Originally Posted by iamjoe

You certainly don't have to go very far to see that a similar concept has been designed, perfected and has saved countless injuries and dollars.

Nascar adopted the roof-flap several years ago. While it is much more simple then what a device for a boat would need to be, it works every time.

I don't think Cats are designed to run the fastest when they are teetering on blowing over. The way I understand it is that a Cat will run the best if the tunnel provides lift to both ends of the boat. The bow will lift more because this is the point of entry for the air providing the lift. But, the aft is designed to lift as well, so the entire hull creates less drag and the speed increases. I think the trick is to control the aft lift so the props keep biting and the forward motion isn't disrupted.

On paper, it seems pretty simple, but in the real world there would have to be a lot of single components working together.

Regardless of how it happens, there has to be a particular angle of attack that is the point of no return, which is when the boat can't be saved. The trick is to design a device that senses both the angle of attack, wind velocity and the forward speed that can deploy and retract very quickly or slowly, depending on what condition it senses but ultimately deploy at a set angle less than the poit of no return.

For example, in yesterdays disaster, the device would sense that the boat had strong forward motion, a rapid change in wind-speed (assuming a gust of wind caused the blow-over) and reached the point of no return quickly. It would deploy quickly to aerodynamically place weight on the bow and bring it back down to earth, but would also have to retract fast enough so the boat doesn't stuff.

On the other hand, it would have to very particular as to when and how far it deploys. There was a post the other day about "hanging it way out" or something similar. That boat was certainly hung out there, and the last thing they needed was to be slammed nose-in to the wall of a swell.


Unfortunately, time and money is all it takes. I would think that a flap, hinged to thr rear/opening to the front, fairly large in size with the ability to sit flush with the surface of the tunnel, set with a series of very strong actuators that would be computer-controlled and hooked to quick sensing angle sensors, wind and speed sensors (and structurally supported) would do the trick. I don't know what you make the flap with (carbon fiber?) or where you get the actuators, but I'm sure that they can be had. As far as the computer, how hard could it be to program something so simple. As for the sensors, the aviation sector could provide those.

In my opinion, ALL of tha Cat manufacturers should put their heads and their money together and come up with something that will come as standard equipment. After all, with the kind money that the buying public who support these companies spends on these boats, it would be a gesture that would bring a ton of press and truckloads of goodwill (not to mention the creation of a most brilliant customer preservation program), it would pay off for them in the end.

Just think, a story about how a series of competitive businesses teamed up for the overall saftey of their customers? Forbes, Wallstreet, World-wide exposure for a "feel-good" story about competitors teaming up etc.

With disaster, sometimes comes opportunity! Maybe some of you guys that have the dough would like to enter into what could be a lucrative enterprise? I'm game for sure on this one!!!!

I wonder if theres an app for that?

Originally Posted by Philm

This is all well and good, but what about a roll? Or a big stuff that sinks the boat and knocks out the occupants? A safety capsule would work in both of these cases and in the case of a big blow over (which does not happen nearly as often). Those drag racing guys have some disgusting crashes and just get up out of their floating capsule and walk away. Plus, as has been previously stated, a capsule works all the time, in every scenario. An air foil only really works in one.

I would throw money at that LONG before i would throw money at a computer controlled air plane wing. It is simple, it is much easier to implement, and the technology is already there.

Originally Posted by Gripenland

I totally agree.
A cat is an aerodynamically unstable craft. An aeroplane is an aerodynamically stable craft. Yes, there are aerodynamically unstable aircraft, generally for military purposes. They are compared to throwing a dart arrow backwards. The aircraft wants to turn but the on board computers keep the plane stable.
So it is theoreticly possible to have an on board system that prevent flips on cats but the engineering cost will be on military proportions.

A good safety cockpit will probably give the most bang for the buck if engineered the right way.

Originally Posted by iamjoe

Maybe, maybe not? First, rollovers are a completely different animal. Not what we are talking about and creating a "save-all" isn't realistic. The can of worms would then fly open and people would be looking for a solution to Two boats running into each other because of driver-error.

Capsules would certainly work, but they would only do part of the job; they save the lives (which is paramount and the whole idea), but they don't save the hardware. The boat in yesterdays disaster to pretty roughed up. While it probably "could" be repaired, will it ever really be right? I don't know the answer to that.

