The Land and Water Speed Records Thread

The Land and Water Speed Records Thread

Author
Discussion

FunkyNige

8,859 posts

274 months

Sunday 13th February 2011
quotequote all
Conian said:
Nothing to add to this thread, merely posting for the updates, cheers to all contributing!
You can click the 'Watch' button at the top of the page and it has the same effect.

Life Saab Itch

Original Poster:

37,068 posts

187 months

Sunday 13th February 2011
quotequote all
dr_gn said:
So there is nothing stopping a "Ground Effect" vehicle being used with a vestigial water vane being used? Surely not?
So an Ekranoplan with a following skvarm (sp) torpedo.

yoof full chav

38,749 posts

186 months

Sunday 13th February 2011
quotequote all
Life Saab Itch said:
dr_gn said:
So there is nothing stopping a "Ground Effect" vehicle being used with a vestigial water vane being used? Surely not?
So an Ekranoplan with a following skvarm (sp) torpedo.
Sounds like a plan, who you gonna get to drive it??

DJC

23,563 posts

235 months

Sunday 13th February 2011
quotequote all
Thats a bit complicated chaps. You are over egging the pudding just to get rid of the perceived level of drag effect. The drag is not the problem.

dr_gn

16,140 posts

183 months

Sunday 13th February 2011
quotequote all
DJC said:
Thats a bit complicated chaps. You are over egging the pudding just to get rid of the perceived level of drag effect. The drag is not the problem.
I wasn't thinking the drag was particularly the problem...more that if you remove the need for planing, then you also remove the associated critical angle envelope of the hull to the water, and therefore you also remove the stability issue: It's relatively easy to design a positively stable aircraft (or ground effect vehicle).

jonnylayze

1,640 posts

225 months

Monday 14th February 2011
quotequote all
davepoth said:
jonnylayze said:
maybe that's why I feel different about it - I have to admit i know a lot more about BABS and the Owen family than I do about the guy who raised Bluebird but my initial thought is that the rescue and restoration of BABS was a real labour of love by true enthusiasts interested in the engineering heritage of the thing.

The other clear difference to Campbell and Bluebird for me is that Parry Thomas was not buried with BABS
Campbell isn't either. They recovered his body from the lake at around the same time as Bluebird.
Yes. I acknowledge that but my understanding is that the body was discovered/recovered after they brought the boat up - so there is a difference but I accept the point.

Anyway, I'm more interested in whether anyone - particulalry if its PH-led - is going to break the WSR.....

malcolm speed

9 posts

155 months

Thursday 28th April 2011
quotequote all
Some interesting postings in this thread but as often happens some misguided statements have been made. Intrigued by those who may be planning speed attempts on land or water, but as a native american proverb is said to go "talk is cheap white man; takes money to buy whisky".

If Donald Malcolm Campbell had been within a structural part of the boat after the crash, he would have been found by the navy divers on the 5th January. At the inquest the location and condition of the body was described. The boat was his 'killer' not his grave. In some other crashes his remains might have surfaced (as the Bluebird K7 team members on the water that morning had hoped). He now has a land based grave.

The Taylor boat 'Hustler' had thrust vectoring fitted to its jet engine during the record bids which followed the crash of K7. The UIM rules for record boats are in section 600. Hulls are 'free'.

There are lots of record books to be found but many are now out of print, but new ones are published all the time. Should you want to be in touch with record breaking then 'Fast FACTS' is the club members newsletter of the Speed Record Club, which carries first hand stories, historical articles, book reviews and much more.

Malcolm


dr_gn

16,140 posts

183 months

Thursday 28th April 2011
quotequote all
malcolm speed said:
Some interesting postings in this thread but as often happens some misguided statements have been made. Intrigued by those who may be planning speed attempts on land or water, but as a native american proverb is said to go "talk is cheap white man; takes money to buy whisky".

If Donald Malcolm Campbell had been within a structural part of the boat after the crash, he would have been found by the navy divers on the 5th January. At the inquest the location and condition of the body was described. The boat was his 'killer' not his grave. In some other crashes his remains might have surfaced (as the Bluebird K7 team members on the water that morning had hoped). He now has a land based grave.

The Taylor boat 'Hustler' had thrust vectoring fitted to its jet engine during the record bids which followed the crash of K7. The UIM rules for record boats are in section 600. Hulls are 'free'.

There are lots of record books to be found but many are now out of print, but new ones are published all the time. Should you want to be in touch with record breaking then 'Fast FACTS' is the club members newsletter of the Speed Record Club, which carries first hand stories, historical articles, book reviews and much more.

