AMF canopy upgrade?

[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"

[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? 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.....?

[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