PDA

View Full Version : Dave Craig's Wood Wings



lilabner
03-26-2006, 03:34 PM
We spent some time with Dave Craig yesterday, before we went to Mt Dora. For those of you that knew him, I am happy to report he is doing great..He looks just like he always did, with gray hair. Still has a great sense of humor and he and his lovely wife are enjoying life. He was gracious enough to loan me some pictures to post of the three wood wings he owned..We really enjoyed swapping old stories, but I couldn't get him to Mt Dora because of prior commitments.

Butch

lilabner
03-26-2006, 03:37 PM
more pictures

The Vee wing was used for short courses..it has been shown before with a different wind screen. The vee was made to cut down on lift.

lilabner
03-26-2006, 03:42 PM
Dave thinks this wing went to the Mercury Museum

lilabner
03-26-2006, 03:51 PM
The start of the Gold Coast Marathon..year unknown, probably 1964, and if Danny looks real hard, he can find a Powercat Hydro.

lilabner
03-26-2006, 04:01 PM
This was his first Wing..and the one that set the record at Lake X..probably wing number two..I originally thought the U4, that was in the race, set the record, but there were two wings there..This one did not race in the six hour..

bernie
08-30-2006, 06:00 PM
Hope I don't screw this up. I have been meaning to post this for quite some time. I owned the U1 wing at one time, bought it from Mercury for a hundred bucks! They were going to burn it. This was about 1970 or so. Bought it from Wayne Meyer - it was in the weeds by the Fond du Lac race shop on Water Street - now Mr. Marine's marine dealership.
Rebuilt it and ran it with a pair of 1250 BP's that Dan Donovan found in Illinois - seems OMC had these for some reason - until I scared myself bad enough to get rid of it - lauched it off a roller at around 95 MPH one day on Lake Winnebago in 1970 or 71, it came down right side up and hence the for sale sign. The rest is history: I did locate and get a quote from the fellow I sold it to, who will remain nameless at this time.
"The subject "Wing" currently resides in the Cass County, North Dakota land fill site circa 1973. It was one of two that were destroyed because people did not believe me when I told them that in order to run best at top end "Wings" needed negative tuck. Positive tuck results in extra close views of the moon which they found out the hard way. What was really funny, yes even hilarious, is that it took two boats for them to be finally convinced. The Spellmen boat met the same fate at the hands of the same idiots shortly after your boat went 30 ft. into the sky. Both boats were destroyed at the hands of "Fighter Jocks" of the ND Air National Guard. Seems their theory was that if the nose started getting a little high you should simply kick in a little flap and things would be fine. Seeing I am not a trained aerodynamics guy I can't be sure but a little flap probably made things worse. Luckily nobody got killed.
They destroyed your boat all by themselves but I got to see the 8 mm film. The morning the Spellmen boat blew over I was out screwing around with it. I could tell that something was not right so I brought it back and declined any further seat time until the set up was changed. Their answer was to through in a little more fuel and through in a superbly trained, by the US Air Force, fighter pilot. The Spellmen boat also resides in the same landfill.
I could have sworn that in witnessing the blow-over I heard a lengthy wail identical to that made by "Goofy" while he was skiing down a shear vertical in an old Disney cartoon. The wail was most pronounced at the top of the arc."
Attached are photos from when I picked the wing up and as I ran it - thanks to Sam C. for shrinking them for me. Will have to add another post to get them all in.

bernie
08-30-2006, 06:13 PM
I had one of the original canopies when I got the boat - it was severly cracked though and I threw it away! Boat had dual straight rack Ride Guide steering. I had a brake lever out of Volkswagon to operate the airleron. It also has an airspeed indicator. With the 1250's it would accellerate like a Corvette. Best I remember was around 98 on the airspeed. I added the two round cowls ahead of the seats. The fun was to put someone in the other seat and take it out and nail it - the other person would slowly disappear under the cowlinf from fright.
This note was from Rick Connolly:
There were two Miss Skyways. Dave Craig ran them both. The one you had was the first Miss Skyway named after the marina Dave owned at the time. Dave called it his short course boat. It was ~ 16 something feet long and turned well unlike most wings. I talked to Dave Switzer and they made two of these wings which he called the "inverted V" wing. I'm not positive, but I think the inverted V wing was the boat Dave won the 1963 Gold Coast Marathon in. He can't remember which Miss Skyway he was running in the race. Some of the pictures he sent me indicate it was.

