expect to hear the windbags run their mouths about what will work and what won't . When asked what they are doing different... I bet it is the same old story. As many of you know Gary Stray , Scotty B and myself are fathers and take the safety of our boat as serious as the performance, Haggin as given us a mandate to make the boat as safe as we possibly can. So we are we digging deep with every new concept, watching videos and reviewing most of the old crash photos. Any racer is welcome to stop by our race shop to discuss their safety program and ways to enhance what they have. Most upgrades can be done for less than a set of props. We are always open to brainstorming, new matériels and new ideas.

We will presenting these basic upgrades to Smitty so he can begin implementing them with OPA in the form of suggestions then ultimately rules.


The bottom line is we are tired of losing friends from the same mistakes over and over again and we are doing something about it.

Great Job Guys! Keep up the Great work!! I'm glad someone's taking this seriously! :cheers2:

[Slandrew]

Dave,

There are many facet's the the upgrades we are employing on Miss Geico and Talki-n -Trash. Remember these are retrofit upgrades . The proper way to do this is a full redesign of the entire safety cell (which we are doing). One hard lesson we have learned in Offshore Racing is that when you think your safe ...your not. Never stop looking for ways to enhance your safety program.
I applaud Vinny and Jimmy for looking at ways to enhance their cockpit and hope my fellow racers follow in their footsteps. I hope we have more bring their boats for an evaluation before the season starts.

We have employed considerable resources to understand the "dynamic"forces we are dealing with. I can assure you that VERY few people truly understand dynamic water forces and their characteristics. Every step forward seems to open another set of challenges. Many builders simply look the other way so as not to admit that their cockpits are out dated and dangerous, considering the evolution of speed and tight turning courses this is another tragedy in the making. . One key point that we have uncovered utilizing information from various military programs is that for several milliseconds water is an immovable force. We cannot simply rely on a canopy that gives to pressure as the intrusion of water then becomes the the killer. The best way to grasp this concept is to slap your hand as hard as you can against the water next time you are in the pool. While a crude analogy it will help reinforce the concept of strength and dispersal of pressure. What you can clearly see from the high strength carbon mask are several pressure dispersing rails. Highpoint that will break the pressure line first. We strive to keep water from entering the cockpit. We are utilizing shapes to optimize our safety envelope and overcome the massive dynamic forces we face.

Another lesson we have learned from the Unlimited Hydro Racers is to utilize similar pressure diffusing diversion modules surrounding the cockpit (under the deck). Feel free to contact Dave Villwock to inquire what happens when these are not employed. Simple fixes and lessons already learned that seem to be overlooked by most of todays builders. The modules divert high pressure water flow away from the pilots underneath the deck. They should surround the cockpit.

As I mentioned keeping all water out of the cockpit is optimal and in my opinion what every builder should be striving for. Any water incursion can kill and simple engineering can raise the current offshore fleet's water repellent level two fold. Cutting holes that are not water tight in the liner of cockpit cell is a big problem and should be avoided , the slow fill is could be just as dangerous as the quick one if your unconscious.

Most any fire fighter or EMT will be able to discuss and probably firmly state that the secondary acceleration is the most deadly in a high impact crash (your body hitting the seatbelt or cockpit roof). Employing the latest NASCAR/GT circuit safety restraints properly set up Hans devices and DRAGBOAT helmet air systems and ratcheting belts is where we are at this point. Stabilizing your legs so they are not broken should they hit the dash. Remember a super cat is doing 150 mph a turbine cat 180+. Take your car out to a flat road and run it up to this speed if you need a reminder of the velocity we are talking about.

Jerry Gilbreath pounded this into my head.. "Ultimately You and only You are responsible for the safety systems operational on your boat. Never take anyones word" , check it yourself.

Our hatches are now made to the same specs as the bottom of our boat and pinned on all four sides creating a system that builds strength back into the shape of the canopy and ensuring no corners raise when the boat twists. Those parts made from aeronautical grade matériels by an FAA rated shop.

There is more if you want to stick around next time you stop by the shop.

One last thing. The marine/offshore racing industry has a habit of gossiping and trashing everyone and anyone that does, try or innovates. I expect to hear the windbags run their mouths about what will work and what won't . When asked what they are doing different... I bet it is the same old story. As many of you know Gary Stray , Scotty B and myself are fathers and take the safety of our boat as serious as the performance, Haggin as given us a mandate to make the boat as safe as we possibly can. So we are we digging deep with every new concept, watching videos and reviewing most of the old crash photos. Any racer is welcome to stop by our race shop to discuss their safety program and ways to enhance what they have. Most upgrades can be done for less than a set of props. We are always open to brainstorming, new matériels and new ideas.

We will presenting these basic upgrades to Smitty so he can begin implementing them with OPA in the form of suggestions then ultimately rules.


The bottom line is we are tired of losing friends from the same mistakes over and over again and we are doing something about it.:confused:Windbag?I perfer to be called blow hard:willy_nilly:

[Maximus]

Dave,

As you saw the shop is quite busy. Maybe we can focus on a pictorial post on the next boat. We are an open shop with regards to safety. If you are seriously interested in learning were an hour away. I bet you have some good ideas on top of what is being implemented you always do. I will talk with Doug and get Gary and him together to discuss the diversion modules.

