Reinforced Cockpits - response

[Bill Huson]

pointy pickles look pretty . . .

unless one is jammed into your kidney. Pointy pickles serve no aero or hydrodynamic purpose. However, pointy pickles are great for stabbing a buoy when a driver cuts the corner a tad close. Oh wait, come to think of it stabbing a buoy is a bad thing. *ponder - ponder* hmm, sorry, other than styling I can't think of one advantage to pointy pickles.

[reed28n]

Round tips

That teddy thing is just creepy.......while I don't necessarily agree wiht all of th whole pickle thing and composites ... I definitely agree something will help.

FYI....We started making cock pit sides higher to keep the driver with the boat longer. We started using cabon and kevlar for strength in the cock pit sides the safety aspect was a bonus and admittedly an after thought. We have always rounded the pickles but 1" radius is a little goofy.

We always make the dash a break away unit to allow the driver a less inhibited exit. We have always made the sponson construction very very light for performance and to crumple. (always is about 18 boats)

Builders are making changes to their construction methods without rule changes and published desired specs will likely do as good as a rule change.

and getting pierced with any radius made out of any material is really gonna hurt

accident - an undesirable or unfortunate happening that occurs unintentionally and usually results in harm, injury, damage, or loss; casualty; mishap:

[Brian10s]

Scott,
I know you have done alot with composites and making a safer race boat. And that you (and other builders) continue to try different ideas to come up with safer boats. Those efforts should be commended by not only those that driver these boats but those that race against them as well. But we still need to convice other builders to take up the cause. Every driver should be demanding these in every new boat. And since they are not, then we have not done our job educating and convincing them these items are truely needed.

As for the teddy - you got the legs for it. Don't you remember the Lemmy party at the 05 Nats?
See you at Lockhaven this year, if not WP in 08.

[Fox]

refer to the opc section of the rule book for recommended layup of cockpit sites and then step it back for stock. It is a place to start.


Carbon Fiber should be used on the outside layer for rigid strength and kevlar should be used on the inside for more of a "flexable" strength.

[DougMc]

refer to the opc section of the rule book for recommended layup of cockpit sites and then step it back for stock. It is a place to start.


Carbon Fiber should be used on the outside layer for rigid strength and kevlar should be used on the inside for more of a "flexable" strength.

Good info. Which page, I want to read more on the OPC composit rules? Also needed to be known is which type of kevlar or carbon. What weight?, weave?, etc? Which glue or what ever should be used to make the material cure properly? What are the proper bagging procedured?

How will the AOF/APBA/NBRA/UIM approved reinforced sides be anchored to the hull of the boat? A tested and approved side which does not stay attached may or may not be worse than just thick plywood. Only well do***ented testing of products would tell which is best or safer.

Are any tests currently done, being conducted or planned?

Which manufacturers are willing to supply or donate, or have already supplied or donated, samples for testing?

[Al Peffley]

Reinforced Cockpit Sides

I had Jon Steen lay a panel of reinforced Nomex honeycomb and Carbon/Kevlar weave (that I had vacuum-bagged at Fiberlay) in my 1995 CSH/OSY hydro's right cokpit [sic] inside panel. Over ten years later, and several violent rollover dumps, it has not delaminated or cracked. I did this after talking to Wartinger and Nate Brown about the numerous two-boat crash fatalities in several UIM Formula hydro racing classes (the UIM guys purposely ran into each other a lot in the past, especially during open-cokpit Formula 250 championship races.) The original UIM safety committee's idea, as it was explained to me by Wart, was to use tough, thin S/S metal panels to reinforce their cockpits (they changed to arimid fibers around the same time Jon and I designed my 1995 CSH/OSY hydro.) The UIM is just now requiring reinforcement in OSY hulls.

I damaged some ribs busting out the right side of my CSH Flyer in 1994, so I know something about chest injuries from stuffing the boat below pro speeds. I stuffed the Steen-built boat hard in 2005 without breaking the cockpit side at the same race site eleven years later (other corner this time). Part of the problem in a kneeler is that you use the right cockpit side to brace yourself in the corners, and the non-reinforced cokpit side begins to fatigue over time from all of the flexing, sharp jolts, and airborne launches (like at the Stock Nats! ). Usually, if you get hacked or cut into, it's from the right side because you try to pass on the inside and the other boat driver tries to cut you off.

