Lee Taylor's Discovery II rocket boat

Yes,well if you had watched what is now F1 in about 77 or 78 They were using brakes....and it was rather spectacular until someone got hurt. No more Brakes allowed!

But you don't have to turn to go straight!

 

Franklin,
Les Staudacher's last wwsr boat was nothing like Craig Arfon's boat. Look a little closer.

 

Les Staudacher

The Tempo Alcoa was Staudacher's FIRST water speed record boat, not his last.

 

Franklin, I don't know about you , but I am tired of Wicks, quicksilver and Warby talking like they have already done it and have yet to even build a hull. (Except warby). While there taking peoples money, I have a boat already capable of these speeds. I can be on the water in less than 6 months with some financial backing.(not 6-7 yrs) I can have the carbon outrigger, capsule, drives and a t-55 propeller hull in the water for less than a 100grand. 360mph is posssible with propellers. With a jet even more. Anyone want to get serious about this let me know. My hull has already ran 1/4 mile speeds over 257. Let me set it up for a kilo and I'm confident in the #'s. We have dozens of passes with 3 different teams and a proven safety record. This is not to deminish any of those efforts, there is just alot of press about nothing. Maybe it will take another backyarder like myself.

 

Credibility

Having a hull design that's already run 257 mph is pretty good credibility to me. All the talk from Wicks and Quicksilver does get tiresome. I'd love to see a prop-driven boat get the outright record.

 

Dan , is your boat a hydro? And what is the length of the hull?

 

It is an outrigger hydro, 21ft. The setup for the kilo boat is a bit different, but same hull. My first one can be seen at liquid quik.com The B&R racing site

 

Safety

Dan - I think sticking with props might also be safer because you already have a lot of experience accumulated with how the hull reacts. With a jet boat the thrust line would be well above the waterline, so you'd be starting much farther down the learning curve in a whole new ballgame.

 

The thrust point on the fuel boat is at the V-drive, props and angle are the transom lift. My hull with rear sponsons control prop load and attitude. this can all be done with or without the props

 

Thrust Vectors

In a wheel-driven car, thrust is generated at the tire contact patch so the force vector is to the side of and below the center of gravity. In a jet car, the force vector acts down the centerline of the car through the center of gravity. The result is different vehicle dynamics. The same principles apply to boats. For example, a jet engine can load the front sponsons while props don't.

 

surfacing props can and do load the sponsons. Thats where the cg of the vehicle are very important in relationship to thrust line, v-drive location, angle ect.

 

Dan,

I read the report of the B&R boat surviving a serious parts failure at speed. For many other hydros that could have resulted in disintegration. Conceptually, your design appears to be both a bit more stable (5 point vs 3 point) and perhaps to have a bit less lift, or at least less of a tendency to fly when unstable, compared to hydros and tunnels, as you don't have the large airfoil surface up front. Being able to adjust multiple components should help. I'm not a professional designer, but my gut tells me that it should be more stable at very high speeds. Congratulations on what looks like a very good boat.

 

Design Departures

In powerboats it's not that often someone makes a departure from classic or traditional design that works, which makes Dan's design all the more remarkable.

 

Returning to the subject of Ekranoplans as candidates for an attempt on the Water Speed Record, the Lun class http://www.se-technology.com/wig/html/main.php?open=showpic&code=&pic=406
is reputed to having a speed around 297 knots. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lun-class_ekranoplan

Assuming it were available and it was flown with a foil or extended keel of some kind in permanent contact with the water during the flight, who would consider such a endeavour as a genuine contender for the WSR?

Pericles

 

boat or plane

Pericles,

Iam sure to be opposed on this one but here is my opinion...Any craft that is flying in what is known as ground effect and can not fly out of it is not a plane but a ground effect craft. If it where to rely on the waters surface for directional control I would call it a boat. If the wwsr record were to be broken by a wig craft it may not receive the same credability for doing so as a craft with part of its hull in contact with the water would. A air trapping hydro flying completely off the waters surface with one half blade of a prop and the tip of the skeg in the water is essentially a wig...and also considered a boat. At wwsr record speeds the craft is much larger and heavier due to the thrust required for such speeds, and is therefore much harder to feel than say a kneeler hydro outboard @150 or so. The requirement for aerodynamic control surfaces becomes much more important for safe runs. It all depends on whether or not you want to fly or not while attempting the record. If a rigger is going to break the record without aero controls it will need to stay in contact with the surface and have enough thrust to overcome the drag. A wig will need to overcome the drag of its larger aero surfaces as well as it's hydro surface. So yes i would consider it a contender. As to whether or not the rest of the world would consider it a boat or not...? probably 50/50

NAD