Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Race Talk > General Racing Discussion
What is the highest probability of canopy failure on a race boat? >

What is the highest probability of canopy failure on a race boat?

Notices
View Poll Results: What is the highest probability of canopy failure on a current Super-Cat?
Design
5
12.20%
Improper Installation
12
29.27%
Modification from design
9
21.95%
Impact of water only
5
12.20%
Impact from solid object
7
17.07%
Other
3
7.32%
Voters: 41. You may not vote on this poll

What is the highest probability of canopy failure on a race boat?

Thread Tools
 
Old 05-05-2004, 08:11 PM
  #11  
Registered
 
mr_velocity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 3,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally posted by Ron P
Did anyone ever read George Linder's book about how to build a canopy? Its from the Lavin foundation.
Matter of fact I have a copy George sent me a few years ago. When I got it I read it from cover to cover and looking over the boat it was a comfort to see that it met all the recommendations.
mr_velocity is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 08:50 PM
  #12  
Registered
 
Dredgeking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Lake Charles, LA
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally posted by Ron P
Has one ever failed? Meaning it broke and allowed water to hit the occupants in the face?
jack carmody, corpus christi, 2001

jack's failed for several reasons. i have been told that his modifications to the canopy may have been a contributing factor. from what i saw, they were.
Dredgeking is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 08:54 PM
  #13  
Registered
 
Dredgeking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Lake Charles, LA
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally posted by GeoGraphics INC
Any F16 style canopy that has a hole cut in the top has its inherent strength removed, they are ok when the water goes over the front as in a front end stuff, it is when the boat turns sideways and the impact is from the side they do not hold up as in the case of the kuwait Prince that was decapitated by the canopy when their canopied V-hull barrel rolled.
this may be one reason why jack's canopy failed. jack did not have the doors in the top of his canopy. he just had open holes = big water scoop = bad news.
Dredgeking is offline  
Old 05-05-2004, 10:59 PM
  #14  
Racer
Racer
 
Ryan Beckley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sarasota, Florida, USA
Posts: 5,143
Received 31 Likes on 19 Posts
Default

I've also seen the "doors" be the problem. There is no failsafe. You build the canopy to the best of your ability and knowledge, I'm sure there been a few faliures of canopies on planes too. Noting is perfect, I agree with Bertel you are beating your head against the wall with this issue.
Dick Fullam, Mike Poppa, Mark Lavin, Tom Gentry, Peachy Perez, Spirit Of Miss Liberty, Pepe Ferrera, Jack Carmody, Jeff Christiansen, Randy Linebach, Jack Storlee all of these people died doing what they loved, advancements have been made from all of there losses lets not turn this into some other type of argument. It is what it is we all know the inherent dangers in what we do, we try to be as safe as possible. DO NOT lay blame on anyone or anything we take risks in this sport we know what they are.
Ryan Beckley is offline  
Old 05-06-2004, 12:15 AM
  #15  
Kent Perroux
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The poll is only an interest in what is the general concensus of knowledgable people of what is the weak points might be in one safety item.

This is not meant to place blame on any incident or any person; it cant; it is meerly opinions of people that use the product. As I write this note, it appears that most consider improper installation as the weakest point. Even if there is NO improper installations, this is the perception of the most people that responded. I believe this is important, especially for manufacturers/riggers to know.

Just in what has been listed so far, I have learned that my perception is different that most others here.
 
Old 05-06-2004, 08:08 AM
  #16  
Kent Perroux
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Peconic,

I am absolutely amazed how quickly you can take a simple and informative thread, and turn it into trash. You need to quit trying to read into my questions and assuming my intentions. There is nothing here that states that this would be used for any type of marketing, changes, investigations or anything else other than what I stated.

I was interested in the racers' perceptions, not specifically the actual problems. This was for my own interest, and possibly others. If my perception of a level of security is significantly higher than the actual level of security, I am at risk of exceeding that that barrier. If, however, my perception of the level of security is significantly less than the actual level of security, the risk of exceeding that parameter is very low.

Do you feel safer driving a Chevrolette at 150mph or driving a Ferrari at 150mph? Although the Chevy may have a higher level of safety, your perception of safety may be higher in the Ferrari.

The thread was very informative until you popped and trashed it.

You are correct that the ACTUAL safety of these things should be investigated thoroughly, preferably by a proffessional organization.


Last edited by Kent Perroux; 05-06-2004 at 08:12 AM.
 
Old 05-06-2004, 11:13 AM
  #17  
www.weismann.net
Gold Member
 
shifter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: newport beach,ca
Posts: 1,249
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Why is there a concentration on the effect and not the cause?
The problem is (What made the boat unstable?) Get the boats stable and it will help the problem.
pat W
shifter is offline  
Old 05-06-2004, 04:12 PM
  #18  
Charter Member #94
Charter Member
 
Gordo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: New Port Richey, FL
Posts: 2,694
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

I don't disagree that making a boat more stable makes it safer. However, I think we're discussing racing situations here<?>.
That being the case, I would think any discussion concerning safety can't be all bad.
I agree that offshore powerboat racing is inherently dangerous. All of us that race understand, and indeed accept that danger and the risks involved. Some of us choose to minimize the danger or risks by racing in a canopy. If this is in fact, false security, then I think we need to know why. If the canopy simply failed do to design problems, modifications, improper installation, or other problems, these can, and should be addressed. However, if deaths in canopy race boats were due to dramatic impact, or other "racing" incident, then maybe we need to look at where or how we race.
Since I race in both open and canopy boats, I have a personal interest in this thread, and hope Peconic can accept that sometime, perception is reality.
__________________
Abby-someone
Gordo is offline  
Old 05-06-2004, 08:10 PM
  #19  
Registered
 
Phantom1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lake Murray, SC
Posts: 5,648
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally posted by Peconic

If you are interested in perceptions: It is my perception that most respondents don't even have a canopy, let alone a supercat. So much for "opinions of people who use that product."
With race experience of 3 races, and none in a canopied Super Cat, does that mean that your opinions are worthless as well?
Phantom1 is offline  
Old 05-06-2004, 08:32 PM
  #20  
Registered User
 
Joe Todesca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Danvers, Mass
Posts: 884
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

I have never raced in a Supercat canopy boat but I was very impressed with Kidstuff , Colby added a reinforced rolled steel cage in his boat canopy's . His vision was vastly limited but the size and structure of the cage was something. Jo
Joe Todesca is offline  


Quick Reply: What is the highest probability of canopy failure on a race boat?


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.