The reaction time would be real time, like a millisecond. 1000 + time faster than any man

canard; my only concern is it could stuff the nose with a gust of wind. throttle chop might do that too. That's why the motec seems like the answer. (throttle regulation). like traction control, the engine will only be allowed to use as much HP as it takes to do it in a way that keeps the boat level. trim too. It just takes the driver out of the sport, but could keep them alive.

In my opinion, it takes bigger balls to say "enough is enough" than to keep chasing these speeds. Mr Slozack, in my opinion, may not have only saved himself, but the decision could very well save others that could not be the first one to step back.

Money buying HP was Qatar's game........these two guys in an old Skater were not playing in that game.

I hope the online publishing folks take note and write about this positive turn.

Except the legendary Apache throttleman Bobby Saccenti!

Bill Gates was still jerking off in his garage when Bobby was out getting the work done! :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fpj_NYNDKgs

Big hurtle to resolving this in the performance marine side is no sanctioning body pressing manufactures to develop a solutions. If anything, it's much the opposite. No need to hash it out, but imagine your sport saying you can't run any wing or splitter because downforce might give you an unfair advantage. And safety issues are the sole responsibility of manufactures.. Now who's gonna push for those advancements? Ya'd ended up with a bunch of big block Pinto's running 250mph without some leadership...

The F1 Hydro guys have probably done more research into this topic than any other group. I know cause that was the first guys I approached in a design forum couple years ago. They are happy to share what they've learned, but it took them a countless CAD and wind tunnel hours to get where they are today. Out of those discussions I also learned about the limitations of the canards on boats and aircraft. And then we looked at the main issue here, dumping huge volumes of compressed tunnel air on demand. Long story short, once you "stall" a wing, only drag can correct it to regain control. So soon as those props lose grip, your just along for a ride.

I'm really glad to see the interest in possible ways to approach this problem again. But without a dedicated group and someone funding research, it's all just conjecture that will soon fall to the wayside. As it has several times before. Really wish someone would prove me wrong this time.

Mr. Szolack is far from alone in his apprehension, http://www.offshoreonly.com/articles...king-hard-look.

The events over the weekend were horrific and tragic, but this is wonderful news.

Great interviews, thanks for sharing.

As a cat owner and reading this thread there is a lot of talk and maybe a few good ideas being thrown around. Jim Melling was a great guy that i have had many conversations with and i will sorely miss him. I pray for both his and Garth's family in these tough times.
Regarding this thread I think most of you guys are missing a big point. We have a boat that was designed in 96 with the intentions of being run in the speed range of 120mph or so. As time progressed more hp was added and the speeds went up. I agree the lift in the tunnel originally designed for 120mph was far to high for the speeds that was achieved and it took a small change in somrhing that set things in motion. Jim and Garth new the risks and I am sure they took whatever precautions they could afford. This boat was not run on a unlimited budget.
The first thing we all can do is ask ourselves are we really doing the right thing by pushing old technology beyond it limits. I bet if you guys ask Randy Scism or Pete they will tell you a boat designed to go 200mph would have a.different tunnel configuration along with other considerations as well. Maybe these boats have reached their limit with the power available today. There is a reason JT was absent from the last 2 shootouts. I whole heartedly agree with Ron and his decision. I believe that alone will do more our sport in the near future than anything else. IMO regardless of technology and whatever failsafes computers can provide it cannot replace the human element.
We all need to be smart about how we go about the sport we love and make good decisions. This involves more than designing a wing. Many others have died this year in pleasure boats out for a fun day on the water. May Jim and Garth RIP!

VERY well said.

Throttle control is NOT a viable option. I have read the experts talk about stopping a blow over. They said that as the bow comes up IF you throttled up it would push the bow down. But it doesn't work IF you are already at full throttle. They also said that as the bow goes up IF you chop the throttle it will settle the transom increasing the speed of bow lift.
With the wing the computer would control the bow completely and not allow the bow to rise. The tunnel would have to be ventilated to allow only enough lift for the transom NOT the bow. Remember the wing lifts the bow. The front of a CAT weighs very little when compared to the total weight of the boat.The whole idea is to keep the bow at a preset angle. Even if you hit a wave ( large boat wake - not 5+ ft ) the wing would be able to correct the bow attitude. remember the bow goes up and then the transom goes up and the boat stays flat to the water ( preset angle )

Does anybody know what Jeff had just given the green light and commissioned Peter at Skater to build? Editorial states: a new state of the art 46′ Skater that would be campaigned to race against the big black corporate giant. Ironically his goal was to develop a host of new safety devices and standards to change the safety aspect of hi performance boating. [I]This boat was to be the safest ever built. Beyonce that goal was to even the playing field showing that with the very best the aftermarket had to offer they could be a winner. The new boat would be powered by Smith Power engines, Arneson Industries drives, Hering Propellers, and Hardin Marine accessories. Jeff was a man committed to helping the smaller independent companies wage a competition similar to “David & Goliath” safety improvements Asbell and Smith working towardsmin a new build from Peter[I/]

You understand the article you quoted was over 3 years ago right?