Anyway when Dave Craig got the second Miss Skyway he sold~gave the V wing to Jan Schoonover. Jan had Frustration written on the side of the boat because he said it was a frustrating to drive. This can be seen in the one picture you sent me as you indicated previously. Another comment he made was the V wing with 1250BP's on it would have been a real handful to drive. Jan also confirmed he sold it Bill Anderson. Bill is dead and I talked to his son who doesn't remember the boat. He is mailing me some boat racing 8MM film that he had converted to video and is checking his moms photo albums for pictures of the boat.

So, the long and short of it is you owned one of the three most famous Switzer wings there ever were in my humble opinion. Ironically no one seemed to know much about it and miss-took it for non Switzer wing. At any rate your ass was riding in the seat that two of top wood wing drivers sat in. - Rick

lilabner
08-30-2006, 07:21 PM
I had been working for Dave just before he got this Wing..we were out testing at a lake we all used and he asked me to drive it so he could see the attitude it ran...I don't think it had a flap at that time. It had 800's on it and would only run about 80.. It crow hopped pretty bad until it got around 70..but it did turn pretty well..left turns were much safer than right as there were a lot of other pleasure boats on the small lake also..

lottactionraceing
12-29-2011, 08:23 PM
hay butch,dave had badest of the wings every day i went to work i thought about jumping in it and going for a spin. johnny.

gofish7070
12-30-2011, 02:56 PM
Brings back a ton of memories, Great stuff

Mini Max
12-30-2011, 05:56 PM
So what does the flap do? Bernoulli's principle? Speed up the air back there and reduce lift in the stern?

seeroy
12-30-2011, 10:04 PM
So what does the flap do? Bernoulli's principle? Speed up the air back there and reduce lift in the stern?

Increases camber of the wing. Air on top then must travel further than air on bottom of wing and yet get to trailing edge at same time. Intensifies low pressure above wing. Nature abhors a vacuum. Wing "lifts" into low pressure area to fill vacuum......Creation of lift. It's MAGIC. :confused:

http://i42.tinypic.com/2mzhxsp.jpg

Mini Max
12-31-2011, 08:25 AM
I think the wing theory on the Switzer wing goes pretty far, however, what is the explanation that the same wing flies inverted?

http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/ycakewalk/Posts/upsidedown_invert.jpg

I think Brownie cooked up a tunnel flap for Scott Layman's 28' Skater that we built for him when he was racing (just the flap). The bow would rise substantially coming off waves and with the flap deployed it would "Fly" level.

Dosn't a 28 Skater have a big cockpit above the tunnel which would make the air flow knarley before it could flow to the stern?

afr
12-31-2011, 09:22 AM
hey guys so according to this if i cut my center section back on tunnel entry i would loose lift as i got to much lift as it is now

??

Mini Max
12-31-2011, 10:01 AM
Instead of loosing bow lift, add a flap and get "High"!!!!!

afr
12-31-2011, 10:11 AM
Instead of loosing bow lift, add a flap and get "High"!!!!!

hu ?? i was loooking at wings /flaps from the start of this project

2us70
12-31-2011, 12:01 PM
Butch check your private messages.

velox
01-02-2012, 10:42 PM
I was friends with LilAbner when the wood wings were in Miami and got to see them all. The wood ones were much faster than the later fiberglass ones with the engines available in the mid 60's. They remain to this day the neatest boats ever built!