There is not enough area on the left cockpit side in most kneelers to protect the driver very well in the cutout area because of the arm and throttle provisions for cornering. Laydown hydros and enclosed runabouts are another story -- I have no experience with the runabouts other than general observations at Depue when several wrecks occured in the late 1990's. I have purposely "bailed out" of my kneeler boats twice -- one two-story blow-over and one hacked, roostertail flipover crash (at Depue) with no place to go. Making the sides very high eliminates that "jump for escape" option in a kneeler...

ANY new laydown boat I buy in the future will have reinforced cokpit sides and a 19-inch width (a cramped cokpit is more unsafe due to movement restrictions and cramped appendages.) I DO wear a neck brace above 70 mph. I like the break-away dash idea, especially in laydown. However, I think the pickelfork mod is much less beneficial than developing more protective clothes to protect the drivers from direct motor equipment strikes to the body (in or out of the boat.) Motors have hurt more drivers (at least fifteen bad accidents that I have personally witnessed) than pickel forks (zero occurances in my memory) in my 14 years of organized boat racing.

Race courses with very shallow water in the back stretch ARE ALWAYS A HAZARD FOR BREAKING ONES NECK at high speed (I hit the bottom of the lake once too, but was only doing about 65 mph and it still hurt my neck!)

Al Peffley

[Heliarc]

If some sort of reinforced cockpit rule does in fact happen, I would like to suggest grandfathering ALL boats going forward. Specifically, existing boats that were built prior to any implementation of the rule AND all boats built after the rule is implemented. What I mean is this. I can see this rule being tweeked every year (or so) as new materials and ideas come to light. If everyone would have to retrofit their existing boats (or buy/build a new one) each season to comply, that could possibly over time drive even more people from boat racing. I have a feeling that people would just get sick of it. Keep grandfathering boats going forward. All the grandfathered boats will eventually be replaced over time. And the new boats being built will comply to any changes to the rule and will (hopefully) be safer.

Just to be clear. I am all for safety. But let's be reasonable.

[Lights]

What exactly is the new rule on reinforcement of the cockpit sides and when does it take effect.

[Al Peffley]

Grandfathering

I agree with Barry. Some sort of minimum specs for thickness of reinforcement materials can be set and the type of materials/install process description can be grandfathered by year of manufacture and existing hull modification (voluntary mods).

To be fair, sample panels made with both wood and composite materials that are reinforced at the minimum acceptable thickness (inside and outside), covered with the approved arimid fiber cloth types (there are several brands, including Kevlar), should be tested for impact cert by a third party who does not race or build boats (who will pay for this????). Static & dynamic structural testing is expensive if done right (using photostress covering & strain gages.)

Bob Wartinger, APBA & AOF Safety people: Do you think we can accept and adopt the UIM structural (static and failsafe) testing results as our "standard", and not spend the extra money to pay for the sample panel testing ourselves?

Al

[pav225]

Safety

There has been a lot of good discussion regarding boat safety, but we really need to look at supporting data before moving ahead on implementing any changes. Do we have good data to support the need for reinforced cockpit sides?

In the past, the OPC Category had good data that supported the need for change... 45ss boats had a problem of spinning out in the corners and getting t-boned by another boat. Many times the end result was a pickle fork stuck through the side of a cockpit (where the driver was strapped in). At the time, multiple factors contributed to a pickle fork going through the side of a capsule. These included: poor capsule construction, "sharp" pickles, multiple pieces of spruce ending at the tip of the pickle, and the fact that tunnel boats don't slide when t-boned. A lot of good changes were made to make 45ss racing safer (i.e. break away pickles and improved capsules) however, one of the biggest contributors to improved safety was the improvement in boat design. The newer boat designs greatly reduced the number of spin outs in the corners, and thus the number of injuries due to pickle forks through the capsules.

By looking at the data, we may find that hydroplanes and runabouts need to be addressed differently than tunnel boats in order to improve our safety. For example, propellers are probably not a large contributor to injuries in OPC racing because the driver is strapped inside the capsule. In hydroplanes and runabouts, the drivers are typically thrown from the boat and are now more exposed to propellers than OPC drivers. In addition, if the boat had a reinforced cockpit, it would't help the driver who is sitting in the water because he wasn't strapped in a capsule. Each category has its own unique risks, and we need to address them individually in order to be effective.

I applaud the pursuit of safety and would be glad to participate with future safety committees.

-Mike Pavlick