Maybe that's the point... 3 years later and the power numbers have increased but the safety innovations really haven't.

Look, when I see some guy walking around the East Side or Brightmoor in a "RIP Pookie" shirt, it's hard not to shake my head and roll my eyes, because you just KNOW Pookie was all about that game until he wasn't....
It's getting like that with these boats. I'm happy guys are stepping back a little.

Yes, i do realize that. Just haven't seen mention of the safety innovations that he was working towards in these years since he and Brads' passing. Maybe it was hull design and some parts of his ideas live on, i just have wondered for years now, what was he / they working on.
Godspeed to the women and men we have lost over the years and God bless the families and friends picking up the pieces.

Couldn't agree more. I'm not an engineer but I think the design of the tunnel is key to the issue. More engineering is needed to figure out how changes can be made to give the lift needed without allowing so much air that a blowover can occur. As speed increases, the dynamics change and the hull, more specifically the tunnel, needs to be designed for the speeds we are currently seeing. As it has been stated before, the engine technology has effectively surpassed the hull design. The air flow is greater at these higher speeds. Don't get me wrong, I love this sport. The blend of engineering and design is what draws me in.

I looked around for different engineering approaches after the 2014 Lake of the Ozarks crash with Joel Begin and throttled by Mike Fiore. All I could find were posts and mentions of safety efforts such as a front wing or the parachute designs. Qatar did you have this in use at the same race and if I remember correctly their parachute actually deployed on an earlier run. I did find one manufacturer that did something different with the tunnel. I'm not endorsing this manufacturer but I can appreciate the efforts they have gone to in recognition of the issue. The Statement 50 foot Passion appears to be different. I have never seen one in person and can not attest to the quality. Their design focuses on the tunnel as the key in controlling the air to reduce the blow over.

With all this said, this community has lost too many great people in the recent years. RIP!

While I understand this thread is concentrating on tunnels and blow overs, when speeds in any multi engine boat get above a certain speed, say 100+, what happens when you have a catastrophic engine, drive, hydraulic steering, or prop failure? I understand that hydraulic steering when functioning properly will keep the drives straight, but lets say you are running at 165 in Parvey's boat and spit a propshaft and now you instantly have all that torque on only one side. I witnessed a buddy's 33 Fountain with Arnesons make a HARD left turn in front of me years ago at over 100. Hours later when he limped in in the dark we knew why.

Darr has the answer ��:


"Jim David Darr · Chief Executive Officer at Gateway pool and spa
Agree. Enough is enough. With Ron. Win. Kenny. And the Parveys either hanging it up or on the edge I think its time to stop the high speed runs. Im working on a blow over system that will virtually eliminate them but stopping the events is the answer"

Yup, a 7hp outboard motor on a 12 aluminum boat. LOL.

....and a fat, sweaty Betty in the bow for added security. (And shade/warmth, depending on season).

Good for you Ron! I was worried about you at shoot out. I'm glad you couldn't get the motor running right the last time :)

I wonder how well that will hold up on his cardboard bussel..... :lolhit:

I felt the same way about Summer in Dail 911. I had a terrible feeling about it. I was so glad they loaded up and couldn't lay one down.

I hope they come to the same conclusion as Ron.

As an avid fan of offshore racing and especially the LOTO Shootout since its beginning I have to say I don't care how fast they go. I just love watching and listening to the boats run. They are works of art to me. I have always admired the guys and gals who put their asses on the line to put on the show at the Shootout or in offshore racing. Three of my favorites are Dial 911, Garth and Jim in their Skater and Flight Club. When I saw a video of Garth and Jims's pass at Lake Havasu I was an instant fan. It was a thing of beauty. I couldn't wait to see them at LOTO. Their performance at LOTO was amazing. I cannot tell you what a thrill it is for a guy with a 23 ft Wellcraft, to see and hear these boats, and meet the people that drive them in person. I really don't care if they squeeze every last mph out of them. The number is not why we go to the shootout. Its the people and the machines. After the tragic accident that week by a very skilled driver coming back from dinner, I think there was a lot of apprehension from spectators and participants alike. I will gladly watch Summer Richardson run 153 safely knowing that boat can and has run 191. I watched a video of Chip Romer running Dial 911 up to 191mph and its hairy. I love Flight Club and we were bummed you didn't get to make a few more passes on Sunday but in all honesty I was more thrilled just to see and hear the boat up close and in person. Mr Szolack I admire and respect your decision. We love seeing you guys go crazy fast but I don't ever want anyone to die doing it.

