|
Re: active thunder vs. outerlimits
Originally Posted by ACTIVESHACK
Paint is getting there. Who is Sonic and a new Nor-Tech coming to see for a new paint job.
|
Re: active thunder vs. outerlimits
Forgive me for tugging the thread back off track, but...
I want to commend car crash for his knowledge in a particular area. I also want to point out that knowledge in one sector does not directly cross over into all other sectors. I will not offer any argument regarding the effectiveness of a single step in freeing up the planing surface of an accelerating seaplane. Given the requirements of a set of seaplane floats, you have a given load range (airplane weight) given takeoff speed, and a given power source. With these three factors you can compute what you need to determine pontoon size (for supporting the resting weight in a stable fashion) and step configuration and placement (ie: the best location to break worst-case planing friction in order to allow the limited power to properly accelerate). A seaplane pontoon design does not have to deal with directional stability (the aerodynamics ofthe plane handles that), wave jumping reentry behavior (the aero of plane handles that), tendency to porpoise (the a of the p handles that), predictable tracking in a corner (plane doesnt turn in the water), smooth and efficient ride at a variety of cruising speeds (the plane acts as a dragrace hull - from stop to liftoff every single time), high speed load-carrying (the wings do that), high speed pitch and roll damping (wings), and a HOST of other performance boat related issues that a seaplane, a drag boat, or a kilo boat never has to contend with. Apples and Oranges. Given the requirements of a performance pleasure boat and its wide range of operating envelopes, there are times when the boat benefits from additional design features in different locations on the hull. At the uper end of the design speed for a properly designed boat hull, the forward steps are generally out of the water, and hence, "not functionally there" making the hull a single step again. At lower speeds, the forward step can break hull friction further forward, this improving cruise efficiency. Other hull features can be optimized to assist in turning, in rough water handling, in launch and reentry behavior, and in low speed cruise situations. It blows my mind to see somebody insist that one particular design principle is the BEST for a SLEW of different applications. There is knowledge and understanding in this position, but there is not application and comprehension. An engineer's job is to observe, gather data, comprehend, assess problem areas, develop an improvement goal, research options, consider possible solutions, select the best option for the goal, and develop effective application of it. Not choose a proven solution from ONE sector and take the position that it is the PROPER solution for other sectors. I deal with "engineers" who think like this on a weekly basis. Education is wonderful. Knowledge is wonderful. You can buy both of those with money and time. Experience is priceless, and simply cannot be bought. It must be earned. Thassall I got for this one. peace out mc |
Re: active thunder vs. outerlimits
Originally Posted by animalhouse
Car crash,
lets start by clearing one thing up, The video you put up of the AMF boat spinning was clearly the fact they went to hot into the corner in a very rough water race. As admitted in the original thread about a year ago by the driver. I was the owner of the boat prior to it being turned into a race boat powered by turbine power, and I can tell you that it never handled funny, never chine walked, and certainly nerver spun out. WE completed over a dozen poker runs in all types of water, and never had any problems. Second of all, if you are such the expert on boat design, give us your credentials, let us know how many boats you have designed. You base your opinion of a hull design based upon kilo speeds? I guess that we should rush out to buy the fountain because it is superior to everybody else in a kilo run!!! But you are missing the point, their kilo boat is a potatoe chip built for one purpose straight line in a kilo. Our kilo boat (XXX) was a production boat, with full interior, and ran 20 poker runs with no major problems (until the 1550 sterlings finaly let go with 300 hours on them) Ask anybody in attendance at this years chicago poker run if the 47 gtx was a poorly designed boat? It ran circles around everyone else in the monster water and did it quite comfortably. Did you notice when the turbine AMF spun out that it stayed upright and the drives and all hardware were still there? That spun occured at over 95 mph. How many poorly built boats would have sunk due to the hole left in the transom from the drives being ripped off? You have no clue on what you are talking about. The outerlimits' steps are placed for purpose and function, most boat builders place them wherever they think they look the best with no concept of how they are supposed to perform. I have had enough seat time in every model outerlimits they have built, and can assure all who doubt that they are fast, dry, stable, and chew up rough water better than anything out there. Show us your credentials in hydrodynamics and we may believe you, but judging from your 23 posts you are new here and are looking to ruffle some feathers. |
Re: active thunder vs. outerlimits
what??? :confused:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:46 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.