T2x
01-03-2012, 08:53 AM
I think Brownie cooked up a tunnel flap for Scott Layman's 28' Skater that we built for him when he was racing (just the flap). The bow would rise substantially coming off waves and with the flap deployed it would "Fly" level.

Dosn't a 28 Skater have a big cockpit above the tunnel which would make the air flow knarley before it could flow to the stern?

Totally different hull and concept then a Wing Switzer ( I've had both a 28 Skater and a wing). The Skater is strictly flying on tunnel compression and is a cat...not a hydro.

Fast Fred
01-09-2012, 07:18 PM
:cool:

Mark75H
01-14-2012, 12:04 PM
Totally different hull and concept then a Wing Switzer ( I've had both a 28 Skater and a wing). The Skater is strictly flying on tunnel compression and is a cat...not a hydro.

I'd like to hear Jim Russell's opinion

T2x
01-15-2012, 06:07 PM
I'd like to hear Jim Russell's opinion

With all due respect to Jim......Why?

A cat is a cat and a 4 point hydro is not. The Skater 28 is a narrow tunnel cat without a flat deck (hi-lift) topsides. It relies on ground effect pressure generated in the tunnel and is suspended on the rear of the sponsons as are all cats and tunnel hulls. The Wing Switzer is suspended on the forward sponsons and the lower units until the speed at which the entire boat is carried by the wing and the lowers.



249749249748

FUJIMO
01-16-2012, 11:15 AM
I'd like to hear Jim Russell's opinion X 2 :thumbsup:

Mark Poole ModVP
01-16-2012, 01:20 PM
T2X's description of the differences is correct.


Switzer is a ram wing hydro. Skater is a ram air tunnel.

lottactionraceing
02-11-2012, 08:48 PM
hay butch daves boats were bad ass,every day at work at skyway i wanted to put miss skyway in the water,and haul ass. johnny.

seeroy
02-12-2012, 11:19 AM
[QUOTE=Mini Max;2269361]I think the wing theory on the Switzer wing goes pretty far, however, what is the explanation that the same wing flies inverted?

http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/ycakewalk/Posts/upsidedown_invert.jpg

Flying upside down is impossible. Your photo was obviously taken of an airplane flying south of the equator where everything is upside down, including the pictures.:D:D:D Sorry, I just could not resist that. Many aerobatic aircraft have a wing shape that is symmetrical or nearly symmetrical. In fact, the aircraft you pictured appears to have a nearly symmetrical wing. Consequently, one compensates with forward stick thus changing the wings “angle of attack”. Like I said before, it’s magic!

Mark75H
02-12-2012, 11:48 AM
The emperor has no clothes

seeroy
02-12-2012, 02:22 PM
The emperor has no clothes
Good Morning Sam. I used the QR scanner on my iphone. What a neat thing, it immediately took me to BRF. These darn toys are almost as neat as fast boats.
I've always said , "If your not having fun, your underwear is too tight".
Best Regards - Steve "The Invisible Man" Sirois :D

lottactionraceing
02-18-2012, 06:01 PM
hey butch just testing

Jimboat
02-18-2012, 07:58 PM
I'd like to hear Jim Russell's opinion

OK....I finally noticed this thread. (what a great history on the Wings!)

T2X is right that they are different boats, that's for sure. Aerodynamically, though, the Skater and the Wing are both doing the same thing - operating on the same aerodynamic principles. Both get lift from the aerodynamic forces of the aerofoil formed by of tunnel roof and deck surface, and both enhanced by the presence of ground effect. It's the different sponson designs that make these 2 hulls somewhat different. I still call a 4-pt hydro a tunnel hull though, when it has fully extended aft sponsons. (The 4pt design has an advantage of helping to control/maintain a more constant angle-of-attack under normal conditions).