To those of you offering support. Thank you and we mean that sincerely. ANY Idea you may have is interesting to us.

So many race boats boats safety systems in need of repair upgrade or replacement. The most basic lessons that took great racers lives are being forgotten for nothing more than laziness. It helps if the fellow racers let their friends know about something they feel is not safe. For me... I should have been more firm on the dock with Phil and Aero Express...but I wasn't.


We get pretty good pricing on safety equipment and may be able to help get the proper equipment for any racer serious about safety this year.

[stainless]

So many race boats boats safety systems in need of repair upgrade or replacement. The most basic lessons that took great racers lives are being forgotten for nothing more than laziness. It helps if the fellow racers let their friends know about something they feel is not safe. For me... I should have been more firm on the dock with Phil and Aero Express...but I wasn't.


I know what you mean. I was at that race when that happened also. Felt sick after seeing the aftermath.

[MarylandMark]

Geico leading the way once again! Good job


One last thing. The marine/offshore racing industry has a habit of gossiping and trashing everyone and anyone that does, try or innovates. I expect to hear the windbags run their mouths about what will work and what won't .

Say it ani't so!

[phragle]

I'm glad to see secondary impact being addressed. I have mentioned it many times before. Was just watching an Indy car replay. Seconds after a wreck you have 10 men with extrication equipment swarming the car. Out on the water you will have 1 or 2 divers within 30~45 seconds with limited equipment.. If you broke an arm or leg hitting something in the boat or are bleeding, extricating you has become much more difficult.

Stainless... I really don't believe it is out of laziness. Many have what they my consider status quo as far as safety goes and after that it becomes out of sight and out of mind. one is not focused on how to improve safety. In fact a great deal of subconscoius denial probably exists after that. No racer wants to think about the big wipeout when they can be thinking of bottom tweaks and better props.

[stainless]

I'm glad to see secondary impact being addressed. I have mentioned it many times before. Was just watching an Indy car replay. Seconds after a wreck you have 10 men with extrication equipment swarming the car. Out on the water you will have 1 or 2 divers within 30~45 seconds with limited equipment.. If you broke an arm or leg hitting something in the boat or are bleeding, extricating you has become much more difficult.

Stainless... I really don't believe it is out of laziness. Many have what they my consider status quo as far as safety goes and after that it becomes out of sight and out of mind. one is not focused on how to improve safety. In fact a great deal of subconscoius denial probably exists after that. No racer wants to think about the big wipeout when they can be thinking of bottom tweaks and better props.

That was a Maximus quote.

[phragle]

my bad

[MarylandMark]

I'd think it would be more money/value than laziness. I wish I knew from personal experience, however I'd think most think "safe enough" is just that and paying the X extra to be that much safer isn't worth it. Before any one even says it, what is more valuable than your life? I agree, but if that were the case, why exactly wouldn't every one be doing it (it as in using the safest system out)?

I want all of you to be here tomorrow so keep pushing the envelope on safety!

[MarylandMark]

To those of you offering support. Thank you and we mean that sincerely. ANY Idea you may have is interesting to us.

You asked for it.. :sifone:

So if, God forbid, a boat such as Talkin Trash were to go over, with a 90 degree spin thrown in the mix- so 1st thing on the boat that hits the water upon re-entry is the canopy sideways- would those same tabs grab more water than if the canopy were smooth?

If so, is this design a case of better than it was because more often than not the boat would be at an angle other than a 90 degree angle upon re-entry? Or is it a case of the surface tension is broken either way? The ribs look rounded so does the water roll off to an extent anyway?

Either way as I've said, I'm a fan and keep it upright and going forward but if all doesn't work out on that; glad you are focusing as much on safety as pushing the limit on the speedo as well!

[Slandrew]

Safety systems on boats is improving greatly canopys mandate should only be on boats that surpass 100mph just my opinion?Great to see the big guns are concerned:seeya:

[Offshore Ginger]

I'd think it would be more money/value than laziness. I wish I knew from personal experience, however I'd think most think "safe enough" is just that and paying the X extra to be that much safer isn't worth it. Before any one even says it, what is more valuable than your life? I agree, but if that were the case, why exactly wouldn't every one be doing it (it as in using the safest system out)?

I want all of you to be here tomorrow so keep pushing the envelope on safety! Mark , funny thing drag boat people have been pushing the envolope for many years doing triple digits closer to the water with many more guidelines to follow which includes there helmets and yes you are right about saftey.......................and to tell you the truth , should we or somebody ..............have been l@@king into this years ago.

[Steve 1]

Mark , funny thing drag boat people have been pushing the envolope for many years doing triple digits closer to the water with many more guidelines to follow which includes there helmets and yes you are right about saftey.......................and to tell you the truth , should we or somebody ..............have been l@@king into this years ago.

Yes and the drag guys have to let go of the rope and lock the canopy down then 4 seconds later are at 260 mph.

[Offshore Ginger]

Yes and the drag guys have to let go of the rope and lock the canopy down then 4 seconds later are at 260 mph. Steve 1, funny thing , i have been aproached about this subject ........ and have been giving a lot of thought about it ,and without letting the cat out of the bag................ i am doing a lot of study and research including schedules along with feeling everything out and hoping to have a better handle on things in the future:seeya:

[phragle]

You asked for it.. :sifone:

So if, God forbid, a boat such as Talkin Trash were to go over, with a 90 degree spin thrown in the mix- so 1st thing on the boat that hits the water upon re-entry is the canopy sideways- would those same tabs grab more water than if the canopy were smooth?

