Cockpit construction
11-27-2011 | 03:13 PM
#161
Platinum Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 10,833
Likes: 18
From: Beautiful Fort Lauderdale www.cheetahcat.com
Look Solving for q, our friendly for holding the boat on the surface BUT Deadly in human contact, Ole "Dynamic Pressure": 200 MPH = 293.2 FPS
OK, we got .5 X 1.94032 (Density of water in the cooler) Times our VERY expensively earned FPS of 293.3 = 284.54 X That $$$ 293.3 again = 83455.582 Pressure in Pounds square foot / 144 = 579.568 PSI Think THICK composite cross-sections and throw those toy hatches in the friggin trash bin!!
In other words we are building a submarine that has to dive to @ 1250 feet or so!!!!
OK, we got .5 X 1.94032 (Density of water in the cooler) Times our VERY expensively earned FPS of 293.3 = 284.54 X That $$$ 293.3 again = 83455.582 Pressure in Pounds square foot / 144 = 579.568 PSI Think THICK composite cross-sections and throw those toy hatches in the friggin trash bin!!
In other words we are building a submarine that has to dive to @ 1250 feet or so!!!!
Last edited by Steve 1; 11-27-2011 at 03:21 PM. Reason: typo
11-27-2011 | 03:19 PM
#162
Registered
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 701
Likes: 0
Look Solving for q, our friendly for holding the boat on the surface BUT Deadly in human contact, Ole "Dynamic Pressure": 200 MPH = 293.2 FPS
OK, we got .5 X 1.94032 (Density of water in the cooler) Times our VERY expensively earned FPS of 293.3 = 284.54 X That $$$ 293.3 again = 83457.907 Pressure in Pounds square foot / 144 = 579.568 PSI Think THICK composite cross-sections and throw those toy hatches in the friggin trash bin!!
In other words we are building a submarine that has to dive to @ 1250 feet or so!!!!
OK, we got .5 X 1.94032 (Density of water in the cooler) Times our VERY expensively earned FPS of 293.3 = 284.54 X That $$$ 293.3 again = 83457.907 Pressure in Pounds square foot / 144 = 579.568 PSI Think THICK composite cross-sections and throw those toy hatches in the friggin trash bin!!
In other words we are building a submarine that has to dive to @ 1250 feet or so!!!!
11-27-2011 | 03:46 PM
#164
Thread Starter
Registered
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 529
Likes: 12
From: RI Narragansett Bay
11-27-2011 | 04:06 PM
#165
Registered
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,283
Likes: 1
From: EASTON MA.
Glassdave, I think you are correct about the deflectors being moulded in.
Personally, I'm not to found of water deflectors. I worry abut the pressure zone when the are hit by water from the wrong direction. I.e. the rear deflector in a stuff or the front deflector in a flip.
Personally, I'm not to found of water deflectors. I worry abut the pressure zone when the are hit by water from the wrong direction. I.e. the rear deflector in a stuff or the front deflector in a flip.
11-27-2011 | 04:18 PM
#166
Platinum Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 10,833
Likes: 18
From: Beautiful Fort Lauderdale www.cheetahcat.com
11-27-2011 | 04:41 PM
#167
Registered
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: Glen Cove, NY
Hi, I was reading along and forgive me if this has been discussed already. Given the engineering envoved in designing a canopy strong enough to withstand the loads you have mentioned, but has there been any thought given to designing some type of stability system that would only deploy if the boat became so out of shape that recovery was not possible by the diver/throttleman. Given the speeds and reaction times necessary to provide enough input via the cockpit controls it doesn't seem likely this could be activated by a human, but maybe a computerized stability system, or even a mechanical device that is depolyed as normal airflow over/under the hull is disrupted enough. Anyway just a thought.
11-27-2011 | 04:45 PM
#168
Registered
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
I think the first shot is a polycarbonate windshield; the second is the mil spec canopy. By the demonstration video, I'm not convinced from an impact perspective cutting the lids reduces strength. I'm a bit more concerned about how the rollbar may prevent the canopy from deforming.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibJ3aXrvaCs
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibJ3aXrvaCs
Last edited by Lighthouse; 11-27-2011 at 05:18 PM. Reason: cold bird strike
11-27-2011 | 05:30 PM
#169
Thread Starter
Registered
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 529
Likes: 12
From: RI Narragansett Bay
I think the first shot is a polycarbonate windshield; the second is the mil spec canopy. By the demonstration video, I'm not convinced from an impact perspective cutting the lids reduces strength. I'm a bit more concerned about how the rollbar may prevent the canopy from deforming.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibJ3aXrvaCs
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibJ3aXrvaCs
The milspec is laminated .
I have both on the shelf and will post cross section pics tomorrow .
11-27-2011 | 09:47 PM
#170
Skater Brother
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,541
Likes: 5
From: Wichita, KS
I was thinking a big egg shape as well sunk into a Standardized cavity in the deck, maybe an insert that could be distributed to manufacturers. Not so much break away but blow away in catastrophic event. The egg shape would lend it's ability to deflect water from any angle.