The Wing was, at it's time, and still is, one of the most efficient aerodynamic lifting designs used in performance hull designs. The Wing generated so much lift that it was pretty easy to lift the entire hull aerodynamically. (This also made it a bit of a trick to drive sometmes, as boats really need to have parts in the water to maintain dynamic stabilty). I have had several great discussions with Dave Switzer about their designs - and i still marvel at the advanced aerodynamic advantage that Bob & Dave designed into the Wings!

Mark75H
02-19-2012, 12:03 AM
Thank you

T2x
02-19-2012, 01:35 PM
Thank you


Sam What is your point? With all due respect to Jim...the Switzer Wing is completely different even from the 4 point Sidewinders and Power cats in that they ran with the aft step in contact with the water......I presume that is what "fully extended aft sponsons" means.... The Switzers aft sponsons can be coated in sand...because they ride out of the water.

Bottom line...The Skater and most tunnel hulls and cats pack air...the wing flys through it.

T2x
02-19-2012, 01:40 PM
251607251606

Jimboat
02-19-2012, 02:13 PM
...The Skater and most tunnel hulls and cats pack air...the wing flys through it.

Well...aerodynamically, there is no difference in the principle of a wing "flying through" the air, and the wing of a Skater or other tunnel hull design "packing" the air that you are referring to. The concept of "packing air" is no more than the angle of attack of an aerodynamic surface "wing" in close ground proximity.

The touching of rear sponson pads with the water doesn't affect the aerodynamic function of the "wing" of any of these examples. Some hull designs allow for touching, most require it, and a few don't have any (eg: a full WIG). The sponson planing surfaces do, of course, change the hydrodynamic function and dynamic balance of the hull design. The Switzer "WING" is a more efficient lifting surface, aerodynamically. Additionally, it sometimes would ride with aft sponsons out of the water (not planing or lifting surfaces), primarily due to the significant additional aero lift that it was designed to generate. That's the difference. Aerodynamically, however, the "wings" of all of these hull designs are functioning similarly, although are all of different efficiencies, generating different contributions to Total Lift.

Another way of thinking of it, is your PowerCat example may be generating 95% of Lift aerodynamically (by it's wing) and 5% of Lift hydrodynamically (by sponson lift). The Switzer Wing may be generating 100% of it's Lift aerodynamcially and 0% of Lift hydrodynamically.

Since hydrodynamic drag is 100's of times more severe than comparable aerodynamic drag (for same amount of Lift generated), the 'upside' of more aero Lift is less Total drag and higher potential speed. The 'downside' of less hydrodynamic drag is less stability control due to de-coupling from water surface.

p.s. - Rich, i love your Wing!

T2x
02-19-2012, 09:28 PM
Well...aerodynamically, there is no difference in the principle of a wing "flying through" the air, and the wing of a Skater or other tunnel hull design "packing" the air that you are referring to. The concept of "packing air" is no more than the angle of attack of an aerodynamic surface "wing" in close ground proximity.

The touching of rear sponson pads with the water doesn't affect the aerodynamic function of the "wing" of any of these examples. Some hull designs allow for touching, most require it, and a few don't have any (eg: a full WIG). The sponson planing surfaces do, of course, change the hydrodynamic function and dynamic balance of the hull design. The Switzer "WING" is a more efficient lifting surface, aerodynamically. Additionally, it sometimes would ride with aft sponsons out of the water (not planing or lifting surfaces), primarily due to the significant additional aero lift that it was designed to generate. That's the difference. Aerodynamically, however, the "wings" of all of these hull designs are functioning similarly, although are all of different efficiencies, generating different contributions to Total Lift.

Another way of thinking of it, is your PowerCat example may be generating 95% of Lift aerodynamically (by it's wing) and 5% of Lift hydrodynamically (by sponson lift). The Switzer Wing may be generating 100% of it's Lift aerodynamcially and 0% of Lift hydrodynamically.