If so, is this design a case of better than it was because more often than not the boat would be at an angle other than a 90 degree angle upon re-entry? Or is it a case of the surface tension is broken either way? The ribs look rounded so does the water roll off to an extent anyway?

Either way as I've said, I'm a fan and keep it upright and going forward but if all doesn't work out on that; glad you are focusing as much on safety as pushing the limit on the speedo as well!

Due to cohesion, water will actually bend continuing the comprssive force on the canopy. Water needs to be pierced, which is what I believe the ribs are intended to do. The easy explaination is to think about how a 24 degree hull rides better than a 20 degree hull.

[Steve Miklos]

Steve , funny thing , i have been aproached about this subject ........ and have been giving a lot of thought about it ,and without letting the cat out of the bag................ i am doing a lot of study and research including schedules along with feeling everything out and hoping to have a better handle on things in the future:seeya:

A drag boat is much lighter. Even at 260 MPH the forces can be less than the upper classes of current offshore catamarans. A single occupant also make thes the solution easier as the cockpit is small needing only forward visibilty.
Steve

[Steve Miklos]

Due to cohesion, water will actually bend continuing the comprssive force on the canopy. Water needs to be pierced, which is what I believe the ribs are intended to do. The easy explaination is to think about how a 24 degree hull rides better than a 20 degree hull.

Yep!
Steve

[Offshore Ginger]

A drag boat is much lighter. Even at 260 MPH the forces can be less than the upper classes of current offshore catamarans. A single occupant also make thes the solution easier as the cockpit is small needing only forward visibilty.
Steve Steve , i am not looking into getting into any upper classes of currant offshore cat's .but...............have been doing my schoolwork about capsuls / canopies and with that in mind thank you for your advise .:seeya:

[rainmn]

That canopy reminded me of Fat Albert... :sifone:

[Wahoo 214]

Due to cohesion, water will actually bend continuing the comprssive force on the canopy. Water needs to be pierced, which is what I believe the ribs are intended to do. The easy explaination is to think about how a 24 degree hull rides better than a 20 degree hull.

sounds like a "Stepped" canopy. Let it slide on the water instead of get sucked into it.

[phragle]

sounds like a "Stepped" canopy. Let it slide on the water instead of get sucked into it.

Sliding isn't really that big of a deal..its the splat that is. sliding happens because of the cohesion. When you break the cohesion on a 'slapping impact' you get a sploosh instead of a splat if that makes any sense.

[Ron P]

Great stuff in here. Glad to see the racers taking their safety seriously.

Lets make 2010 the year of Safe Racing!

[Dr Speed]

What ever happened with the idea of testing at Stevens?

[Maximus]

Due to cohesion, water will actually bend continuing the comprssive force on the canopy. Water needs to be pierced, which is what I believe the ribs are intended to do. The easy explanation is to think about how a 24 degree hull rides better than a 20 degree hull.


You got it Phragle. We call them "Piercing Strakes" . Our entire mask and strakes are Vacuum bagged and will be mounted to the cockpit as and additional layer of protection. Our "on staff" carbon laminate expert combined with outside experts have created a lightweight super strong shell that will increase the safety envelope.

[Whoz Your Daddy]

Great job with the Safty upgrades!!!!

[T2x]

and to tell you the truth , should we or somebody ..............have been l@@king into this years ago.

We did....The Lavin Foundation was started in 1987 by Marce and Chris Lavin as a result of a safety meeting called after Mark's death including Gary Garbrecht, Bob Nordskog, George Linder, Don Pruett, Dr. Matt Houghton, Bill Fauntleroy (Lifeline jackets), engineers from Bell Helmets, Texstar (F-16 canopy manufacturers), and me. That humble beginning begat the Lavin guidelines. The guidelines basically languished until a fatal accident took the lives of some Arab racers. This caused a major safety effort in UIM and the guidelines (with updates) became mandatory in their races. In the U.S. a combination of litigation worries, splintered racing organizations, and an almost maniacal desire to remove weight from race boats while making overweight and out of shape owner/drivers "comfortable" removed all serious safety development. Sadly even the UIM racers cut corners to save weight in recent years (with fatal consequences) until their safety systems were no more than the windowed "decorations" we see on so many hulls today.

I applaud the Geico team for their efforts and I'm sure they will admit that this is the result of wisdom through experience----- which can only be achieved after you spend enough time in the sport. The challenge therefore remains to gain the support of that plethora of racers who have not had enough time or experience to fully understand the risks involved.

Marc, Scotty, et al........ Keep up the good work,and if you need any help in not re-inventing the wheel, give us a call at any time..

T2x

[Whoz Your Daddy]

"while making overweight and out of shape owner/drivers "comfortable":sifone::sifone:

[skaterdave]

What ever happened with the idea of testing at Stevens?

dr speed, how hard would it be to build a scaled down version and do destructive testing to see if these 'theories' actually make a difference.