Malcolm

Can you shed any light on the control aspect of a WSR craft: does it have to be steered by an immersed rudder? Is that the basic definition of a WSR craft?

Are there a set number of points which have to be in contact with the water in order for a craft to be classed as a "boat"?

malcolm speed

9 posts

155 months

Thursday 28th April 2011
quotequote all
The UIM rules for thrust powered boats allow the hull to be 'free' therefore it does not appear to matter when on the plane that a 'boat' has one, two, three, four or even more planing points. A boat has to start from an immersed position, otherwise it would not be a boat as has been recognised down the centuries. Can you tow a eurofighter to the centreline of the lake before the start of a run?

If Hustler was allowed to 'throw away' its rudder then I would expect a case could be put forward for others to do the same.

Enjoy reading the UIM circuit rule book ..... but be warned, if you spend too long building a craft then another nation might get the rules altered to make the concept 'illegal'.

(If the boat is prop driven then a rudder would be needed to control the direction of the boat, unless you like tight circles .............. or fit contra rotating twin props.)

Malcolm


dr_gn

16,140 posts

183 months

Thursday 28th April 2011
quotequote all
malcolm speed said:
The UIM rules for thrust powered boats allow the hull to be 'free' therefore it does not appear to matter when on the plane that a 'boat' has one, two, three, four or even more planing points. A boat has to start from an immersed position, otherwise it would not be a boat as has been recognised down the centuries. Can you tow a eurofighter to the centreline of the lake before the start of a run?

If Hustler was allowed to 'throw away' its rudder then I would expect a case could be put forward for others to do the same.

Enjoy reading the UIM circuit rule book ..... but be warned, if you spend too long building a craft then another nation might get the rules altered to make the concept 'illegal'.

(If the boat is prop driven then a rudder would be needed to control the direction of the boat, unless you like tight circles .............. or fit contra rotating twin props.)

Malcolm

Thanks for that.

So in theory, Convair hold the World Water Speed Record, with their Sea Dart aircraft, with a speed in excess of Mach 1 (in a "dive")?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_F2Y_Sea_Dart

malcolm speed

9 posts

155 months

Thursday 28th April 2011
quotequote all
Of course it would not because it did not get timed through a kilomtere or mile timing trap, which is normally at a height of a few feet above the water. Then there is the return run in twenty minutes (prop boats) or one hour (thrust). And the UIM did not have officials from the governing body of the country concerned present to ratify the speed. Even then would they claim 10 mph ?

But it does look as though it would meet the floating definition of a 'boat'.

Malcolm

dr_gn

16,140 posts

183 months

Thursday 28th April 2011
quotequote all
malcolm speed said:
Of course it would not because it did not get timed through a kilomtere or mile timing trap, which is normally at a height of a few feet above the water. Then there is the return run in twenty minutes (prop boats) or one hour (thrust). And the UIM did not have officials from the governing body of the country concerned present to ratify the speed. Even then would they claim 10 mph ?

But it does look as though it would meet the floating definition of a 'boat'.

Malcolm
Yeah, sorry - badly worded response on my part.

I meant in theory, that craft would comply with water speed record regulations, and a speed run could be contrived to easily break the current record?

malcolm speed

9 posts

155 months

Thursday 28th April 2011
quotequote all
Not sure there are any pilots who would fly zero feet over a stretch of water at 320 plus mph to get a record. Can the boat/plane be flown in a straightline. In any case how long would it take the 'craft' to pick up speed from resting in the water?

The only saving grace is that if the lake comes to an end then the pilot executes a full climbing take off with afterburners on!

IMHO the UIM/RYA or whoever would never let this one get underway.

Malcolm


dr_gn

16,140 posts

183 months

Thursday 28th April 2011
quotequote all
malcolm speed said:
Not sure there are any pilots who would fly zero feet over a stretch of water at 320 plus mph to get a record. Can the boat/plane be flown in a straightline. In any case how long would it take the 'craft' to pick up speed from resting in the water?

The only saving grace is that if the lake comes to an end then the pilot executes a full climbing take off with afterburners on!

IMHO the UIM/RYA or whoever would never let this one get underway.

Malcolm

Andy Green did it on land...at a speed much higher than 320mph (now aiming for 1000mph). If someone wants a crack at the WSR, then the danger clearly doesn't put them off.

Is there a stipulation that the WSR needs to be attempted on a lake? The Sea Dart took off from the...sea.