As for the cost, I disaagree with engineering be of military proportions. We're talking about a series of parts that should be at least semi-available. Besides, how economical does it need to be considering the job it does. I certeainly am not picturing a device that would sell for peanuts....... High-tech = high dollars

Think of the impact it could have if it was able to be retrofitted!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by Gripenland

You have a good point in saving the hardware. This is very popular in the automotive industry these days and the insurance company's are extremely happy about that. It also saves lives.

But in my opinion, the boat racing industry have some very basic safety issues to address before moving to active safety systems.

Originally Posted by iamjoe

You certainly don't have to go very far to see that a similar concept has been designed, perfected and has saved countless injuries and dollars.

Nascar adopted the roof-flap several years ago. While it is much more simple then what a device for a boat would need to be, it works every time.

I don't think Cats are designed to run the fastest when they are teetering on blowing over. The way I understand it is that a Cat will run the best if the tunnel provides lift to both ends of the boat. The bow will lift more because this is the point of entry for the air providing the lift. But, the aft is designed to lift as well, so the entire hull creates less drag and the speed increases. I think the trick is to control the aft lift so the props keep biting and the forward motion isn't disrupted.

On paper, it seems pretty simple, but in the real world there would have to be a lot of single components working together.

Regardless of how it happens, there has to be a particular angle of attack that is the point of no return, which is when the boat can't be saved. The trick is to design a device that senses both the angle of attack, wind velocity and the forward speed that can deploy and retract very quickly or slowly, depending on what condition it senses but ultimately deploy at a set angle less than the poit of no return.

For example, in yesterdays disaster, the device would sense that the boat had strong forward motion, a rapid change in wind-speed (assuming a gust of wind caused the blow-over) and reached the point of no return quickly. It would deploy quickly to aerodynamically place weight on the bow and bring it back down to earth, but would also have to retract fast enough so the boat doesn't stuff.

On the other hand, it would have to very particular as to when and how far it deploys. There was a post the other day about "hanging it way out" or something similar. That boat was certainly hung out there, and the last thing they needed was to be slammed nose-in to the wall of a swell.


Unfortunately, time and money is all it takes. I would think that a flap, hinged to thr rear/opening to the front, fairly large in size with the ability to sit flush with the surface of the tunnel, set with a series of very strong actuators that would be computer-controlled and hooked to quick sensing angle sensors, wind and speed sensors (and structurally supported) would do the trick. I don't know what you make the flap with (carbon fiber?) or where you get the actuators, but I'm sure that they can be had. As far as the computer, how hard could it be to program something so simple. As for the sensors, the aviation sector could provide those.

In my opinion, ALL of tha Cat manufacturers should put their heads and their money together and come up with something that will come as standard equipment. After all, with the kind money that the buying public who support these companies spends on these boats, it would be a gesture that would bring a ton of press and truckloads of goodwill (not to mention the creation of a most brilliant customer preservation program), it would pay off for them in the end.

Just think, a story about how a series of competitive businesses teamed up for the overall saftey of their customers? Forbes, Wallstreet, World-wide exposure for a "feel-good" story about competitors teaming up etc.

With disaster, sometimes comes opportunity! Maybe some of you guys that have the dough would like to enter into what could be a lucrative enterprise? I'm game for sure on this one!!!!

I wonder if theres an app for that?

Originally Posted by Philm

Did you not read the beginning of the thread? Everyone who knows the sport agrees that by adding ridiculous amounts of expense to it will only serve to push it further underwater (no pun intended). Especially if said super expensive retrofit only serves to prevent ONE kind of accident, one extremely rare kind of accident that only happens in fast cats. What about canopy vee hulls?

So yes, a capsule could be considered a save all. It could protect in canopy vessels of every speed and in every kind of accident, be it blow over, collision, roll over, stuff, ect. Pretty much the only time they are a danger is in case of fire, and even then they are designed to resist fires for a certain amount of time and have on board oxygen for time spent underwater.

We are talking about saving lives here, not saving a boat. I bet both Bob and Jeff would care less about their boat if they had walked away from that one. I know I have walked away from banged up cars and motorcycles with little thought as to how bad the damage was to them because I was not hurt or dead.

Just a thought.

P.S. I think that some sort of gyro controlled air foil would be bad ass, but I dont ever see it becoming anything more than a very limited novelty.