[Steve Miklos]

We did....The Lavin Foundation was started in 1987 by Marce and Chris Lavin as a result of a safety meeting called after Mark's death including Gary Garbrecht, Bob Nordskog, George Linder, Don Pruett, Dr. Matt Houghton, Bill Fauntleroy (Lifeline jackets), engineers from Bell Helmets, Texstar (F-16 canopy manufacturers), and me. That humble beginning begat the Lavin guidelines. The guidelines basically languished until a fatal accident took the lives of some Arab racers. This caused a major safety effort in UIM and the guidelines (with updates) became mandatory in their races. In the U.S. a combination of litigation worries, splintered racing organizations, and an almost maniacal desire to remove weight from race boats while making overweight and out of shape owner/drivers "comfortable" removed all serious safety development. Sadly even the UIM racers cut corners to save weight in recent years (with fatal consequences) until their safety systems were no more than the windowed "decorations" we see on so many hulls today.

I applaud the Geico team for their efforts and I'm sure they will admit that this is the result of wisdom through experience----- which can only be achieved after you spend enough time in the sport. The challenge therefore remains to gain the support of that plethora of racers who have not had enough time or experience to fully understand the risks involved.

Marc, Scotty, et al........ Keep up the good work,and if you need any help in not re-inventing the wheel, give us a call at any time..

T2x

Agreed on all of the above.
The other problem is that the sanctioning groups want boat count. The inspectors do not have the absolute authority to deem a design unsafe and leave it on the trailer. Not to mention the everyone wants to be friends part of offshore racing.

Mike A. has a very good accident reconstruction team I would bet he would share their learnings.
Steve

[Caincando1]

Dave,


Our Lockheed Martin team consists of PhD' MIT grads that have run programs within the F-22 fighter jet program to Deep submergence vehicles capable of handling 3000-10,000 ft of water pressure as well as High speed water landing craft. Not only are we discussing laminate schedules but verifying design and velocities. We have spent countless hours discussing these variables and best case solutions to these challenges when working on a retrofit. We work with the Hydro teams and other high speed crash experts. As I said Yes we are working on a safety pod.





Wouldn't it be easier to just ask Dr. Sheldon Cooper?:bump::bump: That was a joke for those that don't watch the TV show "The Big Bang Theory".

All joking aside, I commend you all for leading the pack in safety, not just winning!

[T2x]

dr speed, how hard would it be to build a scaled down version and do destructive testing to see if these 'theories' actually make a difference.

I can't see how you would scale down weight, inertia, cockpit air/water pressure or the human body and its organs.

[Scotty B]

I can't see how you would scale down weight, inertia, cockpit air/water pressure or the human body and its organs.

Bingo x 1000. , I talked to Gary Stray about your previous post and he asked for your #

[Chris]

I've heard this put forth on many occasions- the concept of dynamic testing. Just off the top of my head, I can think of a handful of ways to crash an offshore boat. A forward stuff, a barrel roll, and like the Victory boat, a rearward crash. Probably lots of variations. Now we have speeds ranging between 100 and 180 mph. so someone is going to have to figure out how to crash in these different ways at these different speeds to test all the variables. Sounds expensive and technologically challenging.

I applaud the Geico team for what they're doing. It's smart to learn from the experiences of others. It may not be flawless, but it's leagues better than some of what's presently happening.

[jonp]

This same discussion is a very hot topic here in Europe also. We have had discussions on ways of testing canopies but it is hard to find good methods since the variations of impact forces are infinite. I personally think that we need to use computer simulations.

It's really great to see that you take safety seriously. The public opinion here in Europe is that racers in the US are less engaged in safety issues. Therefore it is great to see initiatives like these. Just to bad that the UIM and your american organizations does'nt work closer together. I hope there will be changes to that.

PS! Pardon my badly written english ;-)

[Scotty B]

Just to set the record strait, safety has been a priority for our team since its inception and we have continued to try and improve our boat year after year. We have been proactive and not reactive

[T2x]

Just to set the record strait, safety has been a priority for our team since its inception and we have continued to try and improve our boat year after year. We have been proactive and not reactive

Agreed....can I borrow your Cougar rib/rescue boat.....? :D

[skaterdave]

I can't see how you would scale down weight, inertia, cockpit air/water pressure or the human body and its organs.

T2x, so no testing? like i stated earlier, no one has tested these changes/modifications that anyone is doing. wether it be geico, skater, mti or DW.

But as far as I've read DW is the only that is using FRP engineering (High Modulas) that has far more experience working with FRP panels and laminates. For instance they have taken test panels on varying laminates and tested them to failure. This atleast gives a baseline for recommending laminate schedules.

Its great to say that you guys are working with military submarine MIT grads, but I'm pretty sure that wether it was a submarine or the Raptor jet that there was actual testing done. This is the point everyone seems to be overlooking. It's great that you guys are moving in a forward direction but there is no TESTING to say its going to work.

Is it really that hard to get Mystic to fabricate a canopy with the cockpit liner to form a pod and do some testing? What maybe 30k to build that, you guys had 10x that in props sitting on the floor.

Skater made a pod for dunk testing for OSS, they're half way there.

[T2x]

The public opinion here in Europe is that racers in the US are less engaged in safety issues. Therefore it is great to see initiatives like these. Just to bad that the UIM and your american organizations does'nt work closer together. I hope there will be changes to that.