And please don't stop the events, just be as safe as you can be. For clarification, I mean please don't stop having the events. They are one of the most amazing things in motorsports. As I said, I totally respect any ones decision to participate or not participate especially when you are literally putting your life on the line.

A Hans device and a airbag deployed style wing is what is needed in this sport ASAP. An Airbag is instant and could lower the craft back into a neutral position asap, and also be relatively cheap as most are already mass produced.

Throttle chop will drop the nose on most every boat some harder than others . If a boat is flying already it will do nothing obviously. On most boats the prop is just behind a fixxed surface. Granted the prop spinning will create lift. In most aplications a boat weight at the transome and will be enough to hold the back down for the most part.

The really definative " never let up " comes from 3 point hydros and boats with a prop not directly behind a fixed surface. That is why unlimited Hydros have to have a canard now adays because the back is supported by the prop only when the power is on. And if you cut the throttle it drops the back about a foot and becomes a brake drag pulling the back down forcing the front up. All hydro guys swear you can never let up at speed for that reason.

The Skaters were never CAD/CAM engineered or wind tunnel developed. They were guess-work design at best, and they made "changes" based on best-guess analysis after testing or an accident. If one of them stuffed, add more recovery to the front entry. If it barrel-rolled, widen the tunnel. And etc. So, what makes the 1996 model limited to a certain top speed versus a 2006 model? It was simple, too much bow rise, add a little wedge in the back to hold the nose down, or change props, or raise drives. It was all common sense testing, find errors, figure it out. Fix it. I'm NOT disrespecting Skaters contribution to the industry, I just don't think people are aware at how little technology is involved in these boats.

Judging by the threads you post on and information and opinions, in said posts you are obviously no newbie, so... how about some background on you.
Not bashing , but curious.

Thank you. I've said this multiple times. These aren't big companies with huge R&D budgets. People give the manufacturers way to much credit when they claim it was "designed" to do this or that.

I'm not knocking pete. But imo every change made skaters since this 36' boat would only make them more likely to blow over (wider and lighter).

Quick easy idea: a rudder set back multiple feet from the transom. As the angle of attack goes up, it gets stuffed in the water. It could even have a flat area higher that really digs in hard if the angle is extreme. There wouldn't be an extra drag compared to your normal skeg if it's the same depth.

Another. moving the engines forward. I feel like this is happening already with the tunnel extensions and bussels to some extent.

Also: changing mass distribution in the boat to give it a higher polar moment of inertia in the fore aft plane. On that same tangent, a sea keeper gyro system.

You mean like this.....?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]560644[/ATTACH]
Pic from Google/Bruce Bullock marine

I do not disagree with the design procedures of the boats that built back in the day and the way some are built today. Your point is a valid. Nor am I here to defend Skater but I ask all you this question.
1) How many times has any boat ran over 190mph? Not to mention being in the 36' size range.
2) Of all the runs over 190mph not counting the big Mystics or turbine boats how many other manufactures other than Skater have accomplished this? Gino's MTI did it and is the only other brand I am aware of.

I would bet if they left this boat set up to run 170mph or less it would not have went over. Jim had told me many times they wanted to break 200mph. To the best of my knowledge the time trials being run that day were not on a closed course and limited to a mile. It was a radar run for top speed. We all know the boat ran 194mph at LOTO in a mile course. Maybe they were looking to break 200mph and were well on there way before it went over.

Point is that if you take anything with a wing at those speeds it will fly at some point. There is a reason Nascar added restrictor plates, roof flaps etc. Indy car changed motors for less HP. NRHA shorten the length of the run. Reason being even with spoilers, and down force if the vehicle got out of shape it would lift and fly up in the air. You are also correct there were things that keep the bow down and make the boat safer. But just like they lose is fast. Add down force and maybe the boat only runs in the 180's? Cars have to deal with smooth pavement and only wind gusts on a track. Boats have many more variables no CAD design will help if you encounter something at those speeds that upset the running angle of wing. The dangers involved at those speeds will never be safe. Just my .02 cents.

Amen. Offshore is literally the only motorsport to not slow down. Nascar figured out in the 80s people died over 200. They slowed them down. F1 the same. Offshore? Hell, two supercharged big blocks not doing it for you? Throw some turbines in! Stupidity. Our safety technology was tapped out in the late 90s, the speeds have continued to climb. We need to slow down.

A 33 eliminator ran 193 at the shoot out a couple years ago. I could not believe it. Very impressive

You are exactly right. The boat has to depend on 2 unstable surfaces - wind and water, so when running at these high speeds, you either get lucky, or lose to Mother Nature.

Then the boat was sold & the power pulled I believe , I heard it was a trick to drive from what GT said . It was a crazy feat no wonder Gregs wife was crying when the run was done .