Since hydrodynamic drag is 100's of times more severe than comparable aerodynamic drag (for same amount of Lift generated), the 'upside' of more aero Lift is less Total drag and higher potential speed. The 'downside' of less hydrodynamic drag is less stability control due to de-coupling from water surface.

p.s. - Rich, i love your Wing!

Hi Jim:

In the old days our tunnel hulls would "pop the tail" and lose some directional stability at a speed where most of the lift was generated from air compression and deck lift with minimal hull contact ...aft.... The 28 Skater has virtually no deck lift and relies on full ground effect and sponson lift to carry the boat.....as does a 4 point Powercat. The wing on the Switzer generates much more lift topsides and has a significantly lower attack angle..sometimes negative in that Kenny Kitson ran the aft steps higher out of the water than the forward surfaces...

I have driven everything from Powercats to Molinari's to our Shadows and Conquests, to Skaters of all sizes..and nothing comes close to the ride sensation of the Wing. Perhaps the newest low compression Formula one boats at max speed may approximate this but I doubt it. I believe the only hulls approaching this attitude are the big Hydros....running "downhill" in the straights. Again I don't believe the wing is a true tunnel hull as the "tunnel" ends at the forward step (the air traps are outboard of the rear sponsons so air is directed outward around the flap and under the sponson bottoms at the rear.... you can't do that with a traditional cat since the tunnel wall is in the way..... We did put airtraps on the inside of some of our Conquest Offshore cats, effectively closing the steps from the tunnel side... This generated more rear lift and speed while improving directional stability, but never raised he sponsons completely out of the water..... Like I said...The wings fly, the cats ...pack air.

T2x

WharfRat
02-20-2012, 12:49 AM
Rich, why isn't anyone running with this design? Economy, lack of interest?

Jimboat
02-20-2012, 08:07 AM
The 28 Skater has virtually no deck lift and relies on full ground effect and sponson lift to carry the boat.....as does a 4 point power cat. The wing on the Switzer generates much more lift topsides...T2x

This has been a good discussion. The aerofoil formed by the deck surface and tunnel roof is what generates the aero lift in all of these designs. Some more than others - but all rely on both deck and tunnel surfaces - it's the upper and lower surfaces of a wing, just like in an airplane. There isn't really any individual amount of "deck lift" or "packing air" lift - all of the aero lift comes from the net pressure differential between upper surface (deck) and lower surface (tunnel roof). Without the upper surface you don't get a pressure difference to the lower surface - and no lift. Higher lift aerofoil shapes (like the Switzer Wing has) will generate more lift, due to it's shape. Also cluttered deck surfaces will cause pressure disruptions and more aero drag. BUT the aero lift still comes from the pressure difference between top and bottom surfaces.

As for "definition of a tunnel"....maybe just semantics, but all of them gain aero lift from the wing between sponsons, no matter what the configuration is. But i guess anyone can call them what ever they want.

cheers!

T2x
02-20-2012, 08:24 AM
Rich, why isn't anyone running with this design? Economy, lack of interest?

IMHO...The design never "matured". The few folks who attempted copies (De Silva and Dutchman) didn't gain a real following and had some tragic results. In addition the Molinari/Schultz invasion made turning at speed the racing priority....with good reason. Now that we know how to make hydros turn (appropriately sized turn fins)....part of the original obstacles have been cleared. The remaining issue is the sponson design ( the "immaturity"). The Switzers created so much speed that the competitive cat and vee hulls in the early to mid 60's couldn't make up enough ground in the turns to over come the mph. However the Achilles heel in the design is uneven wave heights, wakes, etc which altered the attack angle of the boat and left it airborne and kiting only to rebound and nose in (stuff) due to lack of lift in the forward entry of the sponson bottom design. Had the dual engine classes survived during the factory wars I believe the wing design would have re-emerged with a fuller and assymetrical forward sponson pad design similar to the tunnel hulls and present day Offshore cats. That is the logical progression model that was never financed nor developed.....