The only true conduit for a cooperative safety effort between the US and the UIM is the APBA. If we could get together under that banner the pieces would fall readily into place.

Of course if the Queen had balls, she'd be King.

T2x

[T2x]

T2x, so no testing? .

I never said that, what I question is the value of scale model testing.

I am reminded of a conversation that the late Doug Lewis ( a truly gifted rigger, crew chief, throttleman and engine builder)had with a safety equipment provider. The gist of the conversation was how strong some new cockpit devices were...and Doug scoffed at some of the hardware. The vendor was quoting various lab and test results and Doug was openly dismissive of the mock up display ,

His suggestion was to put all of this hardware on a dummy in a test cockpit...... place it 100 feet from a pool or harbor on land and then hit it at 100+ mph with a dump truck into the body of water......... Then repeat the process until your development reached the point where a human replaced the dummy....... Until that was possible....you had work to do.

I agree with Doug except that with today's 200 mph turbines.....you might want to replace the dump truck with a bullet train.

If reading the above gives you a new perspective on what we are truly dealing with....... I've made my point.

T2x

[skaterdave]

I never said that, what I question is the value of scale model testing.

I am reminded of a conversation that the late Doug Lewis ( a truly gifted rigger, crew chief, throttleman and engine builder)had with a safety equipment provider. The gist of the conversation was how strong some new cockpit devices were...and Doug scoffed at some of the hardware. The vendor was quoting various lab and test results and Doug was openly dismissive of the mock up display ,

His suggestion was to put all of this hardware on a dummy in a test cockpit...... place it 100 feet from a pool or harbor on land and then hit it at 100+ mph with a dump truck into the body of water......... Then repeat the process until your development reached the point where a human replaced the dummy....... Until that was possible....you had work to do.

I agree with Doug except that with today's 200 mph turbines.....you might want to replace the dump truck with a bullet train.

If reading the above gives you a new perspective on what we are truly dealing with....... I've made my point.

T2x

underatood on the scale model.

i'm with 100%, i just don't see anyone taking those necassary steps. And at this time only the hydro and drag guys have proven to have a reliable safety program.

[Scotty B]

One driver lighter boats, big difference. You just cannot test a cockpit the way it needs to so we have to rely on past experience, mathmatics and tapping into the smartest engineering and racing minds we can find

[skaterdave]

what about going back to the old-school twin canopy design? either tow hydro or drag designs?

atleast that has been proven. especial since almost all the current center pods have shown weakness and thats at supercat/class1 speeds. add another 50-60 mph to that for the turbines.

[Steve Miklos]

The one thing we can all agree on (I hope) is that the canopy needs to be as strong as the bottom of the boat.
Steve

[Offshore Ginger]

The one thing we can all agree on (I hope) is that the canopy needs to be as strong as the bottom of the boat.
Steve No , stronger without a doubt .

[Dr Speed]

I can't see how you would scale down weight, inertia, cockpit air/water pressure or the human body and its organs.

Weight, inertia, water pressure can be scaled. Accelerations in waves are tested all the time. A model and be built and tested to test the accelerations on the canopy from various angles. Phots from various angles can determine the interaction and a 6 axis force gauge can get you all the pressures you could want.
The best purpose of tank testing would be to test the hydrodynamic effects of the mods which can be tested and changed quickly then tested again to compare results. This is done often with strakes. I've done it with steps as well.
Here is an underwater photo of twin step variation of a cat lite running at 105 mph scale speed
http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb34/l0st1nboston/40fpsstep3strakes.jpg

[Madpoodle]

what about going back to the old-school twin canopy design? either tow hydro or drag designs?

atleast that has been proven. especial since almost all the current center pods have shown weakness and thats at supercat/class1 speeds. add another 50-60 mph to that for the turbines.

Would two smaller pods be stronger than one large one?

[Steve Miklos]

Weight, inertia, water pressure can be scaled. Accelerations in waves are tested all the time. A model and be built and tested to test the accelerations on the canopy from various angles. Phots from various angles can determine the interaction and a 6 axis force gauge can get you all the pressures you could want.
The best purpose of tank testing would be to test the hydrodynamic effects of the mods which can be tested and changed quickly then tested again to compare results. This is done often with strakes. I've done it with steps as well.
Here is an underwater photo of twin step variation of a cat lite running at 105 mph scale speed
http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb34/l0st1nboston/40fpsstep3strakes.jpg

Very cool! Anymore pictures?
Thanks
Steve

[T2x]

Weight, inertia, water pressure can be scaled. Accelerations in waves are tested all the time. A model and be built and tested to test the accelerations on the canopy from various angles. Phots from various angles can determine the interaction and a 6 axis force gauge can get you all the pressures you could want.
The best purpose of tank testing would be to test the hydrodynamic effects of the mods which can be tested and changed quickly then tested again to compare results. This is done often with strakes. I've done it with steps as well.
Here is an underwater photo of twin step variation of a cat lite running at 105 mph scale speed
http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb34/l0st1nboston/40fpsstep3strakes.jpg

Gee, you make it sound so easy......... It's amazing that a tunnel boat builder named Hodges in England had to drop a full scale safety canopy repeatedly from a helicopter in the late 80's after scaled tank testing failed to replicate the conditions involved in a crash scenario........