IMO, there *must* be some fundamental rule that defines a WSR craft, and 'ties' it to the water. My guess is that it has to be steered primarily by an immersed rudder. If this wasn't the case, we'd have had Schneider Trophy or WIG vehicles shattering the record left right and centre.

Snoggledog

6,948 posts

216 months

Thursday 28th April 2011
quotequote all
dr_gn said:
IMO, there *must* be some fundamental rule that defines a WSR craft, and 'ties' it to the water. My guess is that it has to be steered primarily by an immersed rudder. If this wasn't the case, we'd have had Schneider Trophy or WIG vehicles shattering the record left right and centre.
I'm not so sure. WIGS take a while to get going so the average over the mile would be less. Also a quick google seems to suggest that WIGS have never managed to get much over 350mph. IIRC, hydroplanes which are classed as boats don't have rudders.

dr_gn

16,140 posts

183 months

Friday 29th April 2011
quotequote all
Snoggledog said:
dr_gn said:
IMO, there *must* be some fundamental rule that defines a WSR craft, and 'ties' it to the water. My guess is that it has to be steered primarily by an immersed rudder. If this wasn't the case, we'd have had Schneider Trophy or WIG vehicles shattering the record left right and centre.
I'm not so sure. WIGS take a while to get going so the average over the mile would be less. Also a quick google seems to suggest that WIGS have never managed to get much over 350mph. IIRC, hydroplanes which are classed as boats don't have rudders.
I thought that you could have as much run-up to the measured mile as you wanted?

Snoggledog

6,948 posts

216 months

Friday 29th April 2011
quotequote all
dr_gn said:
I thought that you could have as much run-up to the measured mile as you wanted?
Interesting.....scratchchin

From what I can understand WIGs are classed as boats as the flight envelope does not allow them to gain altitude of any real significance. So in theory a WIG could be used.

skwdenyer

16,181 posts

239 months

Saturday 30th April 2011
quotequote all
dr_gn said:
Thanks for that.

So in theory, Convair hold the World Water Speed Record, with their Sea Dart aircraft, with a speed in excess of Mach 1 (in a "dive")?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_F2Y_Sea_Dart
What a fantastic plane; not heard of that before. The idea of loading 3 pf those into a submarine, with an elevator to depot them for use is wonderful. Who said Thunderbirds wasn't factual?

In fact, that is one of the many reasons for IMHO the decline in engineeering. My grandfather worked on the Fairey Rotodyne; in the '50s there was, it seemed, nothing which was too difficult to do. Now?

I grew up just over the hill from Coniston Water. I'm with DJC; there is unfinished business there.

dr_gn

16,140 posts

183 months

Saturday 30th April 2011
quotequote all
skwdenyer said:
dr_gn said:
Thanks for that.

So in theory, Convair hold the World Water Speed Record, with their Sea Dart aircraft, with a speed in excess of Mach 1 (in a "dive")?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_F2Y_Sea_Dart
What a fantastic plane; not heard of that before. The idea of loading 3 pf those into a submarine, with an elevator to depot them for use is wonderful. Who said Thunderbirds wasn't factual?

In fact, that is one of the many reasons for IMHO the decline in engineeering. My grandfather worked on the Fairey Rotodyne; in the '50s there was, it seemed, nothing which was too difficult to do. Now?

I grew up just over the hill from Coniston Water. I'm with DJC; there is unfinished business there.
I can assure you there's still plenty of innovation going on, just buried a bit deeper.

malcolm speed

9 posts

155 months

Monday 2nd May 2011
quotequote all
The UIM rule book may not be as interesting as some reading material but it does set out the intentions of the world governing body. Always read the rules before entering into any sport ....

In section 500.01 they define a 'boat'. "By boat we understand any vessel used in powerboating (hydroplane, monohull, catamaran ...)".

"A boat is a vessel that floats on the water when stationary and continuously derives support, directional control or propulsive effort from hydrodynamic forces".

So a seaplane or WIG is not eligible as they do not take part in 'powerboating'.

Aerodynamic controls alone do not meet with the rules, as you have to use 'hydrodynamic forces'.

Of course with a jet or rocket boat the propulsive effort words would not apply.

You can use the sea, lakes, rivers for speed record attempts if the waterway has been accepted for making a record attempt, but as the timing through the mile or kilo has to be from the shore you cannot go into the middle of the ocean.

Might be wrong but, I would find it improbable that the custodians of Coniston Water will allow an outright water speed record bid at 400 mph on their max 5 mile lake. Some one should ask them.

Malcolm.