A number of us have talked about how potentially dynamic a 40 or 50 foot "wing" design would be with today's Offshore power. Since the current fleet of 200 mph uber cats can only achieve these speeds in relatively calm water...a similar sized wing with proper turn fins would be faster and better handling in those conditions. Once the seas reach 3 to 4 feet all bets are off with any design at those speeds but the wing should hold it's own in normal Offshore racing conditions and Poker Runs as well. The real value and benefit would come from being able to achieve these double digit speeds with less HP and more economy and dependability.....

George and I have scratched out a few versions of this concept...one of which is designed to break the world's OB and propeller driven speed record simultaneously. But like anything else...all it needs is proper financing.

T2x

T2x
02-20-2012, 08:39 AM
This has been a good discussion. cheers!

Agreed...any discussion regarding Wings is worth the effort and thought. This design was, and is, way ahead of its time....although, in truth, the traditional cat/tunnel design has not advanced much in the past 30 years and may have reached the end of its development curve i.e. "maturity".

Cheers back at ya......

Old fiberglass
02-20-2012, 12:55 PM
Tunnels kind of confuse me. The true tunnels like a vintage Molinari was the norm then over time they "typically" developed into a center pad. Powercats went this route from a true cat to a having a center pad. I believe it was done on the cats so it could be run with just one motor. When I talked to Dave Switzer several years back he had built a jet boat with a center pad and was running it. It was not meant to be a performance boat, but did not take a lot of power to push it along.

Picture is of a PlaceCraft tunnel mold for a jet boat with center pad for converations sake. I have built several of these. Anyway jet boats can not run without the center pad for the water pickup, jet drive and so forth. They do work just fine with outboards this way. I have an old SleekCraft Mod VP mold that has a center pad as well. I can't wrap my head around with is better pad or no pad for a outboard. Are true tunnels better at higher speeds vs. a tunnel w/pad ??

The wing design is really a 4 point hydro with and adjustable air trap in the back. Would a wing "possibly" benefit from a center pad ??

Just thinking and rambling out loud.

seeroy
02-20-2012, 08:06 PM
Jim, Rich, and Sam - I agree that this has been a great conversation. I am certainly not an aerodynamics expert, but having spent 27 years flying, I was taught in USAF Undegraduate Pilot Training the basic principles of lift/flight. We all owe thanks to Mr Bernoulli. Jim - You expressed it short and sweet as the "pressure differential" that creates lift for a cambered wing. Rich explains it exquisitely when he said, "there is nothing else like it". I spent 8-10 hours in a fiberglass Switzer Wing at Lake X and watched the wood wings "fly" with Dave Craig, Odell Lewis, and Johnny Bakos. I have explained it before, but I always like to relive it by writing about the experience. I would get up on plane with the flap in the "UP" position and accelerate to some speed and then lower the flap incrementally which would effectively change the camber and increase the differential thus creating more lift. I sat well down in the cockpit and could hear the water pounding on the aft bottom. As I gained speed and lowered more flap, the water pounding on the hull would gradually go away. At that point the only sound was engine noise and the boat was TRULY FLYING. Interestingly, the speed was only in the mid 80's. We were testing Super Speedmaster lowers and consequently were not really propped for speed. Obviously flying into the wind was the best condition, but once I got airborne, I could fly it all the way around the south end of the lake in a slight left crab and never touch down. The feeling was absolutely exhilarating. After nearly 50 years, I can close my eyes and still see and feel it. Personally, I did not think we were "packing air". However, it is quite possible that we were operating on a combination of lift, ground effect, and some air packing. Jim - You mentioned that any interference on the upper wing surface could/would be a problem. We actually had one Wing at the lake that had the cockpit in the center of the wing instead of in a sponson. That did indeed interrupt airflow and consequently that particular boat was a bit of a "dog". Thanks for this thread - Steve Sirois