Must have been the wrong tank............

With all due respect...there have been a myriad of "experts" called on between the APBA, the UIM, Fabio Buzzi and the Arab racers to delve into boat racing accident dynamics. At this moment Bob Wartinger a respected APBA/UIM boat racer and aircraft engineer is probably heading up the best effort, but he has a long way to go....... George Linder,one of the pioneers of Offshore cat design, also an Aircraft and Marine Engineer has been working on these issues since the mid 80's and probably has more knowledge regarding this subject than anyone on the planet......At the very least he understands most of the questions. The challenge is to coordinate all of the historical data and build from there and not as I said earlier to waste time re-inventing the wheel (or the sponson in this case). The best way to attack this is a combination of historical accident data, engineering, experience, and common sense. I seriously doubt that a computer program, a slide rule and a test tank will solve this problem in a silo without the other ingredients.

T2x

[T2x]

Would two smaller pods be stronger than one large one?

Abso-friggin-lutely!!!!!

[Dr Speed]

Gee, you make it sound so easy......... It's amazing that a tunnel boat builder named Hodges in England had to drop a full scale safety canopy repeatedly from a helicopter in the late 80's after scaled tank testing failed to replicate the conditions involved in a crash scenario........

Must have been the wrong tank............

With all due respect...there have been a myriad of "experts" called on between the APBA, the UIM, Fabio Buzzi and the Arab racers to delve into boat racing accident dynamics. At this moment Bob Wartinger a respected APBA/UIM boat racer and aircraft engineer is probably heading up the best effort, but he has a long way to go....... George Linder,one of the pioneers of Offshore cat design, also an Aircraft and Marine Engineer has been working on these issues since the mid 80's and probably has more knowledge regarding this subject than anyone on the planet......At the very least he understands most of the questions. The challenge is to coordinate all of the historical data and build from there and not as I said earlier to waste time re-inventing the wheel (or the sponson in this case). The best way to attack this is a combination of historical accident data, engineering, experience, and common sense. I seriously doubt that a computer program, a slide rule and a test tank will solve this problem in a silo without the other ingredients.

T2x


Of course the complete project will not be easy. I was wondering why they, or someone supposedly connected to this project, considered tank testing and then opted against it. Tank testing is not the be all end all, but it can provide a lot of good data for a lot less money then prototyping something and dropping it from a helicopter. Also, when designing ribs to "pierce" the water in the event of a roll over, tank tests on a variety of designs can determine which is best for various situations.

If you and AMF think that forces cannot be accuratly scaled enough to rely on the results, then that is the answer to my original question, although I disagree. You could always build full size prototypes, RC them and crash them.

[phragle]

or hang a mystic from a 747 like the space shuttle and drop it from 50' into the ocean at 300 mph. there's ideas and practicle ideas...

[Bobcat]

Why not lose the canopy/module on these 200 MPH beasts . Driver and throttleman could sit down farther into the boat, and have a video monitors instead of windows. something similar to a flight simulator (fighter) .

[T2x]

Of course the complete project will not be easy. I was wondering why they, or someone supposedly connected to this project, considered tank testing and then opted against it. Tank testing is not the be all end all, but it can provide a lot of good data for a lot less money then prototyping something and dropping it from a helicopter. Also, when designing ribs to "pierce" the water in the event of a roll over, tank tests on a variety of designs can determine which is best for various situations.

If you and AMF think that forces cannot be accuratly scaled enough to rely on the results, then that is the answer to my original question, although I disagree. You could always build full size prototypes, RC them and crash them.

Good questions...... The issue as I recall was that scaled down boats...even RC race boats behave quite differently than full sized versions. In fact the most successful RC racing designs don't work at all as full sized race boats. The English tests failed to create the dynamics present in full scale accidents, hence the helicopter testing. I can follow up if needed, but this is old news.

I am interested in your "piercing" concepts. While I understand the piercing concept (currently used in a wide variety of semi planing hulls), I don't see how you could align the blade(s) with an almost infinite number of attack angles. On the other hand we have been working with air management on tractor trailers and small deflectors are having a significant impact on drag characteristics.....perhaps a dimpled, deflective surface design has merit?

Like I said this will take the efforts of a lot of people....some of whom may actually have something to contribute... :D

T2x

[Maximus]

what about going back to the old-school twin canopy design? either tow hydro or drag designs?

atleast that has been proven. especial since almost all the current center pods have shown weakness and thats at supercat/class1 speeds. add another 50-60 mph to that for the turbines.


That was the most obvious solution and our first initiave as we looked at this challange, we are still weighing this as an option. The main builder of these units has sent us the drawings as well as a two man design as well. We still believe that a pod can be built that better fits our purposes.

Bottom line is even the most basic "lessons learned" are not being implimented on many race boats. As Rich commented these wheels have already been invented. Safety pods for the "big boats" are getting there and most smart teams are taking it seriously.


Hmmm "dimples"....I ' Like it a lot!!!

[Offshore Ginger]

Abso-friggin-lutely!!!!!I hate to say this put there will always be those people who will try to use or modifided there canopies because they just to not feel confortable with the way they are set up for them and Jack Carmondy of the old Carlos N Charlies X-treme is a prime example of this .

