Entry Angle vs Hollow Waterlines

[Leo Lazauskas]

Originally Posted by Ad Hoc

But Cocoon doesn't have Raquel Welsh
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/book...MACDONALD.html

No, but 1,000,000 years B.C. does
Now I'm really feeling old!

[philSweet]

darn, Leo beat me to it. I had Ad Hoc figured more as a Mother, Jugs, and Speed kinda guy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother,_Jugs_%26_Speed

(SO I originally underlined the title of the movie, but I looked that up under grammer and found a comment that said-

Underlines only enter the conversation because they were used before italics were available widely (back when people were using typewriters). Nowadays italics are used instead, although you might have an old-school teacher who insists on underlining.

Talk about feeling old. I think italics were around when I was in school.)

[Ad Hoc]

Originally Posted by philSweet

I had Ad Hoc figured more as a Mother, Jugs, and Speed kinda guy.

Nope, never heard of that film

Surely you were all smitten as over-active teenagers watching Raquel Welch in the 3 Musketeers???

[messabout]

Did Raquel have hollow bows? I thought them rather pleasingly bulbous.

[Ad Hoc]

Originally Posted by messabout

...I thought them rather pleasingly bulbous.

Oh yes...exceedingly so

[MikeJohns]

Originally Posted by Luc Vernet

Shouldn't the "champions" of hollow waterlines at the bows, F.L Herreshoff, and before him Steers, specially with his schooner America, or the old American and Canadian fishing schooners and pilots boats be cited here?...........

Intensive refinement of low resistance forms rejected any performance advantage to hollow in the bow [fwd waterlines] years ago. It's considered now to be always detrimental.

[Luc Vernet]

Originally Posted by MikeJohns

Intensive refinement of low resistance forms rejected any performance advantage to hollow in the bow [fwd waterlines] years ago. It's considered now to be always detrimental.

Did I say the opposite??? Too fast reading, MikeJohns.
Giving historical references and saying why, at that time, something was found beneficial is not in contradiction with later development showing that the opposite is more performing....all other elements being different!
Not, may I say, a very scientific approach...

[MikeJohns]

Luc
I agree with your post. I was using your opening paragraph to comment particularly on FLH; as a proponent of 'hollow' waterlines. You will find people citing this 'great discovery' of his as not having been rediscovered by current Naval Architects. I had someone telling me this just recently and there seem to be a few around who really believe it.

Fast sailing ships had some hollow but it is of course small relative to the Froude number ships operate at and was not a feature of enhanced attached laminar flow but traditional construction for a deep forefoot.

[rxcomposite]

Of bulbous bow and hollow waterline.

[vandutch]

This bow is getting a lot of talk but is it a lot of hype or is it really grounded technically?

[daiquiri]

Originally Posted by vandutch

This bow is getting a lot of talk but is it a lot of hype or is it really grounded technically?

What is so particular about it?

[vandutch]

That's what I don't get. The marketing jargon is often Kevlar reinforced... vacuum-injected sandwich... Aft... Is it possible to be rare?