seeroy
02-20-2012, 08:19 PM
OFF2009...It doesn't get much better than me standing with Dave Switzer, Johnny Bakos, and Bob Switzer.
Also, notice Odell Lewis and Brownie in the background. - :D Steve Sirois :D

http://i43.tinypic.com/990ztk.jpg

Jimboat
02-20-2012, 08:25 PM
Jim - You expressed it short and sweet as the "pressure differential" that creates lift for a cambered wing. .. I would get up on plane with the flap in the "UP" position and accelerate to some speed and then lower the flap incrementally which would effectively change the camber and increase the differential thus creating more lift. I sat well down in the cockpit and could hear the water pounding on the aft bottom. As I gained speed and lowered more flap, the water pounding on the hull would gradually go away. At that point the only sound was engine noise and the boat was TRULY FLYING. ...Obviously flying into the wind was the best condition, but once I got airborne, I could fly it all the way around the south end of the lake in a slight left crab and never touch down. .. Jim - You mentioned that any interference on the upper wing surface could/would be a problem. We actually had one Wing at the lake that had the cockpit in the center of the wing instead of in a sponson. That did indeed interrupt airflow and consequently that particular boat was a bit of a "dog". Thanks for this thread - Steve Sirois

Steve - all sounds perfect to me! Great story. How exhilarating that ride must have been! Yup...lowering the flap changed the camber of aerofoil and L/D characteristics. It must have been one of the main sources of control you had. You were certainly "flying" in every sense of the word! Thanks for all.

T2x
02-21-2012, 08:37 AM
Tunnels kind of confuse me. The true tunnels like a vintage Molinari was the norm then over time they "typically" developed into a center pad. Powercats went this route from a true cat to a having a center pad. I believe it was done on the cats so it could be run with just one motor. When I talked to Dave Switzer several years back he had built a jet boat with a center pad and was running it. It was not meant to be a performance boat, but did not take a lot of power to push it along.

Picture is of a PlaceCraft tunnel mold for a jet boat with center pad for converations sake. I have built several of these. Anyway jet boats can not run without the center pad for the water pickup, jet drive and so forth. They do work just fine with outboards this way. I have an old SleekCraft Mod VP mold that has a center pad as well. I can't wrap my head around with is better pad or no pad for a outboard. Are true tunnels better at higher speeds vs. a tunnel w/pad ??

The wing design is really a 4 point hydro with and adjustable air trap in the back. Would a wing "possibly" benefit from a center pad ??

Just thinking and rambling out loud.

I always thought that the center pods were used simply to provide a proper single engine platform, but it would be interesting to see how duals run on a Powercat "t" hull in an a-b comparison with an identical non pod hull. I am not sure how a pod might affect a wing other than it would require a split aileron of some kind. I do know that the triple engine wings were similar in speed to the duals....in spite of 50% more power.

GENE LANHAM
02-22-2012, 12:59 AM
Steve - all sounds perfect to me! Great story. How exhilarating that ride must have been! Yup...lowering the flap changed the camber of aerofoil and L/D characteristics. It must have been one of the main sources of control you had. You were certainly "flying" in every sense of the word! Thanks for all.

Jimboat----thanks!!!---someone finally said it!!! CONTROL: At the speeds the Switzer Wing was capable of, sufficient total lift was not an issue. In fact, the efficiency of a cambered airfoil can be calculated by the negative angle of attack needed to generate zero lift!!! The flap/aileron was actually an elevator, and was a control surface-----

Jimboat
02-22-2012, 08:12 AM
Jimboat----thanks!!!---someone finally said it!!! CONTROL:At the speeds the Switzer Wing was capable of, sufficient total lift was not an issue. In fact, the efficiency of a cambered airfoil can be calculated by the negative angle of attack needed to generate zero lift!!! The flap/aileron was actually an elevator, and was a control surface-----

Ha Ha - the most tricky part of a design that generates sufficient aero lift so as not to need any sponson lift, is the loss of control surface to the water reference. So the control usually left to that last little bit of sponson contact with the water is now gone - i suspect that when driving the 'Win', you could really 'feel it' when you got to that point.