[skaterdave]

That was the most obvious solution and our first initiave as we looked at this challange, we are still weighing this as an option. The main builder of these units has sent us the drawings as well as a two man design as well. We still believe that a pod can be built that better fits our purposes.

Bottom line is even the most basic "lessons learned" are not being implimented on many race boats. As Rich commented these wheels have already been invented. Safety pods for the "big boats" are getting there and most smart teams are taking it seriously.


Hmmm "dimples"....I ' Like it a lot!!!

can you give description of the two man pod and how it would vary from your current Mystic setup?

[T2x]

More thoughts to ponder......................

I spoke to Linder last night and reviewed this thread.......

He asks..... If scale model testing is valid, why do car companies and testing labs spend tens of millions of dollars on full scale crash tests?

One added point to follow, but first let me ask if any of you know the maximum speed of a falling object at sea level?

T2x

[imco offshore]

two seperate man pod was removed because ,,your partner is your first responder,,in the case of a problem a person sitting next to you ,that is ok,, can help,, like put an air hose in your mouth,,seperate pods your waiting for someone to come and help and that might be too late,

[phragle]

More thoughts to ponder......................

I spoke to Linder last night and reviewed this thread.......

He asks..... If scale model testing is valid, why do car companies and testing labs spend tens of millions of dollars on full scale crash tests?

One added point to follow, but first let me ask if any of you know the maximum speed of a falling object at sea level?

T2x

If your going to ask that and ask for a definitive answer, your going to have to provide the variables. Gravity is only one factor. Drag coefficient etc...

[skaterdave]

two seperate man pod was removed because ,,your partner is your first responder,,in the case of a problem a person sitting next to you ,that is ok,, can help,, like put an air hose in your mouth,,seperate pods your waiting for someone to come and help and that might be too late,

what good is that, if the guy your counting on to help is unable because the canopy failed

[2TR]

Ok, I know this may sound dumb but a V-Bottom hull seems to hold up and cut the water at most any angle, why not design a v-bottom deck/canopy?

It might look ugly but it would be safe ???

Maybe I'm still drunk :ack2: Just thinking out loud...

[T2x]

If your going to ask that and ask for a definitive answer, your going to have to provide the variables. Gravity is only one factor. Drag coefficient etc...

I believe you can slow an object down with drag.....but I don't think you can speed it up....... hence my question....the maximum speed of a falling object at sea level?

[T2x]

Ok, I know this may sound dumb but a V-Bottom hull seems to hold up and cut the water at most any angle, why not design a v-bottom deck/canopy?..

Vee bottoms don't cut the water when they are moving sideways.

[2TR]

Vee bottoms don't cut the water when they are moving sideways.

Have you ever seen Dean (Wahoo) drive? :willy_nilly:











Thanks, Point taken.

[T2x]

Okay...let's cut to the chase..... an average object accelerates in free fall at 15ft/sec/sec and a human body maxes out at approximately 120 mph at or near sea level... (faster in higher altitudes and lighter air). It seems to me that what we are attempting to do with cockpit design is essentially make a dead stall light weight plane crash survivable for boat speeds up to about 150mph. Above that you are dealing with forces that can increase exponentially.
Taking all that into consideration there must be some kind of "crush zone" around the occupant(s) in all directions. This can be pneumatic, rubber or foam but it must be there. Aside from Statement's suspended cockpit, which is an update on Bob Nordskog's 1966 suspended racing seat design I have seen little development in this area. What is needed is an "egg within an egg" cockpit with a crushable/flexible substance between the inner and outer shells. The thickness of this layer is strictly dependent upon the maximum forces at play and the deceleration reduction needed between those forces and the limits which the human body can sustain without external...or internal injury(s).

There is also a dynamic that I'm unsure how to approach. A rotational or spinning moment at over 200 mph can generate centrifugal force strong enough to rip your insides apart without any contact, collision, or intrusion into the cockpit.....

We can leave that to a later discussion.

T2x

[Maximus]

. What is needed is an "egg within an egg" cockpit with a crushable/flexible substance between the inner and outer shells. The thickness of this layer is strictly dependent upon the maximum forces at play and the deceleration reduction needed between those forces and the limits which the human body can sustain without external...or internal injury(s).

There is also a dynamic that I'm unsure how to approach. A rotational or spinning moment at over 200 mph can generate centrifugal force strong enough to rip your insides apart without any contact, collision, or intrusion into the cockpit.....


T2x


Interesting Rich,

Almost ...word for word/design what the Lockheed guys have come to us with and are working on designs for. Inside the egg a wall of air bags (like a car). They believe that this is actually quite simple. The pod will be able to remove the top half for full servicing and will be sealed with fly by wire controls and instrumentation.

[shifter]

After the pod is sealed thoughts of I should not have had that bran muffin this morning.... or the bowl of chili.

Do not trust Gary he is British.

pat W

[phragle]

Im not getting the airbag concept. In a car you a minimally restrained with a lap/shoulder belt so you can move quite abit.. hence airbags. In a raceboat with a 5 or 6 point belt system and a hans your torso isnt going anywhere and your head should stay put with the hans and seat cradle headrest. your limbs are another story but good design and padding should take care of that.

[Dr Speed]

More thoughts to ponder......................

I spoke to Linder last night and reviewed this thread.......