This is also a reason that it's difficult to push the speed of the Wing faster than it was originally designed for, without feeling the difference in stability control - it just generates SO MUCH lift as it's speed increases. What a marvel of design for its time!

velox
02-22-2012, 12:26 PM
From what I understand, the Switzers, built their first one in a little more than a week or so.
I think they designed it as they went.
I have often said, it was the coolest boat ever built!
I saw Dave Craigs first Switzer within days of when he got it. For me it was love at first sight.

T2x
02-22-2012, 03:11 PM
. For me it was love at first sight.

Same here.........

Gene what kind of "control" are you referring to? Angle of attack? Altitude? speed?... My flap is basically used in straightaways....and, if anything, needs to be raised a bit in turning scenarios. Kenny Kitson feels I should fix it in a single position close to even with the wing bottom as he doesn't believe I need it with the power from the v6's. On the other hand I find that deploying it "calms" the boat down during the transition from full hydro lift to full aero lift...after the (rapid) acceleration through that phase it can probably come all the way back up...but again...I am not running limited in line 6 power. It will be interesting to watch "Shadow Cat's" hull run this year with traditional power plants.

As far as the engineering principles at play here are concerned, I think, as Charlie pointed out, this was a seat of the pants thing that worked amazingly well and engineers have spent the ensuing years trying to explain exactly what forces are at play....after the fact. Truth is the 18 and 20 foot versions of essentially the same design behave quite differently..as did the various wooden variants one from another. So we have an inconsistent and under developed concept that has yet to realize its fullest potential. In fact had Dave Switzer built the reverse "V" nosed version first...which from the rear does not appear to be anything like the others..... the design may have come in dead last in that storied first race on Lake Winnebago and we would have heard no more of it. Race boat design at its core will always have a nice mixture of trial and error, experience, seat of the pants "feel", luck, engineeering and even eye appeal as the recipe for the magical, sometimes mythical art form that it is.....

seeroy
02-22-2012, 05:51 PM
Same here.........
recipe for the magical.....

Like I said once before, "It's Magic"

Gene - I have 12 March date with "the robot". I will call you as soon as I can after. - Steve

GENE LANHAM
02-22-2012, 06:06 PM
Gene what kind of "control" are you referring to? Angle of attack?.....

Yes. The only time I came close to a blow-over, was at the south end of the Parker 6.5 mile straight. A cockpit/driver malfunction at speed, accidently released the 'home-made electric elevator control'.:mad: I never ran the boat again without my right foot firmly buried in the 'stirrup'----and threw that electric contraption away----

GENE LANHAM
02-22-2012, 06:30 PM
From what I understand, the Switzers, built their first one in a little more than a week or so.
I think they designed it as they went.
I have often said, it was the coolest boat ever built!
I saw Dave Craigs first Switzer within days of when he got it. For me it was love at first sight.

Me too!! And from the beginning they used the 'Clark Y' airfoil, knowing it was simple and efficient at the speeds they anticipated---

afr
02-22-2012, 06:54 PM
Ha Ha - the most tricky part of a design that generates sufficient aero lift so as not to need any sponson lift, is the loss of control surface to the water reference. So the control usually left to that last little bit of sponson contact with the water is now gone - i suspect that when driving the 'Win', you could really 'feel it' when you got to that point.

This is also a reason that it's difficult to push the speed of the Wing faster than it was originally designed for, without feeling the difference in stability control - it just generates SO MUCH lift as it's speed increases. What a marvel of design for its time!
holy chit jimbo this is me

afr
02-22-2012, 07:00 PM
actually flying a boat, few get to know , what that feels like not one other i have ever been in or drove thats feels like a hydro