He asks..... If scale model testing is valid, why do car companies and testing labs spend tens of millions of dollars on full scale crash tests?

One added point to follow, but first let me ask if any of you know the maximum speed of a falling object at sea level?

T2x


NHTSA Regulations. There is a difference between knowing the forces, and proving that the design works. Car companies also speed millions on CFD before building a prototype and millions on wind tunnel testing before creating the final design. Solids are also better understood then fluids.

Falling object speed is not the problem. The boats arent high enough to reach terminal velocity in a freefall. The boat flipping and hitting the canopy at an angle is. If a boat is going 100mph in the horizotal direction, flips and is traveling at 10fps verticle, the resultant vector speed that the canopy hits the water is 100.23mph.

We could always just control the boats from the safety of the support truck like an unmanned surface craft or a drone.

[stainless]

More thoughts to ponder......................

I spoke to Linder last night and reviewed this thread.......

He asks..... If scale model testing is valid, why do car companies and testing labs spend tens of millions of dollars on full scale crash tests?

One added point to follow, but first let me ask if any of you know the maximum speed of a falling object at sea level?

T2x

.From 5000 feet: 122 MPH
From 10,000 feet: 550 MPH
From 20,000 feet: 770 MPH
From 5000 meters: 1127 km / hourThe above are for falling in a vacuum.

[T2x]

.From 5000 feet: 122 MPH
From 10,000 feet: 550 MPH
From 20,000 feet: 770 MPH
From 5000 meters: 1127 km / hourThe above are for falling in a vacuum.

See my post # 86 above.....

T2x

[T2x]

Falling object speed is not the problem. The boats arent high enough to reach terminal velocity in a freefall.
.

My point was not about dropping from a great height it was about designing technology capable of allowing people to survive a plane crash...... Point being.....the forces are similar.

[T2x]

Im not getting the airbag concept. In a car you a minimally restrained with a lap/shoulder belt so you can move quite abit.. hence airbags. In a raceboat with a 5 or 6 point belt system and a hans your torso isnt going anywhere and your head should stay put with the hans and seat cradle headrest. your limbs are another story but good design and padding should take care of that.

I am not referring to airbags...this is about a deceleration cushion for the entire cockpit...... The human body cannot withstand a dead on deceleration to zero from 60 mph (much less 200) without some flexibility in the impacted structure. The amount of flexibility is directly related to the amount of speed reduction in the scenario.......so if a 2 inch foam cushion of a particular density will suffice for 100 mph crashes perhaps a 6 inch cushion is needed for 150 mph....etc......

[T2x]

Interesting Rich,

Almost ...word for word/design what the Lockheed guys have come to us with and are working on designs for. Inside the egg a wall of air bags (like a car). They believe that this is actually quite simple. The pod will be able to remove the top half for full servicing and will be sealed with fly by wire controls and instrumentation.

Great minds think alike......... I'll help out for half their fee...... :p

[C_Spray]

The basic principle is to keep all the components of the body in alignment (hence the advent of head restraints like the HANS and seats with extensive head surrounds), and then slow the entire body as progressively as possible. Immense G-forces are survivable if they are applied slowly enough. Rapid changes in acceleration ("jerk") is the killer. The other important factor is to eliminate any rebound effects. Any energy-absorbing mechanism should not launch the person back in the other direction once the impact is over. Introduce rotational acclerations (spins, barrel rolls, trips, etc.) and things get really complicated. The crack-the-whip effect can kill a person without leaving a mark on them (see "basal skull fractures").


Any padding/deceleration damping mechanism would have to take into account the likely G-forces expected in any particular direction. Where boats are different from a car hitting a wall is that the boats orientation at impact will affect the deceration loads. For example, a boat submarining will slow down much more progressively that one that lands sideways on the face of an oncoming wave with its hullside forward. The fact that a boat can dig into the water makes the issue far more complex that what car racers face. Race tracks have recently gone through great efforts to provide smooth (often paved) run-off areas so errant race cars don't start tumbling. Boat racing does not provide this luxury.

The boat drag capsule design makes a lot of sense in many ways. The capsule is designed to break away from all the heavy and pointy parts of the hull, and is designed to skip over the water, rather than dig in.

[phragle]

Aside from the basal skull fracture, another occurance that is not often thought about but that I have seen first hand a few times is the Aorta tearing as the heart moves inside the chest. According to the calculatons we made after one incdent this occured at a speed under 62 mph on a dead stop impact.

[T2x]

Aside from the basal skull fracture, another occurance that is not often thought about but that I have seen first hand a few times is the Aorta tearing as the heart moves inside the chest. According to the calculatons we made after one incdent this occured at a speed under 62 mph on a dead stop impact.

That very condition took a tunnel boat racer's life in a Washington, North Carolina Race about 10 years ago. It was a snap barrel roll accident at about 110 mph as I recall.

[Steve Miklos]

That very condition took a tunnel boat racer's life in a Washington, North Carolina Race about 10 years ago. It was a snap barrel roll accident at about 110 mph as I recall.

Rich you will be safe since you have no heart!
Had to lighten it up!
Carry on
Steve

[T2x]

Rich you will be safe since you have no heart!


Yessir...but i have an oversized brain. Sadly sitting down restricts about half of the circulation to it.